American Canyon City Council
November 19, 2024

As more particularly described in the Development
Agreement, if chosen by Master Developer in its sole and exclusive discretion, Master Developer shall be responsible for the design and construction of the “Phase 1 Newell Drive Initial Access.” The Phase 1 Newell Drive Initial Access shall begin (commence) from the existing terminus of Newell Drive, Relevant
Subsequent
Approvals
Certain
proceeds
As set forth
in
Development
Agreement
e.g., PreFinal Map,
Applicable
498

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
5 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
northward to the intersection of Newell Drive and Rio Del Mar then westward on Rio Del Mar to the intersection of Rio Del Mar and Loop Road, then northward on Loop Road to include Loop Road Segment 1,” as that term is defined in Section

2.07 of the Development Agreement, and as shown on Exhibit B to the Development Agreement, and Exhibit A to these
Master Conditions.
from State
of California
will help
fund
portions of
the Newell
Drive Initial
Access
SIA, Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit)

15. § 2.06(c)(1)

As more particularly described in the Development
Agreement, if chosen by Master Developer in its sole and exclusive discretion, Master Developer shall be responsible for the design and construction of the “ Phase 2 Newell Drive Initial Access.” The Phase 2 Newell Drive Initial Access shall include the extension of Rolling Hills Drive from the Phase 1 terminus of Rolling Hills Drive northward to the intersection of Rolling Hills Drive and Rio Del Mar, and the extension of Loop Road from the Phase 1 terminus of Loop Road, to the northward edge of Loop Road Segment 2, as both are shown on Exhibit B to the Development Agreement, and Exhibit A to these Master Conditions.

Applicable
Parcels
As set forth
in
Development
Agreement
Applicable

16. 2.06(c)(1)

As more particularly described in the Development
Agreement, before the 743rd building permit for a residential structure on the Project can be issued by the City, Developer, at Developer’ s sole and exclusive discretion, shall construct one of the following roadway improvements (all shown on Exhibit B to the Development Agreement and Exhibit A to these Master Conditions.):

A. Commencing from the intersection of Loop Road and Rio Del Mar westward on Rio Del Mar to the intersection of Rio Del Mar and SR 29, as shown on Exhibit B to the
Development Agreement.

B. Commencing from the intersection of Loop Road and Rio Del Mar westward on Rio Del Mar, then southward as Rio Del Mar becomes South Napa Junction, to the intersection of South Napa Junction and SR 29, as shown on Exhibit B to the
Development Agreement, and Exhibit A to these Master
Conditions.

Any and all affordable residential housing units built in the Watson Ranch Specific Plan shall be exempt from, and
therefore shall not be included, in determining the 743 residential housing unit count or any other residential unit cap.

Applicable
Parcels
As set forth
in
Development
Agreement
Applicable

17. § 2.07(a)

Developer shall not be responsible for any fees and costs related to the City Attorney, and/or any City Special Legal Counsel regarding any railroad croswsing, roadway, and/or other MBI.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Applicable
499

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
6 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit

18. § 2.07(c)(1)

At the time of Building Permit issuance for a “ Model Plan Review” ( model home plan review) residential unit, Developer shall pay to City Processing Fees in the amount designated for that size/type of model home residential unit set forth in Exhibit C to the Development Agreement. Said amount of
Processing Fees shall be considered to be in Calendar Year 2019 dollars, and, commencing in 2020, that amount shall be increased each year by the relevant year’ s percentage amount set forth in the Construction Cost Index for the San Francisco Region.

Applicable
Parcels
Building
Permit
Applicable

19. § 2.07(c)(2)

At the time of Building Permit issuance for an “ After Model Plan Review” residential unit, Developer shall pay to City Processing Fees in the amount designated for that size/type of After Model Plan Review residential unit set forth in Exhibit C to the Development Agreement. Said amount of Processing Fees shall be considered to be in Calendar Year 2019 dollars, and, commencing in 2020, that amount shall be increased each year by the relevant year’ s percentage amount set forth in the Construction Cost Index for the San Francisco Region.

Applicable
Parcels
Building
Permit
Applicable

20. 2.07(c)

Processing of project approvals shall be performed pursuant to the Development Agreement.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable

21. 2.07(c)(3)
Pages 34-35
Developer shall pay, one or some combination of the following options, in Developer’ s sole and exclusive discretion:

A. To City, those Processing Fees that at the
time Processing Fees are due to City reflects the amount that City actually expends to provide such processing services, which City actual expenditures shall not include any
administrative fees, charges, and/or assessments; and/or B. To a third-party consultant (“ Processing
Consultant”) acceptable to City and contracted directly with Developer the amount that the Processing Consultant and Developer contract for such processing services. Should Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
500

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
7 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

Developer desire to contract with a particular Processing Consultant, prior to entering into such contract, Developer shall provide written notice to City at least thirty (30) days prior to Developer entering into such Processing Consultant contract ( the “ 30-day period”), which notice to City shall address such intended contract, including without limitation, naming the intended Processing Consultant. Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notice from Developer, City shall indicate its consent or objections, in writing. If City fails to raise objection to Developer within such 30-day period, City consent shall be deemed provided. If City raises objection to such Developer- noticed Processing Consultant within said 30- day period, then the Resolution Process set forth in the Development Agreement shall apply. City and Developer shall maintain and update a list of Processing Consultants acceptable to City. And/or,
C. To a Processing Consultant acceptable to
City and contracted directly with Developer and City (a threeparty agreement) the amount that the Processing Consultant and Developer contract for such processing services. Again, City and Developer shall maintain and update a list of
Processing Consultants acceptable to City.

22. § 2.07(d)
Pages 35-36
In Developer’ s sole and exclusive discretion, Developer shall pay Inspection Fees for residential development, MBI, in -tract infrastructure, NVRG and Hotel, and/or any other Project construction requiring inspection, in either or some
combination of the following options:

1. To City, those Inspection Fees that at the time
Inspection Fees are due to City reflects the amount that City actually expends to provide such inspection services, which City actual expenditures shall not include any administrative fees, charges, and/or assessments; and/or;

2. To a third-party consultant acceptable to City
and contracted directly with Developer (“ Inspection
Consultant”) the amount that the Inspection Consultant and Developer contract for such inspection services. Should Developer desire to contract with a particular Inspection Consultant, prior to entering into such contract, Developer shall provide written notice to City at least thirty (30) days prior to Developer entering into such Inspection Consultant contract (the “ 30-day period”), which notice to City shall address such intended contract, including without limitation, naming the intended Inspection Consultant. Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notice from Developer, City shall indicate its consent or objections, in writing. If City fails to raise objection to Developer within such 30-day period, City consent shall be deemed provided. If City raises objection to Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
501

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
8 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
such Developer- noticed Inspection Consultant within said 30- day period, then the Resolution Process set forth in the Development Agreement shall apply. City and Developer shall maintain and update a list of Inspection Consultants acceptable to City. And/or,

3. To an Inspection Consultant acceptable to City and
contracted directly with Developer and City (a three-party agreement) the amount that the Inspection Consultant and Developer contract for such inspection services. Again, City and Developer shall maintain and update a list of Inspection Consultants acceptable to City.

23. § 2.07(f)

During the Term of the Development Agreement, Developer shall not pay any past, current and/or future City development fees, impact fees, mitigation fees and/or any and all other impact fees imposed on development in the City in any and all categories ( collectively, “ City Impact Fees”). Such City Impact Fees that Developer shall not pay during the Term of the Agreement include, without limitation, Civic Facility Fees, Wastewater Capacity Fees, Water Capacity Fees, Traffic
Impact Fees, Parks & Recreation Fees, and/or General Plan Update Fees, and any other present or future City Impact Fee imposed on development to mitigate Project impacts and
provide funding for public infrastructure, services and/or facilities.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable

24. §

2.07(h)(1)(D)

Developer shall improve and construct the relevant portions of Newell Drive, including and excluding, as follows: Newell Drive Segment 1, with the exception that the portion of such Newell Drive Segment 1 improvements located on the Newell Property that Developer shall improve and construct shall be limited to one-half (1/2) width of a typical roadway section (as shown in the Specific Plan), which provides for a single travel lane in each direction.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable

25. §

2.07(h)(1)(E)

Developer’ s commencement of Watson Ranch Specific Plan’ s Phase 4 of residential development shall be conditioned upon Developer’ s commencement of “Developer’ s Newell Drive Obligations,” provided the relative/relevant “ City Precursors” prerequisites) to each such Developer’ s Newell Drive
Obligations have been satisfied by City, all as provided in the Development Agreement.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
502

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
9 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

26. §

2.07(h)(1)(E)

If at Developer’ s planned commencement of Watson Ranch Specific Plan’ s Phase 4 of residential development, the City Precursors are not fully satisfied and in place, then Developer may commence development of the Watson Ranch Specific
Plan’ s Phase 4 of residential development and shall no longer be responsible for Developer’ s Newell Drive Obligation. The status of the City Precursors shall be addressed in the Annual Review of the Development Agreement in order to keep the Parties apprised of status.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable

27. 2.07(h)(2)

Regarding Rio Del Mar With an At-Grade Railroad Crossing.

A railroad crossing at Rio Del Mar is anticipated for the Project by the General Plan and Specific Plan. The Parties generally desire that the railroad crossing at Rio Del Mar be an at-grade” crossing. However, the Parties also recognize that time, money, and the authority of others, including without limitation governmental agencies such as the California Public Utilities Commission (“ PUC”), have influence and authority over such at-grade crossing options. Further, the Parties recognize that time savings, certain Developer financial obligation reductions, and other factors may make a gradeseparated crossing at Rio Del Mar more attractive and achievable. Lastly, the Parties recognize that should an atgrade or grade-separated railroad crossing at Rio Del Mar prove unsuccessful, there exists a private at-grade railroad crossing at South Napa Junction that is the subject of a previous settlement agreement. Therefore, which railroad crossing to pursue will be an evolving analysis by the Parties as they work through the many issues. At any time period during which an at-grade railroad crossing is being pursued, Developer, exercising its sole and exclusive discretion, shall have the right to assert to City that such an at-grade application should be abandoned and/or otherwise put aside and that a grade-separated railroad crossing at Rio Del Mar shall be pursued. If such an assertion is made, then such at-grade application will be abandoned and/or otherwise put aside and a grade-separated railroad crossing at Rio Del Mar shall be pursued by the Parties.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable

28. 2.07(h)(2)(C)
Pages 42-43
When Developer or City is required by the Development
Agreement (below) to construct (or cause the financing and/or construction of) At-Grade Rio Del Mar improvements, such improvements shall be constructed and improved at such time as set forth in the Project s relevant subdivision map approval.

That being stated, general construction and improvement obligations regarding At-Grade Rio Del Mar are as follows:
i. Developer shall be responsible for the construction
and improvement of At-Grade Rio Del Mar Segment
Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Applicable
503

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
10 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
1 at such time as set forth in the Project' s relevant
subdivision map approval, provided that Developer
shall be reimbursed by City for Developer' s full costs related to such construction and improvement of
such At-Grade Rio Del Mar Segment 1, and
provided that such full reimbursement by City to
Developer shall occur the earlier of the following
events: Within thirty (30) days of the date of the
recording of any final subdivision map regarding the
Adobe Property," or within thirty (30) days of the
date of the City's issuance of any Building Permit
regarding the Adobe Property. For the purposes of
the Development Agreement, the "Adobe Property"
shall mean that property depicted on Exhibit A to the
Development Agreement. Further, for the purposes
of the Development Agreement, Developer' s full
costs ( including without limitation, a reasonable
construction management fee in an amount
consistent with practices within the trades for such
roadway construction, and every other task required)
related to such construction and improvement of
such At-Gracie Rio Del Mar Segment l shall be
referred to as " Developer's At-Grade Rio Del Mar
Segment 1 Costs";
ii. Developer shall be responsible for the construction and improvement of At-Grade Rio Del Mar Segment
2 at such time as set forth in the Project's relevant
subdivision map approval, provided that Developer
shall be reimbursed by City for Developer's full costs
related to such construction and improvement of
such At-Grade Rio Del Mar Segment 2, with such
reimbursement being a priority, and coming from
funds City secures through City's imposition on
other development in the City some form of fees,
charges, assessments and/or other means, and further
provided that such City reimbursement obligation to
Developer shall continue until such time asDeveloper is fully so reimbursed, or the Development Agreement's Term concludes,
whichever occurs first. For the purposes of the
Development Agreement, Developer's full costs
related to such construction and improvement of
such At-Grade Rio Del Mar Segment 2 shall be
referred to as " Developer's At-Grade Rio Del Mar
Segment 2 Costs";
iii. The details of the "At-Grade Rio Del Mar Railroad
Crossing Segment" are addressed in subdivision
Occupancy
Permit
504

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
11 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
h)(4) of the Section 2.07 of the Development
Agreement;
iv. Developer shall be responsible for the construction and improvement of At-Grade Rio Del Mar Segment
3 at such time as set forth in the Project' s relevant
subdivision map approval;
v. Developer shall be responsible for the construction
and improvement of At-Grade Rio Del Mar Segment
4 at such time as set forth in the Project' s relevant
subdivision map approval; and,
vi. Developer shall be responsible for the construction and improvement of At-Grade Rio Del Mar Segment
5 at such time as set forth in the Project' s relevant
subdivision map approval.

29. §

2.07(h)(3)(B)
Pages 44-45
It is understood by the Parties that all such right-of-way dedications shall reflect the right-of-way requirements of the General Plan and Specific Plan, and that if City is responsible for securing the dedication, that City shall secure the dedication at City’ s sole cost and expense and at such time as the Parties agree is necessary to ensure the absence of Developer construction delay on the Rio Del Mar
Improvements. City shall coordinate the acquisition of rightof-way from the relevant property owner, with the goal being the full dedication of Grade-Separated Segment A and GradeSeparated Segment B, and Grade-Separated E at no cost to the Parties. The Parties recognize that if eminent domain or other City actions are necessary to acquire the right-of-way from the relevant property owner(s) needed for the construction of Grade-Separated Segment A, Grade-Separated Segment B, and Grade-Separated E, delays may occur and shall be allowed.

Should eminent domain be required, acquisition shall be by, and at the sole and exclusive cost and expense of, City.

Regarding the dedication of the relevant Segments of GradeSeparated Rio Del Mar, the following shall apply:
i. City shall secure the dedication of Grade-Separated
Rio Del Mar Segment A;
ii. City shall secure the dedication of Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar Segment B;
iii. The details of the “Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar
Railroad Crossing Segment” are addressed below in
subdivision (h)(4) of the Section 2.07 of the
Development Agreement;
Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
505

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
12 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
iv. Developer shall dedicate to City, upon the Project’ s first recorded subdivision map (e.g., the final map
relating to the Large Lot Vesting Tentative Map),
Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar Segment C;
v. Developer shall dedicate to City, upon the Project’ s first recorded subdivision map (e.g., the final map
relating to the Large Lot Vesting Tentative Map),
Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar Segment D; and
vi. City secured the dedication of Grade-Separated Rio
Del Mar Segment E through the recordation of the
Newell Parcel Map.

30. 2.07(h)(3)(C)
Pages 45-46
It is understood by the Parties that when Developer or City is required by the Development Agreement ( below) to construct or cause the financing and/or construction of) GradeSeparated Rio Del Mar improvements, such improvements shall be constructed and improved at such time as set forth in the Project’ s relevant subdivision map approval. That being stated, general construction and improvement obligations regarding Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar are as follows:
i. Developer shall be responsible for the construction
and improvement of Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar
Segment A at such time as set forth in the Project’ s
relevant subdivision map approval, provided that the
portion of the costs to Developer of constructing and
improving Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar Segment A
that is equal to “Developer’ s At-Grade Rio Del Mar
Segment 1 Costs” shall be reimbursed by City to
Developer, and provided that such reimbursement by
City to Developer (for the dollar amount of the
portion of the costs to Developer of constructing and
improving Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar Segment A
that is equal to “Developer’ s At-Grade Rio Del Mar
Segment 1 Costs”) shall occur the earlier of the
following events: Within 30 days of the date of the
recording of any final subdivision map regarding the
Adobe Property, or within 30 days of the date of any
City issuance of any Building Permit regarding the
Adobe Property.
ii. Developer shall be responsible for the construction and improvement of Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar
Segment B at such time as set forth in the Project’ s
relevant subdivision map approval, provided that the
portion of the costs to Developer of constructing and
improving Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar Segment B
that is equal to “Developer’ s At-Grade Rio Del Mar
Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
506

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
13 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

Segment 2 Costs” shall be reimbursed by City to
Developer, and provided that such reimbursement by
City to Developer ( for the dollar amount of the
portion of the costs to Developer of constructing and
improving Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar Segment B
that is equal to “Developer’ s At-Grade Rio Del Mar
Segment 2 Costs”) shall be a priority, and shall come
from funds come from funds City secures through
City’ s imposition on other development in the City
some form of fees, charges, assessments and/or other
means, and further provided that such City
reimbursement obligation to Developer shall
continue until such time as Developer is fully so
reimbursed, or the Development Agreement’ s Term
concludes, whichever occurs first.
iii. The details of the “ Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar
Railroad Crossing Segment” are addressed in the
Development Agreement;
iv. Developer shall be responsible for the construction and improvement of Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar
Segment C at such time as set forth in the Project’ s
relevant subdivision map approval;
v. Developer shall be responsible for the construction
and improvement of Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar
Segment D at such time as set forth in the Project’ s
relevant subdivision map approval; and
vi. Developer shall be responsible for the construction and improvement of Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar
Segment E at such time as set forth in the Project’ s
relevant subdivision map approval.

31. §

2.07(h)(3)(E)

It is understood by the Parties that right-of-way dedications shall reflect the right-of-way requirements of the General Plan and Specific Plan, and that if City is responsible for securing the dedication under the Development Agreement, that City shall secure the dedication at City’s sole cost and expense and at such time as the Parties agree is necessary to ensure the absence of Developer construction delay on South Napa
Junction. City shall coordinate the acquisition of right -of-way from the relevant property owner, with the goal being the full dedication of South Napa Junction Segment 1 and/or South Napa Junction Segment 2 at no cost to the Parties. The Parties recognize that if eminent domain or other City actions are necessary to acquire the right-of-way from the relevant property owner(s) needed for the construction South Napa Junction Segment 1 and/or South Napa Junction Segment 2, Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
507

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
14 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
delays may occur and shall be allowed. Should eminent
domain be required, acquisition shall be by, and at the sole and exclusive cost and expense of, City. Regarding the dedication of the relevant Segments of South Napa Junction, the
following shall apply:
i. City shall secure the dedication of South Napa
Junction Segment 1;
ii. City shall secure the dedication of South Napa
Junction Segment 2;
iii. The details of the “ South Napa Junction Railroad
Crossing” are addressed in subdivision ( h)(4) of the Section

2.07 of the Development Agreement;
The details of the “ South Napa Junction Railroad
Crossing” are addressed in subdivision ( h)(4) of the
Section 2.07 of the Development Agreement.

32. §

2.07(h)(3)(F)

General construction and improvement obligations regarding South Napa Junction are as follows:
i. Developer shall be responsible for the
construction and improvement of South Napa Junction
Segment 1 at such time as set forth in the Project’ s relevant subdivision map approval, provided that Developer shall be reimbursed by City for Developer’ s full costs related to such construction and improvement of such South Napa Junction Segment 1, and provided that such full reimbursement by City to Developer shall occur the earlier of the following events:

The recording of any final subdivision map regarding the Adobe Property,” or the City issuance of any Building Permit regarding the Adobe Property. For the purposes of the
Development Agreement, the “Adobe Property” shall mean
that property depicted on Exhibit A to the Development
Agreement. Further, for the purposes of the Development Agreement, Developer’ s full costs related to such construction and improvement of such South Napa Junction Segment 1 shall be referred to as “ Developer’ s South Napa Junction Segment 1 Costs”;
ii. Developer shall be responsible for the
construction and improvement of South Napa Junction
Segment 2 at such time as set forth in the Project’ s relevant subdivision map approval, provided that Developer shall be reimbursed by City for Developer’ s full costs related to such construction and improvement of such South Napa Junction Segment 2, with such reimbursement being a priority, and coming from funds City secures through City’s imposition on other development in the City some form of fees, charges, assessments and/or other means, and further provided that such Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
508

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
15 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

City reimbursement obligation to Developer shall continue until such time as Developer is fully so reimbursed, or the Development Agreement’ s Term concludes, whichever occurs first;
iii. The details of the “ South Napa Junction Railroad
Crossing” are addressed in subdivision ( h)(4) of the Section

2.07 of the Development Agreement;
iv. Developer shall be responsible for the
construction and improvement of South Napa Junction
Segment 3 at such time as set forth in the Project’ s relevant subdivision map approval;
v. Developer shall be responsible for the
construction and improvement of South Napa Junction
Segment 4 at such time as set forth in the Project’ s relevant subdivision map approval; and,
vi. Developer shall be responsible for the
construction and improvement of South Napa Junction
Segment 5 at such time as set forth in the Project’ s relevant subdivision map approval.

33. § 2.07(h)(4)(B)

City shall be responsible for making any and all application( s) to such relevant public agencies including without limitation the PUC for any and all such rail crossing(s), and Developer shall be responsible for coordinating and paying for the consultants needed to support that effort. Developer shall be responsible for all City Staff costs and fees relating to whichever/all railroad crossings pursued, which City Staff costs and fees reflect the amount that City actually expends for such City Staff costs and fees, which City actual expenditures shall not include any administrative fees, charges, and/or assessments; Developer shall not be responsible for the City costs and fees relating to the City Attorney, and any additional City-hired special legal counsel, regarding whichever/all railroad crossings are pursued.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable

34. §

2.07(h)(4)(C)
Pages 49-50
If Developer, in its sole and exclusive discretion, determines to pursue the At-Grade Railroad Crossing, then the following shall apply:
i. Developer shall provide City written notice that
Developer has determined to pursue the At-Grade Railroad Crossing; and
ii. Developer shall be responsible for the costs and
fees related to such At-Grade Railroad Crossing Segment.

Developer shall be responsible for all costs related to the SR 29/Rio Del Mar Tie-in, up to a maximum of $2.5 million. Any amount beyond such $2.5 million shall be subject to the Resolution Process” requirements of Section 2.03 of the Development Agreement, where the Parties will endeavor to resolve the amount in excess of $2.5 million dollars. City shall Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
509

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
16 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
be responsible for making application to all relevant public agencies - including without limitation, the California Department of Transportation (“ CalTrans”) - to secure
encroachment Permits required to build that SR 29 Tie-In Developer decides to pursue (either the SR 29/Rio Del Mar Tie-In or the SR 29/South Napa Junction Tie-In). Developer shall be responsible for the costs and fees related to such City cooperation, coordination and application, including the costs and fees related to City Staff, which City Staff costs and fees reflect the amount that City actually expends for such City Staff costs and fees, which City actual expenditures shall not include any administrative fees, charges, and/or assessments; time; however, Developer shall not be responsible for any costs and fees relating to the City Attorney and/or Special Counsel hired by City to assist. Developer shall be reimbursed by City for Developer’ s costs ( up to a maximum of $2.5 million - any amount beyond such $2.5 million shall be subject to the Resolution Process” requirements of Section 2.03 of the Development Agreement) related to such construction and improvement of such SR 29/Rio Del Mar Tie-in in two ways:

First, the first fifty percent ( 50%) of Developer’ s costs related to such construction and improvement of such SR 29/Rio Del Mar Tie-shall be reimbursed by City to Developer at the earlier of the following events: Within 30 days of the date of the recording of any final subdivision map regarding the Adobe Property, or within 30 days of the date of City’s issuance of any Building Permit regarding the Adobe Property; and
Second, the second and final 50% of Developer’ s costs related to such construction and improvement of such SR 29/Rio Del Mar Tie-shall be reimbursed by City to Developer, with such reimbursement being given priority, and such reimbursement coming from funds City secures through City’s imposition on other development in the City some form of fees, charges, assessments and/or other means, and further provided that such City reimbursement obligation to Developer shall continue until such time as Developer is fully so reimbursed, or the Development Agreement’ s Term concludes, whichever occurs first.

35. §

2.07(h)(2)(D)
Pages 50-51
If Developer, in its sole and exclusive discretion, determines to pursue the Grade-Separated Railroad Crossing, then the
following shall apply:
i. Developer shall provide City written notice that
Developer has determined to pursue the Grade-Separated
Crossing at Rio Del Mar.
ii. Developer shall be responsible for all costs and
fees related to the Grade-Separated Railroad Crossing Segment, including the costs and fees related to City Staff time, which City Staff time costs and fees reflect the amount that City Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
510

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
17 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
actually expends for such City Staff costs and fees, which City actual expenditures shall not include any administrative fees, charges, and/or assessments; however, Developer shall not be responsible for any costs and fees relating to the City Attorney and/or Special Counsel hired by City to assist.

36. §

2.07(h)(2)(E)
Pages 51-52
If neither the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Segment nor the Grade-Separated Railroad Crossing Segment is pursued by Developer and/or either or both are pursued but denied by the PUC (and/or others), and/or either or both are pursued but abandoned by Developer, then if Developer, in its sole and exclusive discretion, determines to pursue the existing at-grade railroad crossing at South Napa Junction, then the following shall apply:
i. Developer shall provide City written notice that
Developer has determined to pursue the at-grade railroad crossing at South Napa Junction; and
ii. Developer shall be responsible for the costs and
fees related to such South Napa Junction Railroad Crossing Segment.
iii. Developer shall be responsible for all costs and
fees related to the SR 29/South Napa Junction Tie-In, up to a maximum of $2.5 million. Any amount beyond such $2.5
million shall be subject to the “Resolution Process”
requirements of Section 2.03 of the Development Agreement, where the Parties will endeavor to resolve the amount in excess of $2.5 million dollars. City shall be responsible for making application to all relevant public agencies - including without limitation, the California Department of Transportation CalTrans”) - to secure encroachment Permits required to build that SR 29 Tie-In Developer decides to pursue (either the SR 29/Rio Del Mar Tie-In or the SR 29/South Napa Junction Tie-In). Developer shall be responsible for the costs and fees related to such City cooperation, coordination and application, including the costs and fees related to City Staff time, which City Staff costs and fees reflect the amount that City actually expends for such City Staff costs and fees, which City actual expenditures shall not include any administrative fees, charges, and/or assessments; however, Developer shall not be
responsible for any costs and fees relating to the City Attorney and/or Special Counsel hired by City to assist. Developer shall be reimbursed by City for Developer’ s costs (up to a maximum of $2.5 million - any amount beyond such $2.5 million shall be subject to the “Resolution Process” requirements of Section

2.03 of the Development Agreement) related to such
construction and improvement of such SR 29/South Napa
Junction Tie-In in two ways: First, the first fifty percent (50%) of Developer’ s costs related to such construction and
improvement of such SR 29/South Napa Junction Tie-In shall Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
511

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
18 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
be reimbursed by City to Developer at the earlier of the following events: The recording of any final subdivision map regarding the Adobe Property, or the City issuance of any Building Permit regarding the Adobe Property; and Second, the second and final 50% of Developer’ s costs related to such construction and improvement of such SR 29/South Napa
Junction Tie-In shall be reimbursed by City to Developer, with such reimbursement being a priority, and coming from funds City secures through City’ s imposition on other development in the City some form of fees, charges, assessments and/or other means, and further provided that such City reimbursement obligation to Developer shall continue until such time as Developer is fully so reimbursed, or the Development
Agreement’ s Term concludes, whichever occurs first.

37. §

2.07(h)(5)(B)

City and Developer shall cooperate and coordinate their efforts to secure approval of the SR 29 Tie-In that Developer decides to pursue ( either the SR 29/Rio Del Mar Tie-In or the SR 29/South Napa Junction Tie-In) in a manner to ensure the absence of Developer construction delay on either the AtGrade Rio Del Mar, Grade-Separated Rio Del Mar improvements, or South Napa Junction improvements.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable

38. 2.07(h)(6)

Relating to the Loop Road Improvements:

A. Developer shall dedicate to City at such
relevant Project subdivision map recordation date, that land described in Exhibit B to the Development Agreement.

B. Developer shall construct (or cause the
finance and construction of) at such time as set forth in the Specific Plan (and such relevant Project subdivision map approval), those roadway improvements described in Exhibit C to the Development Agreement (collectively, the “ Loop Road Improvements”). The Loop Road Improvements are
comprised of “Loop Road Segment 1,” “ Loop Road Segment 2,” and “ Loop Road Segment 3,” as shown on Exhibit B to the Development Agreement , and Exhibit A to these Master
Conditions.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable

39. 2.07(h)(7)
Pages 52-53
Relating to the Rolling Hills Drive Improvements:

A. Developer shall dedicate to City at such
relevant Project subdivision map recordation date, that land described in Exhibit B to the Development Agreement, and Exhibit A to these Master Conditions (collectively, the “Rolling Hills Drive Improvements”).

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map, SIA,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Applicable
512

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
19 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

B. Developer Developer shall construct ( or
cause the finance and construction of) at such time as the commencement of Watson Ranch Specific Plan’ s Phase 2 of residential development ( and such relevant Project subdivision map approval) or sooner if required to meet secondary access requirements for residential development, those roadway improvements described in Exhibit B to the Development
Agreement.

Occupancy
Permit

40. 2.07(h)(8)

Relating to Underground Utilities:

A. Developer shall dedicate to City at such
relevant Project subdivision map recordation date those underground utility and storm drain infrastructure
improvements within the Project subdivision map required by the Project subdivision map’ s development.

B. Developer shall construct ( or cause the
finance and construction of) at such time as set forth in such relevant Project subdivision map approval, those underground utility and storm drain infrastructure improvements within the Project required by the Project’ s development.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map; Final
Map
Recordation
Applicable

41. 2.07(k)

Developer shall dedicate to City at such relevant Project subdivision map recordation date and improve at such time as set forth in the Specific Plan and such relevant Project subdivision map approval, approximately three and fiftyfive/one hundredths (3.55) acres of the Property for use as Park A,” as more particularly set forth in Exhibit B to the Development Agreement. Developer shall be obligated to
contribute no more than five million six hundred thousand 5,600,000) for the improvement of Park A; said $5,600,000 maximum shall include any and all Processing Fees, Building Permit Fees, User Fees, and/or Inspection Fees.

Notwithstanding the forgoing, the $5,600,000 amount (for the improvement of Park A) shall be considered to be in Calendar Year 2019 dollars, and, commencing in 2020, that amount shall be increased each year by the relevant year’ s percentage amount set forth in the Construction Cost Index for the San Francisco Region, until such Park A improvements are
completed. Consistent with the foregoing, the Parties shall work together to secure that portion of Park A that sits on the Newell Property, including seeking to have the controlling owners of the Newell Property dedicate such portion to the City through existing and/or future subdivision maps.

Developer’ s obligation to improve/construct Park A shall commence only after both fee title to that portion of Park A that sits on the Newell Property has been secured and is in City Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map; Final
Map
Recordation,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
513

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
20 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
possession, and the Specific Plan’ s Phase 2 of development of the Project has commenced.

42. § 2.07(l)

Developer shall dedicate to City at such relevant Project subdivision map recordation date and improve at such time as set forth in at such relevant Project subdivision map approval, approximately five and fifty-seven/ one hundredths ( 5.57) acres for use as “ Park B,” as more particularly set forth in Exhibit B to the Development Agreement. Developer shall be obligated to contribute no more than two million eight hundred thousand dollars ($2,800,000) for the improvement of Park B; said 2,800,000 maximum shall include any and all Processing
Fees, and/or Inspection Fees. Notwithstanding the forgoing, the $2,800,000 amount (for the improvement of Park B) shall be considered to be in Calendar Year 2019 dollars, and, commencing in 2020, that amount shall be increased each year by the relevant year’ s percentage amount set forth in the Construction Cost Index for the San Francisco Region, until such Park B improvements are completed. Consistent with the foregoing, the Parties shall work together to secure that portion of Park B that sits on the Newell Property, including seeking to have the controlling owners of the Newell Property dedicate such portion to the City through existing and/or future subdivision maps. Developer’ s obligation to
improve/construct Park B shall commence only after both: fee title to that portion of Park B that sits on the Newell Property has been secured and is in City possession; and the Specific Plan’ s Phase 3 of development of the Project has commenced.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map; Final
Map
Recordation,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable

43. Developer shall dedicate to the City, at such relevant Project subdivision map recordation date, and improve at such time as set forth in such relevant Project subdivision map approval, approximately sixty-seven one hundredths (.67) acres for use as the “Napa Valley Vine Trail,” as more particularly set forth in Exhibit B to the Development Agreement. Developer shall be obligated to contribute no more than four hundred sixty thousand dollars ($460,000) for the improvement of the Napa Valley Vine Trail; said $460,000 maximum shall include any and all Processing Fees, and/or Inspection Fees.

Notwithstanding the forgoing, the $460,000 amount (for the improvement of the Napa Valley Vine Trail) shall be
considered to be in Calendar Year 2019 dollars, and,
commencing in 2020, that amount shall be increased each year by the relevant year’ s percentage amount set forth in the Construction Cost Index for the San Francisco Region, until such Napa Valley Vine Trail improvements are completed.

Consistent with the foregoing, the Parties shall work together to secure that portion of the Napa Valley Vine Trail that sits on the Newell Property, including seeking to have the controlling owners of the Newell Property dedicate such portion to the Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map; Final
Map
Recordation,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
514

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
21 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

City through existing and/or future subdivision maps. Said Developer’ s obligation to improve the Napa Valley Vine Trail shall commence only after fee title to that portion of the Napa Valley Vine Trail that sits on the Newell Property has been secured and is in City possession. The Parties recognize the City has exercised its discretion in requiring the Developer to construct various Class I trails including the Napa Valley Vine Trail and the River to Ridge Trail. The Parties shall coordinate and cooperate, including without limitation, the entering into of any necessary or desirous “ Measure T Funding Equivalent Set-Aside Agreement,” regarding the accounting procedures used to memorialize the Developer’ s costs in dedicating and improving said Class I trails with express purpose of
maximizing the amount of “Measure T Funding Equivalent
Set-Aside” defined by that certain Napa Valley Transportation Authority – Tax Authority Measure T Ordinance, and that certain Measure T Funding Agreement by and between the
City and the Napa Valley Transportation Authority – Tax Authority.

44. 2.07(n)

Developer shall dedicate to the City at such relevant Project subdivision map recordation date approximately two (2) acres of the Property for use as the “ Community Plaza and
Community Center Site” ( which includes the required parking for the use), as more particularly set forth in Exhibit B to the Development Agreement. The Parties recognize that
Developer, in Developer’ s sole and exclusive discretion, may save the “Silos” depicted in the Specific Plan, and if Developer determines to so save the Silos, then Developer may move the location of the Community Plaza and Community Center Site further south to accommodate the Silos preservation. City shall complete the improvements to the Community Plaza and the Community Center Site as set forth in the Specific Plan.

Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map; Final
Map
Recordation,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable

45. § 2.07(o)

Developer shall dedicate an easement to the City, at such relevant Project subdivision map recordation date, and improve at such time as set forth in at such relevant Project subdivision map approval, approximately six and seventy one hundredths

6.7) acres of the Property for use as the “Quarry Lake Park,” as more particularly set forth in Exhibit B to the Development Agreement. Developer shall be obligated to contribute no more than one million six hundred thousand dollars
1,600,000) for the improvement of the Quarry Lake Park; said $1,600,000 maximum shall include any and all Processing Fees, and/or Inspection Fees. Developer may, in Developer’ s sole and exclusive discretion, further improve the Quarry Lake Park with additional uses that complement the “ Napa Valley Ruins & Gardens” ( described herein). The $1,600,000
maximum (for the improvement of Quarry Lake Park) shall be considered to be in Calendar Year 2019 dollars, and,
Applicable
Parcels
Pre-Final
Map; Final
Map
Recordation,
Grading
Permit,
Construction
Permit,
Building
Permit,
Occupancy
Permit
Applicable
515

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
22 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

D. MASTER CONDITIONS – SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT

AGREEMENTS
Master
COA # Developer Obligations Mechanism Implement. Status

46. At Developer’ s expense, in a good and workmanlike manner, Developer shall furnish all required materials and labor for all of the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work shown on all Improvement Plans prepared by Developer’ s engineer of record, and submitted to and approved by City.

SIA SIA Applicable

47. Developer shall do all work and furnish all materials necessary to complete the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work in accordance with the approved Improvement Plans for the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work, or with any changes required or ordered by said City's Engineer for the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work, which, in his/ her reasonable opinion, are necessary or required to complete the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work. All construction work on the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work must be performed solely by licensed contractors, and the word "Developer" when used in this Agreement shall mean and include all such licensed contractors performing such construction on Developer's behalf or account.

SIA SIA Applicable

48. Completion of the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work shall be accomplished within 24 months of the execution of the relevant SIA, subject to the Developer protections provided by the Development Agreement, and subject to extensions granted by City .

Additionally, to the extent greater than the Developer protections provided by the Development Agreement, City shall extend the relevant SIA, as needed, in the event "good cause" is shown by Developer.

SIA SIA Applicable

49. Developer shall replace or have replaced, repair or have repaired, as the case may be, or pay to the City, the entire cost of replacements or repairs, of any and all public and/or private (non -Developer) property damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done on the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work under the relevant SIA, whether such public property be owned by the United States or any agency thereof, or the State of California, or any agency or political subdivision thereof, or by the City or by any public or private corporation, partnership or association, or by any person whomsoever, or by any combination of such owners. Such replacement and/or repair cost shall not exceed the cost of such property damage or destruction suffered.

SIA SIA Applicable
commencing in 2020, that amount shall be increased each year by the relevant year’ s percentage amount set forth in the Construction Cost Index for the San Francisco Region, until such Quarry Lake Park improvements are completed.
516

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
23 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

50. Developer shall, at Developer' s sole expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the approval and construction of the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work, give all necessary notices, and pay all fees and taxes required. Developer shall furnish to City proof of having obtained required workers' compensation insurance coverage prior to commencing any relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work.

SIA SIA Applicable

51. Developer shall ensure competent supervision of all relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work at all times. The Developer, at Developer' s expense, shall have a registered civil engineer establish the horizontal and vertical control survey, if necessa ry, to construct the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work in accordance with the plans and specifications for such relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work.

SIA SIA Applicable

52. Developer shall at all times maintain proper facilities and provide safe access for inspection to all parts of the work on the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work, and to the shops wherein the work is in preparation, to assure that the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work shall be done in accordance with the approved Improvement Plans for such relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work.

SIA SIA Applicable

53. Developer shall furnish to City all of the following:
a) A surety bond or bonds in the amount equal to 100% of the estimated cost of the on the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work, as security for the faithful performance of all the provisions of the relevant SIA, including without limitation, the repair and reconstruction of defective work on the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work. Such surety bond shall remain in effect at a minimum of thirty-five (35) days beyond the date of Notice of Completion of the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work
b) A surety bond or bonds in the amount equal to 50% of the estimated cost of the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work, as security to guarantee payment in full of all persons who perform labor upon or furnish materials to be used in construction of the relevant MBI, Public
Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work. Such surety bond shall remain in effect at a minimum of thirty-five (35) days beyond the date of Notice of Completion of the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work.
c) A surety bond in the amount of 10% of the estimated cost of the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private
Improvements work as security for the warrantee of all the provisions of the relevant SIA, including without limitation the repair and reconstruction of defective work provisions of such Agreement. Such surety bond shall remain in effect at a minimum of thirty-five (35) days beyond the date of Notice of SIA SIA Applicable
517

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
24 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

Completion of the relevant MBI, Public Improvements, and/or Private Improvements work.
d) All surety bonds referenced shall be prepared on the standard forms provided by City and available from City's Engineer. e) Consistent with the Development Agreement, other forms of surety – such as irrevocable letters of credit, cash deposits, savings account( s), certificate( s) payable to City, etc. - in a form equivalent to each said surety bonds may be proposed by Developer, and shall be accepted by City in place of such surety bonds described herein, provided such other form of surety is satisfactory to City's City Attorney, and provided that all legal expenses incurred by City in reviewing and approving said other forms of surety be paid by Developer.
f) Developer shall maintain such surety bonds and/or approved other form of surety in full force and effect consistent with the terms of the relevant SIA, including any extensions of time to such relevant SIA.

In the event Developer fails to meet the Developer obligation( s) for which the relevant surety bond or other form of approved surety was provided, then, contingent upon City having properly followed and exhausted the requirements of the Development Agreement, City shall have the right to call upon each such relevant surety bond or other approved form of surety to satisfy the Developer obligation(s) for which such relevant surety bond or other approved form of surety was provided to City.

54. Title to, and ownership of, all relevant MBI and/or Public Improvements which are to be delivered to City as shown on the Improvement Plans shall vest absolutely in City upon completion and acceptance of such relevant MBI and/or Public Improvements by City, which City shall accept.

SIA SIA Applicable

55. If, within a period of one (1) year after final acceptance by City of any MBI and/or Public Improvements work performed under the applicable SIA, any such MBI and/or Public Improvement work fails to fulfill any of the requirements of such applicable SIA or the Improvement Plans referred to therein, Developer shall, without delay and without any cost to City, repair or replace or reconstruct any such failure regarding such MBI and/or Public Improvements work. Any dispute between City and Developer on this topic shall be addressed through the provisions of the Development Agreement. City may, at its option, make the necessary repairs or replacements or perform the necessary work, again, with the provisions of the Development Agreement applying regarding the resolution of such City payment and actions. Likewise, City may, but shall not be required to and without limitation, draw upon the applicable surety bond or other approved form of security deposited by Developer and/or take such action as authorized under the relevant SIA and the Development Agreement.

SIA SIA Applicable

56. Notwithstanding any other provision of an applicable SIA, neither Developer nor any of Developer's agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of City in connection with the performance of Developer's obligations under the applicable SIA.

SIA SIA Applicable
518

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
25 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

57. Inspections, Improvement Plans review, and other services performed shall be pursuant to the Development Agreement.

SIA SIA Applicable

58. The Development Agreement shall apply regarding all inspection, Improvement Plan review, and other services performed by City or others chosen by Developer after the execution of the relevant SIA.

SIA SIA Applicable

59. In the event any such notice of breach is given and surety is present, Developer' s surety shall have the duty to take over and complete the work and the Public Improvements; provided, however, that if the surety, within ten (10) days after serving upon it such notice of breach, does not give City written notice of its intention to take over and complete the performan ce of the contract, and does not commence performance thereof within ten (10) days after notice to City of such election, City may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion by contract or any other method City may deem advisable, for the account and at the expense of Developer, and Developer' s surety shall be liable to City for any direct costs or damages occasioned City thereby, and, in such event, City without liability for so doing, may take possession of, and utilize in completing the work , such materials, appliances, plant and other property belonging to Developer as may be on the site of the work and necessary therefor.

SIA SIA Applicable

60. Developer shall not commence work under this contract until Developer shall have obtained all insurance required under this section and such insurance shall have been reasonably approved by City as to form, amount, and carrier. A lapse in any required insurance coverage during this Agreement shall be a breach of this Agreement. Developer agrees that if the aforesaid insurance is not kept in full force and effect, City may terminate this Agreement upon ten (10) days prior notice to Developer, unless Developer delivers evidence of insurance to City within such ten (10) day period.

SIA SIA Applicable

61. Developer shall take out and maintain during the life of this contract such insurance as shall protect City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, directors, attorneys, agents (including outside consultants), and employees and each of them„ and Developer and any agents and employees performing work covered by this contract from claims for damages for personal injury, including death, as well as from claims for property damage which may arise from Developer's or any sub-contractor's operations under this contract, whether such operations be by Developer or by anyone directly or indirectly employed by Developer.

SIA SIA Applicable

62. The certificate or policy of insurance shall name the City (and such, other entities or individuals of the City as are indemnified under the contract, such as "... its elected and appointed officials, officers, directors, attorneys, agents, and employees...") as additional, or co- insureds with the Developer. The amounts of such insurance shall be as follows:
a) Public Liability Insurance. In an amount not less than $1,000,000 for injuries, including, but not limited to, death to any one person and subject to the same limit for each person in an amount not less than $1,000, 000 on account of any one occurrence; SIA SIA Applicable
519

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
26 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
b) Property Damage Insurance. In an amount of not less than 1,000,000 for damage to the property of each person on account of any one occurrence;
c) Comprehensive Automobile Liability. Bodily injury liability coverage of $1,000,000 for each person in any one accident and 1,000,000 for injuries sustained by two or more persons in any one accident. Property damage liability of $1,000,000 for each accident.
d) Worker' s Compensation Insurance. In the amounts required by law.

63. City shall not, nor shall any officer, agent or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage happening or occurring in the work specified in this Agreement prior to the completion, approval and/ or acceptance of the same; nor shall the City, nor any of its elected and appointed officials, officers, directors, attorneys, agents ( including outside consultants), and employees and each of them, thereof, be liable for any persons or property injured by reason of said work or by reason of the acts or omissions of the Developer, its officers, agents or employees, in the performance of said work.

Prior to the completion, approval, or acceptance of the work, the Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and save harmless the City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, directors, attorneys, agents ( including outside consultants), and employees and each of them, from and against any and all liability, expense, including defense costs and legal fees, and claims for damages of any nature whatsoever, including, but not limited to, bodily injury, death, personal injury, or property damage arising from the Developer's operations or its services hereunder, including any workers' compensation suits, liability, or expense, arising from or connected with services by any person pursuant to this Agreement, whether arising from activities of Developer or any of Developer's contractors, subcontractors or by persons directly or indirectly employed by or acting as agent for Developer or arising out of the use of any patent or patented article in the construction of said work. Developer agrees to, and shall upon request, promptly and fully defend City and its elected and appointed officials, officers, directors, attorneys, agents (including outside consultants), and employees and each of them„ from any suits or actions at law or equity for damages caused, or alleged to have been caused, by reason of the activities hereinabove identified as being the responsibility of Developer.

SIA SIA Applicable

64. Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of the California Labor Code.

SIA SIA Applicable

65. Developer shall at all times from the effective date of this Agreement to the completion and acceptance of the Public Improvementsby the City, give good and adequate warning of each and every dangerous condition caused by the construction of said Public Improvementsand will protect the traveling public therefrom.

SIA SIA Applicable

66. Developer warrants that it has control of the real property reserved, or needed for the installation of the Public Improvements, and the streets in which it is to be placed, as is necessary to allow it to carry out its obligations under this Agreement.

SIA SIA Applicable
520

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
27 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

67. The acquisition price and costs and all other expenses of obtaining all easements required for the Public Improvementsshall be, paid by Developer. All necessary easements for the Public Improvements to be dedicated to City, if not already conveyed to City, shall be granted to City concurrently with the inspection and acceptance by the City of the relevant MBI, an/or Public Improvements.

SIA SIA Applicable

68. All service connection charges for the Public Improvementsto be constructed to serve said parcel( s) of real property shall be the amounts described in the Development Agreement.

SIA SIA Applicable

69. Upon the provision of reasonable notice, the City, its officers, agents, and employees and the Surety upon any bond shall have the right from and after the date of the execution of the relevant SIA to enter upon said parcel of real property and any property where appurtenant easements are located for purposes of inspection and investigation at any and all reasonable times.

SIA SIA Applicable

70. When relevant to the MBI and/or Public Improvemen ts work, Developer shall retain and pay the cost of the Geotechnical Engineer of Record to perform all testing and reporting of items including but not limited to, rough grading, subgrade preparation and compaction, concrete testing, and asphalt testing and compaction. Such reports shall be made available to City upon City’ s request.

SIA SIA Applicable

81. Developer shall retain and pay the cost of the Engineer of Record to certify the Private Improvements are constructed to their satisfaction and at the places, at the grades, with the materials and in the manner shown upon the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City' s Engineer.

SIA SIA Applicable
E. MASTER CONDITIONS – MITIGATION MEASURES
Master
COA # Mitigation Measures
Method of
Verification
Timing;
Parcel #
Status

82. Mitigation Measure 4.1-1: Water Tank Visibility. As required by the 2004 Proposed Water Tanks (2) Mitigated Negative Declaration, construction plans for the Zone 3 water tank shall incorporate the following mitigation:

1. A landscaped earthen berm shall be constructed around the tank site to eliminate direct views of the water tank as much as feasible from the areas surrounding the tank site.

The earthen berm shall be landscaped with trees and other vegetation suitable to the City, such as evergreen trees, to screen the water tank from surrounding areas, reduce soil erosion, and blend the berm with the surrounding vegetation.

2. The water tank shall be painted a neutral color deemed appropriate by the City so the tank blends with the surrounding hillside vegetation as much as possible.

Approval of
water tank plans
Prior to
issuance of
grading
permit

83. Mitigation Measure 4.1-3: Lighting Plan. Prior to any site disturbance activities, the Project Applicant shall submit a construction lighting plan to the City for approval. The construction lighting plan shall ensure that the minimum amount of lighting is used to meet safety requirements and to ensure that limited spillover occurs to nearby sensitive uses. All lighting shall be directed downward and away from surrounding land uses.

Design
Guidelines
Complete
upon
Design
Guidelines
approval

84. Mitigation Measure 4.2-1: Construction Fugitive Dust Emissions. The following Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Notes on
construction
plans; site
During
constructio
n activities
521

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
28 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
and additional mitigation measures for fugitive dust control shall be required for all construction activities within the project area. These measures would reduce fugitive dust emissions primarily during soil movement and grading, but also during vehicle and equipment movement on unpaved project sites.

Basic BMPs that Apply to All Construction Sites

1. All exposed surfaces ( e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.

2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off site shall be covered.

3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).

5. All streets, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes ( as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of CCR). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.

7. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’ s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.

8. A publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action, if necessary, within 48 hours. BAAQMD’ s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Additional BMPs that Apply to All Construction Sites

1. All exposed surfaces shall be watered at a frequency adequate to maintain minimum soil moisture of 12 percent. Moisture content may be verified by lab samples or moisture probe.

2. All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph.

3. Wind breaks (e.g., trees, fences) shall be installed on the windward side(s) of actively disturbed areas of construction. Wind breaks shall have at maximum 50 percent air porosity.

4. For areas that are to remain open space (e.g., not a road, building, or otherwise structurally covered area), vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast-germinating native grass seed) shall be planted in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established.

5. All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.

6. Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road shall be treated with a 6- to 12-inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.

7. Sandbags or other erosion control measures shall be installed to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than 1 percent.

Before starting on-site construction activities, the contractor or Project Applicant shall submit a site-specific dust control plan (Plan) to the American Canyon Planning Division for review and approval. The Project Applicant shall ensure that all applicable requirements of the Plan have been incorporated into the contract specifications. The Plan shall state, in inspections to
verify BMPs are
implemented
522

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
29 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
reasonable detail, how the Contractor shall meet the requirements above. The Plan shall include a certification statement that the Contractor agrees to comply fully with the Plan.

85. Mitigation Measure 4.2-2: Operational Emissions Reductions. The total reduction in ROG and NOX emissions that would be achieved from implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.2-2a , the TDM program, and Mitigation Measure 4.2-2b, the CAP mitigation strategies, would be calculated at the time the final TDM program and CAP strategies are determined. If the ROG and NOX emissions reduction from implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.2-2a and 4.2-2b are determined by a qualified air quality expert to reduce the project’ s emissions to below the BAAQMD operational thresholds contained in the 2017 BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, no further mitigation would be required. If the ROG and NOX emissions reduction from implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.2-2a and 4.2-2b do not reduce the project’ s emissions to below the BAAQMD operational thresholds identified in the 2017 BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, Mitigation Measure 4.2-2c, purchase of emission offsets, would be pursued.

Contingent on
future
conditions.

Applicable

86. Mitigation Measure 4.2-2a (same as Mitigation Measure 4.12-3a in Section 4.12, Transportation and Traffic): Transportation Demand Management ( TDM) Program.

Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the non -residential use areas ( i.e., Napa Valley Ruins & Gardens (“ NVRG”) and hotel), the Project Applicant shall develop a TDM program for the non -residential use areas ( i.e., NVRG and hotel) and shall submit the TDM program to the City Department of Public Works for review and approval. A qualified air quality expert shall prepare a calculation of the ROG and NOX emissions reductions that would result from implementation of the TDM program. The Project Applicant shall be responsible for funding and overseeing the delivery of trip reduction/TDM proposed programs and strategies, which may include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Establishment of carpool, buspool, or vanpool programs;

2. Vanpool purchase incentives;

3. Cash allowances, passes or other public transit subsidies and purchase incentives;

4. Preferential parking locations for ridesharing vehicles;

5. Computerized commuter rideshare matching services;

6. Guaranteed ride-home program for ridesharing;

7. Bicycle programs including bike purchase incentives, storage, and maintenance programs;

8. On -site car share and bike share service;

9. Preparation of a Parking Management Plan to address parking accommodations for large events;

10. Designation of an on -site transportation coordinator for the project;

11. Transit and trip planning resources such as commute information kiosk;

12. Employer-provided showers, changing rooms, and clothing lockers for office employees that commute via active transportation;

13. Bicycle route mapping resources;

14. Participation in future citywide Transportation Management Association (TMA); and

15. Submit annual reports to the City regarding TDM activities.

Approval of
TDM Program
Prior to
issuance of
first
building
permit for
the nonresidential
use area
i.e.,
NVR& G
and hotel)

87. Mitigation Measure 4.2-2b: Operational Emissions Reduction Strategies. To reduce ROG and NOX emissions within the Project Site, the Project shall include feasible operational emissions reduction strategies as part of its final design. The specific strategies may include, but are not limited to, the measures described below; however, other measures may be implemented:

Recommendations
from Air Quality
Technical Report
that identify
updated project
emissions
Prior to
issuance of
the first
building
523

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
30 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each phase of the Project, the Applicant shall develop operational emissions reduction strategies, which could include the mitigation strategies identified in Table 4.2-8, Summary of Operational CAP Mitigation Strategies, to provide options for reducing ROG and NOX emissions from operation of the project. The operational emissions reduction strategies shall be submitted to and approved by the City, prepared by a qualified air quality technical expert, and evaluate the emissions reduction strategies in relation to the project’ s emissions.
calculations and
feasible
operational
emissions
reduction
strategies
permit for
the project

88. Mitigation Measure 4.2-2c: Purchase Emission Offsets. Prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy for Phase 1 or prior to the issuance of the first residential building permit in Phase 2, whichever occurs first, the Applicant would, partially or wholly, purchase offset credits if determined to be feasible based on information available at the time implementation would be required. To reduce ROG and NOX emissions depending on the reductions achieved through Mitigation Measure 4.2-2a and Mitigation Measure 4.2-2b, and if this mitigation is implemented.

The Applicant or its designee shall pay a mitigation offset fee to the BAAQMD Bay Area Clean Air Foundation ( Foundation) 1in an amount to be determined at the time of the impact. The fee would offset emissions that exceed the threshold of significance after implementation of Project- Level Reduction Strategies and the TDM Program described above to the extent feasible.

The Project Applicant would implement Mitigation Measure 4.2-2c through payment of a mitigation offset fee to the BAAQMD’ s Foundation in an amount not to exceed $30,000 per weighted ton per year of ozone precursors per year requiring emissions offset. The fee shall be determined by the City of American Canyon Planning Division in consultation with the Applicant and be based on the type of projects available at the time of the payment. The offset fee is calculated to be roughly proportional” to the operational air quality impacts. Documentation of payment shall be provided to the City of American Canyon or its designated representative.

The current process for payment of offset fees is detailed above. As required by this mitigation measure, payment of offset fees would proceed according to BAAQMD procedures when initiated. The Applicant or its designee would enter into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the BAAQMD’s Foundation. The MOU would include details regarding the funds to be paid, the administrative fee, and the timing of the emissions reduction project. Acceptance of this fee by the BAAQMD shall serve as an acknowledgment and commitment by the BAAQMD to (1) implement an emissions reduction project(s) within a timeframe to be determined based on the type of project(s) selected and after receipt of the mitigation fee to achieve the emission reduction objectives specified above, and (2) provide documentation to City of American Canyon or its designated representative and to the Project Applicant describing the amount of and the project(s) funded by the mitigation fee, including the amount of emissions of ROG and NOX reduced (tons per year) within SFBAAB from the emissions reduction project(s). If there is any remaining unspent portion of the mitigation offset fee following implementation of the emission reduction project(s), the Project Applicant shall be entitled to a refund in that amount from the BAAQMD. To qualify under this mitigation measure, the specific emissions retrofit project must result in emission reductions within SFBAAB that would not otherwise be achieved through compliance with existing regulatory requirements.

Bay Area Air
Quality
Management
District
Memorandum of
Understanding
Prior to the
issuance of
the final
Certificate
of
Occupancy
for Phase 1
or prior to
the
issuance of
the first
residential
building
permit in
Phase 2,
whichever
occurs first
1 More information on the Bay Area Clean Air Foundation can be found at Bay Area Air Quality Management District BAAQMD), Bay Area Clean Air Foundation, 2015, available at http:// www. baaqmd. gov/about- the-air-district/ bay-areaclean- air-foundation. 524

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
31 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

89. Mitigation Measure 4.2-3a: Architectural Coatings. The applicant shall use low-VOC architectural coatings during construction for all buildings, which shall have VOC content that is more stringent than local requirements prescribed in Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Regulation 8 Organic Compounds, Rule 3 Architectural Coatings as revised on July 1, 2009. Coatings that meet the “ supercompliant" VOC standard of less than 10 grams of VOC per liter of paint would qualify.

Notes on
construction
plans indicating
use of low-VOC
architectural
coatings during
construction of
all buildings
Prior to
issuance of
building
permits

90. Mitigation Measure 4.2-3b: Tier 4 Construction Equipment. To reduce construction emissions to below the 2017 BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, prior to start of construction activities after the occupancy of Phase 1, the Project Applicant shall submit to the City either:

Documentation showing that all off-road construction equipment used prior to the start of construction activities after the occupancy of Phase 1 with greater than 25 hp and operating for more than 20 hours total over the entire duration of construction activities shall have engines that meet or exceed either U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) or California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 off-road emission standards.
or,
Provide supplemental analysis prepared by a qualified air quality specialist to show that emissions of ROG and NOX would not exceed the thresholds from the 2017 BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines using other methods.

Documentation
of compliance
with the 2017
BAAQMD
CEQA Air
Quality
Guidelines based
on the type of
construction
equipment used
or supplemental
analysis prepared
by a qualified air
quality specialist
Prior to the
start of
constructio
n activities
after the
occupancy
of Phase 1

91. Mitigation Measure 4.2-5: Construction Emissions Minimization. To reduce construction emissions to below the thresholds identified in the 2017 BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, prior to the start of construction of each of the following— Phase 1 area south of the NVRG and the off-site Rio Del Mar roadway improvements and Phase 4—the Project Applicant shall submit to the City either:

Documentation showing that all off-road construction equipment used in the southwestern portion of Phase 1 of construction (located directly south of Napa Valley Ruins & Gardens), the entirety of Phase 4 of construction, and the off-site Rio Del Mar roadway improvements with greater than 25 hp and operating for more than 20 hours total over the entire duration of construction activities shall have engines that meet or exceed either U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) or California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 2 off-road emission standards and have been retrofitted with an CARB Level 3 Verified Diesel Emissions Control Strategy.

Equipment with engines meeting Tier 4 Interim or Tier 4 Final off-road emission standards automatically meet this requirement.
or,
Provide supplemental analysis prepared by a qualified air quality specialist to show health risks at on - and off-site sensitive receptors would not exceed the thresholds from the 2017 BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines using other methods.

Documentation
of compliance
with the 2017
BAAQMD
CEQA Air
Quality
Guidelines based
on the type of
construction
equipment used
or supplemental
analysis prepared
by a qualified air
quality specialist
Prior to the
start of
constructio
n of the
Phase 1
area south
of the
NVR&G
and the offsite Rio
Del Mar
roadway
improveme
nts and
Phase 4

92. Mitigation Measure 4.2-7: GHG Emissions Reductions. The total reduction in GHG emissions that would be achieved from implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.2 -2a, the TDM program, and Mitigation Measure 4.2-7a, the GHG reduction strategies, would be calculated at the time the final TDM program and GHG reduction strategies are determined. If the GHG emissions reduction from implementation of Mitigation Measures

4.2-2a and 4.2-7a are determined by a qualified air quality expert to reduce the project’ s emissions to below the operational thresholds of 2.67 MT CO2e per service population per year, no further mitigation would be required. If the GHG emissions reduction from implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.2-2a and 4.2-7a do not reduce the project’ s Contingent Applicable
525

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
32 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
emissions to below this threshold, Mitigation Measure 4.2-7b, purchase of GHG emission offsets, would be pursued.

93. Mitigation Measure 4.2-7a: GHG Reduction Strategies. To reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions within the project site and to maximize the Project’ s ability to achieve the GHG operational threshold of 2.67 MT CO2e per service population per year, the project shall include feasible operational GHG emissions reduction strategies as part of its final design.

The specific strategies of the program may include, but are not limited to, the measures described below; however, other measures may be implemented:

All development shall, at a minimum, meet the Title 24, Part 6 (2016), standards, or the most current Title 24, Part 6, standard, whichever is more conservative. All residences shall meet the anticipated 2019 Title 24 Standards to achieve Zero Net Electricity. The GHG emissions benefit from residential Zero Net Electricity was included in the unmitigated inventory.

Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each phase of the project, the Project Applicant shall identify operational GHG emissions reduction strategies that could include the strategies identified in Table 4.2-14, Summary of Operational GHG Mitigation Strategies, which provides options for reducing GHG emissions from project operation. The operational GHG emissions reduction strategies shall be submitted to and approved by the City, developed by a qualified air quality technical expert, and evaluate the emissions reduction strategies in relation to the project’ s emissions.

Calculations
from a GHG
technical expert
based on specific
strategies
incorporated into
the project
Prior to
issuance of
building
permits for
each phase

94. Mitigation Measure 4.2-7b: Purchase GHG Emission Offsets. In order to determine whether or to what extent the purchase of GHG emissions offsets is necessary to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for each year that the GHG emissions exceed the threshold of 2.67 MT CO2e per service population per year for the lifetime of the project assumed to be 30 years), the operational GHG emissions reduction program described above in Mitigation Measure 4.2-7a will include a plan for the purchase of GHG offsets.

The amount of offsets needed will take into account the GHG emissions reductions associated with the TDM program and the operational GHG emissions reduction program.

Additionally, the feasibility of offsets shall be evaluated at the time implementation would be required. If feasible, the plan shall include:

The plan for the purchase of GHG offsets shall include timing requirements, which take into account calculations showing actual emissions of the project, which could take into account phase-in of occupancy, reductions in vehicle emissions, as well as other factors that affect emissions.

GHG emission offsets could include any of the following sources: ( 1) the California Air Resources Board (CARB) quarterly allowance auctions held as part of its Cap-and-Trade Program; (2) the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Exchange (GHG Rx); or (3) Approved Registries recognized by the State of California, which currently include the Climate Action Reserve (CAR), American Carbon Registry ACR), and Verra (formerly Verified Carbon Standard).

The amount of offsets purchased shall depend on the cost per annual metric ton of CO2e reductions, the overall cost feasibility of this measure, which shall be determined based on information available at the time implementation would be required, and the on-site GHG reduction measures.

To demonstrate compliance, the Project Applicant or its designee would provide the following documentary evidence to City’s Planning Division: An attestation from an Approved Registry or other source described above that the Project Applicant or its designee has retired a given quantity of carbon offsets. Offsets from the approved sources Calculations
from a GHG
technical expert
based on specific
strategies
incorporated into
the project and,
if necessary and
feasible,
attestation from
an Approved
Registry or other
source described
above regarding
the purchase of
required carbon
offsets
Evaluated
prior to
issuance of
building
permits for
each phase
526

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
33 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
above satisfy defined standards and incorporate principles of GHG emissions reduction accounting. These principles ensure the offsets use relevant methodologies and assumptions, represent additional reductions that would not otherwise be achieved by law, do not double count reductions, and are enforceable.

95. Mitigation Measure 4.3-1a through Mitigation Measure 4.3-41c: Special-Status Plants, California Red-Legged Frogs, Western Pond Turtle, Breeding Birds, Including Raptors and Tri-colored Blackbird, Swainson’ s Hawk, Golden Eagle, and White-Tailed Kite, Burrowing Owls, Callippe Silverspot Butterfly Host Plant (Johnny Jump Up), Callippe Silverspot Butterfly, American Badger, CDFW Streambed Alteration Agreement, Wetlands and Other Waters, Bats. Developer shall be responsible for conducting all applicable studies, and obtaining any and all permits required by any and all State and/or Federal agencies. If such permits require the Developer to provide studies, reports, mitigation or other actions or measures, then the Developer shall provide such reports, mitigation or other actions or measures to the satisfaction of such governing State and/or Federal agencies. When requested by City, Developer shall send a letter to the City explaining such Developer compliance, and shall send City copies of compliance permits, letters, and/or other authorizations received by Developer from any such State and/or Federal agencies.

Compliance
prior to issuance
of applicable
permit
Satisfied

96. Mitigation Measure 4.4-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological Resources. If prehistoric or historic- era archaeological resources are encountered by construction personnel during project implementation, all construction activities within 100 feet shall halt and the contractor shall notify the City of American Canyon. Prehistoric archaeological materials might include obsidian and chert flaked- stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, scrapers) or toolmaking debris; culturally darkened soil midden”) containing heat-affected rocks, artifacts, or shellfish remains; and stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars, pestles, handstones, or milling slabs); battered stone tools, such as hammerstones and pitted stones. Historic-era materials might include stone, concrete, or adobe footings and walls; filled wells or privies; and deposits of metal, glass, and/or ceramic refuse.

The Project Applicant shall retain a Secretary of the Interior-qualified archaeologist to inspect the findings within 24 hours of discovery and inform the City of American Canyon If it is determined that the project may damage a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource (as defined pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines), construction shall cease in an area determined by the archaeologist until a mitigation plan has been prepared in accordance with PRC § 21083.2 and CEQA Guidelines § 15126.4; approved by the City; and implemented to the satisfaction of the archaeologist. In consultation with the City, the archaeologist shall determine when construction may commence.

Consistent with § 15126.4(b)(3), the mitigation plan shall recommend preservation in place, as a preference, or, if preservation in place is not feasible, data recovery through excavation. If preservation in place is feasible, this may be accomplished through one of the following means: (1) modifying the construction plan to avoid the resource; 2) incorporating the resource within open space; ( 3) capping and covering the resource before building appropriate facilities on the resource site; or (4) deeding resource site into a permanent conservation easement. If preservation in place is not feasible, a qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a detailed treatment plan to recover the scientifically consequential information from and about the resource, which shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to any excavation at the resource site. Treatment of archaeological resources shall follow the requirements of PRC § 21083.2. Treatment for most resources shall consist of (but would not necessarily be not limited to) sample excavation, artifact collection, site documentation, and historical research, with the aim to target the recovery of important scientific data contained in the portion(s) of the Submit
documentation
of findings and
mitigation plan,
if resources are
encountered
During
grading
activities
527

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
34 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
significant resource to be impacted by the project. The treatment plan shall include provisions for analysis of data in a regional context, reporting of results within a timely manner, curation of artifacts and data at an approved facility, and dissemination of reports to local and state repositories, libraries, and interested professionals.

97. Mitigation Measure 4.4-3: Unanticipated Discovery of Paleontological Resources. If paleontological resources, such as fossilized bone, teeth, shell, tracks, trails, casts, molds, or impressions are encountered by construction personnel during project implementation, all construction activities within 100 feet shall halt and the contractor shall notify the City of American Canyon. The Project Applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist to inspect the findings within 24 hours of discovery. The paleontologist shall assess the nature and importance of the find and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in conformance with Society of Vertebr ate Paleontology standards, and in consultation with the City of American Canyon. The Project Applicant shall implement the final treatment measures.

Submit
documentation
of findings and
verification of
treatment
measures, if
resources are
encountered
During
grading
activities

98. Mitigation Measure 4.4-4: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains. If human remains are encountered by construction personnel during project implementation, all construction activities within 100 feet shall halt and the contractor shall notify the City of American Canyon. The City shall contact the Napa County Coroner to affirmatively indicate to the City that no investigation of the cause of death is required. The Native American Heritage Commission ( NAHC) shall be contacted within 24 hours if the Coroner determines that the remains are Native American. The NAHC shall then identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendant from the deceased Native American ( PRC 5097.98), who in turn shall make recommendations to the City of American Canyon for the appropriate means of treating the human remains and any associated funerary objects CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(d)).

Submit
documentation
of findings and
treatment
measures, if
remains are
encountered
During
grading
activities

99. Mitigation Measure 4.5-4: Geotechnical Requirements for the Quarry Pond. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the Project Applicant shall submit to the City plans that are consistent with the geotechnical recommendations of a minimum setback of 3:1 horizontal:vertical) from the toe of the existing quarry pond bank. Any proposed plans inside of the 3:1 setback, shall be the subject of a detailed slope stability analysis by a current California registered Geotechnical Engineer or Engineering Geologist where proposed slopes must meet minimum factor of safety requirements as determined by the most recent California Building Code for both static and dynamic (earthquake) conditions.

Graded cut-and-fill slopes over 15 feet shall be no steeper than 3:1 with slopes up to 15 feet no steeper than 2:1. Other measures, such as use of retaining walls and geogrid reinforcement or corrective grading, shall be implemented as necessary in accordance with the specific geotechnical recommendation informed by the aforementioned detailed slope stability analysis and outlined in the design level geotechnical report.

Submit grading
plans for Quarry
Lake Pond
Prior to
issuance
building
permits
100. Mitigation Measure 4.6-1a: Evaluation for Lead-Based Paint or Coatings, AsbestosContaining Materials, or Polychlorinated Biphenyls. The Project Applicant shall submit documentation to the City to verify that all proposed areas for demolition or modification have been assessed by California state licensed contractors for the potential presence of lead-based paint or coatings, asbestos containing materials, and polychlorinated biphenylcontaining equipment prior to issuance of a demolition permit.

Submit
documentation
of findings
Prior to
demolition
activities
101. Mitigation Measure 4.6-1b: Health and Safety Plan. If the assessment required by Mitigation Measure 4.6-1a finds presence of lead-based paint, asbestos, and/or polychlorinated biphenyls, prior to any construction or demolition activities on the project site, the Project Applicant shall submit to the City for approval and shall implement a health and safety plan to protect workers from risks associated with hazardous materials during abatement, demolition or renovation of affected structures.

Submit and
receive approval
of Health and
Safety Plan
Prior to
demolition
of
structures
containing
lead-based
paint,
asbestos,
and/or
528

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
35 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
polychlorin
ated
biphenyls
102. Mitigation Measure 4.6-1c: Lead-Based Paint Removal Plan. If the assessment required by Mitigation Measure 4.6-1a finds presence of lead-based paint, prior to any demolition of structures containing lead based paint, the Project Applicant shall submit to the City for approval and shall implement a lead-based paint removal plan in accordance with City and California Code of Regulations Title 8, §§ 1532.1 et seq., requirements. The plan shall specify, but not be limited to, the following elements for implementation:

Develop a removal specification approved by a Certified Lead Project Designer; 2 Ensure that all removal workers are properly trained;
Contain all work areas to prohibit off-site migration of paint chip debris; Remove all peeling and stratified lead-based paint on building and non-building surfaces to the degree necessary to safely and properly complete demolition activities according to recommendations of the survey. The demolition contractor shall be responsible for the proper containment and disposal of intact lead-based paint on all equipment to be cut and/or removed during the demolition; Provide on-site personnel and area air monitoring during all removal activities to ensure that workers and the environment are adequately protected by the control measures used;
Clean up and/or vacuum paint chips with a high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter;
Collect, segregate, and profile waste for disposal determination; or Properly dispose of all waste.

Submit and
receive approval
of Lead-Based
Paint Removal
Plan
Prior to
demolition
of
structures
containing
lead-based
paint
103. Mitigation Measure 4.6-1d: Asbestos Abatement. If the assessment required by Mitigation Measure 4.6-1a finds asbestos, prior to undertaking demolition or construction activities involving asbestos disturbance, the Project Applicant shall, demonstrate to the City that asbestos abatement shall be conducted by a California state licensed contractor prior to building demolition. Abatement of known or suspected asbestos-containing materials shall occur prior to demolition or construction activities that would disturb those materials. Pursuant to an asbestos abatement plan developed by a state-certified asbestos consultant and approved by the City, all asbestos-containing materials shall be removed and appropriately disposed of by a state certified asbestos contractor in accordance with Caltrans transportation requirements and any requirements of the receiving facility.

Submit
documentation
that abatement
has been
completed
Prior to
demolition
of
structures
containing
asbestos
104. Mitigation Measure 4.6-1e: Polychlorinated Biphenyl Abatement. If the assessment required by Mitigation Measure 4.6-1a finds polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), prior to undertaking demolition or construction activities that could disturb potential PCBs, the Project Applicant shall ensure that PCB abatement shall be conducted prior to building demolition or renovation. The Project Applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that PCBs shall be removed by a qualified contractor and transported in accordance with Caltrans requirements.

Submit
documentation
of PCB
abatement
Prior to
demolition
of
structures
containing
PCBs
105. Mitigation Measure 4.6-2a: Phase I Recommendations. Prior to commencement of construction, the Project Applicant shall contract a qualified environmental consulting firm with state registered professionals (Professional Engineers or Geologists) to carry out the recommendations contained in the April 14, 2015, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment report by ENGEO Incorporated pertaining to the potential environmental concerns. The Phase I report included recommendations for collection of surface soil samples for laboratory analysis and oversight of other earthwork activities. The findings of the soil sampling effort shall be submitted to the Napa County Environmental Health Submit
documentation
that
recommendation
s of the Phase I
Environmental
Site Assessment
have been
Prior to
commence
ment of
constructio
n
2 A Lead Project Designer is defined in CCR Title 17, Division 1, Chapter 8. 529

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
36 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

Division ( NCEHD) prior to initiating any earthwork activities on the project site for direction on whether any further sampling or remediation may be necessary. implemented, as
necessary
106. Mitigation Measure 4.6-2b: Soil Management Plan. The project shall submit and obtain approval of a Soil Management Plan from the Napa County Environmental Health Division ( NCEHD) prior to initiating any earthwork activities on the project site. During construction, the contractor shall cease any earthwork activities upon discovery of any suspect soils or groundwater ( e.g., petroleum odor and/or discoloration) during construction in accordance with a Soil Management Plan prepared for the project by a qualified environmental consultant and approved by the NCEHD. The contractor shall notify the NCEHD upon discovery of suspect soils or groundwater and retain a qualified environmental firm to collect soil samples to confirm the level of contamination that may be present. If contamination is found to be present, any further proposed groundbreaking activities within areas of identified or suspected contamination shall be conducted according to a site specific health and safety plan, prepared by a California state licensed professional. The contractor shall follow all procedural direction given by NCEHD and in accordance with the Soil Management Plan prepared for the site to ensure that suspect soils are isolated, protected from runoff, and disposed of in accordance with transportation laws and the requirements of the licensed receiving facility.

Submit NCEHDapproved Soil
Management
Plan and Health
and Safety Plan,
as necessary
Prior to
grading and
during
constructio
n
107. Mitigation Measure 4.6-2c: Removal of Contaminated Soil or Groundwater. If contaminated soil or groundwater is encountered and identified constituents exceed human health risk levels, the Project Applicant shall submit documentation to the City to verify that it has been delineated, removed, and disposed of off site in compliance with the receiving facilities’ requirements prior to construction of any building foundation.

Submit
documentation
of removal of
contaminated
soil or
groundwater, if
encountered
Prior to
constructio
n of any
building
foundation
108. Mitigation Measure 4.6-4: Development within 50 Feet of the Pacific Gas & Electric PG&E) Pipeline/Easement. Prior to issuance of building or grading permits, Project Applicant shall submit documentation to the City to verify that development plans located within 50 feet of the existing PG& E pipeline/easement, including utilities that may intersect the existing PG&E pipeline, have been submitted to PG& E Gas Transmission Integrity Management and PG& E Land Development for review and approval. Project Applicant plans for all proposed improvements located within this zone shall adhere to the requirements of PG&E Gas Transmission Integrity Management and PG& E Land Development, including without limitation, setback requirements, depth of cover over pipeline, location of trees and maintenance requirements, minimum separation of crossing utilities, trail location, as well as any relocation requirements, if applicable.

Submit
development
plans for any
activities within
50 feet of the
existing PG& E
pipeline/easemen
t
Prior to
issuance of
building or
grading
permits for
any
activities
within
50 feet of
the existing
PG&E
pipeline/ea
sement.
109. Mitigation Measure 4.7-1: Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Prior to issuance of grading permits for the project, the Project Applicant shall submit documentation to the City to verify that a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan SWPPP) has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit.

The SWPPP shall be designed, without limitation, to address the following objectives:
1) all pollutants and their sources, including sources of sediment associated with construction, construction site erosion, and all other activities associated with construction activity are controlled; (2) where not otherwise required to be under a Regional Water Quality Control Board permit, all non -stormwater discharges are identified and either eliminated, controlled, or treated; (3) site best management practices (BMPs) are effective and result in the reduction or elimination of pollutants in stormwater discharges and authorized non -stormwater discharges from construction activity; and (4) stabilization BMPs are installed to reduce or eliminate pollutants after construction is completed. The SWPPP shall be prepared by a qualified SWPPP developer and included as part of Submit
Stormwater
Pollution
Prevention Plan
Prior to
issuance of
grading
permits
530

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
37 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
construction specifications. The SWPPP shall include the minimum BMPs required for the identified Risk Level in accordance with NPDES Construction General Permit requirements. BMPs could include, but are not necessarily limited to the use of straw bales, silt fences, fiber rolls, hydroseeding, preservation of existing vegetation, straw mulch, washing of truck tires prior to exiting site, protection of existing storm drain inlets, dedicated refueling areas with secondary containment, and on -site storage of spill prevention kits. BMP implementation shall be consistent with the BMP requirements in the most recent version of the California Stormwater Quality Association Stormwater Best Management Handbook- Construction or the Caltrans Stormwater Quality Handbook Construction Site BMPs Manual.
110. Mitigation Measure 4.7-2: Water Discharge Requirements for Dewatering. For areas that may encounter groundwater during excavation activities, the Project Applicant shall incorporate San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFRWQCB) discharge requirements into construction specifications for any dewatering activities that may be necessary. The Project Applicant shall provide all requested plans and protocols and incorporate any SFRWQCB additional comments or requests into project specifications for construction activities. Dewatering plans shall include, without limitation, an assessment of water quality, protocols for containment, and thresholds for discharge. No discharge of pumped water for dewatering shall occur prior to approval from SFRWQCB.

Submittal of
dewatering plans
During
excavation
and grading
activities
111. Mitigation Measure 4.7-3a: Post-Construction Stormwater Controls. Prior to approval of tentative maps or issuance of building permits for the project, the Project Applicant shall submit documentation to the City to verify that post -construction stormwater controls have been included in the site design in accordance with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) Phase II Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) Permit and the Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA) Post-Construction Manual. The Project Applicant shall prepare the final Stormwater Control Plan (SCP) and any necessary changes by the City or the SFRWQCB shall be incorporated into project design plans to ensure the required controls are in place and adhere to the requirements of the NPDES Phase II Small MS4 Permit and consistent with the BASMAA manual. At a minimum, the SCP shall demonstrate how the following measures shall be incorporated into the project:

Low-impact development (LID) site design principles (e.g., preserving natural drainage channels, treating stormwater runoff at its source rather than in downstream centralized controls);
Source control best management practices (BMPs) in the form of design standards and structural features for all proposed areas of development; Source control BMPs for landscaped areas shall be documented in the form of a Landscape Management Plan that relies on Integrated Pest Management and also includes pesticide and fertilizer application guidelines designed to minimize any offsite discharge; and Treatment control measures (e.g., bioretention, porous pavement, vegetated swales) targeting any potential pollutants such as sediment, pathogens, metals, nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus compounds), oxygen-demanding substances, organic compounds (e.g., PCBs, pesticides), oil and grease, and trash and debris. The SCP shall demonstrate that the project has the land area available to support the proposed BMP facilities sized per the required water quality design storm.

Submit
documentation
of compliance
with the NPDES
Phase II Small
Municipal
Separate Storm
Sewer Systems
Permit and the
Bay Area
Stormwater
management
Agencies
Association
Post-construction
Manual
Prior to
approval of
tentative
maps or
issuance of
building
permits
112. Mitigation Measure 4.7-3b: Compliance with the MS4 Permit. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the Project Applicant shall submit documentation to the City to demonstrate adherence to Provision E.12.h of the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) Permit, which requires that an Operation and Maintenance Program is implemented for post-construction stormwater management features. Responsible parties and funding for long-term maintenance of all Best Management Practices (BMPs) must be Submit
documentation
that an Operation
and Maintenance
Program has
been
Prior to
issuance of
building
permits
531

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
38 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.
specified within the Operation and Maintenan ce Plan. This Plan shall specify a regular inspection schedule of stormwater treatment facilities in accordance with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) MS4 Permit. Reports documenting inspections and any remedial action conducted shall be submitted regularly to the City for review and approval.
implemented for
post-construction
stormwater
management
features
113. Mitigation Measure 4.9-1: Construction Noise. To reduce the potential for noise impacts due to construction of the project, the Project Applicant shall require construction contractors to implement the following measures:

Stationary construction noise sources shall not be located within 200 feet of residence.

If necessary to locate this equipment within 200 of existing residences, stationary equipment shall be shielded by temporary noise barriers or acoustic enclosures that are long and tall enough to break line of sight.

Noise barriers or shielding shall be erected for construction work associated with on - site construction activities that involves heavy construction equipment and occurs within 200 feet of residences for an extended period of time (i.e., more than 2 weeks).

The barriers shall be long enough to break line of sight and at least 8 feet in height.

Equipment warm up areas and equipment storage areas shall not be located closer than 500 feet of adjacent residences.

All heavy construction equipment and all stationary noise sources ( such as diesel generators) shall have properly functioning manufacturer -installed mufflers.

Stationary noise sources, such as temporary generators and pumps, shall be positioned as far from nearby receivers as possible, within temporary enclosures and shielded by barriers ( which could reduce construction noise by as much as 5 dB), or other measures, to the extent feasible.

Use “ quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary equipment where such technology exists.

Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines.

To further reduce the potential for impacts, a Construction Noise Management Plan shall be prepared and shall include the following:

A process by which to provide a minimum of 2 weeks’ advance notice to all residences located within 200 feet of construction activities that are expected to occur for a period of 2 weeks or longer within a defined area, including the approximate start and end dates of such activities.

Signs shall be posted at all project entrances upon commencement of construction for the purposes of informing all contractors/subcontractors, their employees, agents, material haulers, and all other persons at the project of the basic requirements of Mitigation Measure 4.9-1.

Publicly visible signs shall be posted on security fencing at multiple locations around the perimeter of the project construction boundary that include:

Permitted construction days and hours.

A telephone number and designated person to contact for registering noise complaints. The designated person shall be available to respond to, and if necessary through complaint verification, take corrective action to ensure that noise emissions from the offending equipment or activity is addressed.

Corrective action shall be applied immediately if feasible, and within no later than 48 hours after receipt of the noise complaint. The designated person shall track complaints and corrective actions taken to resolve noise complaint issues.

Submit
documentation
verifying
implementation
of mitigation
implementation,
including
construction
Noise
Management
Plan
During
constructio
n activities
114. Mitigation Measure 4.12-3a (same as Mitigation Measure 4.2-2a in Section 4.2, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions): Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the non-residential use areas (i.e., TDM program Prior to
issuance of
first
532

MASTER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR AC-1 PORTION OF WATSON RANCH
39 Copyright © 2020 by Michael Patrick Durkee. All rights reserved. No portion of these Master Conditions may be reproduced, stored for retrieval or used or reused in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Michael Patrick Durkee.

Napa Valley Ruins & Gardens [ NVR&G] and hotel), the Project Applicant shall develop a TDM program for the non-residential use areas (i.e., NVR&G and hotel) and shall submit the TDM program to the City Department of Public Works for review and approval. The Project Applicant shall be responsible for funding and overseeing the delivery of trip reduction/ TDM proposed programs and strategies, which may include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Establishment of carpool, buspool, or vanpool programs;

2. Vanpool purchase incentives;

3. Cash allowances, passes or other public transit subsidies and purchase incentives;

4. Preferential parking locations for ridesharing vehicles;

5. Computerized commuter rideshare matching services;

6. Guaranteed ride-home program for ridesharing;

7. Bicycle programs including bike purchase incentives, storage, and maintenance programs;

8. On -site car share and bike share service;

9. Preparation of a Parking Management Plan to address parking accommodations for large events;

10. Designation of an on -site transportation coordinator for the project;

11. Transit and trip planning resources such as commute information kiosk;

12. Employer- provided showers, changing rooms, and clothing lockers for office employees that commute via active transportation;

13. Bicycle route mapping resources;

14. Participation in future citywide Transportation Management Association (TMA); and

15. Submit annual reports to the City regarding TDM activities. building
permit for
the nonresidential
use area
i.e.,
NVR& G
and hotel)
115. Mitigation Measure 4.12-9: Construction Management Plan. The Project Applicant shall develop and submit a Construction Management Plan (CMP) to the City of American Canyon prior to commencement of any construction activities, including construction activities associated with the transportation mitigation measures. The provisions of a CMP shall specifically address the characteristics of construction -related traffic associated with development. Such plans identify construction phasing and the level and type of construction-related traffic. The CMP shall identify construction truck routes to access the WRSP site, lane closures on existing public streets (if needed) including a plan for any necessary traffic control measures, and on-site staging requirements, and other information as required by the City.

Once the construction truck routes have been approved, but before construction has started, the Project Applicant shall conduct a survey of existing conditions of pavement along the approved truck routes and submit documentation of the results to the City.

When construction has been substantially completed such that there would be no further construction truck trips, the Project Applicant shall re-survey the construction truck routes. The Project Applicant shall be responsible for repairing damage to roadways used for construction vehicle access to the site and attributable to the project so that the roadway conditions are returned to their pre-construction conditions (or better) as documented in the pre-construction survey along the truck routes following the construction of the project.

Construction
Management
Plan
Prior to
constructio
n activities
533

MARCUS ROAD MARCUS ROAD
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45
46 47 48
49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61
62 63
64 65
66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78
79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115 119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136 STREET A

STREET B

STREET D

STREET C

PARCEL E (ALLEY E) PARCEL F (ALLEY F) PARCEL G (DRIVE G) PARCEL H (DRIVE H) PARCEL I (DRIVE I) PARCEL J (DRIVE J) PARCEL K (DRIVE K) PARCEL L (DRIVE L) PARCEL M (DRIVE M) PARCEL A

PARCEL B

PARCEL C

PARCEL D CARTIER STREET

PARCEL N

PARCEL O

MARCUS ROAD
116
117
118

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP

OF SHEETS
SHEET NO.

TM-1
0 60 120 180 9
WATSON RANCH - LOT 7

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON NAPA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 80' DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2024
PL24-0012

CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS

SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM

ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916) 788-4456
G:\1217-063\ACAD\VTM\TM01_VTM.DWG
LEGEND

EXISTING PROPOSED DESCRIPTION

GENERAL NOTES ABBREVIATIONS
SITE
1"=60'

SHEET INDEX
Sheet Number Sheet Title

VICINITY MAP
534
D
D
D
D
C
C
E E
E E
A A
19 20 21 22 PARCEL G PARCEL H PARCEL J

PARCEL E PARCEL F PARCEL K PARCEL L PARCEL M

PARCEL B

PARCEL C

MARCUS ROAD MARCUS ROAD MARCUS ROAD

ALLEY E
111
112
113
114 118
117
116
115 119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126 130
129
128
127 131
132
133 136
135
134
79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
67 73 74 75 76 77 78
17 18 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
32 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46
47 48
49 66
65 64
63 62 57 58 59 60 61
56 51 52 53 54 55
50 91
92 93 96
95 94 97
98 99 102
101
100
103
104
105
108
107
106 109
110

ALLEY F DRIVE G DRIVE H DRIVE I DRIVE J DRIVE K DRIVE L DRIVE M

STREET B STREET C STREET A

PARCEL A CARTIER STREET

PARCEL N
C

C PARCEL I
68 69 70 71 72

PARCEL D
A A

EXISTING EVA

PARCEL O

STREET D
B
B
19 20 21 22

ALLEY E

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP

OF SHEETS
SHEET NO.

TM-2
0 50 100 150 9
WATSON RANCH - LOT 7

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON NAPA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 80' DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2024
PL24-0012

CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS

SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM

ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916) 788-4456
G:\1217-063\ACAD\VTM\TM02_VTM.DWG
1" = 50'

TYPICAL PRIVATE SIDE YARD EASEMENT DETAIL
LEGEND

LINEWORK DESCRIPTION
535

SECTION A-A

SECTION B-B SECTION C-C

SECTION D-D SECTION E-E

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP

OF SHEETS
SHEET NO.

TM-3
NOT TO SCALE 9
WATSON RANCH - LOT 7

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON NAPA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 80' DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2024
PL24-0012

CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS

SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM

ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916) 788-4456
G:\1217-063\ACAD\VTM\TM02_VTM.DWG
NTS

NON-STREET

PARCEL AREAS
PARCEL AREA (SF±)

STREET PARCEL AREAS
PARCEL AREA (SF±)

LOT AREAS
LOT AREA (SF±) LOT AREA (SF±)

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
536

OHW OHW OHW OHW OHW
OHW
OHW
OHW
OHW
OHW
OHW
OHW

FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO II

MARCUS ROAD MARCUS ROAD MARCUS ROAD

EXISTING CONDITIONS

OF SHEETS
SHEET NO.

TM-4
0 50 100 150 9
WATSON RANCH - LOT 7

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON NAPA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 80' DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2024
PL24-0012

CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS

SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM

ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916) 788-4456
G:\1217-063\ACAD\VTM\TM04_EX CONDITIONS.DWG
1"=50'
LEGEND

EXISTING
FO
OHW

EXISTING
I

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
537
I
I
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78
79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136

PARCEL B

EX EVA

MARCUS ROAD STREET A

STREET B

STREET D

STREET C

ALLEY E

ALLEY F DRIVE G DRIVE H DRIVE I DRIVE K DRIVE L DRIVE M

PARCEL C

PARCEL N DRIVE J

MARCUS ROAD

PRELIMINARY STORM DRAIN TABLE

STRUCTURE RIM INV PIPE SIZE (IN) SLOPE LENGTH (LF)

PRELIMINARY STORM DRAIN TABLE

STRUCTURE RIM INV PIPE SIZE (IN) SLOPE LENGTH (LF)

PRELIMINARY STORM DRAIN TABLE

STRUCTURE RIM INV PIPE SIZE (IN) SLOPE LENGTH (LF)

PRELIMINARY SANITARY SEWER TABLE

STRUCTURE RIM INV PIPE SIZE (IN) SLOPE LENGTH (LF)

PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN

OF SHEETS
SHEET NO.

TM-5
0 50 100 150 9
WATSON RANCH - LOT 7

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON NAPA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 80' DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2024
PL24-0012

CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS

SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM

ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916) 788-4456
G:\1217-063\ACAD\VTM\TM05_UTILITY PLAN.DWG

NO SCALE
LEGEND

EXISTING PROPOSED DESCRIPTION

PARCEL O

PARCEL A

PARCEL D
1" = 50'

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP

TYPICAL ALLEY UTILITY SERVICE DETAIL
538
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46
47 48
49 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 17 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63
64 65
66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78
79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
C
C
D
D
F
F
G
G
I
I
B B
H
H
J
J
A A

STREET B STREET C

ALLEY E ALLEY F DRIVE G DRIVE H DRIVE I DRIVE J DRIVE K DRIVE L

PARCEL C

K K DRIVE M
J J
K
K
L L
E
E

STREET D STREET A

PRELIMINARY GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN

OF SHEETS
SHEET NO.

TM-6
0 50 100 150 9
WATSON RANCH - LOT 7

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON NAPA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 80' DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2024
PL24-0012

CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS

SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM

ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916) 788-4456
G:\1217-063\ACAD\VTM\TM06_GRADING & DRAINAGE.DWG

PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN CHART

PRELIMINARY EARTHWORK SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION CUT (±CY) FILL (±CY)

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
1"=50'
LEGEND

EXISTING PROPOSED DESCRIPTION
539

SECTION A-A SECTION B-B SECTION C-C SECTION D-D

SECTION H-H

SECTION E-E SECTION F-F SECTION G-G

SECTION I-I

SECTION K-K

SECTION J-J

SECTION L-L

PRELIMINARY GRADING CROSS SECTIONS

OF SHEETS
SHEET NO.

TM-7
0 120 240 360 9
WATSON RANCH - LOT 7

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON NAPA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 80' DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2024
PL24-0012

CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS

SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM

ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916) 788-4456
G:\1217-063\ACAD\VTM\TM06_GRADING & DRAINAGE.DWG

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
540
111
112
113
114 118
117
116
115 119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126 130
129
128
127 131
132
133 136
135
134
79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46
47 48
49 66
65 64
63 62
50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61
91 92
93 96
95 94 97
98 99 102
101
100
103
104
105
108
107
106 109
110

PARCEL C

PARCEL B

PARCEL N STREET A DRIVE G

STREET B STREET C

STREET D

ALLEY E ALLEY F DRIVE H DRIVE I DRIVE J DRIVE K DRIVE L DRIVE M

EX EVA

EX UTILITY ACCESS ROAD EX UTILITY ACCESS ROAD UTILITY ACCESS ROAD

MARCUS ROAD
DMA 1
DMA 1
DMA 2

MARCUS ROAD
DMA 3

PARCEL D

PARCEL O

PARCEL A

MARCUS ROAD
LOT 7 STORMWATER TREATMENT SUMMARY

DMA ID DRAINAGE AREA
(SF±)

SURFACE
TYPE
RUNOFF
FACTOR
SIZING
FACTOR

TREATMENT AREA
REQUIRED (SF±)

BASIN D AREA
PROVIDED (SF±)

PRELIMINARY STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN

OF SHEETS
SHEET NO.

TM-8
0 50 100 150 9
WATSON RANCH - LOT 7

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON NAPA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 80' DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2024
PL24-0012

CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS

SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM

ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916) 788-4456
G:\1217-063\ACAD\VTM\TM08_SWCP.DWG

EXISTING PROPOSED DESCRIPTION
LEGEND
DMA #

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
1"=50'
541
111
112
113
114 118
117
116
115 119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126 130
129
128
127 131
132
133 136
135
134
79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46
47 48
49 66
65 64
63 62
50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61
91 92
93 96
95 94 97
98 99 102
101
100
103
104
105
108
107
106 109
110

PARCEL C

PARCEL B

PARCEL N STREET A DRIVE G

STREET B STREET C

STREET D

ALLEY F DRIVE H DRIVE I DRIVE K DRIVE L DRIVE M

UTILITY ACCESS ROAD EX UTILITY ACCESS ROAD UTILITY ACCESS ROAD

MARCUS ROAD MARCUS ROAD

PARCEL O EXISTING WETLAND

MARCUS ROAD

PARCEL D EX EVA

ALLEY E

AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK
S
S
S
S
S
S
S

S S S S
S S

S CARTIER STREET

PARCEL A AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK

AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK

AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK

AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK DRIVE J
30°
60° 90°
120°
150°
180°

AMERICAN CANYON FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS

PRELIMINARY CIRCULATION & FIRE TRUCK ACCESS PLAN

OF SHEETS
SHEET NO.

TM-9.1
0 50 100 150 9
WATSON RANCH - LOT 7

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON NAPA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 80' DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2024
PL24-0012

CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS

SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM

ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916) 788-4456
G:\1217-063\ACAD\VTM\TM09_CIRCULATION & TRUCK ACCESS.DWG LEGEND
S
1"=50'

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
542
111
112
113
114 118
117
116
115 119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126 130
129
128
127 131
132
133 136
135
134
79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46
47 48
49 66
65 64
63 62
50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61
91 92
93 96
95 94 97
98 99 102
101
100
103
104
105
108
107
106 109
110

PARCEL C

PARCEL B

PARCEL N STREET A DRIVE G

STREET B STREET C

STREET D

ALLEY F DRIVE H DRIVE I DRIVE K DRIVE L DRIVE M

UTILITY ACCESS ROAD EX UTILITY ACCESS ROAD UTILITY ACCESS ROAD

MARCUS ROAD MARCUS ROAD

PARCEL O EXISTING WETLAND

MARCUS ROAD

PARCEL D EX EVA

AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK

ALLEY E

AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK

AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK

AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK

AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK S
S
S
S
S
S
S

S S S S
S S

S CARTIER STREET

PARCEL A

AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK

AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK

AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK DRIVE J AMERICAN CANYON AERIAL LADDER TRUCK 30°
60° 90°
120°
150°
180°

AMERICAN CANYON FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS

PRELIMINARY CIRCULATION & FIRE TRUCK ACCESS PLAN

OF SHEETS
SHEET NO.

TM-9.2
0 50 100 150 9
WATSON RANCH - LOT 7

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON NAPA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 80' DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2024
PL24-0012

CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS

SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM

ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916) 788-4456
G:\1217-063\ACAD\VTM\TM09_CIRCULATION & TRUCK ACCESS.DWG LEGEND
S
1"=50'

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
543
Watson Ranch Lot 7 – Location Map
Attachment 2
544
WATSON RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT CHAPTER 7 - CIRCULATION | 91 Figure 7.5: Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation

NAPA VALLEY VINE TRAIL
artboard 2
artboard 3
29 Circulation Plan (Replacement Figure 7.1)

MARCUS ROAD

MARCUS ROAD

NEWELL DRIVE

RIO DEL MAR EAST

ROLLINGHILLSDRIVE

ROLLINGHIL LSDRIVE

SUMMERWOOD DRIVE

SOUTH NAPA JUNCTION RD

NAPA JUNCTION RD NAPA JUNCTION RD

SOUTH NAPA JUNCTION RD

EUCALYPTUSDR

SUMMERWOOD DRIVE

RIO DEL MAR EAST RIO DEL MAR EAST

ROLLINGHIL LSDRIVE

EUCALYPTUSDR

NAPA VALLEY VINE TRAIL

CONNECTION TO

PROPOSED RIVER TO

RIDGE TRAIL
LEGEND
ON-STREET BIKE LANE*

OFF-STREET BIKE/

PEDESTRIAN TRAIL

WRSP BOUNDARY
Unless otherwise noted, all other
streets incorporate Class III bike lanes.
*On both sides of the street, except
Rio Del Mar East (north side only)

EXISTING NEWELL

OPEN SPACE TRAIL NAPA VALLEY VINE TRAIL

RIVER TO RIDGE TRAIL

MALLEN WAY MALLEN WAY

CONNECTION TO

PLANNED NAPA

VALLEY VINE TRAIL
0 300 600 1200
N
rev - 03-13-2023
ATTACHMENT 3
Watson Ranch Trail Exhibit
545

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON CITY COUNCIL

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
On Tuesday, November 19, 2024, at the hour of 6:30 p.m., at 4381 Broadway, Suite 201 (in the American Canyon City Council Chambers), a public hearing will be held by the City Council of the City of American Canyon to consider the following application:

APPLICATION: The City Council will consider a Resolution to approve a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for development of 136 single-family detached homes on a 12.86-acre site in the Watson Ranch Specific Plan Medium Density Residential 16 (WRSP MDR16) Zone, APN 059- 430-045 (File No. PL24-0012)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Planning Commission reviewed the project on October 24, 2024 and recommended City Council Approval. The applicant proposes to develop the Watson Ranch Lot 7 Subdivision consisting of 136 singlefamily lots, 4 public streets, 9 private drives, and 6 non-residential parcels. The project site is west of the Marcus Rd and Cartier Street intersection and accessible by Marcus Rd.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The proposed Watson Ranch Lot 7 Subdivision Map was contemplated “Project Approvals” analyzed under the Project FEIR and the Watson Ranch Specific Plan Development Agreement.

Under CEQA, the Watson Ranch Specific Plan Project FEIR is a program EIR and is generally assumed to be used at a "development level." See, e.g., CEQA Guidelines § 15168. There is no substantial evidence of changed circumstances under CEQA Guidelines section 15162 requiring further CEQA review as the whole of the approvals sought are contemplated under the Project FEIR analysis.

PROJECT LOCATION: Vacant lot west of Marcus Rd and Cartier Street; APN 059-430-045 APPLICANT: KB Homes
All interested persons are invited to attend the meeting and be heard on this matter. Copies of all documents that relate to the above-described project may be examined at the Community Development Department office prior to the hearing. The meeting will be conducted in person and by teleconference via a Zoom connection where the City Council and staff will participate with both audio and video presence.

The meeting will be accessible for all members of the public to attend via the City’s website, YouTube, and Cable TV Channel 28 and public comments enabled via email and phone.

Written comments may be submitted to Taresa Geilfuss, CMC, City Clerk by email at [email protected]. Hardcopy comments may be delivered to City Hall at 4381 Broadway, Suite 201, American Canyon, CA 94503, prior to the public hearing or to the City Council meeting. Electronic 546
comments may be submitted up to 3 pm on the day of the hearing on our website at this link:
https://www.americancanyon.gov/Work/Local-Government/City-Hall/City-Clerk/Meetings-Agendas.

If you challenge the particular proceedings in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City prior to the public hearing.

Public meetings/events sponsored or conducted by the City of American Canyon are held in accessible sites.

Requests for accommodations may be made by calling (707) 647-5310 (voice) or 711 for the California Relay Service or by e-mailing the ADA Coordinator at [email protected] at least 72 hours in advance of the event. Copies of documents distributed at the meeting are available in alternative formats upon request.
_____________________________
Taresa Geilfuss, CMC City Clerk
Date: November 4, 2024
Publication Date: November 8, 2024
547
ATTACHMENT 4
548
549
550
551
552
Watson Ranch Lot 7 Project Comments
Date* 07/05/2024
Name* Jeff
Company
Email*
Phone
Please
Number
check all
*
that
-
I own a home in American Canyon
apply* I rent a home in American Canyon
Address*
I own a business in American Canyon
I work in American Canyon
None of the above
Street Address
Address Line 2
City
american canyon
Postal / Zip Code
94503
State / Province / Region
California
Country
United States
Comments* If comments are being provided through the upload of a document, please indicate so.

The attached project documents are for another development.

File Upload
ATTACHMENT 5
553
From: William He
To:

Cc: Brent Cooper; Nicolle Hall
Subject: Watson Ranch Lot 7 Project
Date: Friday, July 5, 2024 4:03:39 PM
Attachments: Watson Ranch Lot 7 Project Comments - 07.05.2024.pdf Hi Jeff,
Thank you for commenting on the Watson Ranch Lot 7 project. Staff has fixed the incorrect link to the project page. Please see the project files at this link. If you have any questions or comments, feel free to submit a follow-up comment.

Kind regards,
William He, AICP
Senior Planner, Community Development Department
City of American Canyon | 4381 Broadway Street, Suite 201 | American Canyon, CA 94503 707 647 4337 | [email protected]
www.cityofamericancanyon.org
554
555
From: William He
To: ; Van Gorder, Mark
Cc: Brent Cooper; Erica Ahmann Smithies; Edison Bisnar; Nicolle Hall; Marcus, Jerry Subject: Fw: Watson Ranch Lot 7 Project Comments
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 10:19:41 AM
Attachments: Watson Ranch Lot 7 Project Comments.pdf
Hi Greg,
Thank you for submitting your comment regarding a PG&E pipeline in Watson Ranch. We have forwarded your question to Mark Van Gorder, PG&E correspondent for the North Bay, copied on this e-mail.

Kind regards,
William He, AICP
Senior Planner, Community Development Department
City of American Canyon | 4381 Broadway Street, Suite 201 | American Canyon, CA 94503 707 647 4337 | [email protected]
www.cityofamericancanyon.org
From: Laserfiche Notification <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 10:29 PM
To: Brent Cooper <[email protected]>; William He <[email protected]>; Nicolle Hall <[email protected]> Subject: Watson Ranch Lot 7 Project Comments
A comment form has been submitted for the Watson Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Project. 556

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
NOVEMBER 19, 2024

STAFF REPORT

PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM NUMBER: 17.

TITLE
SDG 220 Warehouse EIR and CUP

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolu)on to (i) cer)fy the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2023100842), and (ii) adop)ng CEQA Findings of Fact, (iii) adop)ng a Statement of Overriding Condi)ons, and (iv) adopt a Mi)ga)on Monitoring and Repor)ng Program for the SDG Commerce 220 Distribu)on Center Project located at 1055 Commerce Court, APN 058-030-069 (File Number PL23-0017); and Adopt a Resolu)on approving the SDG Commerce 220 Distribu)on Center Condi)onal Use Permit for development of a 219,834 square foot wine warehouse on a 10.45-acre site located at 1055 Commerce Court, APN 058-030-069 (File number PL23-0017).

CONTACT
William He, AICP, Senior Planner

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS
Table 1: Site Information
General Plan Designation Commercial Recreation (CR)
Zoning District Recreation and Open Space (REC)
Site Size 10.45 acres
Present Use Vacant Site
Surrounding Zoning and Uses
North: REC / SDG Commerce 217 Distribution
Center
South: REC / SDG Commerce 330 Distribution
Center
East: REC / A residence and the Paintball Jungle
amongst a eucalyptus grove
West: REC / North Slough, undeveloped
eucalyptus grove
Access Commerce Court by way of Green Island Road
Commerce Court Setback Required: 15 feet Provided: 70 feet plus 557
I. Background
Project Description
SDG Commerce 220, LLC (Applicant) proposes to develop a 219,834 square-foot wine storage and distribu)on center on the 10.45-acre parcel at 1055 Commerce Ct in the recrea)on (REC) zone. The warehouse includes 23 truck doors and approximately 4,400 square feet of office space.

The one-story building would have a maximum height of 35 feet. The site includes 134 passenger vehicle parking spaces, 23 truck parking stalls, and 12 bicycle parking spaces. The project will be supported with approximately 40,800 square feet of landscaping.

According to the applicant, the typical hours of opera)on for wine distribu)on and storage are 6:00 am to 6:00 pm on Monday through Friday, and 6:00 am to 12:00 am Monday through Friday on peak months. The project would employ approximately 35 full-time employees.

A Regional Location map is included as Attachment 20.

A Vicinity Map is included as Attachment 21.

Photographs of the site are included as Attachment 22.

The site plan is available as Attachment 23.

The warehouse building photosimulation and elevations are available as Attachment 24.

A list of important Environmental Impact Report milestones is available as Attachment 25.

The project plans are available as Attachment 18.

Project Objectives
The purpose of the Project is to develop land in Recrea)on Zone to the highest and best use. The objectives of the proposed project are to:

1. Posi)vely contribute to the local economy through new capital investment, the crea)on of new jobs, and the expansion of the tax base.

2. Develop land to its highest and best use.

3. Continue the buildout of the City of American Canyon in accordance with the General Plan.

4. Meet regional demand for wine warehousing by adding to the inventory of this space.

5. Develop nonresiden)al uses on the project site that are compa)ble with the City of American Canyon’s Water Reclamation Facility and the Napa County Airport.

6. Maximize the efficient use of land by developing an industrial project at the upper end of the allowable Floor Area Ratio range.

7. Complete the buildout of the SDG Commerce development.

8. Protect North Slough by employing stormwater pollu)on preven)on measures during construction and operation.

9. Provide development fees to the American Canyon Fire Protec)on District to fund the development of a new fire station.

The project includes two en)tlements, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and a Condi)onal Use 558
Permit (CUP). The EIR evaluates the CUP project on 10.45 acres. The CUP consists of the 220,000 square foot warehouse and circulation areas.

History
The project site is part of a previously larger 35.85-acre site. The larger site was subdivided into three lots (SDG Commerce 217, 220, and 330) through a parcel map in February 2019. The southern parcel (SDG Commerce 330) was developed in 2020. The Northern parcel (SDG Commerce 217) was en)tled in 2021 and under construc)on. The central parcel (SDG Commerce 220) is the project site evaluated in this DEIR.

Existing Conditions
The site at 1055 Commerce Court is vacant and was graded as part of a previous environmental review. Vehicle access is available from Commerce Court by Green Island Road to the north. Access to the south is limited to a pedestrian and bike path. There is no vehicle access from the south to Wetlands Edge.

There are approximately 0.65-acres of wetlands on-site consis)ng of 0.04 acres of a linear wetland area and 0.02 acres of seasonal wetlands. The wetlands have a 25-foot buffer with fencing.

Environmental Impact Report
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the SDG Commerce 220 Distribu)on Center (Proposed Project) according to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (State Clearinghouse No. 2023100842). An EIR is an informa)onal document for the agency decisionmakers and the public to understand poten)al environmental impacts associated with the Proposed Project.

EIR Milestones
The EIR was circulated for public review for 52 days from June 11, 2024 to August 2, 2024. During the public review period, the DraJ EIR, including the technical appendices, is available for review at the City of American Canyon Community Development Department offices and the American Canyon Library. A copy of the DraJ EIR is included as AKachment 1. The EIR is also available as AKachments 2 through 16 and on the City's website at this link:
https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/Browse.aspx?id=154541&repo=r-f53bdda4.

The City received ten comment leKers on the DraJ EIR. A response to each comment was prepared and sent to the authors ten days prior to the Planning Commission hearing on October 24, 2024.

Together, the DraJ EIR, Final EIR, Mi)ga)on Measures and Repor)ng Program (MMRP), and all appendices are available in Attachments 2 to 16, Exhibits B to O.

II. Analysis of the EIR
EIR Overview
559
Consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City determined the proposed SDG Commerce 220 project has the poten)al for significant environmental impacts. For this reason, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required to fully describe and analyze those impacts.

FirstCarbon Solu)ons (FCS) prepared the DraJ EIR, Responses to DraJ EIR, and MMRP. The DraJ EIR provides a project-level analysis for the proposed project. The City of American Canyon is the lead agency for the proposed project and has discre)onary authority over the proposed project and project approvals. The DraJ EIR was intended to address all public infrastructure improvements and all future development within the parameters of the proposed project.

Public comment on the DraJ EIR was invited for a 52-day period from June 11, 2024, through August 2, 2024. The City, as lead agency, has added seven more days to the required 45-day review period due to a request from CDFW. Throughout the DraJ EIR comment period staff received 5 public comments. All public comments were assembled and staff and the EIR consultant prepared a wriKen response to each comment. This document is called the Response to Comments (RTC). The Final EIR is made up of the DraJ EIR together with the RTC. The RTC was released on October 11, 2024, at least ten days before the Planning Commission, holds a public hearing on the Final EIR.

1. Environmental Issues Determined not to be Significant The DraJ EIR iden)fies topical areas that were determined not to be significant. An explana)on of the reasons why each area is determined not to be significant is provided in DraJ EIR Chapter 4, Effects Found not to be Significant. These topical areas are as follows:

Agricultural and Forest Resources
Mineral Resources
Recreation
Wildfire
In addi)on, certain subjects with various topical areas were determined not to be significant. Other poten)ally significant issues are analyzed in these topical areas; however, the following issues are not analyzed:

Scenic Vistas
State Scenic Highways
Loss of Important Farmland
Williamson Act Contracts or Agricultural Zoning
Forest Zoning
Loss of Forest Land
Pressures to Convert Surrounding Agricultural Land or Forest Land Sensitive Natural Communities or Riparian Habitat
Conservation Plans
Septic or Alternative Wastewater Disposal Systems
560
Wildfires
100-year Flood Hazards
Levee or Dam Failure
Seiches, Tsunamis, or Mudflows
Division of an Established Community
Loss of Mineral Resources of Statewide or Local Importance Growth Inducement
Displacement or Persons or Housing
Schools
Parks
Other Public Facilities
Emergency Evacuation
Wildfire Risks
Fire Infrastructure
Post-fire Hazards

2. Project Impacts that are Less than Significant
The DraJ EIR indicated that the following topical areas may contain poten)ally significant environmental issues that will require further analysis in the EIR. Changes to the project and/or feasible mi)ga)on measures lessen the impact to “Less Than Significant”. These sec)ons are as follows:

Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources/Tribal Cultural Resources
Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Energy
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use
Noise
Public Services
Transportation
Utilities and Service Systems

2.1 Summary of Mitigation Measures
CEQA Guidelines Sec)on 15126.4(a) requires lead agencies to consider feasible mi)ga)on measures to avoid or substan)ally reduce a project's significant environmental impacts. The MMRP is available in Attachment 15.

3. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
561
The proposed project would result in the following significant unavoidable impacts:

Inconsistency with CEQA Guidelines Sec)on 15064.3, subdivision (b): The proposed project’s Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) was evaluated in accordance with the City’s adopted VMT policy. For the project’s VMT impact to be less than significant, the VMT per employee would need to be reduced by at least 19 percent below current levels. However, according to the 2021 California Air Pollu)on Control Officers Associa)on (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduc)ons, Assessing Climate Vulnerabili)es, and Advancing Health and Equity (CAPCOA Handbook), a reduc)on in VMT of 15 percent is generally considered the maximum feasible mi)ga)on for suburban environments such as that of the proposed project.

If this level of trip reduc)on could be achieved, that would mi)gate most of the project’s VMT impact, although not to a level that would be less than significant (19 percent); however, given the lack of transit services within an acceptable walking distance of the proposed project, achieving this level of mi)ga)on is considered infeasible. Even with implementa)on of a TDM Plan as required by MM TRANS-2, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable.

Cumulative Transportation: Impact TRANS-2 concluded that the proposed project would have a significant and unavoidable impact on VMT because the proposed project would be required to reduce VMT by a minimum of 19 percent below the citywide average, which would be challenging given the project’s loca)on and lack of access to high-quality transit. MM TRANS-2 would reduce project-related VMT but not to a level below significance. As such, the proposed project would also have a cumulatively considerable contribution on VMT.

4. Summary of Project Alternatives
According to CEQA, an EIR must describe a reasonable range of alterna)ves to a proposed project that could feasibly aKain most of the basic project objec)ves, and would avoid or substan)ally lessen any of the proposed project's significant effects. Addi)onally, a "No Project" alterna)ve must be analyzed (Sec)on 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines). Listed below are the Project Alterna)ves for this Draft EIR:

Alterna)ve 1: No Project Alterna)ve The project site would remain undeveloped for the foreseeable future and no development would occur.

Alterna)ve 2: Reduced Density Alterna)ve A 164,875-square-foot wine warehouse would be developed on the project site, which represents a 25 percent reduction in square footage.

According to the DraJ EIR, the No Project Alternave would avoid the proposed significant and unavoidable impacts of the project and would avoid any poten)al impacts related to all environmental topical areas. However, this alterna)ve would not advance any of the project objec)ves, including those related to facilita)ng the development of land to its highest and best use; posi)vely contribu)ng to the local economy; and mee)ng regional demand for wine warehouse uses.
562
The Reduced Density Alternave would lessen the severity of, but would not avoid, the significant and unavoidable transporta)on impacts associated with the proposed project. According to FCS, the proposed Project would generate 372 net daily trips and the reduced density alterna)ve would generate 279, which equates to a reduc)on in 93 trips. The reduc)on of net daily trips results in a 4% reduc)on of VMT, which would s)ll not meet the required 19% reduc)on of VMT to consider the transportation impact insignificant.

5. Areas of Controversy and Potentially Controversial Issues Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sec)on 15123(b), a summary sec)on must address areas of controversy known to the lead agency, including issues raised by agencies and the public, and it must also address issues to be resolved, including the choice among alterna)ves and whether or how to mitigate the significant effects.

A No)ce of Prepara)on (NOP) for the proposed project was issued on October 27, 2023. The NOP describing the original concept for the proposed project and issues to be addressed in the EIR was distributed to the State Clearinghouse, responsible agencies, and other interested parties for a 30- day public review period extending from October 27, 2023, through November 27, 2023. The NOP public comments and responses are available in the DraJ EIR Appendix A, in AKachment 3. The NOP iden)fied the poten)al for significant impacts on the environment related to the following topical areas:

Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
Energy
Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use
Noise
Public Services
Transportation
Utilities and Service Systems

5.1 Disagreement Among Experts
This DraJ EIR contains substan)al evidence to support all the conclusions presented herein. It is possible that there will be disagreement among various par)es regarding these conclusions, although the City of American Canyon is not aware of any disputed conclusions at the )me of this wri)ng. Both the CEQA Guidelines and case law clearly provide standards for trea)ng disagreement among experts. Where evidence and opinions conflict on an issue concerning the environment, and 563
the lead agency knows of these controversies in advance, the EIR must acknowledge the controversies, summarize the conflic)ng opinions of the experts, and include sufficient informa)on to allow the public and decision-makers to make an informed judgment about the environmental consequences of the proposed project.

5.2 Potentially Controversial Issues
Below is a list of poten)ally controversial issues that may be raised during the public review and hearing process of this Draft EIR:

Health effects on communities from diesel emissions
Traffic and Circulation
Land Use Compatibility
Impacts on wetlands
Climate change
It is also possible that evidence will be presented during the 45-day, in this case 52-day, statutory DraJ EIR public review period that may create disagreement. Decision-makers would consider this evidence during the public hearing process.

6. AB 98 State Warehouse Legislation
Beginning January 1, 2026, Assembly Bill 98 would prescribe various statewide warehouse design and build standards for any proposed new or expanded logis)cs use developments, as specified, including, among other things, standards for building design and loca)on, parking, truck loading bays, landscaping buffers, entry gates, and signage. The bill would except from those design and build standards certain exis)ng logis)cs use developments, proposed expansions of a logis)cs use development, and property currently in a local en)tlement process to become a logis)cs use, under prescribed condi)ons. The bill would require a facility operator, prior to the issuance of a cer)ficate of occupancy, to establish and submit for approval by a city, county, or city and county a truck rou)ng plan to and from the state highway system based on the latest truck route map of the city, county, or city and county, as prescribed. The bill would require a facility operator to enforce the plan.

SDG Commerce 220 is exempt per the referenced State Law. Further, the legisla)on indicates that projects that are approved before January 1, 2025, will be exempt from AB 98. However, if “no development ac)vity” occurs within five years of approval of all en)tlements, the exemp)on expires.

7. EIR Conclusion
The SDG Commerce 220 Project DraJ EIR iden)fied environmental topic areas that had no significant impacts, impacts that are less than significant with mi)ga)on measures, unavoidable impacts, and project alterna)ves. With the Planning Commission’s review and approval, staff and FCS will begin working on a Statement of Findings, which will be presented to the City Council for 564
consideration.

III. Analysis of the Conditional Use Permit
Project Description
SDG Commerce 220, LLC (Applicant) proposes to develop a 219,834 square-foot wine storage and distribu)on center on the 10.45-acre parcel at 1055 Commerce Ct in the recrea)on (REC) zone. The warehouse includes 23 truck doors and approximately 4,400 square feet of office space. The building would be one-story and have a maximum height of 35 feet.

1. Zoning Standards Table
The following table shows the REC development standards (ACMC Sec)on 19.15.030) and how the SDG Commerce 220 Project meets the standards.

Table 2: REC Zone Development Standards
Development Standard Required Provided Compliance
Min. Size 10 acres 10.17 acres Yes
Site Coverage 50% 49.6% Yes
Building Height 35 ft. 35 ft. Yes
Front Setback (from local streets) 15 ft. 71 ft. Yes
Side setback 35 ft. 63 ft. Yes
Rear setback 35 ft. 156 ft. Yes

2. Architecture
The building architecture meets the design and development principles described in the General Plan (Policy 1.22.4 and 1.22). The warehouse includes detailing around windows, building corners, metal awnings, and large windows at the entrance. The building will be designed with earth-tone colors and comprised of concrete )lt wall panels, with a load-bearing structural frame with parapet roofs. The building includes various recessed panels and canopies around offices and corners of the buildings to provide sufficient modulation.

The parapet wall panels vary in height from 33’ to 37’ high. The parapet will fully screen rooJop equipment. Addi)onally, a condi)on of approval requires adequate rooJop equipment screening verified at the time of building permit issuance and occupancy.

3. Lighting and Landscaping
Exterior ligh)ng for the proposed project will include ligh)ng on the building and on parking lot poles on the north side of the property. Parking lot ligh)ng will be consistent with that which is required by the City of American Canyon. The lights will be “shoebox” fixtures, with a height of 30 feet, dimmable LED fixtures which are designed to direct the light towards the ground and reduce glare to surrounding proper)es. A photometric study has been prepared to analyze the light pole 565
spacing to maximize light coverage and minimize excessive light spillage off-site.

The site will be well landscaped, including trees in the north, west, and east setback areas, the parking areas, and around the wetland areas. The tree species include Crape Myrtle, Sweet Bay, London Plane, and California Sycamore. The trees will be supported by shrubs, grasses, and groundcover. The site includes clearly marked pedestrian routes leading to the office suites. There is no landscaping in the south because it will be a circula)on area between SDG Commerce 220 Project (1055 Commerce Ct) and the SDG Commerce 330 Project (1005 Commerce Ct).

4. Parking and Bicycle Parking
The site includes 134 passenger vehicle parking spaces, 23 truck parking stalls, and 12 bicycle parking spaces. Of the 134 passenger vehicles, 5 will provide electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) stalls, one van accessible EVSE, and 19 EV capable stalls. The 12 bicycle parking consists of six bicycle lockers that will accommodate 2 bikes each.

5. Site Specific Issues

5.1 Access
Access to the site is available from Commerce Court via Green Island Road. Because the main building is placed lower than the eleva)on at Commerce Court, an ADA accessible ramp is designed to accommodate wheelchair users. This feature was also included in the SDG Commerce 217 project. Vehicle access to the south is not available, so the neighborhoods south of Commerce Court will not be impacted by vehicle traffic. Instead, a pedestrian/ bicycle path is installed that connects Wetlands Edge Road through Commerce Court and leads up to Green Island Road.

5.2. Sustainability Features
The proposed project would incorporate a variety of sustainable materials and construc)on practices including:

Natural Cooling. The building would be insulated and refrigerated at approximately 58 degrees Fahrenheit, making it suitable for storage of wine and related products. The amount of refrigera)on necessary would be reduced through the use of automa)c intake louvers and fans, which would allow cool night air to be utilized.

Bicycle Lockers. According to ACMC Sec)on19.14.090, this project would require five bicycle parking spaces. The project would provide six long-term bicycle lockers, where each would accommodate up to four bicycles, for a total of 12 bicycle parking spaces. The lockers would be located adjacent to each office area. Short-term bicycle parking would also be similarly located.

EV Charging. According to the CBC Cal Green Standards (Title 24, Part 11, Chapter 5.106.5.3.1), the project would require 17 EV capable spaces. The project would provide five electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) stalls, one van accessible EVSE stall, and 19 EV capable stalls.

Solar PV. Solar would be installed on the building rooJop and produce an es)mated 235,000 566
(kWh) per year. The intent of the solar PV system is to supplement the power consumed by items such as exterior ligh)ng, parking lot lights, interior warehouse ligh)ng and a por)on of the building's refrigeration system.

Stormwater Preven)on. A stormwater pollu)on preven)on plan to minimize contamina)on, erosion, and dust pollu)on during construc)on. All stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces (roofs and paving) will be routed through a specially designed water quality deten)on and treatment basin. Addi)onally, on-site deten)on will be provided to meet the City of American Canyon standards.

Light pollu)on reduc)on. The development will include light standards that point their lights downward to reduce light pollution.

Recycled water for irriga)on. The project will use recycled water for landscaping irriga)on to reduce the use of potable water.

5.3 Napa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
The project is located in the Napa County Airport Land Use Compa)bility Plan (ALUCP) Zone D.

According to the plan, new warehouse development is required to record an aviga)on and hazard easement deed. The property owner completed the recorda)on for all three parcels of 1075, 1055, and 1005 Commerce Court on July 26, 2019.

6. CUP Conclusion
The SDG Commerce 220 Distribu)on CUP project complies with the design standards outlined in the REC Zone. The winery use class is a permiKed use with CUP in the REC zone. The project provides sustainability features that reduce GHG emissions. Addi)onally, the project completed a DraJ EIR that iden)fies mi)ga)on measures for the project. The mi)ga)on measures have been added as conditions of approval.

IV. Public Outreach:

Project outreach occurred between August 21, 2023, and November 18, 2024. A copy of the public notification addresses and map is included in Attachment 26. Specific events are outlined below:

Aug. 21, 2023 – Project Posted on website
Aug. 23, 2023 – Project Information Announcement to GovDelivery Recipients (4,150+/-) Aug. 23, 2023 – Neighborhood letters to introduce the project sent within 500 feet Oct. 27, 2023 – Notice of Preparation (NOP) issued, 30-day review period begins Oct. 27, 2023 – GovDelivery Notice of NOP sent to email subscribers list (4,150+/-) Nov. 17, 2023 – NOP Scoping Meeting held at City Hall and virtually by Zoom.

Nov. 27, 2023 – NOP review period closed.

Jun. 6, 2024 – DEIR with NOA (Notice of Availability) submitted to CEQA.net Jun. 10, 2024 – DEIR NOA posted and DEIR printed copy made available at City Hall (4381 Broadway St), the American Canyon Library (300 Crawford Way), and the Active Adults Center (2185 Elliot Dr).

Jun. 10, 2024 – DEIR NOA sent to property owners within 500 feet 567
Jun. 11, 2024 – GovDelivery Notice of DEIR NOA sent to email subscribers list (4,150 +/-) Jun. 11, 2024 – DEIR Review period begins.

Jun. 24, 2024 – Applicant installed a physical public sign on site.

Jul. 15, 2024 – Revised DEIR NOA sent to property owners within 500 feet.

Jul. 16, 2024 – GovDelivery Notice of Revised DEIR NOA sent to email subscribers list (4,150 +/-) Jul. 19, 2024 – Staff report published and GovDelivery No)ce of public review workshop sent to email subscribers list (4,150 +/-) Oct. 9, 2024 - FEIR posted and FEIR printed copy made available at City Hall (4381 Broadway St), the American Canyon Library (300 Crawford Way), and the Active Adults Center (2185 Elliot Dr).

Oct. 10, 2024 – Planning Commission public notice sent to property owners within 500 feet.

Oct. 11, 2024 – GovDelivery No)ce of EIR and CUP Planning Commission Mee)ng sent to email subscribers list (4,150 +/-).

Oct. 11, 2024 – Public No)ce of Planning Commission Mee)ng Posted on Bulle)n Board at City Hall and at Public Safety Building.

Oct. 12, 2024 – Public Notice of Planning Commission Meeting published in newspaper.

Oct. 18, 2024 – Staff report published and GovDelivery No)ce of public review workshop sent to email subscribers list (4,150 +/-) Oct. 23, 2024 – GovDelivery No)ce Reminder of Planning Commission mee)ng sent to email subscribers list (4,150 +/-)
Oct. 24, 2024 – Planning Commission Meeting
Nov. 4, 2024 – City Council public notice sent to property owners within 500 feet.

Nov. 8, 2024 – GovDelivery No)ce of EIR and CUP City Council Mee)ng sent to email subscribers list (4,150 +/-).

Nov. 8, 2024 – Public No)ce of City Council Mee)ng Posted on Bulle)n Board at City Hall and at Public Safety Building.

Nov. 8, 2024 – Public Notice of City Council Meeting published in newspaper.

Nov. 15, 2024 – Staff report published and GovDelivery No)ce of public review workshop sent to email subscribers list (4,150 +/-) Nov. 18, 2024 – GovDelivery No)ce Reminder of City Council mee)ng sent to email subscribers list (4,150 +/-)
Nov. 19, 2024 – City Council Meeting
The public comments to the October 24, 2024 Planning Commission mee)ng are included as Attachment 28.

COUNCIL PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
Economic Development and Vitality: "AKract and expand diverse business and employment opportunities."

FISCAL IMPACT
The SDG Commerce 220 EIR and CUP project required a developer deposit for review and processing, so there is no fiscal impact for staff time. 568

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the proposed SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center project to fully describe and analyze environmental impacts.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution - SDG Commerce 220 EIR

2. Exhibit A Draft EIR

3. Exhibit B Draft EIR Appendix A - Notice of Preparation

4. Exhibit C Draft EIR Appendix B - AQ, GHG Supporting Information

5. Exhibit D Draft EIR Appendix C - Biological Resources

6. Exhibit E Draft EIR Appendix D - Cultural Resources Supporting Information PUBLIC

7. Exhibit F Draft EIR Appendix E - Geotechnical Report

8. Exhibit G Draft EIR Appendix F - Phase I ESA

9. Exhibit H Draft EIR Appendix G - Hydrology Report

10. Exhibit I Draft EIR Appendix H - Noise Supporting Information

11. Exhibit J Draft EIR Appendix I - Transportation Supporting Information

12. Exhibit K Draft EIR - Docs Incorporated by Reference

13. Exhibit L Final EIR

14. Exhibit M Final EIR Appendix A - Swainson Hawk Mitigation Support

15. Exhibit N MMRP for EIR

16. Exhibit O SDG Commerce 220 FOF and SOS

17. Resolution - SDG Commerce 220 CUP

18. Exhibit A Project Plans

19. Exhibit B Confirmation of Conditions of Approval

20. Regional Location Map

21. Project Location Map

22. Site Photographs

23. Site Plan

24. Warehouse Photosim and Elevations

25. Important EIR Milestones

26. Public Notice Package

27. Public Notice

28. Public Comments
569
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XX
A RESOLUTION (i) CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH #2023100842), (ii) ADOPTING CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT, (iii) ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND (iv) ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE SDG COMMERCE 220 DISTRIBUTION CENTER PROJECT LOCATED AT 1055 COMMERCE COURT, APN 058-030-069 (FILE NUMBER PL23-0017) WHEREAS, on August 3, 2023, SDG Commerce 220, LLC (Applicant) submitted a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for development of a 220,000 square feet wine distribution warehouse at 1055 Commerce Ct; and WHEREAS, the objectives of the SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center are to:

1. Positively contribute to the local economy through new capital investment, the creation of new jobs, and the expansion of the tax base;

2. Develop land to its highest and best use;

3. Continue the buildout of the City of American Canyon in accordance with the General Plan;

4. Meet original demand for wine warehousing by adding the inventory of this space;

5. Develop nonresidential uses on the project site that are compatible with the City of American Canyon’s Water Reclamation Facility and the Napa County Airport;

6. Maximize the efficient use of land by developing an industrial project at the upper end of the allowable Floor Area Ratio range;

7. Complete the buildout of the SDG Commerce development;

8. Protect the North Slough by employing stormwater pollution prevention measures during construction and operation;

9. Provide development fees to the American Canyon fire Protection District to fund the development of a new fire station; and
WHERAS, for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), (“CEQA”) the City is the lead agency for the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City released the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for public comment for a 52- day review period to commence on June 11, 2024, and to end at 5:00 PM August 2, 2024; and WHEREAS, on July 30, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a publicly-noticed workshop to discuss the SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines section 15090 requires that, prior to approving a proposed project for which a final EIR has been prepared, a lead agency’s decision making body must certify that: (1) the final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; (2) the final EIR was presented to the decision-making body of the lead agency, and the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information contained in the final EIR prior to approving the project; and (3) the final EIR reflects the lead agency‘s independent judgment and analysis; and
570
WHEREAS, prior to approving a project that requires the adoption of feasible mitigation measures to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental effects, a lead agency’s decision-making body is required by Public Resources Code section 21081.6, subdivision (a), to adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program to ensure that the mitigation measures adopted by the lead agency are carried out; and
WHEREAS, the City of American Canyon Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on October 24, 2024 on the subject application, and a majority recommended City Council approval; and WHEREAS, a duly-noticed public hearing was held by the City of American Canyon City Council on November 19, 2024 to evaluate the SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project and Final EIR and determined that based on all of the evidence presented, including, but not limited to, written and oral testimony given at meetings, it is appropriate to recommend that the City Council certify the Final EIR as adequate to address environmental impacts associated with the SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Project, and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are included herein by reference as findings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of American Canyon makes three findings necessary to certify that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgement and analysis of the City and thoroughly as adequate to addresses the potentially significant environmental impacts associated with implementation of the SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project. The Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR (Exhibit A to this Resolution) and Appendices (Exhibit B to this Resolution), and the Final EIR, which includes a list of persons, organizations, and agencies that provided comments on the Draft EIR, responses to the comments received regarding the Draft EIR, and errata or revisions to the Draft EIR (Exhibit C to this Resolution).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of American Canyon adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan for the SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project (Exhibit E to this Resolution).

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council of the City of American Canyon held on the 19th day of November, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
____________________________
Leon Garcia, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
571
_______________________________ ___________________________ Taresa Geilfuss, CMC, City Clerk William D. Ross, City Attorney EXHIBITS:

A. Draft EIR
B. Draft EIR Appendices
C. Final EIR
D. MMRP
572
NORTH AMERICA | EUROPE | AFRICA | AUSTRALIA | ASIA
WWW.FIRSTCARBONSOLUTIONS.COM
DRAFT
Environmental Impact Report
SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project
City of American Canyon, Napa County, California
State Clearinghouse Number 2023100842
Prepared for:

City of American Canyon
4381 Broadway Street, Suite 201
American Canyon, CA 94503
707.647.4337
Contact: William He, Senior Planner
Prepared by:

FirstCarbon Solutions
2999 Oak Road, Suite 250
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
925.357.2562
Contact: Mary Bean, Project Director
Janna Waligorski, Senior Project Manager
Date: June 5, 2024
573

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
574
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Table of Contents
FirstCarbon Solutions iii https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-01 TOC.docx Table of Contents
Acronyms and Abbreviations .........................................................................................................ix Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................ES-1 Purpose................................................................................................................................. ES-1 Project Summary .................................................................................................................. ES-1 Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts ............................................................................ ES-1 Summary of Project Alternatives.......................................................................................... ES-2 Areas of Controversy ............................................................................................................ ES-2 Public Review of the Draft EIR.............................................................................................. ES-3 Executive Summary Matrix................................................................................................... ES-4 Chapter 1: Introduction............................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 - Overview of the CEQA Process....................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 - Scope of the Draft EIR .................................................................................................... 1-2

1.3 - Organization of the EIR................................................................................................... 1-4

1.4 - Documents Incorporated by Reference..........................................................................1-6

1.5 - Documents Prepared for the Proposed Project .............................................................1-6

1.6 - Review of the Draft EIR................................................................................................... 1-6 Chapter 2: Project Description .................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 - Project Location and Setting........................................................................................... 2-1

2.2 - Project History................................................................................................................ 2-9

2.3 - Project Characteristics.................................................................................................. 2-10

2.4 - Project Objectives......................................................................................................... 2-22

2.5 - Intended Uses of this Draft EIR.....................................................................................2-22 Chapter 3: Environmental Impact Analysis.................................................................................. 3-1 Organization of Issue Areas.................................................................................................... 3-1 Issues Addressed in this EIR ................................................................................................... 3-1 Level of Significance ............................................................................................................... 3-1 Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measure Format ..................................................................3-1

3.1 - Aesthetics, Light, and Glare.........................................................................................3.1-1

3.2 - Air Quality.................................................................................................................... 3.2-1

3.3 - Biological Resources.................................................................................................... 3.3-1

3.4 - Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources.......................................................3.4-1

3.5 - Energy.......................................................................................................................... 3.5-1

3.6 - Geology, Soils, and Seismicity......................................................................................3.6-1

3.7 - Greenhouse Gas Emissions .........................................................................................3.7-1

3.8 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials...............................................................................3.8-1

3.9 - Hydrology and Water Quality ......................................................................................3.9-1

3.10 - Land Use.................................................................................................................. 3.10-1

3.11 - Noise........................................................................................................................ 3.11-1

3.12 - Public Services.........................................................................................................3.12-1

3.13 - Transportation.........................................................................................................3.13-1

3.14 - Utilities and Service Systems...................................................................................3.14-1 Chapter 4: Effects Found not to be Significant............................................................................. 4-1

4.1 - Introduction.................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.2 - Environmental Effects Found not to be Significant ........................................................4-1 575
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Table of Contents Draft EIR
iv FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-01 TOC.docx Chapter 5: Other CEQA Considerations........................................................................................ 5-1

5.1 - Significant Unavoidable Impacts.................................................................................... 5-1

5.2 - Growth-inducing Impacts .............................................................................................. 5-1

5.3 - Mandatory Findings of Significance............................................................................... 5-3 Chapter 6: Alternatives to the Proposed Project.......................................................................... 6-1

6.1 - Introduction ................................................................................................................... 6-1

6.2 - Project Objectives.......................................................................................................... 6-2

6.3 - Alternative 1—No Project Alternative ........................................................................... 6-3

6.4 - Alternative 2—Reduced Density Alternative ................................................................. 6-3

6.5 - Environmentally Superior Alternative............................................................................ 6-7

6.6 - Alternatives Rejected From Further Consideration ....................................................... 6-9 Chapter 7: Persons and Organizations Consulted/List of Preparers.............................................. 7-1

7.1 - Persons and Organizations Consulted............................................................................ 7-1

7.2 - List of Preparers............................................................................................................. 7-2 List of Appendices
Appendix A: Notice of Preparation/Comments
Appendix B: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Supporting Information Appendix C: Biological Resources Supporting Information C.1 - Biological Resources Assessment
C.2 - Commerce 217 Documents
C.3 - Commerce 220 Documents
Appendix D: Cultural Resources Supporting Information
D.1 - Native American Heritage Commission and Tribal Correspondence D.2 - Northwest Information Center
Appendix E: Geotechnical Report
Appendix F: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Appendix G: Hydrology Report
Appendix H: Noise Supporting Information
Appendix I: Transportation Supporting Information
I.1 - Transportation Memorandum
I.2 - Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
List of Tables
Table ES-1: Executive Summary Matrix..............................................................................................ES-5 Table 1-1: NOP Comment Letter Summary......................................................................................... 1-2 Table 2-1: SDG Commerce 220 Project Summary............................................................................. 2-10 Table 3-1: Cumulative Projects............................................................................................................ 3-4 Table 3.2-1: Description of Criteria Pollutants of National and California Concern......................... 3.2-2 576
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Table of Contents
FirstCarbon Solutions v https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-01 TOC.docx Table 3.2-2: Federal and State Air Quality Standards in the SFBAAB ...............................................3.2-6 Table 3.2-3: Attainment Status......................................................................................................... 3.2-8 Table 3.2-4: Air Quality Monitoring Summary..................................................................................3.2-8 Table 3.2-5: Construction Schedule................................................................................................3.2-28 Table 3.2-6: Project Construction Equipment Assumptions...........................................................3.2-28 Table 3.2-7: Construction Off-site Trips..........................................................................................3.2-29 Table 3.2-8: Vehicle Trip Generation During Operations (Daily).....................................................3.2-30 Table 3.2-9: Vehicle Type Classification ..........................................................................................3.2-30 Table 3.2-10: Summary of Construction Diesel Emission Source Configurations...........................3.2-33 Table 3.2-11: BAAQMD Regional (Mass Emissions) Air Pollutant Significance Thresholds............3.2-38 Table 3.2-12: BAAQMD Odor Screening-level Distances Thresholds..............................................3.2-42 Table 3.2-13: Consistency With 2017 Clean Air Plan Control Measures ........................................3.2-44 Table 3.2-14: Unmitigated Construction Emissions........................................................................3.2-52 Table 3.2-15: Unmitigated Operational Emissions .........................................................................3.2-53 Table 3.2-16: Summary of Construction Health Risks at the Maximum Impacted Receptor.........3.2-56 Table 3.2-17: Summary of Construction Health Risks at the Maximum Impacted Receptor.........3.2-57 Table 3.4-1: Cultural Resources within 0.5-mile Radius of the Project Site....................................3.1-15 Table 3.4-2: Previous Investigations within 0.5-mile Radius of the Project Site.............................3.1-15 Table 3.4-3: Tribal Consultation......................................................................................................3.1-17 Table 3.5-1: Estimated Annual Project Energy Consumption in 2025 ............................................3.5-13 Table 3.6-1: Fault Summary.............................................................................................................. 3.6-3 Table 3.7-1: BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance for Greenhouse Gases......................................3.7-18 Table 3.7-2: Proposed Project Construction GHG Emissions..........................................................3.7-25 Table 3.7-3: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions.....................................................................3.7-26 Table 3.7-4: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emission Beyond Buildout Year (Compliance with Applicable Regulations) ......................................................................................3.7-27 Table 3.8-1: Off-site Points of Interest..............................................................................................3.8-4 Table 3.9-1: American Canyon Meteorological Summary ................................................................3.9-1 Table 3.10-1: Surrounding Land Use Designations.........................................................................3.10-2 Table 3.10-2: General Plan Consistency Analysis............................................................................3.10-8 Table 3.10-3: Development Standards Consistency .....................................................................3.10-45 Table 3.11-1: Sound Terminology ...................................................................................................3.11-3 Table 3.11-2: Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels.........................................3.11-5 Table 3.11-3: Vibration Levels of Construction Equipment............................................................3.11-6 577
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Table of Contents Draft EIR
vi FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-01 TOC.docx Table 3.11-4: Federal Transit Administration Construction Vibration Impact Criteria................... 3.11-9 Table 3.13-1: Bicycle Facility Summary .......................................................................................... 3.13-3 Table 3.13-2: Trip Generation Summary ...................................................................................... 3.13-12 Table 3.14-1: 2020 Sources of Water Supply ................................................................................. 3.14-1 Table 3.14-2: Potrero Hills Landfill Summary................................................................................. 3.14-6 Table 3.14-3: SDG Commerce 220 Estimated Water Consumption ............................................. 3.14-17 Table 3.14-4: Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison (AFY)............................................. 3.14-17 Table 3.14-5: Single Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison (AFY)......................................... 3.14-18 Table 3.14-6: Multiple Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison (AFY)..................................... 3.14-18 Table 3.14-7: Wastewater Generation Estimate .......................................................................... 3.14-21 Table 3.14-8: Construction Solid Waste Generation .................................................................... 3.14-22 Table 3.14-9: Annual Operational Solid Waste Generation ......................................................... 3.14-22 Table 6-1: Reduced Density Alternative Summary.............................................................................. 6-4 Table 6-2: Reduced Density Alternative Trip Generation Comparison ............................................... 6-6 Table 6-3: Summary of Alternatives.................................................................................................... 6-7 Table 6-4: Alternative Location Analysis ........................................................................................... 6-13 List of Exhibits
Exhibit 2-1: Regional Location Map .................................................................................................... 2-3 Exhibit 2-2: Local Vicinity Map Aerial Base ......................................................................................... 2-5 Exhibit 2-3: Site Photographs.............................................................................................................. 2-7 Exhibit 2-4a: Site Plan ....................................................................................................................... 2-11 Exhibit 2-5: Conceptual Illustration................................................................................................... 2-15 Exhibit 2-6: Landscaping Plan............................................................................................................ 2-19 Exhibit 3.1-1: Conceptual Building Elevations.................................................................................. 3.1-7 Exhibit 3.3-1: Soils Map.................................................................................................................... 3.3-5 Exhibit 3.3-2: Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types ....................................................... 3.3-7 Exhibit 3.3-3: CNDDB Special-Status Species Occurrences............................................................ 3.3-13 Exhibit 3.3-4: Biological Impacts.................................................................................................... 3.3-43 Exhibit 3.6-1: Earthquake Fault Zone Map....................................................................................... 3.6-5 Exhibit 3.11-1: Noise Land Use Compatibility.............................................................................. 3.11-11 Exhibit 3.13-1: Local Street Network ........................................................................................... 3.13-19 Exhibit 3.13-2: Existing and Proposed Bikeways.......................................................................... 3.13-21 578
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Table of Contents
FirstCarbon Solutions vii https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-01 TOC.docx Exhibit 6-1: Alternative Locations...................................................................................................... 6-11 List of Figures
Figure 3.7-1: 2010 California Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector................................................3.7-3 579

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
580
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Acronyms and Abbreviations
FirstCarbon Solutions ix https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-02 Acronyms.docx

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
°C degrees Celsius (Centigrade)
°F degrees Fahrenheit
µg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter
AAQS Ambient Air Quality Standards
AB Assembly Bill
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
ACF Advanced Clean Fleet
ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
ACM asbestos-containing material
ACP Alternative Compliance Plan
ACT American Canyon Transit
ACTM Airborne Toxics Control Measure
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
ADMRT Air Dispersion Modeling and Risk Tool
ADT Average Daily Traffic
AFY acre-feet per year
AIA Airport Influence Area
AICUZ Air Installation Compatibility Use Zone
AJD Approved Jurisdictional Determination
ALUC Airport Land Use Commission
APCD Air Pollution Control District
APE Area of Potential Effect
APN Assessor’s Parcel Number
AQMD Air Quality Management District
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
ARB California Air Resources Board
AST aboveground storage tank
ATCM Airborne Toxic Control Measures
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BACT Best Available Control Technology
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit
BASMAA Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association BAU business-as-usual
BCDC Bay Conservation and Development Commission
BCF billion cubic feet
581
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Acronyms and Abbreviations Draft EIR
x FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-02 Acronyms.docx BCF/year billion cubic feet per year
BERD Built Environment Resource Directory
BMP Best Management Practice
BRA Biological Resources Assessment
BSMAA Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association BTU British thermal units
BVOC biogenic volatile organic compound
C&D Construction and Demolition
C2ES Center for Climate and Energy Solution
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Cal/EPA California Environmental Protection Agency
Cal/OSHA California Occupational Health and Safety Administration CalDAG California Disabled Accessibility Guidebook
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code
CalRecycle California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAP Climate Action Plan
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association CASQA California Stormwater Quality Association
CBC California Building Standards Code
CBSC California Building Standards Commission
CCA community choice aggregations
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CCCC California Climate Change Center
CCR California Code of Regulations
CCTS Central California Taxonomic System
CDF California Department of Finance
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEA California Earthquake Authority
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFC chlorofluorocarbon
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
582
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Acronyms and Abbreviations
FirstCarbon Solutions xi https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-02 Acronyms.docx CH4 methane
CHL California Historical Landmarks
CHMIRS California Hazardous Material Incident Report System CHRIS California Historical Resources Information System CMP Congestion Management Plan
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CNPSEI California Native Plant Society Electronic Inventory CNRA California Natural Resources Agency
CO carbon monoxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
COC constituents of concern
CPF cancer potency factor
CPHI California Points of Historical Interest
CPUC California Public Utilities Commission
CRA Cultural Resources Assessment
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency
CWA Clean Water Act
dB decibel
dBA A-weighted decibel
DBH diameter at breast height
DMM Demand Management Measure
DOE United States Department of Energy
DPM diesel particulate matter
DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control
du dwelling unit
du/acre dwelling unit per acre
DWR California Department of Water Resources
EIA Energy Information Administration
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EISA Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
EMFAC Emission Factors mobile source emissions model
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
ERF Emergency Response Framework
ESPS Engineering Standards Plans and Specifications
EV electric vehicle
583
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Acronyms and Abbreviations Draft EIR
xii FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-02 Acronyms.docx EVSE electric vehicle supply equipment
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FAR floor area ratio
FCS FirstCarbon Solutions
FCWCD Flood Control and Water Conservation District
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FGC Fish and Game Code
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
GHG greenhouse gas
gpm gallons per minute
GPS Global Positioning System
GWh gigawatt-hours
GWh/y gigawatt-hours per year
GWP global warming potential
HAP Hazardous Air Pollutants
HARP Hotspots Analysis and Reporting Program
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
HFC hydrofluorocarbon
HHD heavy heavy-duty
HHDT heavy heavy-duty truck
HI hazard index
HOV/HOT High Occupancy Vehicle/High Occupancy Toll
hp horsepower
HRA Health Risk Assessment
HRI California Historic Resources Inventory
HSWA Hazardous and Solid Waste Act
HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
IAQ Indoor Air Quality
IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation
IPCC United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ISO Insurance Services Office
ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
ITP Incidental Take Permit
kW kilowatts
LCFS Low Carbon Fuel Standard
584
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Acronyms and Abbreviations
FirstCarbon Solutions xiii https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-02 Acronyms.docx LDA light-duty automobile
Ldn day/night average sound level
LED light-emitting diode
Leq equivalent sound level
LEV Low Emission Vehicle
LID Low Impact Development
LOS Level of Service
LPG liquified petroleum gas
LSE load-serving entities
LSI Large Spark Ignition
LTS Level of Traffic Stress
M&A Monk & Associates
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MCE Marin Clean Energy
MCV Manual of California Vegetation
MDV medium-duty vehicle
MEIR Maximally Exposed Individual Resident
MEIW Maximally Exposed Individual Worker
mgd million gallons per day
MHDT medium heavy-duty truck
MM Mitigation Measure
MMBTU Million Metric British Thermal Unit
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
mph miles per hour
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission
MTS Metropolitan Transportation System
MW megawatt
MXD mixed-use development
N2O nitrous oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NCTPA Napa County Transportation and Planning Agency
NEHRP National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NESHAP National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
585
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Acronyms and Abbreviations Draft EIR
xiv FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-02 Acronyms.docx NHM Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOAA Fisheries National Marine Fisheries Service
NOC Notice of Completion
NOI Notice of Intent
NOP Notice of Preparation
NOx nitrogen oxides
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NVTA Napa Valley Transportation Authority
NVWMA Napa-Vallejo Waste Management Authority
NWIC Northwest Information Center
O3 ozone
OAL Office of Administrative Law
OEHHA California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment OHWM ordinary high water mark
ONAC Federal Office of Noise Abatement and Control
OPR California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PCB polychlorinated biphenyl
pCi/L picocuries per liter
PERP Portable Equipment Registration Program
PFC perfluorocarbon
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Phase I ESA Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
PJD Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
PM10 particulate matter, including dust, 10 micrometers or less in diameter PM2.5 particulate matter, including dust, 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter PM particulate matter
ppb parts per billion
ppm parts per million
PPV peak particle velocity
PRC Public Resources Code
PVC polyvinyl chloride
Recology Integrated Resource Recovery Company
586
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Acronyms and Abbreviations
FirstCarbon Solutions xv https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-02 Acronyms.docx RecycleSmart Central Contra Costa County Solid Waste Authority REL Reference Exposure Level
RMP Risk Management Plan
rms root mean square
ROG reactive organic gases
RPS Renewables Portfolio Standard
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SAFE Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient
SF6 sulfur hexafluoride
SFBAAB San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin
SFPUC San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
SIP State Implementation Plan
SNAP Significant New Alternatives Policy
SO2 sulfur dioxide
SOI Sphere of Influence
SORE Small Off-Road Engine
South Coast AQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SR State Route
State Water Board California State Water Resources Control Board SWIS Solid Waste Information System
SWMP Storm Water Management Plan
SWP State Water Project
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
TAC toxic air contaminant
TCM transportation control measures
TDM Transportation Demand Management
TDS total dissolved solids
TDV Time Dependent Valuation
TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
Tg teragram
therms/y therms per year
TIA Traffic Impact Analysis
TIS Traffic Impact Study
TISG Transportation Impact Study Guide
TMA Transportation Management Association
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
TNC Transportation Network Company
TOD Transit Oriented Development
587
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Acronyms and Abbreviations Draft EIR
xvi FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec00-02 Acronyms.docx TRU Transport Refrigeration Unit
UBC Uniform Building Code
UCERF3 Third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USC United States Code
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
USDOT United States Department of Transportation
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
UST underground storage tank
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
V/C volume to capacity ratio
Valley Air District San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District VDECS Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VOC volatile organic compounds
WAF worker adjustment factor
WATERS Watershed Assessment, Tracking, and Environmental Results System WDR Waste Discharge Requirements
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan
WRF Water Reclamation Facility
WSA Water Supply Assessment
WSS Web Soil Survey
WTP Water Treatment Plant
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant
ZEV Zero-Emission Vehicle
588
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Purpose
This Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) is prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the SDG Commerce 220 Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2023100842). This document is prepared in conformance with CEQA (Public Resources Code [PRC] § 21000, et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 14, § 15000, et seq.).

The purpose of this Draft EIR is to inform decision-makers, representatives of affected and responsible agencies, the public, and other interested parties of the potential environmental effects that may result from implementation of the proposed project. This Draft EIR describes potential impacts relating to a wide variety of environmental issues and methods by which these impacts can be mitigated or avoided.

Project Summary
Project Location
The project site is located at 1055 Commerce Court in the City of American Canyon, in Napa County, California. The project site consists of Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 058-030-069 (10.17 acres) plus small additional improvement areas (consisting primarily of parking lot improvements and connections to adjoining land uses) for a total of 10.45 acres. The rectangular project site is bounded by a eucalyptus grove and North Slough (west), a parcel entitled for a wine distribution warehouse known as SDG Commerce 217 currently under construction (north), Commerce Court beyond which is a paintball recreation area (east), and a wine distribution warehouse known as SDG Commerce 330 (south). The project site is located on the Cuttings Wharf, California, United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle Map, Township 4 North, Range 4 West, Section 14 (Latitude 38° 11’ 22” North; Longitude 122° 16’ 19” West).

Project Description
The applicant, SDG Commerce 220, LLC proposes to develop a 219,834-square-foot wine storage and distribution center on the 443,005-square-foot project site. The warehouse would provide 23 truck doors and approximately 4,400 square feet of office space. It would have perimeter concrete tilt wall panels with varying parapet heights and accent spandrel glass/metal canopy features around offices and corners of the building. The average roof height would be approximately 35 feet; portions of the building exterior walls would have various heights to provide architectural relief. The building would be insulated and refrigerated at approximately 58°F (degrees Fahrenheit), making it suitable for storage of wine and related products. The amount of refrigeration necessary would be reduced through the use of intake louvers and fans, which would allow cool night air to be utilized.

Project Objectives
The objectives of the proposed project are to:
589
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Executive Summary Draft EIR
ES-2 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx

1. Positively contribute to the local economy through new capital investment, the creation of new jobs, and the expansion of the tax base.

2. Develop land to its highest and best use.

3. Continue the buildout of the City of American Canyon in accordance with the General Plan.

4. Meet regional demand for wine warehousing by adding to the inventory of this space.

5. Develop nonresidential uses on the project site that are compatible with the City of American Canyon’s Water Reclamation Facility and the Napa County Airport.

6. Maximize the efficient use of land by developing an industrial project at the upper end of the allowable Floor Area Ratio range.

7. Complete the buildout of the SDG Commerce development.

8. Protect North Slough by employing stormwater pollution prevention measures during construction and operation.

9. Provide development fees to the American Canyon Fire Protection District to fund the development of a new fire station.

Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
The proposed project would result in the following significant unavoidable impacts:
• Inconsistency with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b): The proposed project’s Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) was evaluated in accordance with the City’s adopted VMT policy.

For the project’s VMT impact to be less than significant, the VMT per employee would need to be reduced by at least 19 percent below current levels. However, according to the 2021 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (CAPCOA Handbook), a reduction in the VMT of 15 percent is generally considered the maximum feasible mitigation for suburban environments such as that of the proposed project. If this level of trip reduction could be achieved, that would mitigate most of the project’s VMT impact, although not to a level that would be less than significant (19 percent); however, given the lack of transit services within an acceptable walking distance of the proposed project, achieving this level of mitigation is considered infeasible. Even with implementation of a TDM Plan as required by MM TRANS-2, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
• Cumulative Transportation: Impact TRANS-2 concluded that the proposed project would have a significant and unavoidable impact on VMT because the proposed project would be required to reduce VMT by a minimum of 19 percent below the citywide average, which would be challenging given the project’s location and lack of access to high-quality transit. MM TRANS-2 would reduce project-related VMT but not to a level below significance. As such, the proposed project would also have a cumulatively considerable contribution on VMT. 590
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-3 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Summary of Project Alternatives
Below is a summary of the alternatives to the proposed project considered in Section 5, Alternatives to the proposed project.

No Project Alternative
The project site would remain undeveloped for the foreseeable future and no development would occur.

Reduced Density Alternative
A 164,875-square-foot wine warehouse would be developed on the project site, which represents a 25 percent reduction in square footage.

Areas of Controversy
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15123(b), a summary section must address areas of controversy known to the lead agency, including issues raised by agencies and the public, and it must also address issues to be resolved, including the choice among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate the significant effects.

A Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the proposed project was issued on October 27, 2023. The NOP describing the original concept for the proposed project and issues to be addressed in the EIR was distributed to the State Clearinghouse, responsible agencies, and other interested parties for a 30- day public review period extending from October 27, 2023 through November 27, 2023. The NOP identified the potential for significant impacts on the environment related to the following topical areas:
• Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use
• Noise
• Public Services
• Transportation
• Utilities and Service Systems
Disagreement Among Experts
This Draft EIR contains substantial evidence to support all the conclusions presented herein. It is possible that there will be disagreement among various parties regarding these conclusions, although the City of American Canyon is not aware of any disputed conclusions at the time of this writing. Both the CEQA Guidelines and case law clearly provide standards for treating disagreement among experts. Where evidence and opinions conflict on an issue concerning the environment, and the lead agency knows of these controversies in advance, the EIR must acknowledge the controversies, summarize the conflicting opinions of the experts, and include sufficient information 591
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Executive Summary Draft EIR
ES-4 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx to allow the public and decision-makers to make an informed judgment about the environmental consequences of the proposed project.

Potentially Controversial Issues
Below is a list of potentially controversial issues that may be raised during the public review and hearing process of this Draft EIR:
• Health effects on communities from diesel emissions
• Traffic and Circulation
• Land Use Compatibility
• Impacts on wetlands
• Climate change
It is also possible that evidence will be presented during the 45-day, statutory Draft EIR public review period that may create disagreement. Decision-makers would consider this evidence during the public hearing process.

In rendering a decision on a project where there is disagreement among experts, the decisionmakers are not obligated to select the most environmentally preferable viewpoint. Decision-makers are vested with the ability to choose whatever viewpoint is preferable and need not resolve a dispute among experts. In their proceedings, decision-makers must consider comments received concerning the adequacy of the Draft EIR and address any objections raised in these comments.

However, decision-makers are not obligated to follow any directives, recommendations, or suggestions presented in comments on the Draft EIR, and can certify the Final EIR without needing to resolve disagreements among experts.

Public Review of the Draft EIR
Upon completion of the Draft EIR, the City of American Canyon filed a Notice of Completion (NOC) with the State Office of Planning and Research to begin the public review period (PRC § 21161).

Concurrent with the NOC, this Draft EIR has been distributed to responsible and trustee agencies, other affected agencies, surrounding cities, and interested parties, as well as all parties requesting a copy of the Draft EIR in accordance with Public Resources Code 21092(b)(3). During the public review period, the Draft EIR, including the technical appendices, is available for review at the following locations:

American Canyon City Hall
4381 Broadway Street, Suite 201
American Canyon, CA 94503
Hours: Monday-Friday: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Saturday–Sunday: Closed
Active Adults Center
2185 Elliot Drive
American Canyon, CA 94503
Hours: Monday - Friday 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

Saturday–Sunday: Closed
American Canyon Library
300 Crawford Way
Hours: Monday, Tuesday, and
Thursday–Saturday: 10:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m.

Wednesday: 12:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

Sunday: Closed
592
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-5 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx The Draft EIR is also available for review at the following website:
https://www.cityofamericancanyon.org/government/community-development/developmentprojects Agencies, organizations, and interested parties have the opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR during the 45-day public review period. Written comments on this Draft EIR may be submitted electronically at this website link: https://cityofamcan.org/SDG220.

Hardcopy written comments on this Draft EIR should be addressed to:

SDG Commerce 220 Project
City of American Canyon
4381 Broadway Street, Suite 201
American Canyon, CA 94503
Submittal of electronic comments in Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF format is encouraged. Upon completion of the public review period, written responses to all significant environmental issues raised during the comment period will be prepared and made available for review by the commenting agencies at least 10 days prior to the public hearing before the City of American Canyon on the proposed project, at which the certification of the Final EIR will be considered. Comments received and the responses to comments will be included as part of the record for consideration by decision-makers for the proposed project.

Executive Summary Matrix
Table ES-1 below summarizes the impacts, mitigation measures, and resulting level of significance after mitigation for the relevant environmental issue areas evaluated for the proposed project. The table is intended to provide an overview; narrative discussions for the issue areas are included in the corresponding section of this EIR. Table ES-1 is included in the EIR as required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15123(b)(1).
593
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-6 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Table ES-1: Executive Summary Matrix
Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation Section 3.1—Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
Impact AES-1: The proposed project, located in a nonurbanized area, would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or the quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. (Public views are those
that are experienced from a publicly-accessible vantage point.)
No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Impact AES-2: The proposed project may create a new
source of substantial light or glare which could adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Cumulative Impact No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Section 3.2—Air Quality
Impact AIR-1: The proposed project could conflict with
or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.

MM AIR-1: Implement BAAQMD Best Management Practices to Control Dust During Construction
The following dust control measures, as recommended by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), shall be included in the design of the proposed project and implemented during construction:
• All exposed non-paved surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and access roads) shall be watered at least two times per day and/or non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to exposed nonpaved surfaces. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered and/or shall maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard. • All visible mud or dirt tracked out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. the use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
• All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing Less than significant impact with
mitigation incorporated.
594
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-7 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation the maximum idling time to 5 minutes, as required by the California airborne toxics control measure (ACTM) Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations. clear signage regarding idling restrictions shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications. all equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
• The prime construction contractor shall post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust complaints. the construction contractor shall take corrective action within 48 hours. the BAAQMD’s and the City’s phone numbers shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Impact AIR-2: The proposed project would result in a
cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard.

Implement MM AIR-1. Less than significant impact with
mitigation incorporated.

Impact AIR-3: The proposed project would not expose
sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Impact AIR-4: The proposed project would not result in
other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Cumulative Impact No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Section 3.3—Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1: The proposed project could have a
substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service.

MM BIO-1a: Pre-construction Surveys for Swainson’s Hawk Prior to ground disturbance that occurs during the nesting season for Swainson’s hawk (generally March 20 to July 20), a qualified Biologist shall conduct Swainson’s hawk nesting surveys within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site to determine whether nests are occupied. Occupancy shall be determined through observation of all accessible areas, including from Less than significant impact with
mitigation incorporated.
595
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-8 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation public roads or other publicly accessible observation areas of Swainson’s hawk activity (e.g., foraging) on and near the project site.

The qualified Biologist shall follow the survey protocol outlined in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley, which recommends surveys according to the following survey periods:

I. January–March 20: Conduct one survey total.

II. March 20–April 5: Conduct three surveys total. Surveys shall be conducted between sunrise to 10:00 a.m. and/or 4:00 p.m. to sunset.

III. April 5–April 20: Conduct three surveys total. Surveys shall be conducted between sunrise to 12:00 p.m. and/or 4:30 p.m. to sunset.

IV. April 21–June 10: Initiating surveys are not recommended. Monitoring of known nest sites only.

V. June 10–July 30: (post-fledging) Conduct three surveys total. Surveys shall be conducted between sunrise to 12:00 p.m. and/or 4:00 p.m. to sunset.

Pre-construction surveys shall be completed for at least the two survey periods immediately prior to a project’s initiation.

MM BIO-1b: Swainson’s Hawk Avoidance and Minimization and Construction Monitoring
Following the implementation of MM BIO-1a, if nests are located and determined to be occupied, minimization measures must be implemented, and construction monitoring conducted as follows:

1. Construction activities shall be prohibited within 600 feet of an active and occupied Swainson’s hawk nest, or within 600 feet of nests under construction, to prevent nest abandonment.

2. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if site-specific conditions or the nature of the construction activity (e.g., other nearby development, limited activities) indicate that a smaller buffer, or no buffer at all, could be used, the project applicant may seek approval from the qualified Biologist who in coordination with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) shall determine the appropriate buffer size, which, once approved, shall govern.
596
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-9 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation

3. No tree containing an active Swainson’s hawk nest shall be removed.

MM BIO-1c: Pre-construction Surveys for Burrowing Owl (includes avoidance and passive relocation if found)
A qualified Biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment for wintering burrowing owl, and surveys if habitat is present. The qualified Biologist shall follow the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) 2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation habitat assessment and survey methodology prior to project activities occurring during the burrowing owl wintering season from September 1 to January 31. The habitat assessment and surveys shall encompass a sufficient buffer zone to detect owls nearby that may be impacted, which shall be a minimum of 1,640 feet unless otherwise approved in writing by the CDFW. Surveys shall include four nonbreeding season surveys spread evenly throughout the nonbreeding season pursuant to the CDFW 2012 Staff Report. Time lapses between surveys or project activities shall trigger subsequent surveys, as determined by a qualified Biologist, including but not limited to a final survey within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance and before construction equipment mobilizes to the project area. The qualified Biologist shall have a minimum of 2 years of experience implementing the CDFW 2012 Staff Report survey methodology resulting in detections.

Detected burrowing owls shall be avoided pursuant to the buffer zone prescribed in the CDFW 2012 Staff Report, unless otherwise approved in writing by CDFW, and any eviction plan shall be subject to CDFW review.

Please be advised that CDFW does not consider eviction of burrowing owls (i.e., passive removal of an owl from its burrow or other shelter) as a “take” avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measure; therefore, off-site habitat compensation shall be included in the eviction plan. Habitat compensation acreages shall be approved by CDFW, as the amount depends on-sitespecific conditions and must be completed before project construction unless otherwise approved in writing by CDFW. Habitat compensation shall also include placement of a conservation easement and preparation and implementation of a long-term management plan prior to project construction.
597
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-10 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx MM BIO-1d: Protection of Active Bird Nests (includes pre-construction survey and implementation of avoidance buffer, if found).

1. If the proposed project requires vegetation to be removed during the nesting season (February 1 to August 31), pre-construction surveys shall be conducted no more than 7 days prior to the start of ground or vegetation disturbance (including tree removal) to determine whether or not active nests are present within the project site and buffer area as appropriate.

2. If an active nest is located during pre-construction surveys, a qualified Biologist shall determine an appropriately sized avoidance buffer based on the species and anticipated disturbance level. (The California Department of Fish and Wildlife [CDFW] recommends a minimum nodisturbance buffer of 250 feet around active nests of non-listed bird species and a 500-foot no-disturbance buffer around active nests of nonlisted raptors.) A qualified Biologist shall delineate the avoidance buffer using Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) fencing, pin flags, and/or yellow caution tape. The buffer zone shall be maintained around the active nest site(s) until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. No construction activities or construction foot traffic is allowed to occur within the avoidance buffer(s).

3. The qualified Biologist shall monitor the active nest during construction activities and modify the protection zone accordingly to prevent projectrelated nest disturbance, until the young have fledged.

MM BIO-1e: Roosting Bat Pre-construction Survey and Avoidance A qualified Biologist with relevant roosting bat experience shall conduct a survey for special‐status bats during the appropriate time of day to maximize detectability to determine whether bat species are roosting near the work area no less than 7 days and no more than 14 days prior to beginning ground disturbance and/or construction. Survey methodology may include visual surveys of bats (e.g., observation of bats during foraging period), inspection for suitable habitat, bat sign (e.g., guano), or use of ultrasonic detectors (Anabat, etc.) within 250 feet of project construction activities (where accessible).

If the Biologist determines or presumes bats are present, the Biologist shall exclude the bats from suitable spaces by installing one‐way exclusion devices. After the bats vacate the space, the Biologist shall close off the 598
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-11 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation space to prevent recolonization. Grading shall only commence after the Biologist verifies 7 to 10 days later that the exclusion methods have successfully prevented bats from returning. To avoid impacts on non‐volant (i.e., nonflying) bats, the Biologist shall only conduct bat exclusion and eviction from May 1 through October 1. Exclusion efforts may be restricted during periods of sensitive activity (e.g., during hibernation or while females in maternity colonies are nursing young).

MM BIO-1f: Protection of Western Pond Turtles
A qualified Biologist (i.e., a Biologist with at least 2 years of experience conducting surveys for western pond turtle detections) shall submit a wildlife exclusion fencing plan to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) for review and approval prior to starting construction.

Exclusion fencing shall be installed along the western perimeter of the project site to prevent the species from traveling from North Slough onto the project site during construction. A qualified Biologist shall survey the project site and adjacent habitat within 72 hours of the start of project activities to determine whether western pond turtle or their nests are present and guide the installation of the exclusion fence. If western pond turtles are discovered, a qualified Biologist with experience handling and relocating the species shall move the species to the nearest suitable habitat outside of the project area and exclusion fencing. If western pond turtle nests are found, CDFW shall be notified prior to starting project activities, and the nest site plus a 50-foot buffer around the nest site shall be fenced with orange construction fence until eggs hatch and young turtles disperse to the adjacent North Slough. In addition, if nest(s) are located during surveys, moth balls (naphthalene) shall be sprinkled around the vicinity of the nest (no closer than 5 feet) to mask human scent and discourage predators. Grading within the nest site’s 50-foot buffer area shall be delayed until the young leave the nest as determined by a qualified Biologist. If the CDFW allows translocation of any nestling pond turtles this shall be completed by a qualified Biologist under the direction of the CDFW.

MM BIO-1g: Protection of Overwintering Monarch Butterfly Activities such as vegetation removal, grading, or initial ground-disturbing activities shall be conducted between November 1 and July 31 (outside of the overwintering season) to the extent feasible. If such activities must be 599
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-12 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation initiated during the overwintering season (August 1 through October 31), a pre-construction overwintering survey shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist no more than 7 days prior to vegetation removal, grading, or initial ground disturbance. The survey shall include the disturbance area and surrounding 250 feet to identify the location and status of any colonies that could potentially be affected either directly or indirectly by project activities. If no colonies are present, then project activities can commence as scheduled. If a colony is present, project construction shall cease immediately to avoid all direct and indirect impacts and report the presence of the colony to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and follow all recommendations provided by USFWS and CDFW.

Impact BIO-2: The proposed project could have a
substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United
States Fish and Wildlife Service.

No mitigation required. Less than significant impact.

Impact BIO-3: The proposed project could have a
substantial adverse effect on State or federally
protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.

Implementation of MM BIO-1a through MM BIO-1e. Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Impact BIO-4: The proposed project could interfere
substantially with the movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of wildlife nursery sites.

No mitigation required. Less thank significant.

Cumulative Impact Implementation of MM BIO-1a through MM BIO-1g. Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
600
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-13 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation Section 3.4—Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Impact CUL-1: The proposed project would not cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.

MM CUL-1a: All construction personnel directly involved with projectrelated ground disturbance shall attend a “tailgate” Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training for archaeological resources. The training shall include visual aids, a discussion of applicable laws and statutes relating to archaeological resources, types of resources that may found within the project site, and procedures to be followed in the event such resources are encountered. The training shall be conducted by an Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology.

MM CUL-1b: An Archaeological Monitor reporting to the qualified Archaeologist, shall be present during the clearing, grading, and trenching phases of the proposed project to check for the inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources or human remains. Over the course of the proposed project, should the Archaeologist determine that the probability of inadvertent discovery is low, they may make a recommendation to the lead agency that monitoring be reduced to regular periodic or “spot-check” monitoring, or that monitoring may cease altogether.

MM CUL-1c: If buried cultural resources are discovered during construction, operations shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified Archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified Archaeologist shall make recommendations to the lead agency on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction within the Master Plan area should be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA Guidelines.

If the resources are determined to be unique historic resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be Less than significant Impact with
mitigation incorporated
601
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-14 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation identified by the monitor and recommended to the lead agency.

Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds.

No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the lead agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be donated to a qualified scientific institution approved by the lead agency where they would be afforded long-term preservation to allow future scientific study.

Impact CUL-2: The proposed project could cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.

Implementation of MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, and MM CUL-1c. Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Impact CUL-3: The proposed project could disturb
human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries.

MM CUL-3: In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and Section 5097.98 shall be followed. If during project construction, there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken:

1. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine whether the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resource Code Section 5097.98.

2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance Less than significant impact with
mitigation incorporated.
602
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-15 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation with the recommendations of the MLD or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance:
• The NAHC is unable to identify an MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission.
• The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. • The landowner or authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.

Additionally, California Public Resources Code Section 15064.5 requires the following relative to Native American Remains:
• When an initial study identifies the existence of, or the probable likelihood of, Native American Remains within a project, a lead agency shall work with the appropriate Native Americans as identified by the NAHC as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The applicant may develop a plan with respect to their respective individual development proposals for treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any items associated with Native American Burials with the appropriate Native Americans as identified by the NAHC.

Impact CUL-4: The proposed project may cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource.

MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-3. Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Impact CUL-5: The proposed project may cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource.

MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-3. Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Cumulative Impact MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-3. Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Section 3.5—Energy
Impact ENER-1: The proposed project would not result
in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact. 603
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-16 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation energy resources, during project construction or
operation.

Impact ENER-2: The proposed project would not conflict
with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Cumulative Impact No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Section 3.6—Geology and Soils
Impact GEO-1: The proposed project may expose people
or structures to potential substantial adverse effects
associated with seismic hazards.

MM GEO-1: Prior to the issuance of the building permit, recommendations from the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation prepared by Krazan & Associates (Environmental Impact Report [EIR] Appendix E) shall be incorporated into all project plans and applicable construction-related permits and submitted to the City of American Canyon for review and approval.

Less than significant impact with
mitigation incorporated.

Impact GEO-2: The proposed project may result in
substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.

MM HYD-1: Prior to the issuance of grading permits or building permits (whichever occurs first), the project applicant shall obtain coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (General Permit) (Order WQ 2022-0057-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002) by preparing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and submitting it, along with a Notice of Intent (NOI), to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (San Francisco Bay RWQCB). The City of American Canyon shall confirm that the applicant has prepared a SWPPP and obtained coverage under the General Permit prior to issuance of grading or building permits. The SWPPP shall identify a practical sequence for Best Management Practice (BMP) implementation and maintenance, site restoration, contingency measures, responsible parties, and agency contacts. The SWPPP shall address both the project site and adjacent parcel where soil stockpiles would be removed and the borrow pit would be created to provide fill for the project site. The SWPPP shall include but not be limited to the following elements:
• Temporary erosion control measures shall be employed for disturbed areas.

Less than significant impact with
mitigation incorporated.
604
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-17 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation • No disturbed surfaces shall be left without erosion control measures in place during the winter and spring months. disturbed areas shall be covered with soil stabilizers, mulch, fiber rolls, or temporary vegetation. • Sediment shall be retained on-site by a system of sediment basins, traps, or other appropriate measures. drop inlets shall be lined with filter fabric/geotextile.
• Discharge from the stormwater system shall be diffused in such a way as to mimic existing overland flow conditions.
• The construction contractor shall prepare standard operating procedures for the handling of hazardous materials on the construction site to eliminate or reduce discharge of materials to storm drains. this may include locating construction-related equipment and processes that contain or generate pollutants in a secure way, away from storm drains, gutters, and wetlands; parking, fueling, and cleaning all vehicles and equipment in the secure area; designating concrete washout areas; and preventing or containing potential leakage or spilling from sanitary facilities.
• BMP performance and effectiveness shall be determined either by visual means where applicable (e.g., observation of above-normal sediment release), or by actual water sampling in cases where verification of contaminant reduction or elimination (such as inadvertent petroleum release) is required by the RWQCB to determine adequacy of the measure.
• In the event of significant construction delays or delays in final landscape installation, native grasses or other appropriate vegetative cover shall be established on the construction site as soon as possible after disturbance as an interim erosion control measure throughout the wet season.

Prior to issuance of grading permits for the proposed project, the applicant shall submit to the City of American Canyon for review and approval a SWPPP in accordance with the requirements of the Statewide General Permit. The SWPPP shall be implemented during construction.

Impact GEO-3: The proposed project would not be
located on a geologic unit or soil that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact. 605
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-18 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse.

Impact GEO-4: The proposed project may create
substantial risks to life or property as a result of
expansive soil conditions on the project site.

Implement Mitigation Measure GEO-1. Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Impact GEO-5: The proposed project may directly or
indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.

MM GEO-5: Although extremely unlikely, should any significant paleontological resources (e.g., bones, teeth, well-preserved plant elements) be unearthed by the construction crew, their activities shall be diverted at least 15 feet from the find until a professional Paleontologist has assessed it and, if deemed significant, salvaged in a timely manner.

Collected fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they shall be properly curated and made available for future research.

Less than significant impact with
mitigation incorporated.

Cumulative Impact Implement Mitigation Measure GEO-1, MM HYD-1, and MM GEO-5. Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Section 3.7—Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact GHG-1: The proposed project would not
generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Impact GHG-2: The proposed project would not conflict
with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an
agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Cumulative Impact No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Section 3.8—Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-1: Buildout of the proposed project would
not create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials and would not create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment
No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact. 606
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-19 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the likely release of hazardous
materials into the environment.

Impact HAZ-2: The proposed project would not emit
hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within onequarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Impact HAZ-3: The proposed project would not be
located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would not create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Impact HAZ-4: The proposed project would not create
aviation safety hazards for persons residing or working within 2 miles of the Napa County Airport.

Less than significant impact. No mitigation is necessary.

Impact HAZ-5: The proposed project would not impair
implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan.

Less than significant impact. No mitigation is necessary.

Cumulative Impact Less than significant impact. No mitigation is necessary.

Section 3.09—Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact HYD-1: The proposed project could violate any
water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality.

MM HYD-1: Prior to the issuance of grading permits or building permits (whichever occurs first), the project applicant shall obtain coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (General Permit) (Order WQ 2022-0057-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002) by preparing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and submitting it, along with a Notice of Intent (NOI), to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (San Francisco Bay RWQCB). The City of American Canyon shall confirm that the applicant has prepared a SWPPP and obtained coverage under the General Permit prior to issuance of grading or building permits. The SWPPP shall identify a Less than significant impact with
mitigation incorporated.
607
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-20 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation practical sequence for Best Management Practice (BMP) implementation and maintenance, site restoration, contingency measures, responsible parties, and agency contacts. The SWPPP shall address both the project site and adjacent parcel where soil stockpiles would be removed and the borrow pit would be created to provide fill for the project site. The SWPPP shall include but not be limited to the following elements:
• Temporary erosion control measures shall be employed for disturbed areas.
• No disturbed surfaces shall be left without erosion control measures in place during the winter and spring months.
• Disturbed areas shall be covered with soil stabilizers, mulch, fiber rolls, or temporary vegetation.
• Sediment shall be retained on-site by a system of sediment basins, traps, or other appropriate measures. drop inlets shall be lined with filter fabric/geotextile.
• Discharge from the stormwater system shall be diffused in such a way as to mimic existing overland flow conditions.
• The construction contractor shall prepare standard operating procedures for the handling of hazardous materials on the construction site to eliminate or reduce discharge of materials to storm drains. this may include locating construction-related equipment and processes that contain or generate pollutants in a secure way, away from storm drains, gutters, and wetlands; parking, fueling, and cleaning all vehicles and equipment in the secure area; designating concrete washout areas; and preventing or containing potential leakage or spilling from sanitary facilities.
• BMP performance and effectiveness shall be determined either by visual means where applicable (e.g., observation of above-normal sediment release), or by actual water sampling in cases where verification of contaminant reduction or elimination (such as inadvertent petroleum release) is required by the RWQCB to determine adequacy of the measure.
• In the event of significant construction delays or delays in final landscape installation, native grasses or other appropriate vegetative cover shall be established on the construction site as soon as possible after disturbance as an interim erosion control measure throughout the wet season. 608
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-21 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation Prior to issuance of grading permits for the proposed project, the applicant shall submit to the City of American Canyon for review and approval a SWPPP in accordance with the requirements of the Statewide General Permit. The SWPPP shall be implemented during construction.

Impact HYD-2: The proposed project would not
substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Impact HYD-3: The proposed project would not
substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: (i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; (ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; (iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff; or (iv) impede or redirect flood flows.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Cumulative Impact Implementation of MM HYD-1 Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Section 3.10—Land Use and Planning
Impact LU-1: The proposed project would not conflict
with the applicable provisions of the City of American
Canyon General Plan.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Impact LU-2: The proposed project would not conflict
with the applicable provisions of the American Canyon
Municipal Code.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact. 609
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-22 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation Impact LU-3: The proposed project would not conflict
with the applicable provisions of the Napa County
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Cumulative Impact No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Section 3.11—Noise
Impact NOI-1: The proposed project would not generate
a substantial temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Impact NOI-2: The proposed project would not result in
generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Impact NOI-3: The proposed project would not expose
people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels for a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Cumulative Impact No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Section 3.12—Public Services
Impact PUB-1: The proposed project would not result in
a need for new or expanded fire protection facilities that may have physical impacts on the environment.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Impact PUB-2: The proposed project would not result in
a need for new or expanded police protection facilities that may have physical impacts on the environment.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Cumulative Impact No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact. 610
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-23 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation Section 3.13—Transportation and Traffic
Impact TRANS-1: The proposed project would not
conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy of the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

No mitigation is required. Less than significant impact.

Impact TRANS-2: The proposed project would conflict or
be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3,
subdivision (b).

MM TRANS-2: Transportation Demand Management Program
The proposed project shall develop a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program to encourage employees to choose non-personal vehicle modes of transportation for commuting. This includes a commute trip reduction marketing initiative, through which the employer would disseminate information about available transportation options. Strategies would include encouraging ride sharing among project employees and linking them to resources to find rideshare partners working nearby, such as through the Napa Valley Transportation Authority (NVTA) V-Commute program or the regional 511.org program. Marketing materials can also inform employees of resources such as the Guaranteed Ride Home Program, which provides free rides home in emergency situations for employees using non-personal vehicle transportation modes.

Significant and unavoidable
impact.

Impact TRANS-3: The proposed project would not
substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).

No mitigation is required. Less than significant impact.

Impact TRANS-4: The proposed project would not result
in inadequate emergency access.

No mitigation is required. Less than significant impact.

Cumulative Impact Implementation of MM TRANS-2 Significant and unavoidable impact.

Section 3.14—Utilities
Impact UTIL-1: The proposed project would not require
or result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact. 611
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Executive Summary
FirstCarbon Solutions ES-24 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec00-03 Exec Summary.docx Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects.

Impact UTIL-2: The proposed project would have
sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Impact UTIL-3: The proposed project would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Impact UTIL-4: The proposed project would not
generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact.

Cumulative Impact No mitigation is necessary. Less than significant impact. 612
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Introduction
FirstCarbon Solutions 1-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec01-00 Introduction.docx CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 - Overview of the CEQA Process
This Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) is prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the SDG Commerce 220 Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2023100842). This document is prepared in conformance with CEQA (California Public Resources Code [PRC], § 21000, et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 14, § 15000, et seq.).

This Draft EIR is intended to serve as an informational document for the public agency decisionmakers and the public regarding the proposed project.

1.1.1 - Overview
The proposed project consists of the development of a 219,834-square-foot wine warehouse on the

10.45-acre project site. Chapter 2, Project Description provides a complete description of the proposed project.

1.1.2 - Purpose and Authority
This Draft EIR provides a project-level analysis of the environmental effects of the SDG Commerce 220 Project. The environmental impacts of the proposed project are analyzed in the EIR to the degree of specificity appropriate, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15146. This document addresses the potentially significant adverse environmental impacts that may be associated with the planning, construction, or operation of the project. It also identifies appropriate and feasible mitigation measures and alternatives that may be adopted to significantly reduce or avoid these impacts.

CEQA requires that an EIR contain, at a minimum, certain specific elements. These elements are contained in this Draft EIR and include:
• Table of Contents
• Introduction
• Executive Summary
• Project Description
• Environmental Setting, Significant Environmental Impacts, and Mitigation Measures • Cumulative Impacts
• Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
• Alternatives to the Proposed Project
• Growth-Inducing Impacts
• Effects Found not to be Significant
• Areas of Known Controversy
613
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Introduction Draft EIR
1-2 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec01-00 Introduction.docx

1.1.3 - Lead Agency Determination
The City of American Canyon is designated as the lead agency for the proposed project. CEQA Guidelines Section 15367 defines the lead agency as “. . . the public agency, which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project.” Other public agencies may use this Draft EIR in the decision-making or permit process and consider the information in this Draft EIR along with other information that may be presented during the CEQA process.

This Draft EIR was prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS), an environmental consultant. Prior to public review, it was extensively reviewed and evaluated by the City of American Canyon. This Draft EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City of American Canyon as required by CEQA. Lists of organizations and persons consulted and the report preparation personnel are provided in Chapter 7 of this Draft EIR.

1.2 - Scope of the Draft EIR
This Draft EIR addresses the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. The City of American Canyon issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the proposed project on October 27, 2023, which circulated between October 27, 2023, and November 27, 2023, for the statutory 30-day public review period. The scope of this Draft EIR includes the potential environmental impacts identified in the NOP and issues raised by agencies and the public in response to the NOP. The NOP is contained in Appendix A of this Draft EIR.

Seven comment letters were received in response to the NOP. They are listed in Table 1-1 and provided in Appendix A of this Draft EIR.

Table 1-1: NOP Comment Letter Summary
Affiliation Signatory(ies) Date
Public Agencies
Caltrans Yunsheng Luo November 27, 2023
CDFW Erin Chappell November 17, 2023
Department of Justice Christie Vosburg November 7, 2023 NAHC Cameron Vela October 31, 2023
Private Parties
— Yvonne Baginski November 21, 2023
— Jeannette Goyetche November 21, 2023
— Jerry Hoffman November 25, 2023
Notes:

Caltrans = California Department of Transportation
CDFW = California Department of Fish and Wildlife
NAHC = Native American Heritage Commission
Source: Compiled by FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS). 2023.
614
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Introduction
FirstCarbon Solutions 1-3 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec01-00 Introduction.docx

1.2.1 - Environmental Issues Determined not to be Significant The NOP identified topical areas that were determined not to be significant. An explanation of why each area is determined not to be significant is provided in Chapter 4, Effects Found not to be Significant. These topical areas are as follows:
• Agricultural and Forest Resources
• Mineral Resources
• Recreation
• Wildfire
In addition, certain subjects within various topical areas were determined not to be significant.

Other potentially significant issues are analyzed in these topical areas; however, the following issues are not analyzed:
• Scenic Vistas
• State Scenic Highways
• Loss of Important Farmland
• Williamson Act Contracts or Agricultural Zoning
• Forest Zoning
• Loss of Forest Land
• Pressures to Convert Surrounding Agricultural Land or Forest Land • Sensitive Natural Communities or Riparian Habitat
• Conservation Plans
• Septic or Alternative Wastewater Disposal Systems
• Wildfires
• 100-year Flood Hazards
• Levee or Dam Failure
• Seiches, Tsunamis, or Mudflows
• Division of an Established Community
• Loss of Mineral Resources of Statewide or Local Importance • Growth Inducement
• Displacement or Persons or Housing
• Schools
• Parks
• Other Public Facilities
• Emergency Evacuation
An explanation of why each issue is determined not to be significant is provided in Chapter 4, Effects Found not to be Significant.
615
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Introduction Draft EIR
1-4 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec01-00 Introduction.docx

1.2.2 - Potentially Significant Environmental Issues
The NOP indicated that the following topical areas may contain potentially significant environmental issues that will require further analysis in the EIR. These sections are as follows:
• Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources/Tribal Cultural Resources
• Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Energy
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use
• Noise
• Public Services
• Transportation
• Utilities and Service Systems

1.3 - Organization of the EIR
This Draft EIR is organized into the following main sections:
• Chapter ES: Executive Summary. This chapter includes a summary of the proposed project and alternatives addressed in the Draft EIR. A brief description of the areas of controversy and issues to be resolved and a table that summarizes the impacts, mitigation measures, and level of significance after mitigation are also included in this section. • Chapter 1: Introduction. This chapter provides an introduction and overview describing the purpose of this Draft EIR, its scope and components, and its review and certification process. • Chapter 2: Project Description. This chapter includes a detailed description of the proposed project, including its location, site, and project characteristics. It also includes a discussion of the project objectives, intended uses of the Draft EIR, responsible agencies, and approvals that are needed for the proposed project.
• Chapter 3: Environmental Impact Analysis. This chapter analyzes the environmental impacts of the proposed project. Impacts are organized into major topic areas. Each topic area includes a description of the environmental setting, methodology, significance criteria, impacts, mitigation measures, and significance after mitigation. The specific environmental topics that are addressed within Chapter 3 are as follows:
- Section 3.1—Aesthetics, Light, and Glare: Addresses the potential visual impacts of the proposed project and the overall increase in illumination produced by the proposed project. - Section 3.2—Air Quality: Addresses potential air quality impacts associated with project implementation and emissions of criteria pollutants. In addition, the section also evaluates project emissions of toxic air contaminants.
616
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Introduction
FirstCarbon Solutions 1-5 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec01-00 Introduction.docx - Section 3.3—Biological Resources: Addresses potential impacts on habitat, vegetation, and wildlife; the potential degradation or elimination of important habitat; and impacts on listed, proposed, and candidate threatened and endangered species. - Section 3.4—Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources: Addresses potential impacts on historical resources, archaeological resources, paleontological resources, and burial sites.

Additionally addresses potential project impacts related to tribal cultural resources. - Section 3.5—Energy: Address the potential impacts related to energy that could result from implementation of the proposed project.
- Section 3.6—Geology, Soils, and Seismicity: Addresses the potential impacts the proposed project may have on soils and assesses the effects of project development in relation to geologic and seismic conditions.
- Section 3.7—Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Addresses potential project emissions of greenhouse gases.
- Section 3.8—Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Addresses potential for presence of hazardous materials or conditions on the project site and in the project area that may have the potential to impact human health.
- Section 3.9—Hydrology and Water Quality: Addresses the potential impacts of the project on local hydrological conditions, including drainage areas, and changes in the flow rates. - Section 3.10—Land Use: Addresses consistency with the City of American Canyon General Plan, American Canyon Municipal Code, and Napa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
- Section 3.11—Noise: Addresses potential noise impacts during construction and at project buildout from mobile and stationary sources. The section also addresses the impact of noise generation on neighboring uses.
- Section 3.12—Public Services: Addresses potential impacts upon public services, including fire protection, law enforcement, schools, parks, and recreational facilities. - Section 3.13—Transportation: Addresses potential impacts related to the local and regional roadway system and public transportation, bicycle, and pedestrian access. - Section 3.14—Utilities and Services Systems: Addresses potential impacts related to service providers, including fire protection, law enforcement, water supply, wastewater, solid waste, and energy providers.
• Chapter 4: Effects Found not to be Significant. This chapter contains analysis of the topical sections and CEQA Appendix G checklist questions not addressed in Chapter 3. • Chapter 5: Other CEQA Considerations. This chapter provides a summary of significant unavoidable environmental impacts and growth-inducing impacts. • Chapter 6: Alternatives to the Proposed Project. This chapter compares the impacts of the proposed project with three land use project alternatives: No Project Alternative and Reduced Project Alternative. An environmentally superior alternative has been identified. In addition, alternatives initially considered but rejected from further consideration are discussed. • Chapter 7: Persons and Organizations Consulted/List of Preparers. This chapter contains a full list of persons and organizations that were consulted during the preparation of this Draft 617
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Introduction Draft EIR
1-6 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec01-00 Introduction.docx EIR. This chapter also contains a full list of the authors who assisted in the preparation of the Draft EIR, by name and affiliation.
• Appendices. The Draft EIR appendices includes all notices and other procedural documents pertinent to the Draft EIR as well as all technical material prepared to support the analysis.

1.4 - Documents Incorporated by Reference
As permitted by CEQA Guidelines Section 15150, this Draft EIR has referenced several technical studies, analyses, and previously certified environmental documentation. Information from the documents, which have been incorporated by reference, has been briefly summarized in the appropriate section(s). The relationship between the incorporated part of the referenced document and the Draft EIR has also been described. The documents and other sources that have been used in the preparation of this Draft EIR include but are not limited to:
• City of American Canyon General Plan
• American Canyon Municipal Code
• Napa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
• City of American Canyon Urban Water Management Plan
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15150(b), the General Plan, the referenced documents and other sources used in the preparation of the Draft EIR are available for review at the American Canyon City Hall at the address shown in Section 1.6 below.

1.5 - Documents Prepared for the Proposed Project
The following technical studies and analyses were prepared for the proposed project:
• Biological Resources Assessment, prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions (Appendix C) • Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, prepared by Krazan & Associates (Appendix E) • Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Cameron-Cole (Appendix F) • Hydrology Report, prepared by RSA+ (Appendix G)
• Hydraulic Calculations, prepared by RSA+ (Appendix G) • Stormwater Control Plan, prepared by RSA+ (Appendix G)

1.6 - Review of the Draft EIR
Upon completion of the Draft EIR, the City of American Canyon filed a Notice of Completion (NOC) with the State Office of Planning and Research to begin the public review period (PRC § 21161).

Concurrent with the NOC, this Draft EIR has been distributed to responsible and trustee agencies, other affected agencies, surrounding cities, and interested parties, as well as all parties requesting a copy of the Draft EIR in accordance with Public Resources Code 21092(b)(3). During the public review period, the Draft EIR, including the technical appendices, is available for review at the following locations:
618
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Introduction
FirstCarbon Solutions 1-7 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec01-00 Introduction.docx City of American Canyon City Hall
4381 Broadway Street, Suite 201
American Canyon, CA 94503
Hours:

Monday–Friday: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Saturday–Sunday: Closed
Active Adults Center
2185 Elliot Drive
American Canyon, CA 94503
Hours: Monday - Friday 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

Saturday–Sunday: Closed
American Canyon Library
300 Crawford Way
American Canyon, CA 94503
Hours: Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday–
Saturday: 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

Wednesday: 12:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

Sunday: Closed
The Draft EIR is also available for review at the following website:
https://www.cityofamericancanyon.org/government/community-development/developmentprojects Agencies, organizations, and interested parties have the opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR during the 45-day public review period. Written comments on this Draft EIR may be submitted electronically at this website link: https://cityofamcan.org/SDG220.

Hardcopy written comments on this Draft EIR should be addressed to:

SDG Commerce 220 Project
City of American Canyon
4381 Broadway Street, Suite 201
American Canyon, CA 94503
Submittal of electronic comments in Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF format is encouraged. Upon completion of the public review period, written responses to all significant environmental issues raised will be prepared and made available for review by the commenting agencies at least 10 days prior to the public hearing before the American Canyon Planning Commission on the proposed project. Following a recommendation by the Planning Commission, the City Council will consider certifying the Final EIR at a regularly scheduled Council meeting. Comments received and the responses to comments will be included as part of the record for consideration by decision-makers for the proposed project.
619

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
620
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Project Description
FirstCarbon Solutions 2-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec02-00 Project Description.docx CHAPTER 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) analyzes the potential environmental effects of the proposed SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project (proposed project) in the City of American Canyon.

2.1 - Project Location and Setting

2.1.1 - Location
The project site is located at 1055 Commerce Court in the City of American Canyon, in Napa County, California; refer to Exhibit 2-1. The project site consists of Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 058-030- 069 (10.17 acres) plus small additional improvement areas (consisting primarily of parking lot improvements and connections to adjoining land uses) for a total of 10.45 acres. The rectangular project site is bounded by a eucalyptus grove and North Slough (west), a parcel entitled for a wine distribution warehouse known as SDG Commerce 217 currently under construction (north), Commerce Court beyond which is a paintball recreation area (east), and a wine distribution warehouse known as SDG Commerce 330 (south); refer to Exhibit 2-2. The project site is located on the Cuttings Wharf, California, United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle Map, Township 4 North, Range 4 West, Section 14 (Latitude 38° 11’ 22” North; Longitude 122° 16’ 19” West).

2.1.2 - Existing Land Use Activities
The project site contains undeveloped land. The project site gently slopes from east to west and is approximately 13 to 25 feet above mean sea level. A linear wetland and three isolated wetlands are located within the northern portion of the property. The southern portion of the project site contains several soil stockpiles that are intended for use at the SDG Commerce 217 property. A young eucalyptus tree is located near Commerce Court. The project frontage with Commerce Court is improved with curb, gutter, and sidewalk. Exhibit 2-3 provides photographs of the project site.

2.1.3 - Surrounding Land Uses
North
A wine distribution warehouse known as SDG Commerce 217 is being constructed to the north of the project site at the time of this writing. This parcel totals 10.39 acres. The area further to the north consists of multiple industrial warehouses and other industrial type land uses.

East
Commerce Court, a two-lane undivided roadway, forms the eastern boundary of the project site. A 68-foot-wide City Public Access and Utility easement is located within Commerce Court with underground sewer, water, reclaimed water, sewer force main and underground power. A eucalyptus grove is located east of Commerce Court. A residence, dirt/gravel roads, and various accessory structures are located throughout this eucalyptus grove as well as Paint Jungle, a paintball recreation area.
621

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
622
!
·|}þ12
·|}þ29
·|}þ121
·|}þ37
·|}þ4
Napa County
Solano County
!"#$80
!"#$680
·|}þ12
·|}þ116
Contra Costa County
!"#$780
·|þ}128
Montezuma Slou gh
Carquinez Strait
M
So
a
n
ri
o
n
ma County
County
·|}þ242
!"#$680
·|}þ24
Napa River
Jack London
State Park
Vacaville
Napa
Fairfield
Suisun City
Vallejo
Novato Benicia
Bay Point
Hercules Pinole Martinez
San Anselmo
San Rafael Concord
San Pablo
Pleasant Hill Richmond
Larkspur
El Cerrito
Mill Valley
Albany Walnut Creek
Lafayette
Orinda
Berkeley
Alamo
Sonoma
American
Canyon
Clayton
Exhibit2-1
Region al Location Map
5 2.5 0 5
Miles
!
Text
Project Site
Source:Cen sus2000Data,TheCalifo rn iaSpatial In fo rm ation Library (CaSIL).

I

CITYOFAMERICANCANYON
SDGCOMMERCE220PROJECT

ENV IRONMENTALIMPACTREPORT
56390001•03/2023|2-1_region al.m xd
Project Site
!"#$80
Legend
City of American Canyon
623

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
624
56390001• 12/2023| 2-2_lo cal_vicin ity.mxd
Exhibit2-2
Lo calVicin ityMap
So urce:Bin gAerialImagery.

CITY OFAMERICANCANY ON
SDGCOMMERCE220PROJECT

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTREPORT
1,000 500 0 1,000
Feet
Legend
Project Site
625

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
626
56390001 • 08/2023 | 2-3_site_photographs.cdr
Exhibit 2-3
Site Photographs
View of southern portion of project site. Note existing soils stockpiles.

View of northern portion of project site.

View of project frontage with Commerce Court.

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON
SDG COMMERCE 220 PROJECT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT627

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
628
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Project Description
FirstCarbon Solutions 2-9 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec02-00 Project Description.docx South
A wine distribution warehouse known as SDG Commerce 330 is located south of the project site.

This parcel totals 15.24 acres. The area further to the south consists of an equestrian center (SpiritHorse Therapeutic Riding Center), the American Canyon 4-H Service Club, and the Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School.

West
An 11.23-acre parcel containing a eucalyptus grove and North Slough are located west of the project site. The American Canyon Water Reclamation Facility is located west of North Slough. Further west is the Napa River and associated wetlands.

2.1.4 - Land Use Designations
The project site is designated Commercial Recreation (CR) by the City of American Canyon General Plan and zoned Recreation (REC). A Recreation Zoning District Code Amendment (Ordinance No. 2018-01) was adopted by the City Council on January 16, 2018. The Ordinance allows wine-related warehousing and distribution facilities as a conditionally permitted use within the REC zoning district.

The project site is within Compatibility Zone D (Common Traffic Pattern) of the Napa County Airport’s Land Use Compatibility Plan.

2.2 - Project History
The project site is part of what was previously a larger 35.85-acre site (Exhibit 2-4a). The site was subdivided into three lots (SDG Commerce 217, SDG Commerce 220, and SDG Commerce 330) via a tentative parcel map in February 2019. The southern parcel (SDG Commerce 330) was developed in 2020. The northern parcel (SDG Commerce 217) was entitled in 2021 and at the time of this writing is currently being developed. The central parcel (SDG Commerce 220) is the project site evaluated in this Draft EIR. Exhibit 2-2 shows the relationship of the three parcels to each other. The following narrative provides background on the entire 35.85-acre site.

Aerial photography dating to 1937 indicates that the entire site was occupied by a planted crop of trees; between then and the late 1950s, a eucalyptus grove was planted. From the 1950s until 2001 the site remained relatively unchanged. From 2001 until circa 2012, the northwest corner of the site was used as a paintball field (Sherwood Forest Paintball Area) with the eucalyptus trees remaining in place.

In 2004, a warehouse was built to the north of the site (as shown in Exhibit 2-2), and its development also included construction of Commerce Court cul-de-sac road improvements which terminated at the northeast corner of the SDG Commerce 217 site. Also in 2004, the City of American Canyon installed underground utilities and an access road through the middle of the eucalyptus grove adjacent to the east side of this site. This work also included installation of a sanitary sewer force main that crosses the northern portion of the site (i.e., the 217 SDG Commerce parcel). In 2012 the entire 35.85-acre site was cleared and grubbed of eucalyptus trees and shrubs. 629
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Project Description Draft EIR
2-10 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec02-00 Project Description.docx

2.3 - Project Characteristics

2.3.1 - Project Summary
The applicant, SDG Commerce 220, LLC proposes to develop a 219,834-square-foot wine storage and distribution center on the 443,005-square-foot project site. The warehouse would provide 23 truck doors and approximately 4,400 square feet of office space. It would have perimeter concrete tilt wall panels with varying parapet heights and accent spandrel glass/metal canopy features around offices and corners of the building. The average roof height would be approximately 35 feet high and portions of the building exterior walls would have various heights to provide architectural relief. The building would be insulated and refrigerated at approximately 58°F (degrees Fahrenheit), making it suitable for storage of wine and related products. The amount of refrigeration necessary would be reduced through the use of intake louvers and fans, which would allow cool night air to be utilized.

Table 2-1 summarizes the project characteristics. Exhibit 2-4a depicts the site plan within the greater

35.85-acre site. Exhibit 2-4b provides the project-specific site plan. Exhibit 2-5 provides a conceptual illustration of the proposed project.

Table 2-1: SDG Commerce 220 Project Summary
Acres
Building
Square Feet
Floor Area
Ratio
Building
Height End Use/Characteristics

10.451 219,834 0.5 35 feet Wine Distribution Warehouse/23 truck doors 1 Project site consists of APN 058-030-069 (10.17 acres) plus small additional improvement areas for a total of 10.45 acres.

Source: SDG Commerce 220, LLC. 2022.

Operation and Employment
The building would be designed to accommodate approximately three tenants. Typical hours of operation for wine distribution and storage are 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m., Monday through Friday during peak seasonal months, typically June through November. It is anticipated that the project would employ approximately 35 full-time employees and 20 part-time employees working in up to three overlapping shifts.

Warehousing and storage of wine and other wine-related industries are not labor intensive, and the proposed uses for the building do not demand frequent client or user trips to the site. It is estimated that the proposed project would generate approximately 2 to 4 client or visitor trips per day, likely during off-peak season and during normal working hours. Forklifts used within the building would be electrically powered.

Site Access, Circulation, and Parking
Vehicular and truck access would be taken from one driveway on Commerce Court that would be shared with the SDG Commerce 330 project. Drive aisles would be provided around the full perimeter of the building to support emergency ingress and egress. 630
56390001• 09/2023 | 2-4a_Site_Plan.cdr
Exhibit 2-4a
Site Plan

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON
SDG COMMERCE 220 PROJECT

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Source: RSA+ Consulting Civil Engineers + Surveyors. 07/21/2023.

PROJECT SITE BOUNDARY
631

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
632
56390001• 08/2023 | 2-4b_Site_Plan.cdr
Exhibit 2-4b
Site Plan

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON
SDG COMMERCE 220 PROJECT

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Source: Ward Architects, Inc. 08/01/2023. I
633

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
634
56390001• 08/2023 | 2-5_conceptual_illustration.cdr
Exhibit 2-5
Conceptual Illustration

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON
SDG COMMERCE 220 PROJECT

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Source: Stravinsky Development Group.

View of project rendering looking northwest from southeast corner. 635

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
636
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Project Description
FirstCarbon Solutions 2-17 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec02-00 Project Description.docx A total of 134 car spaces and 23 truck parking stalls would be provided. Of these parking stalls, five would be designated for handicap access and one would be a compact space. There would be five electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) stalls, one van accessible EVSE stall, and 19 electric vehicle (EV) capable stalls. Per the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), nonresidential developments with 101–150 parking spaces must provide at least 17 EV capable spaces and at least four EV capable spaces provided with EVSE (Title 24, Part 11, Chapter 5, Table

5.106.5.3.1). The proposed project would meet these requirements.

Pedestrian circulation throughout the project site would be provided in accordance with the California Disabled Accessibility Guidebook (CalDAG) and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) recommendations and standards Short and long-term bicycle parking would be provided in accordance with current CALGreen codes. The proposed project would provide three, long-term bicycle lockers, each of which would accommodate up to four bicycles, for a total of 12 bicycle parking spaces (located adjacent to each office area). Short-term bicycle parking would also be similarly located. The proposed 12 bicycle parking spaces would be five more than required per the City’s Zoning Ordinance Chapter 19.14.090 (A), Bicycle Parking Requirements.

Lighting
The proposed project would include exterior lighting on the building and parking lot poles on the north side of the property. Parking lot lighting would be consistent with City of American Canyon municipal code requirements Section 19.21.030(M). The 30-foot-tall lights would be “shoebox” dimmable light-emitting diode (LED) fixtures designed to be dark-sky friendly by directing the light toward the ground to prevent glare to surrounding properties.

Signage
One monument sign is proposed, (approximately 8 feet wide by 5 feet tall) located at the entry to the site from Commerce Court.

Landscaping
Landscaping would be provided around the site perimeter on the east, north and partial west sides and within parking islands throughout (Exhibit 2-6). Mechanical equipment would be placed on the north side of the building behind a 6-foot-high color slatted chain-link fence. The irrigation system would be connected to the City’s reclaimed water system, thus eliminating the use of the City’s potable water for landscape purposes. In addition, the warehouse would be dual plumbed with recycled water for toilet flushing inside the warehouse building.

Storm Drainage
Stormwater runoff would be directed via an on-site storm drain system into a detention/bioretention pond located on the western side of the site. Roof drainage would be connected to the proposed detention/bioretention pond via the on-site storm drain system surrounding the building by way of down spouts on the exterior of the building, which would be painted to blend-in with the building façade.

Wetland Areas
The two existing, on-site wetland areas would be preserved in place (see Exhibit 2-4b). 637

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
638
56390001• 08/2023 | 2-6_Landscaping_Plan.cdr
Exhibit 2-6
Landscaping Plan

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON
SDG COMMERCE 220 PROJECT

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Source: Ward Architects, Inc. 08/01/2023. I
639

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
640
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Project Description
FirstCarbon Solutions 2-21 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec02-00 Project Description.docx Utilities
Water
The City of American Canyon would provide potable and recycled water service to the proposed project. Potable and recycled water infrastructure currently exists within Commerce Court. Service laterals would extend from the Commerce Court water lines to project building.

Wastewater
The City of American Canyon would provide wastewater collection and treatment service to the proposed project. Sewer infrastructure currently exists within Commerce Court. Connection back to the existing City sewer infrastructure in Commerce Court would be made through the existing sanitary sewer system and lift station that was previously designed and constructed on the Commerce 330 site for future shared use with the proposed project.

Electricity
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) would deliver electricity to the proposed project. Electric infrastructure currently exists within Commerce Court. Service laterals would extend from the Commerce Court facilities to project buildings. No natural gas would be used. Solar would be installed on the building roof top and would produce an estimated 235,000 kilowatt-hour (kWh) per year. The intent of the solar system is to supplement the power consumed by items such as exterior lighting, parking lot lights, interior warehouse lighting and a portion of the building’s refrigeration system.

Telecommunications Services
Telephone service provided by AT&T would be extended from the existing underground infrastructure in the Commerce Court right-of-way to the electrical room located in the northeast corner of the building.

Off-site Improvements
A small portion of the development extends beyond the parcel boundaries to the north and south of the project site in order to provide parking lot and circulation connectivity. The properties to the north and south of the project site are under related ownership as the proposed project and the potential impacts associated with development and site disturbance on those parcels was analyzed in previous California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation.1,2 Construction
Construction would occur in a single phase, lasting approximately 11 months. For this analysis, construction is assumed to start in September 2024. During the construction phase, 12 to 24 workers would be at the site, with a maximum near to 80 and a minimum of one. Construction hours would be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Construction of the concrete building slab, 1 City of American Canyon. 2021. Commerce 217 Distribution Center Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Website:
https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020120302/2. Accessed August 16, 2023. 2 City of American Canyon. 2018. SDG 330 Wine Warehouse Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Website:
https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2018112067. Accessed August 16, 2023. 641
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Project Description Draft EIR
2-22 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec02-00 Project Description.docx wall panels and large concrete paving pours would be required to be performed during nighttime hours starting no earlier than 12:00 a.m. Pre-notification of these night pour dates and times would be provided to the City and property owners in the vicinity. Typical construction equipment that would be used at the site would include self-loading dirt scraper, bulldozer, motor grader, compactor, roller, water truck, backhoe, excavator, trencher, drilling auger, front end loader, paving machine, laser screed, concrete finishing trowels, tractor, crane, forklift, generator, man lift, scissor lift, welding machine, and light tower. Less than 1,000 cubic yards of imported soil would be required for grading.

2.4 - Project Objectives
The objectives of the proposed project are to:

1. Positively contribute to the local economy through new capital investment, the creation of new jobs, and the expansion of the tax base.

2. Develop land to its highest and best use.

3. Continue the buildout of the City of American Canyon in accordance with the General Plan.

4. Meet regional demand for wine warehousing by adding to the inventory of this space.

5. Develop nonresidential uses on the project site that are compatible with the City of American Canyon’s Water Reclamation Facility and the Napa County Airport.

6. Maximize the efficient use of land by developing an industrial project at the upper end of the allowable Floor Area Ratio range.

7. Complete the buildout of the SDG Commerce development.

8. Protect North Slough by employing stormwater pollution prevention measures during construction and operation.

9. Provide development fees to the American Canyon Fire Protection District to fund the development of a new fire station.

2.5 - Intended Uses of this Draft EIR
This Draft EIR is being prepared by the City of American Canyon to assess the potential environmental impacts that may arise in connection with actions related to implementation of the proposed project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15367, the City of American Canyon is the lead agency for the proposed project and has discretionary authority over the proposed project and project approvals. The Draft EIR is intended to address all public infrastructure improvements and all future development proposals that are within the parameters of the proposed project.

2.5.1 - Discretionary and Ministerial Actions
Discretionary approvals and permits are required by the City of American Canyon for implementation of the proposed project. The proposed project would require the following discretionary approvals and actions, including:
• Conditional Use Permit
642
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Project Description
FirstCarbon Solutions 2-23 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec02-00 Project Description.docx Subsequent ministerial actions would be required for the implementation of the proposed project including issuance of grading and building permits.

2.5.2 - Responsible and Trustee Agencies
A number of other agencies in addition to the City of American Canyon will serve as Responsible and Trustee Agencies, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15381 and Section 15386, respectively. This Draft EIR will provide environmental information to these agencies and other public agencies, which may be required to grant approvals or coordinate with other agencies, as part of project implementation. These agencies may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
• San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Board (San Francisco Bay RWQCB) • County of Napa
• Napa County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC)
• Napa Valley Unified School District (NVUSD)
643

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
644
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Environmental Impact Analysis
FirstCarbon Solutions 3-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-00 Env Impact Analysis.docx CHAPTER 3: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
Organization of Issue Areas
This Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) provides analysis of impacts for those environmental topics where it was determined in the Notice of Preparation (NOP), or through subsequent analysis, that the proposed project would result in “potentially significant impacts.” Sections 3.1 through 3.14 discuss the environmental impacts that may result with approval and implementation of the proposed project.

Issues Addressed in this EIR
The following environmental issues are addressed in Chapter 3:
• Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use
• Noise
• Public Services
• Transportation
• Utilities and Service Systems
Level of Significance
Determining the severity of project impacts is fundamental to achieving the objectives of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 requires that decision makers mitigate, as completely as is feasible, the significant impacts identified in the Draft EIR. If the EIR identifies any significant unmitigated impacts, CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 requires decision makers in approving a project to adopt a statement of overriding considerations that explains why the benefits of the project outweigh the adverse environmental consequences identified in the EIR.

The level of significance for each impact examined in this Draft EIR was determined by considering the predicted magnitude of the impact against the applicable threshold. Thresholds were developed using criteria from the CEQA Guidelines and checklist; State, federal, and local regulatory schemes; local/regional plans and ordinances; accepted practice; consultation with recognized experts; and other professional opinions.

Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measure Format
The format adopted in this Draft EIR to present the evaluation of impacts is described and illustrated below.
645
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Environmental Impact Analysis Draft EIR
3-2 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-00 Env Impact Analysis.docx Summary Heading of Impact
Impact AES-1: An impact summary heading appears immediately preceding the impact description (Summary Heading of Impact in this example). The impact number identifies the section of the report (AES for Aesthetics, Light, and Glare in this example) and the sequential order of the impact (1 in this example) within that section. To the right of the impact number is the impact statement, which identifies the potential impact.

Impact Analysis
A narrative analysis follows the impact statement.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
This section identifies the level of significance of the impact before any mitigation is proposed.

Mitigation Measures
In some cases, following the impact discussion, reference is made to State and federal regulations and agency policies that would fully or partially mitigate the impact. In addition, policies and programs from applicable local land use plans that partially or fully mitigate the impact may be cited.

Project-specific mitigation measures, beyond those contained in other documents, are set off with a summary heading and described using the format presented below:

MM AES-1 Project-specific mitigation is identified that would reduce the impact to the lowest degree feasible. The mitigation number links the particular mitigation to the impact it is associated with (AES-1 in this example); mitigation measures are numbered sequentially.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
This section identifies the resulting level of significance of the impact following mitigation.

Abbreviations used in the mitigation measure numbering are:

Code Environmental Issue
AES Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
AIR Air Quality
BIO Biological Resources
CUL Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
ENER Energy
GEO Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
GHG Greenhouse Gas Emissions
646
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Environmental Impact Analysis
FirstCarbon Solutions 3-3 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-00 Env Impact Analysis.docx Code Environmental Issue
HAZ Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HYD Hydrology and Water Quality
LU Land Use
NOI Noise
PUB Public Services
TRANS Transportation
UTIL Utilities and Service Systems
Cumulative Impacts
The discussion of cumulative impacts in this subsection analyzes the cumulative impacts of the proposed project, taken together with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects producing related impacts. The goal of this analysis is to determine whether the overall long-term impacts of all such projects would be cumulatively significant and to determine whether the project itself would cause a “cumulatively considerable” incremental contribution to any such cumulatively significant impacts. To determine whether the overall long-term impacts of all such projects would be cumulatively significant, the analysis generally considers the following:
• The area in which impacts of the proposed project would be experienced. • The impacts of the proposed project that are expected in the area. • Other past, proposed, and reasonably foreseeable projects that have had or are expected to have impacts in the same area.
• The impacts or expected impacts of these other projects. • The overall impact that can be expected if the individual impacts from each project are allowed to accumulate.
“Cumulative impacts” refers to two or more individual impacts that, when considered together, are considerable, or that compound or increase other environmental impacts (CEQA Guidelines § 15355). Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant impacts taking place over time (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1508.7). If the analysis determines that the potential exists for the project, taken together with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, to result in a significant or adverse cumulative impact, the analysis then determines whether the project’s incremental contribution to any significant cumulative impact is itself significant (i.e., “cumulatively considerable”). The cumulative impact analysis for each individual resource topic is presented in each resource section of this Chapter immediately after the description of the direct project impacts and identified mitigation measures.

The cumulative impact analysis is guided by the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15130.

Key principles established by this section include:
647
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Environmental Impact Analysis Draft EIR
3-4 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-00 Env Impact Analysis.docx • A cumulative impact only occurs from impacts caused by the proposed project together with other projects. An EIR should not discuss impacts that do not result from the proposed project.
• When the combined cumulative impact from the increment associated with the proposed project and other projects is not significant, an EIR need only briefly explain why the impact is not significant; detailed explanation is not required.
• An EIR may determine that a project’s contribution to a cumulative effect impact would be rendered less than cumulatively considerable if a project is required to implement or fund its fair share of mitigation intended to alleviate the cumulative impact.

The cumulative impact analysis relies on these principles as the basis for determining the significance of the proposed project’s cumulative contribution to various impacts.

Table 3-1 lists the relevant cumulative projects considered for the environmental analysis.

Table 3-1: Cumulative Projects
Jurisdiction Project Location Characteristics Status
City of American
Canyon
Giovannoni Logistics
Center
Green Island
Road/Devlin Road

2.4 million squarefoot logistics centerApproved; not
constructed
SDG Commerce 217 1075 Commerce
Court
217,294 square-foot
wine warehouse
Approved; under
construction
Pacific Gas and
Electric Company
(PG&E) Napa
Regional Center
500 Boone Road 99,503 square-foot
maintenance and
operations center on

24.5 acres
Approved; under
construction
Green Island Road
Widening
Green Island Road
between State Route
(SR) 29 and a cul-desac
Reconstruction of
roadway; addition of
a two-way left-turn
lane, curb, gutter,
sidewalks;
construction of the
Napa Valley Vine
Trail
Approved; not
constructed
Napa-Vallejo Waste
Management
Authority
Construction and
Demolition Debris
Recycling Facility
South Kelly
Road/Devlin Road
(southwest
quadrant)
Enclosed
construction and
demolition debris
recycling facility on 9
acres
Awaiting application
Napa Airport
Corporate Center
South Kelly
Road/Devlin Road
(southeast quadrant)
300,000 square-foot
business park on 35
acres
Approved; not
constructed
648
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Environmental Impact Analysis
FirstCarbon Solutions 3-5 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-00 Env Impact Analysis.docx Jurisdiction Project Location Characteristics Status
Watson Ranch
Specific Plan
East of Napa Junction 1,253 market rate
dwelling units; 186
affordable housing
units; 50 live/work
units; 93,500-squarefeet commercial;
100-room hotel
Approved; under
construction
Broadway District
Specific Plan
SR-29 corridor from
the southern city
limit to Green Island
Road
1,200 dwelling units;
840,000 square feet
of nonresidential
uses within 300 acres
Approved; under
Construction
Napa County Sentinels of Freedom
Property
West Napa Logistics;
South of Napa
County Airport
Two warehouses
(224,593 square feet
and 217,294 square
feet) on 20.56 acres
Awaiting application
Hess Collection/Laird
Family General Plan
Amendment and
Rezoning
East of SR-29 from S.

Kelly Road to Paoli
Loop Road

4.5 million square
feet industrial
project on 279 acres
Application in
process
Source: City of American Canyon. 2024.
649

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
650
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.1-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-01 Aesthetics.docx

3.1 - Aesthetics, Light, and Glare

3.1.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing aesthetics, light, and glare setting and potential effects from project implementation on visual resources and the site and its surroundings. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on-site reconnaissance conducted by FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS), as well as review of the City of American Canyon General Plan.

No public comments pertaining to aesthetics, light, and glare were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP).

3.1.2 - Environmental Setting
Regional Setting
American Canyon is located in southern Napa County between the east bank of the Napa River and the Sulfur Springs Mountains foothills. State Route (SR) 29—known locally as Broadway Street— bisects the City from north to south and serves as the primary commercial corridor. Residential uses are generally located in the southern portion of the City, with commercial and industrial uses located in the northern portion near the Napa County Airport. American Canyon is characterized by a contemporary, low-rise, suburban appearance, with most development having occurred within the last 50 years.

Project Site
The project site contains undeveloped land (Exhibit 2-3). The project site gently slopes downward from east to west and is approximately 13 to 25 feet above mean sea level. A linear wetland and another isolated wetland are located within the northern portion of the property. The project frontage with Commerce Court is improved with curb, gutter, and sidewalk. The southern portion of the project site contains several soil stockpiles that are intended for use at the SDG Commerce 217 property during construction of that site’s entitled wine distribution warehouse.

Surrounding Land Uses
West
A Eucalyptus grove and North Slough are located west of the project site. The American Canyon Water Reclamation Facility is located west of North Slough.

North
An undeveloped parcel entitled for a wine distribution warehouse known as SDG Commerce 217 is located north of the project site. This parcel totals 10.39 acres.

East
Commerce Court, a two-lane undivided roadway, forms the eastern boundary of the project site. A Eucalyptus grove is located east of Commerce Court.
651
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Aesthetics, Light, and Glare Draft EIR

3.1-2 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-01 Aesthetics.docx South
A wine distribution warehouse known as SDG Commerce 330 is located south of the project site.

This parcel totals 15.24 acres. The Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School, Wetlands Edge Park, and residential uses are located to the south and are accessed from Eucalyptus Drive.

Light and Glare
The project site does not currently contain any sources of light and glare. Parking lot lights that employ full cut-off fixtures are present at the adjoining Commerce SDG 330 warehouse. Street lighting is present along Commerce Court.

3.1.3 - Regulatory Framework
Local
City of American Canyon
General Plan
The City of American Canyon General Plan sets forth the following goals, objectives, and policies relevant to aesthetics, light, and glare:

Goal 1B Provide for the orderly development of American Canyon that maintains its distinctive character.

Goal 1C Create a pattern and character of land use development that establishes American Canyon as a distinct “place” differentiated from adjacent urban areas, maintains a semi-rural character, and respects the environmental setting.

Objective 1.4 Provide for a pattern of development that (a) establishes distinct neighborhoods, districts, places of community activity and culture and open spaces that are interlinked and promote a cohesive image, (b) locates jobs, commerce, recreation, and other places of community activity within close proximity to all housing units, minimizing the need for vehicular use, (c) achieves a balance of uses to serve both sides of Highway 29, and (d) establishes an overall compact urban form surrounded by open space.

Objective 1.5 Maintain the character and quality of the natural environmental resources of the City and protect the population and development from the adverse impacts of environmental hazards.

Policy 1.22.4 Require that development be designed to achieve a high level of quality and compatibility with existing uses including the consideration of the following:
a. Architectural treatment of all building elevations;
b. Use of extensive landscape along the primary street frontages and parking lots; and
652
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.1-3 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-01 Aesthetics.docx c. Enclosure of storage areas visible from principal highways (including Highway 29) and peripheral residential and commercial districts with decorative screening or other elements.

Policy 1.22.5 Require that industrial areas developed as research and development and officeoriented business parks be designed to convey a unified character by consideration of Policy 1.22.4 and the following:
a. Inclusion of pedestrian walkways, arcades, and/or other visual elements to interconnect individual buildings;
b. Differentiation of building façades by materials, color, architectural details and modulation of building volumes;
c. Incorporation of extensive landscape in parking areas, along building frontages, and other public areas;
d. Use of consistent and well-designed public and informational signage; and e. Installation of elements that define the key entries to the industrial district.

Municipal Code 19.21.020(M), Lighting
Municipal Code Section 19.21.020(M), Lighting, requires that public parking with three or more vehicle parking spots shall have lighting facilities capable of providing sufficient illumination at every point of the parking area and that a lighting study may be required by the community development director. Further, all parking area illumination, including security lighting, shall be designed to reflect away from adjoining properties and right-of-way.

Municipal Code 19.41, Design Permits
A design permit application must be approved by the community development director or planning commission prior to building construction or alteration, including commercial structures and industrial structures. The purpose of the design permit is to provide for a review process that promotes excellence in site planning and architectural design, consistent with General Plan design policies, encourages the harmonious appearance of buildings and sites, ensures that new and modified uses and development are compatible with existing and potential uses in the surrounding area, and produce an environment of stable, desirable character.

Municipal Code 19.42, Conditional Use Permits
A conditional use permit application shall incorporate concurrent applications, such as a design permit application when applicable. The Planning Commission is the approval authority for a conditional use permit application unless the application is subject to Municipal Code 19.01(C,D), Relationship to other Regulations and Requirements.

Municipal Code 19.01(C,D), Relationship to other Regulations and Requirements A discretionary application that is subject to a CEQA environmental review that requires a statement of overriding considerations shall be approved by the City Council. 653
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Aesthetics, Light, and Glare Draft EIR

3.1-4 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-01 Aesthetics.docx

3.1.4 - Methodology
FCS evaluated potential aesthetics, light, and glare impacts through site reconnaissance conducted in November 2022, as well as review of the City of American Canyon General Plan and project plans.

3.1.5 - Thresholds of Significance
The lead agency utilizes the criteria in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist to determine whether impacts to aesthetics are significant environmental effects. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (Refer to Section 7, Effects Found not to be Significant).
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building within a State Scenic Highway? (Refer to Section 7, Effects Found not to be Significant).
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

3.1.6 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the development of the project and provides mitigation measures where appropriate.

Visual Character
Impact AES-1: The proposed project, located in a non-urbanized area, would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or the quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. (Public views are those that are experienced from a publiclyaccessible vantage point.) Impact Analysis
Per Public Resources Code Section 21071, an urbanized area includes an incorporated city that has a population of at least 100,000 persons. The project site is located within the City of American Canyon, which has a population of 21,338 as of January 1, 20231 and is therefore not considered an urbanized area. Public views of the site are limited to those as seen from Commerce Court and partially obscured views as seen from portions of Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School.

The project site is undeveloped and slopes gently downward from east to west. Site elevation ranges from 13 to 25 feet above mean sea level. The southern portion of the project site contains a large 1 California Department of Finance. 2023. Report E-1: Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 1, 2022 and 2023. Website: https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates-e1/. Accessed November 6, 2023. 654
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.1-5 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-01 Aesthetics.docx soil mound that is intended for use on the SDG Commerce 217 property during construction of that site’s entitled wine distribution warehouse. A linear wetland and another isolated wetland are located within the northern portion of the property. The project frontage with Commerce Court is improved with curb, gutter, and sidewalk.

The project vicinity is characterized by industrial development and eucalyptus groves. The industrial development is primarily warehouses. The project is bounded on the north by the SDG Commerce 217 Wine Storage and Distribution Center currently under construction. To the west is an 11.23-acre parcel which remains unimproved with a eucalyptus tree grove and a wire fence; to the south is the SDG Commerce 330 Distribution Center; to the east is a 68-foot-wide City Public Access and Utility Easement within the Commerce Court Extension; to the east of this easement is a 40-acre parcel that is improved with a mobile home, dirt/gravel roads, and a Paintball Jungle recreational business consisting of various sheds and lean-to structures and wire fences.

The proposed project consists of the development of a 219,834-square foot wine warehouse. The proposed project would have a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.496 (Exhibit 2-5 and Exhibit 3.1-1).

Construction of the project would temporarily employ construction-related equipment. Because construction is a temporary activity it is not expected to significantly impact visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.

The proposed warehouse would be similar in appearance to other similar structures in the Green Island Business Park, particularly the adjacent SDG Commerce 330 building to the south and the future SDG Commerce 217 building to the north. The proposed warehouse would employ earth-tone colors and would have perimeter concrete tilt wall panels with varying parapet heights, as well as accent spandrel glass/metal canopy features around corners of the buildings to provide additional modulation. The average roof height of the building would be approximately 35 feet and portions of the building’s exterior walls would have varying heights to provide architectural relief. The proposed use would be consistent with the City of American Canyon General Plan land use designation of “Commercial Recreation” and zoning designation of “Recreation” for the project site and would be similar to and compatible with surrounding wine distribution warehouse uses (See Section 3.9, Land Use and Planning for further discussion). Furthermore, approval by the community development director or planning commission of a design permit for the project is required by Municipal Code

19.41.030, which requires, among other things, review of site plans and architectural design, General Plan consistency, and compatibility with existing and potential uses in the surrounding area.

Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or the quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. Impacts would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
655
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Aesthetics, Light, and Glare Draft EIR

3.1-6 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-01 Aesthetics.docx Light and Glare
Impact AES-2: The proposed project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which could adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Impact Analysis
The project site does not currently contain any existing sources of light and glare. The adjacent SDG Commerce 330 property contains parking lot lights that employ full cut-off fixtures.

The development of the proposed project would result in the installation of new sources of light and glare on the project site during both construction and operation. Construction lighting would be minimal and temporary; operational exterior lighting would include building mounted light fixtures and pole-mounted light fixtures within parking areas surrounding the building. 656
56390001• 03/2023 | 3.1-1_building_elevations.cdr
Exhibit 3.1-1
Conceptual Building Elevations

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON
SDG COMMERCE 220 PROJECT

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Source: Industrial and Commercial Contractors, LP. Ward Architects, Inc. 01/25/2023. 657

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
658
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Administrative Draft EIR Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.1-9 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-01 Aesthetics.docx Parking lot lighting would be consistent with requirements of the City of American Canyon Municipal Code 19.21.020(M), including direction of lighting away from adjoining properties and right-of-way.

The lights would be “shoebox” fixtures, typically 30 feet in height, which are designed with dimmable light-emitting diode (LED) fixtures that direct light toward the ground to reduce glare to surrounding properties. A photometric study would be prepared to analyze the light pole spacing to maximize light coverage while minimizing excessive light spillage off-site. Illuminated signage may also be employed.

A conditional use permit application submittal and approval would be required per Municipal Code Section 19.05.020. The conditional use permit application would be reviewed per the procedures and general standards outlined in Municipal Code Chapter 19.42, which include consistency with the standards of the General Plan and applicable zoning district as well as compliance with applicable policies of the Napa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. With the compulsory implementation of applicable municipal codes, including, but not limited to design permit approval, impacts related to light and glare would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

3.1.7 - Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope of the cumulative aesthetics, light, and glare analysis is the 0.25-mile radius surrounding the project site. This is the area within view of the project site and, therefore, the area most likely to experience cumulative changes in visual character or experience cumulative light and glare impacts.

Several of the projects listed in Table 4-1 are immediately adjacent to or within 0.25 mile of the project site (e.g., SDG Commerce 217).

The project site and the surrounding area have long been planned to accommodate industrial uses and are isolated and separate from the residential areas of the City. The existing surrounding uses are large industrial uses. The City of American Canyon General Plan designates the project site as “Commercial Recreation,” and the American Canyon Zoning Ordinance zones the project site as “Recreation.” Both land use designations permit the types of end uses envisioned by the proposed project. Other existing, approved, and reasonably foreseeable future developments would similarly be required to comply with applicable land use and zoning.

The project as proposed would be compatible with surrounding industrial uses and would be consistent with the City of American Canyon General Plan land use designation and zoning for the project site. A Design Permit would be required from the City to approve the specific building and site design, including building height. Other past projects, present projects under construction, and reasonably foreseeable projects in the surrounding area would be subject to similar landscaping and design requirements. Therefore, the proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and 659
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Aesthetics, Light, and Glare Draft EIR

3.1-10 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-01 Aesthetics.docx reasonably foreseeable projects, would not result in cumulatively significant visual character impacts.

The past, present, and reasonably foreseeable developments near the project site have contributed to—and will continue to contribute to—ambient light and glare in the project vicinity. The proposed project would install new sources of light and glare on the project site from exterior building lighting, security lighting, and lights and glare associated with vehicles accessing the project site. Compulsory compliance with Municipal Code lighting and design permit requirements would ensure that light and glare would be minimized to the extent feasible. Other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future developments in the project vicinity that involve the installation of new exterior lighting fixtures have been and would be required to implement similar standard measures to prevent light spillage. Therefore, the proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects in the applicable geographic area, would not have a cumulatively significant impact related to light and glare.

Level of Cumulative Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
660
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx

3.2 - Air Quality
This section describes existing air quality conditions regionally and locally as well as the relevant regulatory framework. This section also evaluates the possible impacts related to air quality that could result from implementation of the project. Information included in this section is based on project-specific air quality modeling results utilizing California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2022.1 and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) American Meteorological Society Regulatory Model (AERMOD) air dispersion model (Version 22112). Complete modeling output is provided in Appendix B.

The following public comments were received during the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) scoping period related to air quality.
• Requests that the Department of Justice best practices and mitigation measures for warehouses1 be incorporated into the proposed project.
• Concern regarding the project’s diesel truck emissions and associated health impacts.

3.2.1 - Environmental Setting
Regional Geography and Climate
Air quality is affected by the rate and location of pollutant emissions and by climatic conditions that influence the movement and dispersion of pollutants. Atmospheric conditions, such as wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature gradients, along with local and regional topography, influence the relationship between air pollutant emissions and air quality.

The project site is in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB), which consists of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, southwestern Solano, and southern Sonoma Counties. SFBAAB covers approximately 5,540 square miles of complex terrain, consisting of coastal mountain ranges, inland valleys, and the San Francisco Bay. The SFBAAB is generally bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the north by the Coast Ranges, and on the east and south by the Diablo Range.

The climate within the SFBAAB is dominated by a strong, semi-permanent, subtropical high-pressure cell over the northeastern Pacific Ocean. Climate is also affected by the adjacent oceanic heat reservoir’s moderating effects. Mild summers and winters, moderate rainfall and humidity, and daytime onshore breezes characterize regional climatic conditions in the San Francisco Bay Area (Bay Area). In summer, when the high-pressure cell is strongest and farthest north, fog forms in the morning and temperatures are mild. In winter, when the high-pressure cell is weakest and farthest south, occasional rainstorms occur.
1 California Department of Justice. Warehouse Projects: Best Practices and Mitigation Measures to Comply with the California Environmental Quality Act. Website: https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/warehouse-best-practices.pdf. Accessed November 28, 2023.
661
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-2 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Winter daytime temperatures in the SFBAAB typically average in the mid-50°F (degrees Fahrenheit), with nighttime temperatures averaging in the low 40°F. Summer daytime temperatures typically average in the 70°F, with nighttime temperatures averaging in the 50°F. Precipitation varies in the region, but in general, annual rainfall is lowest in the coastal plain and inland valley, higher in the foothills, and highest in the mountains.

Air Pollutant Types, Sources, and Effects
Criteria Air Pollutants
Concentrations of criteria air pollutants are used as indicators of air quality conditions. Air pollutants are termed criteria air pollutants if they are regulated by developing specific public health- and welfare-based criteria as the basis for setting permissible levels. According to the EPA, criteria air pollutants are ozone, particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), lead, and sulfur dioxide (SO2). Table 3.2-1 provides a summary of the types, sources, and effects of criteria air pollutants.

Table 3.2-1: Description of Criteria Pollutants of National and California Concern Criteria Pollutant
Physical Description and
Properties Sources
Most Relevant Effects from
Pollutant Exposure
Ozone Ozone is a photochemical
pollutant as it is not emitted
directly into the atmosphere,
but is formed by a complex
series of chemical reactions
between volatile organic
compounds (VOC), nitrous
oxides (NOX), and sunlight.

Ozone is a regional pollutant
that is generated over a large
area and is transported and
spread by the wind.

Ozone is a secondary
pollutant; thus, it is not
emitted directly into the
lower level of the
atmosphere. The
primary sources of
ozone precursors (VOC
and NOX) are mobile
sources (on-road and
off-road vehicle
exhaust).

Irritate respiratory system;
reduce lung function; breathing
pattern changes; reduction of
breathing capacity; inflame and
damage cells that line the lungs;
make lungs more susceptible to
infection; aggravate asthma;
aggravate other chronic lung
diseases; cause permanent lung
damage; some immunological
changes; increased mortality
risk; vegetation and property
damage.

Particulate
matter (PM10)
Suspended particulate matter
is a mixture of small particles
that consist of dry solid
fragments, droplets of water,
or solid cores with liquid
coatings. The particles vary in
shape, size, and composition.

PM10 refers to particulate
matter that is between 2.5 and
10 microns in diameter, (one
micron is one-millionth of a
meter). PM2.5 refers to
particulate matter that is 2.5
microns or less in diameter,
about one-thirtieth the size of
the average human hair.

Stationary sources
include fuel or wood
combustion for electrical
utilities, residential space
heating, and industrial
processes; construction
and demolition; metals,
minerals, and
petrochemicals; wood
products processing;
mills and elevators used
in agriculture; erosion
from tilled lands; waste
disposal, and recycling.

Mobile or transportationrelated sources are from
• Short-term exposure
(hours/days): irritation of the
eyes, nose, throat; coughing;
phlegm; chest tightness;
shortness of breath;
aggravate existing lung
disease, causing asthma
attacks and acute bronchitis;
those with heart disease can
suffer heart attacks and
arrhythmias.
• Long-term exposure:
reduced lung function;
chronic bronchitis; changes
in lung morphology; death.

Particulate
matter (PM2.5)
662
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-3 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Criteria Pollutant
Physical Description and
Properties Sources
Most Relevant Effects from
Pollutant Exposure
vehicle exhaust and road
dust. Secondary particles
form from reactions in
the atmosphere.

Nitrogen dioxide
(NO2)
During combustion of fossil
fuels, oxygen reacts with
nitrogen to produce nitrogen
oxides—NOX (NO, NO2, NO3,
N2O, N2O3, N2O4, and N2O5).

NOX is a precursor to ozone,
PM10, and PM2.5 formation.

NOX can react with
compounds to form nitric acid
and related small particles and
result in particulate matter
(PM) related health effects.

NOX is produced in
motor vehicle internal
combustion engines and
fossil fuel-fired electric
utility and industrial
boilers. Nitrogen
dioxide forms quickly
from NOX emissions.

NO2 concentrations
near major roads can be
30 to 100 percent
higher than those at
monitoring stations.

Potential to aggravate chronic
respiratory disease and
respiratory symptoms in
sensitive groups; risk to public
health implied by pulmonary
and extra-pulmonary
biochemical and cellular
changes and pulmonary
structural changes;
contributions to atmospheric
discoloration; increased visits
to hospital for respiratory
illnesses.

Carbon
monoxide (CO)
CO is a colorless, odorless, toxic
gas. CO is somewhat soluble in
water; therefore, rainfall and
fog can suppress CO conditions.

CO enters the body through the
lungs, dissolves in the blood,
replaces oxygen as an
attachment to hemoglobin, and
reduces available oxygen in the
blood.

CO is produced by
incomplete combustion
of carbon-containing
fuels (e.g., gasoline,
diesel fuel, and
biomass). Sources
include motor vehicle
exhaust, industrial
processes (metals
processing and chemical
manufacturing),
residential woodburning, and natural
sources.

Ranges depending on
exposure: slight headaches;
nausea; aggravation of angina
pectoris (chest pain) and other
aspects of coronary heart
disease; decreased exercise
tolerance in persons with
peripheral vascular disease and
lung disease; impairment of
central nervous system
functions; possible increased
risk to fetuses; death.

Sulfur dioxide
(SO2)
Sulfur dioxide is a colorless,
pungent gas. At levels greater
than 0.5 parts per million
(ppm), the gas has a strong
odor, similar to rotten eggs.

Sulfur oxides (SOX) include
sulfur dioxide and sulfur
trioxide. Sulfuric acid is formed
from sulfur dioxide, which can
lead to acid deposition and
can harm natural resources
and materials. Although sulfur
dioxide concentrations have
been reduced to levels well
below State and federal
standards, further reductions
are desirable because sulfur
dioxide is a precursor to
sulfate and PM10.

Human caused sources
include fossil fuel
combustion, mineral ore
processing, and
chemical
manufacturing. Volcanic
emissions are a natural
source of sulfur dioxide.

The gas can also be
produced in the air by
dimethyl sulfide and
hydrogen sulfide. Sulfur
dioxide is removed from
the air by dissolution in
water, chemical
reactions, and transfer
to soils and ice caps.

The sulfur dioxide levels
in the State are well
Bronchoconstriction
accompanied by symptoms
which may include wheezing,
shortness of breath and chest
tightness, during exercise or
physical activity in persons with
asthma. Some populationbased studies indicate that the mortality and morbidity effects
associated with fine particles
show a similar association with
ambient sulfur dioxide levels. It
is not clear whether the two
pollutants act synergistically or
one pollutant alone is the
predominant factor.
663
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-4 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Criteria Pollutant
Physical Description and
Properties Sources
Most Relevant Effects from
Pollutant Exposure
below the maximum
standards.

Lead (Pb) Lead is a solid heavy metal
that can exist in air pollution
as an aerosol particle
component. Leaded gasoline
was used in motor vehicles
until around 1970. Lead
concentrations have not
exceeded State or federal
standards at any monitoring
station since 1982.

Lead ore crushing, lead
ore smelting, and
battery manufacturing
are currently the largest
sources of lead in the
atmosphere in the
United States. Other
sources include dust
from soils contaminated
with lead-based paint,
solid waste disposal,
and crustal physical
weathering.

Lead accumulates in bones, soft
tissue, and blood and can affect
the kidneys, liver, and nervous
system. It can cause
impairment of blood formation
and nerve conduction, behavior
disorders, mental retardation,
neurological impairment,
learning deficiencies, and low
IQs.

Sources:

California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2001. Health Effects of Diesel Exhaust. Website:
https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/calenviroscreen/indicators/diesel4-02.pdf. Accessed November 28, 2023.

National Archives and Records Administration. 2009. Part II, United States Environmental Protection Agency. 40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 50 and 58, Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Nitrogen Dioxide; Proposed Rule.

July 15. Website: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2009-07-15/pdf/E9-15944.pdf. Accessed November 28, 2023.

National Toxicology Program. 2016. Report on Carcinogens, 14th Edition; United Staes. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. Benzene. November 3. Website:
http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/twelfth/profiles/Benzene.pdf. Accessed November 28, 2023.

National Toxicology Program. 2016. Report on Carcinogens, 14th Edition; United States Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. Diesel Exhaust Particles. November 3. Website:
https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/content/profiles/dieselexhaustparticulates.pdf. Accessed November 28, 2023.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD). 2007. Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan. June.

Website: https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2007-air-qualitymanagement-plan/2007-aqmp-final-document.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed November 28, 2023.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2016. Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Pollution. Basic Information about NO2. Website: https://www.epa.gov/no2-pollution/basic-information-about-no2#What%20is%20NO2. Accessed November 28, 2023.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2020. Particulate Matter Pollution. Health and Environmental Effects of Particulate Matter (PM). Website: https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/health-and-environmental-effectsparticulate-matter-pm. Accessed November 28, 2023.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2020. Health Effects Notebook for Hazardous Air Pollutants.

Website: www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/hapindex.html. Accessed November 28, 2023.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2021. Indoor Air Quality (IAQ). Volatile Organic Compounds’ Impact on Indoor Air Quality. Website: https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/volatile-organic-compounds-impact-indoorair-quality. Accessed November 28, 2023.

Toxic Air Contaminants
Toxic air contaminants (TACs) are a diverse group of air pollutants that may cause or contribute to an increase in deaths or serious illness, or that may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.

TACs include both organic and inorganic chemical substances that may be emitted from a variety of common sources, including gasoline stations, motor vehicles, dry cleaners, industrial operations, 664
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-5 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx painting operations, and research and teaching facilities. One of the main sources of TACs in California is diesel engine exhaust that contains solid material known as diesel particulate matter (DPM). More than 90 percent of DPM is less than one micron in diameter (about 1/70 the diameter of a human hair) and thus is a subset of PM with aerodynamic diameters equal to or less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5). Because of their extremely small size, these particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar regions of the lungs.2 TACs are different from criteria pollutants because ambient air quality standards have not been established for TACs. TACs occurring at extremely low levels may still cause health effects and it is typically difficult to identify levels of exposure that do not produce adverse health effects. TAC impacts are described by carcinogenic risk and by chronic (i.e., long duration) and acute (i.e., severe but of short duration) adverse effects on human health.

TACs include both organic and inorganic chemical substances. While DPM is a main source, TACs may be emitted from a variety of common sources, including gasoline stations, motor vehicles, dry cleaners, industrial operations, painting operations, and research and teaching facilities. People exposed to toxic air pollutants at sufficient concentrations and durations may have an increased chance of developing cancer or experiencing other serious health effects. These health effects can include damage to the immune system, as well as neurological, reproductive (e.g., reduced fertility), developmental, respiratory, and other health problems.
3 Air Quality
Air quality is a function of both the rate and location of pollutant emissions under the influence of meteorological conditions and topographic features. Atmospheric conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature inversions interact with the physical features of the landscape to determine the movement and dispersal of air pollutant emissions and, consequently, their effect on air quality.

Regional Air Quality
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is the regional agency regulating air quality within the nine-county SFBAAB.

Air Pollutant Standards and Attainment Designations
Air pollutant standards have been adopted by the EPA and the California Air Resources Board (ARB) for the following six criteria air pollutants that affect ambient air quality: ozone, NO2, CO, SO2, lead, and PM, which is subdivided into two classes based on particle size: PM10 and PM2.5. These air pollutants are called “criteria air pollutants” because they are regulated by developing specific public health- and welfare-based criteria as the basis for setting permissible levels. California has also established standards for TACs such as visibility-reducing particles, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and vinyl chloride. H2S is regulated as a nuisance based on its odor detection level. If the standard were based on adverse health effects, it would be set at a much higher level. Vinyl chloride is a TAC 2 California Air Resources Board (ARB). Inhalable Particulate Matter and Health (PM2.5 and PM10). Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/inhalable-particulate-matter-and-health. Accessed November 29, 2023. 3 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Health and Environmental Effects of Hazardous Air Pollutants. Website:
https://www.epa.gov/haps/health-and-environmental-effects-hazardous-air-pollutants. Accessed November 29, 2023. 665
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-6 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx and currently regulated as one, but California established a need to regulate it with a health-based “criteria” prior to the establishment of their toxics programs. Table 3.2-2, below, shows the federal and State air quality standards for various components.

Table 3.2-2: Federal and State Air Quality Standards in the SFBAAB Air Pollutant Averaging Time California Standard Federal Standarda Ozone 1 Hour 0.09 ppm —
8 Hour 0.070 ppm 0.070 ppmf
Nitrogen dioxideb (NO2) 1 Hour 0.18 ppm 0.100 ppm
Annual 0.030 ppm 0.053 ppm
Carbon monoxide (CO) 1 Hour 20 ppm 35 ppm
8 Hour 9.0 ppm 9 ppm
Sulfur dioxidec (SO2) 1 Hour 0.25 ppm 0.075 ppm
3 Hour — 0.5 ppm
24 Hour 0.04 ppm 0.14
(for certain areas)
Annual — 0.030 ppm (for certain
areas)
Leade 30-day 1.5 µg/m3 —
Quarter — 1.5 µg/m3
Rolling 3-month average — 0.15 µg/m3
Particulate matter (PM10) 24 Hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3
Mean 20 µg/m3 —
Particulate matter (PM2.5) 24 Hour — 35 µg/m3
Annual 12 µg/m3 12.0 µg/m3
Visibility-reducing particles 8 Hour See note belowd
Sulfates 24 Hour 25 µg/m3 —
Hydrogen sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm —
Vinyl chloridee 24 Hour 0.01 ppm —
Notes:
µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter
30-day = 30-day average
Annual = Annual Arithmetic Mean
ppm = parts per million (concentration)
Quarter = Calendar quarter
a Federal standard refers to the primary national ambient air quality standard, or the levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety to protect public health. All standards listed are primary standards except for 3-hour SO2, which is a secondary standard. A secondary standard is the level of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant. b To attain the 1-hour nitrogen dioxide national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 98th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 100 parts per billion (0.100 ppm). 666
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-7 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Air Pollutant Averaging Time California Standard Federal Standarda c On June 2, 2010, a new 1-hour SO2 standard was established, and the existing 24-hour and annual primary standards were revoked. To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 75 parts per billion (ppb). The 1971 SO2 national standards (24-hour and annual) remain in effect until one year after an area is designated for the 2010 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1971 standards, the 1971 standards remain in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2010 standards are approved. d Visibility-reducing particles: In 1989, the ARB converted both the general Statewide 10-mile visibility standard and the Lake Tahoe 30-mile visibility standard to instrumental equivalents, which are “extinction of 0.23 per kilometer” and “extinction of 0.07 per kilometer” for the Statewide and Lake Tahoe Air Basin standards, respectively. e The ARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as “toxic air contaminants” with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined. These actions allow for implementing control measures at levels below the ambient concentrations specified for these pollutants.
f The EPA Administrator approved a revised 8-hour ozone standard of 0.07 ppb on October 1, 2015. The new standard went into effect 60 days after publication the Final Rule in the Federal Register. The Final Rule was published in the Federal Register on October 26, 2015, and became effective on December 28, 2015.

Source: California Air Resources Board (ARB). California Ambient Air Quality Standards. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/california-ambient-air-quality-standards. Accessed November 29, 2023.

California Air Resources Board (ARB). National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/national-ambient-air-quality-standards. Accessed November 29, 2023.

Air quality monitoring stations operated by the ARB and BAAQMD measure ambient air pollutant concentrations in the SFBAAB. In general, the SFBAAB experiences low concentrations of most pollutants compared to federal or State standards.

Both the EPA and ARB use ambient air quality monitoring data to designate areas according to their attainment status for criteria air pollutants. These designations identify the areas with air quality problems and initiate planning efforts for improvement. The three basic designation categories are nonattainment, attainment, and unclassified. “Attainment” status refers to those regions that are meeting federal and/or State standards for a specified criteria pollutant. “Nonattainment” refers to regions that do not meet federal and/or State standards for a specified criteria pollutant. “Unclassified” refers to regions with insufficient data to determine the region’s attainment status for a specified criteria air pollutant. Each standard has a different definition, or “form” of what constitutes attainment, based on specific air quality statistics. For example, the federal 8-hour CO standard is not to be exceeded more than once per year; therefore, an area is in attainment of the CO standard if no more than one 8-hour ambient air monitoring values exceeds the threshold per year. In contrast, the federal annual PM2.5 standard is met if the 3-year average of the annual average PM2.5 concentration is less than or equal to the standard.

Air Pollutant Standards and Attainment Designations
Table 3.2-3 shows the current attainment designations for the SFBAAB. The SFBAAB is designated as nonattainment for the State ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 standards and the national ozone and PM2.5 standards. Ozone and fine particle pollution, or PM2.5, are the major regional air pollutants of concern in the San Francisco Bay Area. Ozone is primarily a problem in the summer, and fine particle pollution in the winter.
667
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-8 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Table 3.2-3: Attainment Status
Pollutant State Status National Status
Ozone Nonattainment Nonattainment
CO Attainment Attainment
NO2 Attainment Attainment
SO2 Attainment N/A
PM10 Nonattainment Unclassified
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
Sulfates Attainment N/A
Hydrogen Sulfates Unclassified N/A
Visibility-reducing Particles Unclassified N/A
Lead N/A Attainment
Notes:

CO = carbon monoxide
N/A = information not available
NO2 = nitrogen dioxide
PM10 = particulate matter, including dust, 10 micrometers or less in diameter PM2.5 = particulate matter including dust, 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter SO2 = sulfur dioxide
Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status. January

5. Website: http://www.baaqmd.gov/research-and-data/air-quality-standards-and-attainment-status. Accessed November 29, 2023.

Local Air Quality
The local air quality can be evaluated by reviewing relevant air pollution concentrations near the project area. The air quality monitoring station closest to the project site is the Vallejo – 304 Tuolumne Street Air Monitoring Station, located approximately six miles south of the project site. All data, with the exception of data on PM2.5, are taken from this monitoring station. PM2.5 data are available at and taken from Napa Valley College Air Monitoring Station, located approximately six miles north of the project site.

Table 3.2-4 summarizes the recorded ambient air data at the representative monitoring stations for the years 2020 through 2022, which is the most current data available at the time of this analysis.

Monitoring results for CO and SO2 are not included on the table since no recent monitoring data for Napa County or the SFBAAB was available for these pollutants. Generally, monitoring is not conducted for pollutants that are no longer likely to exceed ambient air quality standards.

Table 3.2-4: Air Quality Monitoring Summary
Air Pollutant Averaging Time Item 2020 2021 2022
Ozone 1 Hour Maximum 1 Hour (ppm) 0.096 0.099 0.066
Days > State Standard (0.09 ppm) 1 1 0
668
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-9 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Air Pollutant Averaging Time Item 2020 2021 2022
8 Hour Maximum 8 Hour (ppm) 0.078 0.072 0.058
Days > State Standard (0.07 ppm) 1 1 0
Days > National Standard (0.070 ppm) 1 1 0
NO2 Annual Annual Average (ppm) 0.007 ID 0.006
1 Hour Maximum 1 Hour (ppm) 0.048 0.041 0.044
Days > State Standard (0.18 ppm) 0 0 0
Inhalable coarse
particles (PM10)
Annual Annual Average (µg/m3
) 18.6 9.9 ID
24 Hour Maximum 24 Hour (µg/m3
) 125 22.9 ID
Days > State Standard (50 µg/m3) 2 0 ID
Days > National Standard (150 µg/m3) 0 0 ID
Fine particulate
matter (PM2.5)
Annual Annual Average (µg/m3
) 12.1 8.8 8.2
24 Hour Maximum 24 Hour (µg/m3
) 152.7 32 21
Days > National Standard (35 µg/m3) 12 0 0
Notes:
µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter
Bold = exceedance
ID = insufficient data
National Standard = National Ambient Air Quality Standard ND = no data
NO2 = nitrogen dioxide
PM10 = particulate matter, including dust, 10 micrometers or less in diameter PM2.5 = particulate matter including dust, 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter ppm = parts per million
State Standard = California Ambient Air Quality Standard (CAAQS) Source: California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2023. iADAM: Top 4 Summary. Website:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/select8/sc8start.php. Accessed November 29, 2023.

Air Pollution Sensitive Receptors
Air pollution does not affect every individual in the population in the same way, and some groups are more sensitive to adverse health effects than others. Residences, schools, day care centers, hospitals, nursing and convalescent homes, and parks are often identified as “sensitive receptors” since their occupants are sensitive to poor air quality. The groups identified with these land uses may have increased susceptibility to respiratory distress or, as in the case of residential receptors, their exposure time is greater than that for other land uses. BAAQMD defines sensitive receptors as children, adults, and seniors occupying or residing in residential dwellings, schools, day care centers, hospitals, and senior-care facilities.

Project Vicinity
The closest off-site air pollution sensitive receptors near the project site include:
• A single-family residence approximately 850 feet east of the project site. 669
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-10 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx • A neighborhood approximately 1,600 feet south of the project site. • Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School, approximately 1,200 feet south of the project site.

Project Site
The project site is vacant and no sensitive receptors currently exist on the project site.

Existing Air Pollutant Emissions
Project Site Vicinity
The primary sources of air pollutants (both criteria air pollutant and TACs) in the project site vicinity include the various other surrounding industrial properties, building-related energy use, and motorrelated vehicle trips associated with the local business uses. The project site shares a driveway with a neighboring industrial warehouse immediately to the south. The project site is located approximately 4,800 feet west of State Route (SR) 29 and approximately 1.57 miles southeast of Napa County Airport. Other activities that result in emissions include space and water heating, landscape maintenance, and any surrounding industrial uses that can store, produce, decommission, or otherwise handle hazardous materials.

Project Site
The project site itself is currently vacant and does not produce any air pollutants.

3.2.2 - Regulatory Framework
Federal
Clean Air Act
Congress established much of the basic structure of the Clean Air Act (CAA) in 1970 and made major revisions in 1977 and 1990. Six common air pollutants (also known as criteria pollutants) are addressed in the CAA. These are particulate matter, ground level ozone, CO, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and lead. The EPA calls these pollutants criteria air pollutants because it regulates them by developing human health-based and/or environmentally based criteria (science-based guidelines) for setting permissible levels. The set of limits based on human health are called primary standards.

Another set of limits intended to prevent environmental and property damage are called secondary standards.
4 The federal standards are called National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The air quality standards provide benchmarks for determining whether air quality is healthy at specific locations and whether development activities will cause or contribute to a violation of the standards.

The criteria pollutants are:
• Ozone • Particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5)
• Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) • Carbon monoxide (CO)
• Lead • Sulfur dioxide
4 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2014. Clean Air Act Requirements and History. Website:
https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/clean-air-act-requirements-and-history. Accessed November 29, 2023. 670
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-11 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx The federal standards were set to protect public health, including that of sensitive individuals; thus, the EPA is tasked with updating the standards as more medical research is available regarding the health effects of the criteria pollutants. Primary federal standards are the levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health.

The CAA also requires each state to prepare an air quality control plan referred to as a State Implementation Plan (SIP). The federal CAA amendments of 1990 added requirements for states with nonattainment areas to revise their SIPs to incorporate additional control measures to reduce air pollution. The SIP is periodically modified to reflect the latest emissions inventories, planning documents, and rules and regulations of the air basins, as reported by their jurisdictional agencies.

EPA Emission Standards for New Off-Road Equipment
Before 1994, there were no standards to limit the amount of emissions from off-road equipment. In 1994, the EPA established emission standards for hydrocarbons, NOX, CO, and PM to regulate new pieces of off-road equipment. These emission standards came to be known as Tier 1. Since that time, increasingly more stringent Tier 2, Tier 3, and Tier 4 (interim and final) standards were adopted by the EPA, as well as by the ARB. Each adopted emission standard was phased in over time. New engines built in and after 2015 across all horsepower sizes must meet Tier 4 final emission standards. In other words, new manufactured engines cannot exceed the emissions established for Tier 4 final emissions standards.

State
California Air Quality Control Plan (State Implementation Plan) An SIP is a document prepared by each state describing existing air quality conditions and measures that will be followed to attain and maintain federal standards. The SIP for the State of California is administered by the ARB, which has overall responsibility for Statewide air quality maintenance and air pollution prevention. California’s SIP incorporates individual federal attainment plans for regional air districts—an air district prepares their federal attainment plan, which is sent to the ARB to be approved and incorporated into the California SIP. Federal attainment plans include the technical foundation for understanding air quality (e.g., emission inventories and air quality monitoring), control measures and strategies, and enforcement mechanisms for attaining and maintaining air quality standards.

Areas designated nonattainment must develop air quality plans and regulations to achieve standards by specified dates, depending on the severity of the exceedances. For much of the country, implementation of federal motor vehicle standards and compliance with federal permitting requirements for industrial sources are adequate to attain air quality standards on schedule. For many areas of California, however, additional State and local regulation is required to achieve the standards.

Local air districts and other agencies prepare SIP elements and submit them to the ARB for review and approval. The ARB will then forward SIP revisions to the EPA for approval and publication in the Federal Register. The BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan is the SIP for the SFBAAB. The 2017 Clean Air Plan accommodates growth by projecting the growth in emissions based on different indicators. For example, population forecasts adopted by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) are used 671
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-12 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx to forecast population-related emissions. Through the planning process, emissions growth is offset by basin-wide controls on stationary, area, and transportation sources of air pollution.

California Clean Air Act
The California Legislature enacted the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) in 1988 to address air quality issues of concern not adequately addressed by the federal CAA at the time. California’s air quality problems were and continue to be some of the most severe in the nation, and required additional actions beyond the federal mandates. The ARB administers the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for the 10 air pollutants designated in the CCAA. The 10 State air pollutants are the six federal standards listed above as well as visibility-reducing particulates, hydrogen sulfide, sulfates, and vinyl chloride. The EPA authorized California to adopt its own regulations for motor vehicles and other sources that are more stringent than similar federal regulations implementing the CAA. Generally, the planning requirements of the CCAA are more stringent than the federal CAA; therefore, consistency with the CCAA will also demonstrate consistency with the CAA.

Other ARB responsibilities include but are not limited to overseeing local air district compliance with California and federal laws; approving local air quality plans; submitting SIPs to the EPA; monitoring air quality; determining and updating area designations and maps; conducting basic research aimed at providing a better understanding between emissions and public well-being, and setting emissions standards for new mobile sources, consumer products, small utility engines, off-road vehicles, and fuels.

California Health and Safety Code Section 39655 and California Code of Regulations Title 17 Section 93000 (Substances Identified as Toxic Air Contaminants) The ARB identifies substances as TACs as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 39655 and listed in Title 17, Section 93000 of the California Code of Regulations, “Substances Identified As Toxic Air Contaminants.” A TAC is defined as an air pollutant that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or that may pose a hazard to human health. TACs are usually present in minute quantities in the ambient air; however, their high toxicity or health risk may pose a threat to public health even at low concentrations. In general, for those TACs that may cause cancer, there are thresholds set by regulatory agencies below which adverse health impacts are not expected to occur.

This contrasts with the criteria pollutants for which acceptable levels of exposure can be determined and for which the State and federal governments have set ambient air quality standards. According to the California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality, the majority of the estimated health risk from TACs for the State of California can be attributed to relatively few compounds, the most important of which is DPM from diesel-fueled engines.

California Low Emission Vehicle Program
The ARB first adopted Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) program standards in 1990. These first LEV standards ran from 1994 through 2003. LEV II regulations, running from 2004 through 2010, represent continuing progress in emission reductions. As the State’s passenger vehicle fleet continues to grow and more sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks are used as passenger cars rather than work vehicles, the more stringent LEV II standards were adopted to provide reductions necessary for California to meet federally mandated clean air goals outlined in the 1994 SIP. In 2012, 672
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-13 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx the ARB adopted the LEV III amendments to California’s LEV regulations. These amendments, also known as the Advanced Clean Car Program, include more stringent emission standards for model years 2017 through 2025 for both criteria pollutants and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for new passenger vehicles.5
The most recent amendments in 2022, the Advanced Clean Cars II Regulations, apply to light-duty passenger car, truck and SUV emissions starting with the 2026 model year through 2035. It will take augmenting the State’s already growing Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) market and robust motor vehicle emission control rules to meet more aggressive tailpipe emissions standards and ramp up to 100 percent ZEVs. By 2035, all new passenger cars, trucks and SUVs sold in California will be zero emissions.

California On-Road Heavy-Duty Vehicle Program
The ARB has adopted standards for emissions from various types of new on-road heavy-duty vehicles. Section 1956.8, Title 13, California Code of Regulations contains California’s emission standards for on-road heavy-duty engines and vehicles, and test procedures. The ARB has also adopted programs to reduce emissions from in-use heavy-duty vehicles including the Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicle Idling Reduction Program, the Heavy-Duty Diesel In-Use Compliance Program, the Public Bus Fleet Rule and Engine Standards, and the School Bus Program and others.6 The Truck and Bus regulation (California Code of Regulations [CCR] § 2025) and amendments requires diesel trucks and buses that operate in California to be upgraded to reduce emissions. The regulation applies to diesel-fueled trucks and buses with a gross vehicle weight of greater than 14,000 pounds to upgrade to 2010 or newer model year engines.

The California “Omnibus” regulation follows the completion of the Truck and Bus regulation with continued reduction of NOX and PM emissions from heavy-duty gasoline and diesel on-road vehicles.

This regulation updated standards, testing and compliance mechanisms for NOX and PM emissions from heavy-duty on-road vehicles for model year 2024 through 2031. The rule will be implemented in phases with the standards becoming more stringent in 2027.

The Advanced Clean Truck Regulation and recently approved Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) regulation are part of a holistic approach to accelerate a large-scale transition of zero-emission medium and heavy-duty vehicles. Together, these regulations will transition California’s truck fleet to ZEV by 2045.

The regulation has a manufacturer sales requirement; by 2035, zero-emission truck/chassis sales would need to be 55 percent of Class 2b–3 truck sales, 75 percent of class 4–8 straight truck sales, and 40 percent of truck tractor sales. The rule also has a company and fleet requirement that gathers information about shipments and shuttle services. This information will help identify future strategies to ensure that fleets purchase available zero-emission trucks and place them in service where suitable to meet their needs.
5 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2013. Clean Car Standards—Pavley, Assembly Bill 1493. Website: http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccms /ccms.htm. Accessed November 29, 2023. 6 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2013. The California Almanac of Air Quality and Emissions—2013 Edition. Website:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanac13/almanac13.htm. Accessed November 29, 2023. 673
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-14 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx The Heavy-Duty Inspection and Maintenance regulation was approved on December 9, 2021, with implementation to be phased in starting January 2023.7 Its goal is to ensure that vehicles’ emissions control systems are properly functioning when traveling on California’s roadways. Trucks registered in other states would have to comply with the Clean Truck Check (HD I/M) regulation if they drive on California’s roadways. HD I/M implements a program combining periodic vehicle testing requirements with other emissions monitoring techniques and expanded enforcement strategies.

This will ensure that vehicles in need of emissions-related repairs are identified and will ensure that any needed repairs are performed. When fully implemented, the program will provide significant reductions in smog-forming and carcinogenic toxic air pollution necessary to achieve federal air quality mandates and healthy air in California’s communities.

California In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation
The In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets (Off-Road Regulation) was enacted to accelerate retirement of older, higher-emitting engines, and increase purchases of newer, cleaner engines. It applies to all off-road, diesel, self-propelled equipment over 25 hp used in California that is not exempted under agricultural or cargo handling equipment provisions. This includes construction equipment such as excavators, loaders, backhoes, cranes, forklifts, oil-drilling rigs, and aircraft towing equipment.

The rule applies to fleets of construction equipment and establishes a 5-minute idling limit for offroad vehicles at construction sites as well as emission limits that become increasingly more stringent each year. These limits may be met by replacing older tier equipment with newer tiers or by installing exhaust retrofits (also known as Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies [VDECS]).

Recent 2022 amendments8
require the use of R99 or R100 renewable diesel in off-road diesel vehicles at the beginning of 2024. Starting in 2023, older tiers are banned and only Tier 3 or higher engines may be added to any fleet. A recent requirement requires that prime contractors and public works awarding bodies obtain and retain a fleet’s valid Certificate of Reported Compliance prior to awarding a contract or hiring a fleet.

Small Off-Road Engine Regulation
Small off-road engines (SORE) are spark-ignition engines with rated power at or below 19 kilowatts (25 horsepower). The SORE regulations require new engines to be certified and labeled to meet emission standards and other requirements. Typical equipment types that use SORE include lawn and garden equipment, portable generators, and pressure washers. Recent amendments to the SORE regulation will require most landscaping equipment to be zero emissions beginning in 2024.

Despite their small size, these engines are highly polluting. The volume of smog-forming emissions from this type of equipment has surpassed emissions from light-duty passenger cars and is projected to be nearly twice those of passenger cars by 2031. Portable generators, including those in recreational vehicles, would be required to meet more stringent standards in 2024 and meet zero7 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2023. Clean Truck Check (HD I/M). Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ourwork/programs/heavy-duty-inspection-and-maintenance-program. Accessed December 8, 2023. 8 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2023. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/carb-approves-amendments-road-regulationfurther-reduce-emissions. Accessed November 21, 2023. 674
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-15 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx emission standards starting in 2028.9 Engines that use diesel fuel and engines that are used in stationary equipment, including standby generators, are not subject to the SORE regulations.

Large Spark Ignition Regulation
The Large Spark Ignition (LSI) Fleet Rule and Amendments, commonly referred to as the “Forklift Rule” applies to forklifts, sweeper/scrubbers, industrial tow tractors, and airport ground support equipment. It applies to fleets (four or more vehicles) and includes off-road gasoline, propane, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), compressed natural gas, and electric forklifts ≥25 hp.10 The regulation sets fleet average emission level requirements that decreases each year to encourage the use of electric vehicle (EV) and low-emissions engines.

Zero-Emission Forklifts
ARB is currently working on a zero-emission forklift regulation11 that would drive greater deployment of zero-emission forklifts within fleets throughout the State. This regulation, currently in draft format, is one of several near-term actions intended to facilitate further zero-emission equipment penetration in the off-road sector and is scheduled for Board consideration in June 2024.

California Airborne Toxic Control Measures
As of December 2022, the ARB had developed 26 mobile and stationary source Airborne Toxic Control Measures (ATCMs).
12 The following summarizes the ATCMs that are potentially applicable for land use development projects such as logistics, warehouse, residential, mixed use, and retail development. Source and industry-specific requirements apply to industrial projects, gas stations, dry cleaners, and other types of facilities which are significant sources of TACs.

Transport Refrigeration Unit ATCM
Transport Refrigeration Units (TRUs) are refrigeration systems powered by small diesel-fueled engines (typically only 9-36 hp) designed to refrigerate or heat perishable products that are transported in various containers, including truck vans, semi-truck trailers, shipping containers, and railcars. TRUs typically operate at refrigerated warehouses or distribution centers, grocery stores, seaport facilities, intermodal railyards, and other locations that are often near sensitive receptors, and often in overburdened disadvantaged communities. TRUs can be found in different sizes and locations depending on the type of transport carrying the goods. Truck TRUs that are used to refrigerate insulated cargo vans are mounted on the frames of straight trucks, while trailer TRUs that refrigerate insulated trailers are mounted on semitrailers.

The ATCM for In-Use Diesel-Fueled TRUs and TRU Generator Sets and Facilities Where TRUs Operate establishes stringent emission standards to lower DPM emissions from all truck-mounted TRUs that operate in California, regardless of where the vehicle is registered. The regulation applies to 9 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2021. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/carb-approves-updated-regulations-requiringmost-new-small-road-engines-be-zero-emission-2024. Accessed November 25, 2023. 10 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2023. Large Spark-Ignition Fleet Regulation Overview. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/offroadzone/landing/lsi.html. Accessed November 25, 2023. 11 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2023. Zero-Emission Forklifts. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/zeroemission-forklifts. Accessed November 16, 2023. 12 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2023. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/airborne-toxic-controlmeasures. Accessed November 16, 2023. 675
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-16 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx refrigerated warehouse facilities (20,000 square feet or greater) and has phase-in requirements for conversion to zero-emission technology from 2024–2029. TRU owners shall turnover at least 15 percent of their truck TRU fleet (defined as truck TRUs operating in California) to ZEV technology each year (for 7 years). By 2030, all truck TRUs operating in California will be ZE, eliminating all NOX and DPM emissions from these sources.

The current TRU ATCM amendments do not apply to trailer-mounted (semi-trailer) TRUs or railcar TRUs. The ARB will assess zero-emission options for trailer TRUs and the remaining TRU categories as part of an additional rulemaking for Board consideration in the 2025 timeframe.13 Asbestos ATCM
In July 2001, ARB approved an ATCM for construction, grading, quarrying, and surface mining operations to minimize emissions of naturally occurring asbestos. The regulation requires application of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control fugitive dust in areas known to have naturally occurring asbestos and requires notification to the local air district prior to commencement of ground-disturbing activities. The measure establishes specific testing, notification, and engineering controls prior to grading, quarrying, or surface mining in construction zones where naturally occurring asbestos is located on projects of any size. There are additional notification and engineering controls at work sites larger than 1 acre. These projects require the submittal of a “Dust Mitigation Plan” and approval by the ARB prior to the start of a project.

Asbestos is also found in a natural state, known as naturally occurring asbestos. Exposure and disturbance of rock and soil that naturally contain asbestos can result in the release of fibers into the air and consequent exposure to the public. Asbestos most commonly occurs in ultramafic rock that has undergone partial or complete alteration to serpentine rock (serpentinite) and often contains chrysotile asbestos. In addition, another form of asbestos, tremolite, can be found associated with ultramafic rock, particularly near faults. Sources of asbestos emissions include unpaved roads or driveways surfaced with ultramafic rock, construction activities in ultramafic rock deposits, or rock quarrying activities where ultramafic rock is present.

Areas are subject to the regulation if they are identified on maps published by the Department of Conservation as ultramafic rock units or if the Air Pollution Control Officer or owner/operator has knowledge of the presence of ultramafic rock, serpentine, or naturally occurring asbestos on the site. The measure also applies if ultramafic rock, serpentine, or asbestos is discovered during any operation or activity. Review of the Department of Conservation maps indicates that no ultramafic rock has been found near the project site.14
13 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2023. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/transport-refrigeration-unit/newtransport-refrigeration-unit-regulation. Accessed November 25, 2023. 14 United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2019. Reported Historic Asbestos Mines, Historic Asbestos Prospects, and Other Natural Occurrences of Asbestos in the Conterminous United States. Website: https://www.usgs.gov/data/reported-historic-asbestosmines-historic-asbestos-prospects-and-other-natural-occurrences. Accessed November 25, 2023. 676
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-17 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Portable Equipment Registration Program ATCM
Owners or operators of portable engines and other types of equipment which meet the qualifications of the ATCM can register their equipment to operate throughout California.15 Permits issued under the Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP) must be honored by all air districts throughout California. However, owners and operators of portable engines which meet the qualifications of this ATCM who do not register their equipment under the PERP must obtain individual permits from local air districts.

Non-Vehicular Source ATCMs
The ARB has also adopted ATCM for non-vehicular sources16 in Title 17, Section 93100. These ATCMs are implemented by local Air Pollution Districts through their local regulations for stationary sources.

They include 13 separate ATCM regulations detailed in Section 93101 through 93113 which address a variety of stationary and area sources of toxics emissions. The ATCMs most relevant to land use development include the Asbestos rule (for Construction and Grading Operations described above), the benzene ATCM for retail service stations, the ATCM for stationary compression-ignition engines (e.g., diesel generators and pumps), and the ATCM for DPM from portable engines rated 50 hp and greater.

California Significant New Alternatives Policy
As part of California’s effort to reduce emissions of Short-Lived California Climate Pollutants under Senate Bill (SB) 1383, California is required to reduce hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) emissions 40 percent below 2013 levels by 2030. HFCs have a powerful impact on climate as they trap heat in the atmosphere at a rate thousands of times that of carbon dioxide.

The ARB was originally relying on EPA Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Rules to meet a large portion of HFC emission reductions required by SB 1383. However, on August 8, 2017, in Mexichem Fluor v. U.S. EPA, the D.C. District Circuit Court significantly limited the EPA’s ability to regulate high global warming potential (GWP) HFCs under the federal SNAP Program Rules.17 As a result, in 2018, California adopted a new ARB HFC regulation and additional legislation under SB 1013, referred to as the California Cooling Act. The regulation and the Senate Bill together are referred to as California SNAP and cover all end-use specific HFC prohibitions except motor vehicle air conditioning systems. In 2020, the ARB amended the regulation to adopt GWP limits for new refrigeration and air conditioning equipment, which ensures that industry not only shifts away from the highest GWP refrigerants but swiftly transitions to technologies with the lowest GWP that are technologically and commercially feasible. The rule applies to air conditioning systems, household refrigerators and freezers, chillers, retail food facilities, retail refrigeration, cold storage facilities, and even vending machines.
15 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2023. Portable Equipment Registration Program. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ourwork/programs/portable-equipment-registration-program-perp. Accessed November 25, 2023. 16 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2023. Air Toxic Control Measures: Mobile and Stationary Sources. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/airborne-toxic-control-measures. Accessed November 25, 2023. 17 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2023. California Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP). Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/california-significant-new-alternatives-policy-snap/about. Accessed November 25, 2023.
677
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-18 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx New cold storage facilities containing more than 50 pounds of refrigerants are subject to the GWP limit Section 95374(c) Table 3 and to the requirements under Section 95475 (c), which includes exceptions, and labeling and recordkeeping requirements. Cold Storage Warehouses are prohibited from using refrigerants with GWP of 150 or greater as of January 1, 2022. 18 Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies
The EPA and the ARB tiered off-road emission standards only apply to new engines, and off-road equipment can last several years. The ARB has developed VDECS, which are devices, systems, or strategies used to achieve the highest level of pollution control from existing off-road vehicles, to help reduce emissions from existing engines. VDECS are designed primarily for the reduction of DPM emissions and have been verified by the ARB. There are three levels of VDECS, the most effective of which is the Level 3 VDECS. Tier 4 engines are not required to install VDECS because they already meet the emissions standards for lower tiered equipment with installed controls.

Tanner Air Toxics Act and Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act TACs in California are primarily regulated through the Tanner Air Toxics Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 1807) and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588), also known as the Hot Spots Act. To date, the ARB has identified more than 21 TACs, and has adopted the EPA’s list of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) as TACs.

Regional
BAAQMD California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines The BAAQMD is the primary agency responsible for ensuring that air quality standards (NAAQS and CAAQS) are attained and maintained in the SFBAAB through comprehensive planning, regulation, enforcement, technical innovation, and promotion of the understanding of air quality issues. The BAAQMD prepares plans to attain ambient air quality standards in the SFBAAB and prepares ozone attainment plans for the national ozone standard, clean air plans for the California standard, and PM plans to fulfill federal air quality planning requirements. The BAAQMD also inspects stationary sources of air pollution; responds to citizen complaints; monitors ambient air quality and meteorological conditions; and implements programs and regulations required by the CAA and the CCAA.

In April 2023, BAAQMD updated the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines that supersede the previous guidance. BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines for implementation of the thresholds are for informational purposes only, to assist local agencies.

BAAQMD Particulate Matter Plan
To fulfill federal air quality planning requirements, the BAAQMD adopted a PM2.5 emissions inventory for the year 2010 at a public hearing on November 7, 2012. The Bay Area Clean Air Plan also included several measures for reducing PM emissions from stationary sources and wood-burning. In 2013, the EPA issued a final rule determining that the Bay Area has attained the 24-hour PM2.5 18 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2023. Cold Storage. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/californiasignificant-new-alternatives-policy-snap/cold-storage. Accessed November 25, 2023. 678
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-19 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx NAAQS, suspending federal SIP planning requirements for the SFBAAB.19 Despite this EPA action, the SFBAAB will continue to be designated as nonattainment for the national 24-hour PM2.5 standard until the BAAQMD submits a redesignation request and a maintenance plan to the EPA and the EPA approves the proposed redesignation.

The Air Basin is designated nonattainment for the State PM10 and PM2.5 standards, but the Air Basin is currently unclassified for the federal PM10 standard and nonattainment for federal PM2.5 standards. The EPA lowered the 24-hour PM2.5 standard from 65 µg/m3 to 35 µg/m3 in 2006 and designated the Air Basin as nonattainment for the new PM2.5 standard effective December 14, 2009.

BAAQMD believes that it would be premature to submit a redesignation request and PM2.5 maintenance plan at this time. Therefore, BAAQMD will prepare a “clean data” SIP to address the required elements, including:
• An emission inventory for primary PM2.5, as well as precursors to secondary PM formation; and
• Amendments to the BAAQMD’s New Source Review regulation to address PM2.5.

The Air Basin will continue to be designated as nonattainment for the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS until the Air District elects to submit, and the EPA approves, a redesignation request and maintenance plan.

At this time, BAAQMD does not have an applicable SIP with which the proposed project would be required to comply. However, development facilitated by the proposed project would be subject to the Bay Area Clean Air Plan, in addition to regulations set forth by BAAQMD.

BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan
In May 2017, the BAAQMD adopted the final Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan. The BAAQMD prepared the 2017 Clean Air Plan in cooperation with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and ABAG. The goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan are to reduce regional air pollutants and climate pollutants to improve the health of Bay Area residents for the next decades. The 2017 Clean Air Plan aims to lead the region into a post-carbon economy, continue progress toward attaining all State and federal air quality standards, and eliminate health risk disparities from air pollution exposure in Bay Area communities. The Plan includes 85 distinct control measures to help the region reduce air pollutants and has a long-term strategic vision that forecasts what a clean air Bay Area will look like in the year 2050. The 2017 Clean Air Plan envisions a future whereby the year 2050:
• Buildings will be energy efficient—heated, cooled and powered by renewable energy. • Transportation will be a combination of EVs, both shared and privately owned, and autonomous public transit fleets, with a large share of trips by bicycling, walking, and transit. 19 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2013. Determination of Attainment for the San Francisco Bay Area Nonattainment Area for the 2006 Fine Particle Standard; California; Determination Regarding Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements. January 9. Website: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2013-01-09/pdf/2013-00170.pdf. Accessed November 25, 2023.
679
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-20 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx • The Bay Area will be powered by clean, renewable electricity and will be a leading incubator and producer of clean energy technologies leading the world in the carbon-efficiency of our products.
• Bay Area residents will have developed a low carbon lifestyle by driving electric vehicles, living in zero-net-energy homes, eating low carbon foods, and purchasing goods and services with low carbon content.
• Waste will be greatly reduced, waste products will be re-used or recycled, and all organic waste will be composted and put to productive use.

The focus of control measures includes aggressively targeting the largest source of GHG, ozone pollutants, and PM emissions: transportation. This includes more incentives for electric vehicle infrastructure, off-road electrification projects such as Caltrain and shore power at ports, and reducing emissions from trucks, school buses, marine vessels, locomotives, and off-road equipment.

Additionally, the BAAQMD will continue to work with regional and local governments to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) through the further funding of rideshare, bike and shuttle programs.

BAAQMD Regulations
Regulation 2, Rule 1 (Permits–General Requirements)
The BAAQMD regulates new sources of air pollution and the modification and operation of existing sources through the issuance of authorities to construct and permits to operate. Regulation 2, Rule 1 provides an orderly procedure with which the project would be required to comply to receive authorities to construct or permits to operate from the BAAQMD for new sources of air pollutants, as applicable.

Regulation 2, Rule 5 (New Source Review Permitting)
The BAAQMD regulates backup emergency generators, fire pumps, and other sources of TACs through its New Source Review (Regulation 2, Rule 5) permitting process.20 Although emergency generators are intended for use only during periods of power outages, monthly testing of each generator is required; however, the BAAQMD limits testing to no more than 50 hours per year. Each emergency generator installed is assumed to meet a minimum of Tier 2 emission standards (before control measures). As part of the permitting process, the BAAQMD limits the excess cancer risk from any facility to no more than 10 per 1 million population for any permits that are applied for within a 2-year period and would require any source that would result in an excess cancer risk greater than 1 per 1 million to install Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for Toxics.

Regulation 6, Rule 1 (Particulate Matter–General Requirements) The BAAQMD regulates PM emissions through Regulation 6 by means of establishing limitations on emission rates, emissions concentrations, and emission visibility and opacity. Regulation 6, Rule 1 provides existing standards for PM emissions that could result during project construction or operation that the project would be required to comply with, as applicable, such as the prohibition 20 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2016. New Source Review Permitting Guidance. Website:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/permits/permitting-manuals/nsr-permitting-guidance. Accessed November 25, 2023. 680
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-21 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx of emissions from any source for a period or aggregate periods of more than 3 minutes in any hour which are equal to or greater than 20 percent opacity.

Regulation 6, Rule 6, (Particulate Matter–Prohibition of Trackout) One rule by which the BAAQMD regulates PM includes Regulation 6, Rule 6, which prohibits PM trackout during project construction and operation. Regulation 6, Rule 6 requires the prevention or timely cleanup of trackout of solid materials onto paved public roads outside the boundaries of large bulk material sites, large construction sites, and large disturbed surface sites such as landfills.

Regulation 8, Rule 3 (Architectural Coatings)
This rule governs the manufacture, distribution, and sale of architectural coatings and limits the reactive organic gases (ROG) content in paints and paint solvents. Although this rule does not directly apply to the proposed project, it does dictate the ROG content of paint available for use during the construction.

Regulation 8, Rule 15 (Emulsified and Liquid Asphalts)
Although this rule does not directly apply to the proposed project, it does dictate the reactive organic gases content of asphalt available for use during construction through regulating the sale and use of asphalt and limits the ROG content in asphalt.

Regulation 9, Rule 8 (Inorganic Gaseous Pollutants–Nitrogen Oxides and Carbon Monoxide from Stationary Internal Combustion Engines)
Under Regulation 9, Rule 8, the BAAQMD regulates the emissions of nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide from stationary internal combustion engines with an output rated by the manufacturer at more than 50 brake horsepower. As such, any proposed stationary source equipment (e.g., backup generators, fire pumps) which would be greater than 50 horsepower would require a BAAQMD permit under Regulation 9, Rule 8 to operate.

Regulation 11, Rule 2 (Hazardous Pollutants–Asbestos Demolition, Renovation, and Manufacturing) Under Regulation 11, Rule 2, the BAAQMD regulates emissions of asbestos to the atmosphere during demolition, renovation, milling, and manufacturing and establishes appropriate waste disposal procedures. Any of these activities which pose the potential to generate emissions of airborne asbestos are required to comply with the appropriate provisions of this regulation.

Regulation 1, Rule 301 (Odorous Emissions)
The BAAQMD is responsible for investigating and controlling odor complaints in the Bay Area. The agency enforces odor control by helping the public to document a public nuisance. Upon receipt of a complaint, the BAAQMD sends an investigator to interview the complainant and to locate the odor source if possible. The BAAQMD typically brings a public nuisance court action when there are a substantial number of confirmed odor events within a 24-hour period. An odor source with five or more confirmed complaints per year, averaged over 3 years, is considered to have a substantial effect on receptors.

Several BAAQMD regulations and rules apply to odorous emissions. Regulation 1, Rule 301 is the nuisance provision that states that sources cannot emit air contaminants that cause nuisance to 681
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-22 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx several people. Regulation 7 specifies limits for the discharge of odorous substances where the BAAQMD receives complaints from 10 or more complainants within a 90-day period. Among other things, Regulation 7 precludes discharge of an odorous substance that causes the ambient air at or beyond the property line to be odorous after dilution with four parts of odor-free air and specifies maximum limits on the emission of certain odorous compounds.

Lastly, the BAAQMD enforces the PERP ATCM on behalf of the ARB. Under the PERP, owners or operators of portable engines and other types of equipment which meet the qualifications of the ATCM can register their equipment to operate throughout California. However, owners and operators of portable engines which meet the qualifications of this ATCM who do not register their equipment under the PERP must obtain individual permits from local air districts. Permits issued under the PERP must be honored by all air districts throughout California.

Plan Bay Area
The Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Community Strategy (RTP/SCS) for the San Francisco Bay Area, named Plan Bay Area 2050 was jointly produced and adopted by the MTC and ABAG.
21 On October 2021, the MTC approved Plan Bay Area 2050. Plan Bay Area includes integrated land use and transportation strategies for the region and was developed through OneBayArea, a joint initiative between ABAG, BAAQMD, MTC, and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. Plan Bay Area is also considered the ABAG/MTC Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). In accordance with SB 743, Plan Bay Area included elements designed to encourage the type of land use development to meet three primary objectives. First, Roadway Level of Service (LOS) could not be considered an environmental impact under CEQA. Second, it introduced changes to VMT per capita as a determinant of environmental impact. Third, the use of VMT as an environmental impact in CEQA is considered a mechanism for achieving State and regional GHG reduction goals. As a regional land use plan, Plan Bay Area aims to reduce per capita GHG emissions through the promotion of more compact, mixed-use residential and commercial neighborhoods located near transit.

Local
City of American Canyon General Plan
The City of American Canyon adopted its General Plan in 1994, which contains objectives and policies that help address air quality and reduce the community’s vulnerability to air pollution. The following objectives and policies from the City’s General Plan are relevant to air quality and apply to the proposed project:22
Goal 8F Reduce consumption of nonrenewable energy sources and support the development and utilization of new energy sources.

Objective 8.22 Minimize transportation-related energy consumption. 21 Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG). 2021. Plan Bay Area 2050. Website: https://www.planbayarea.org/finalplan2050.

Accessed November 28, 2023. 22 City of American Canyon. 2020. General Plan. Website: https://www.cityofamericancanyon.org/government/communitydevelopment/planning-zoning/general-plan-update. Accessed November 25, 2023. 682
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-23 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Policy 8.22.1 Encourage the development of mixed use, pedestrian friendly employment/residential centers that help minimize vehicle trips in American Canyon and contribute to a reduction in energy consumption.

Policy 8.22.3 Require that Development Plans provide for linkages between bicycle and pedestrian circulation systems and transit and employment centers, in accordance with established areawide plans.

Policy 8.22.4 Maintain a system of traffic signals and controls that minimizes waiting time and vehicle speed changes through routes.

Policy 8.22.5 Require that Development Plans provide for High-Occupancy Vehicles (HOV) and public transportation, where feasible, through the provision of appropriate transit areas and park-and-ride locations along public transportation routes.

Objective 8.23 Reduce Energy consumption in buildings.

Policy 8.23.1 Require that developers employ energy-efficient subdivision and site planning methods as well as building design. Measures to be considered include building orientation and shading, landscaping, building reflectance, use of active and passive solar heating and hot water system, etc. In establishing these energy related design requirements, the City shall balance energy-efficient design with good planning principles.

Objective 1.37 Consider initiatives to reduce direct and indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transportation sources, and from new, renovated, and existing development in the City.

Policy 1.37.6 Reduce vehicle engine idling in American Canyon by educating the broader community (i.e., businesses, commuters, residents) on the greenhouse gas impacts caused by engine idling, and implementing feasible commercial vehicle regulations.

City of American Canyon Municipal Code

19.01.061, Industrial Use Greenhouse Gas Standards (Ordinance No. 2024-014) A. Every Industrial Use Land Use Proposal for which the City of American Canyon is the Lead Agency shall use the following threshold to evaluate the significance of greenhouse gas (GHG) impact under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA):
1) TIER 1. Determine if CEQA categorical exemptions are applicable. If not, move to Tier 2.
2) Tier 2. Consider whether the proposed project is consistent with a locally adopted GHG reduction plan that has gone through public hearing and CEQA review, that has an approved inventory, includes monitoring, etc. If not, move to Tier 3.
683
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-24 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx 3) Tier 3. Consider whether the project includes, at a minimum, the following project design elements:
i. Buildings

1. The project will notinclude natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing (in both residential and nonresidential development).

2. The project will not result in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy use as determined by the analysis required under CEQA Section 21100(b}(3) and Section 15126.2(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines.
ii. Transportation

1. The project will achieve a reduction in project-generated vehicle miles traveled ("VMT") below the regional average consistent with the current version of the California Climate Change Scoping Plan (currently 15 percent).

2. The project will achieve compliance with off-street electric vehicle requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2. If the project does not include the above project design elements, the Project has a significant GHG impact. If it does include the above project design elements, move to Tier 4. 4) Tier 4. Consider whether the project generates GHG emissions in excess of the South Coast Air Quality Management District's 10,000 MT CO2e per year screening threshold for industrial uses and stationary projects. If so, the project has a significant GHG impact.

Chapter 19.09, Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards (Ordinance No. 2024-013) Chapter 19.09 of the Municipal Code is applicable to all warehousing, logistics and distribution facilities throughout the City for which an NOP 2024,is issued after March 1, 2024 under the implementing Guidelines of the CEQA. The NOP for the proposed project was issued on October 27, 2023. As such, the proposed project is not subject to Chapter 19.09 of the Municipal Code (Ordinance No. 2024-013). However, for informational purposes, the extent to which the project complies is addressed in Section 3.7.7.

A warehousing, logistics or distribution facility means facilities used for the storage and/or consolidation of manufactured goods (and to a lesser extent, raw materials and excludes bulk storage of materials, which are flammable, explosive, or create hazardous or commonly recognized offensive conditions) before their distribution to retail locations or other warehouses.

The facilities are generally greater than 200,000 square feet in size, with a land coverage ratio of approximately 50 to 80 percent, and a dock-high loading door ratio of approximately 1:5,000- 8,000 square feet. They are characterized by dock high loading doors, could be on opposing sides of the building (cross dock facility); significant movement and storage of products, materials, or 684
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-25 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx equipment; truck activities frequently outside of the peak hour of the adjacent street system; and freeway access, including:
• Freight yards/forwarding terminals;
• Warehousing distribution/high cube distribution centers; • Moving agencies;
• Parcel delivery terminals;
• Railroad freight stations;
• Shipping/receiving yards; and
• Truck terminals.

The following sections shall supersede any existing requirements in the Municipal Code and Specific Plans:

1. On-site motorized operational equipment, including but not limited to forklifts, yard trucks, and pallet jacks, shall be ZE (zero emission). This includes electrical hook ups to the power grid, rather than diesel-fueled generators, for contractors' electric construction tools, such as saws, drills and compressors.

2. All outdoor cargo handling equipment (including yard trucks, hostlers, yard goats, pallet jacks, forklifts, and landscaping equipment) shall be zero-emission vehicles. Each building shall include the necessary charging stations or other necessary infrastructure for zero-emission cargo handling equipment.

3. Prior to issuance of a business license, the City shall ensure rooftop solar panels are installed and can be operated in such a manner that they will supply 100% of the power needed to operate all non-refrigerated portions of the facility including the parking areas.

4. Unless the owner of the facility records a covenant on the title of the underlying property ensuring that the property cannot be used to provide chilled, cooled, or freezer warehouse space, a conduit shall be installed during construction of the building shell from the electrical room to 100% of the loading dock doors that have potentiaI to serve the refrigerated space. When tenant improvement building permits are issued for any refrigerated warehouse space, electric plug-in units shall be installed at every dock door servicing the refrigerated space to allow transport refrigeration units (TRUs) to plug in. Truck operators with TRUs shall be required to utilize electric plug-in units when at loading docks.

5. All generators, and all diesel-fueled off-road construction equipment greater than 75 horsepower, will be zero-emissions or equipped with CARB Tier IV-compliant engines (as set forth in Section 2423 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, and Part 89 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations) or better by including this requirement in applicable bid documents, purchase orders, and contracts with successful contractors.

After either (1) the completion of grading or, (2) the completion of an electrical hookup at the site, whichever is first, require all generators and all diesel-fueled off-road construction equipment, to be zero-emissions or equipped with CARB Tier IV-compliant 685
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-26 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx engines (as set forth in Section 2423 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, and Part 89 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations) or better by including this requirement in applicable bid documents, purchase orders, and contracts with successful contractors. An exemption from these requirements may be granted by the City in the event that the applicant documents that equipment with the required tier is not reasonably available and corresponding reductions in criteria air pollutant emissions are achieved from other construction equipment.

6. Prior to certificate of occupancy, install conduit and infrastructure for Level 2 (or faster) electric vehicle charging stations on-site for employees for the percentage of employee parking spaces commensurate with Title 24 requirements in effect at the time of building permit issuance plus additional charging stations equal to 5% of the total employee parking spaces in the building permit, whichever is greater. By 2030 install Level 2 (or faster) electric vehicle charging stations for 25% of the employee parking spaces required.

7. Install HVAC and/or HEPA air filtration systems in all warehouse facilities.

3.2.3 - Methodology
Model Selection and Guidance
Regional air pollutant emissions are composed of those on-site construction and operational emissions generated from all facets of the proposed project. Air pollutant emissions can be estimated by using emission factors and a level of activity. Emission factors represent the emission rate of a pollutant over a given time or activity, for example, grams of NOX per vehicle mile traveled or grams of NOX per horsepower hour of equipment operation. The activity factor is a measure of how active a piece of equipment is and can be represented as the amount of material processed, elapsed time that a piece of equipment is in operation, horsepower of a piece of equipment used, the amount of fuel consumed in a given amount of time, or VMT per day. The ARB has published emission factors for on-road mobile vehicles/trucks in the Emission Factor (EMFAC) mobile source emissions model and emission factors for off-road equipment and vehicles in the OFFROAD emissions model. An air emissions model (or calculator) combines the emission factors and the levels of activity and outputs the emissions for the various pieces of equipment.

The current version of the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2022.1.1.21, was released on May 27, 2022, as part of a coordinated development effort between the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) and the California Air Districts. Regional construction and operational emissions reported in this analysis were modeled using CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.21.

Criteria Pollutants Assessed
The following air pollutants are assessed in this analysis:
• Reactive organic gases (ROG)
• Nitrogen oxides (NOX)
• Carbon monoxide (CO)
686
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-27 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx • Sulfur oxides (SOX)
• Particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10) • Particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) Note that the proposed project would emit ozone precursors ROG and NOX. However, the proposed project would not directly emit ozone since it is formed in the atmosphere during the photochemical reaction of ozone precursors.

The proposed project would emit ultrafine particles. However, there is currently no standard separate from the PM2.5 standards for ultrafine particles and there is no accepted methodology to quantify or assess the significance of such particles.

Modeling Assumptions–Construction
Construction emissions can vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific type of operation, and prevailing weather conditions. Construction emissions result from onsite and off-site activities. On-site emissions principally consist of exhaust emissions from the activity levels of heavy-duty construction equipment, motor vehicle operation, and fugitive dust (mainly PM10) from disturbed soil. Additionally, paving operations and application of architectural coatings would release VOC emissions. Off-site emissions are caused by motor vehicle exhaust from delivery vehicles, worker traffic, and road dust (PM10 and PM2.5).

Construction activities occurring on the 10.45-acre project site would consist of site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating of the inside and outside of the building. A conceptual construction schedule is provided in Table 3.2-5 that presents the duration for each construction activity. Table 3.2-6 presents the number of assumed construction equipment along with hours of operation per day, horsepower, and load factor. Where project-specific information was not available or unknown, default assumptions were used to complete emissions modeling. The activity for construction equipment is based on the horsepower and load factors of the equipment. In general, the horsepower is the power of an engine—the greater the horsepower, the greater the power. The load factor is the average power of a given piece of equipment while in operation compared with its maximum rated horsepower. A load factor of 1.0 indicates that a piece of equipment continually operates at its maximum operating capacity. This analysis uses the CalEEMod default load factors for off-road equipment.

The anticipated construction schedule, as shown in Table 3.2-5, reflects the construction start date and construction phase durations assumed for the purposes of this environmental analysis. Based on applicant-provided information, construction would start September 2024 and would take approximately 11 months. The construction schedule used in the analysis represents a “worst-case” analysis scenario since emission factors for construction equipment decrease as the analysis year increases, due to improvements in technology and compliance with more stringent regulatory requirements. Therefore, construction emissions would decrease if the construction schedule moved to later years. The duration of construction activity and associated equipment represent a reasonable approximation of the expected construction fleet as required by State CEQA Guidelines. 687
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-28 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Table 3.2-5: Construction Schedule
Construction Activity
Conceptual Construction Schedule Working Days per
Start Date End Date Week Working Days
Site Preparation 9/2/2024 9/13/2024 5 10
Grading 9/14/2024 10/11/2024 5 20
Building Construction 10/12/2024 7/18/2025 5 200
Paving 7/19/2025 8/15/2025 5 20
Architectural Coating 7/19/2025 8/15/2025 5 20
Source: CalEEMod Output (Appendix B).

A summary of the on-site, off-road construction equipment usage assumptions used to estimate emissions is presented in Table 3.2-6.

Table 3.2-6: Project Construction Equipment Assumptions Phase Name Equipment Type
Number
per Day
Hours Per
Day Horsepower
Load
Factor
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Bulldozers 3 8 367 0.4
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8 84 0.37
Grading Excavators 2 8 158 0.38
Graders 1 8 148 0.41
Rubber Tired Bulldozers 1 8 367 0.4
Scrapers 2 8 423 0.48
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8 84 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 7 367 0.29
Forklifts 3 8 82 0.2
Generator Sets 1 8 14 0.74
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7 84 0.37
Welders 1 8 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8 81 0.42
Paving Equipment 2 8 89 0.36
Rollers 2 8 36 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6 37 0.48
Source: CalEEMod Output (Appendix B).
688
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-29 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx A summary of the construction-related vehicle trips is shown in Table 3.2-7. Based on applicantprovided information, grading would require approximately 1,000 cubic yards (cy) of import soil.23 CalEEMod default values for trip lengths and vehicle fleets were used. Note that the total number of off-site construction vehicle trips would not necessarily occur on the same day since construction activities would vary each day during the construction period.

Table 3.2-7: Construction Off-site Trips
Construction Activity Worker (Trips per day) Vendor (Trips per day) Haul (Total Trips) Site Preparation 18 0 0
Grading 20 0 31
Building Construction 141 55 0
Paving 15 0 4
Architectural Coating 28 0 0
Source: CalEEMod Output (Appendix A).

Fugitive Dust
During grading activities, fugitive dust can be generated from the movement of dirt on the project site. CalEEMod estimates dust from bulldozers moving dirt around, from graders or other construction equipment leveling the land, and from loading or unloading dirt into haul trucks. Every project within the BAAQMD’s jurisdiction is required to comply with the requirements of BAAQMD Regulation 6 and BMPs to reduce emissions of fugitive dust. As shown in Appendix B, the BMPs are accounted for in CalEEMod through selection of the appropriate measures in CalEEMod (“water unpaved roads twice daily” and “limit vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 25 miles per hour [mph]”). Development of the proposed project would include design features which would reduce fugitive dust compared to default values.

Modeling Assumptions–Operation
The major sources of operational emissions that would occur over the long-term operations of the proposed project are summarized below.

Motor Vehicles
Motor vehicle emissions refer to exhaust and road dust emissions from the motor vehicles that would travel to and from and within the project site. The regional emissions from the proposed project’s mobile sources were estimated using CalEEMod and the daily trips estimated by the traffic consultant for the proposed project. The proposed project would generate passenger vehicle trips from employees and visitors traveling to and from the project site; additionally, the proposed project 23 At the time of analysis, the amount of soil import was assumed to be 5,000 cubic yards. Therefore, a conservative analysis is presented here since it evaluated a higher amount of soil import and associated haul trips. 689
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-30 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx would also be served with daily truck deliveries. The number of vehicle trips that the proposed project would generate is presented in Table 3.2-8.

Table 3.2-8: Vehicle Trip Generation During Operations (Daily) Vehicle Type Daily Vehicle Trips
Passenger Cars 244
Trucks 128
Total Project Trips 372
Source: W-Trans. 2023. 1055 Commerce Court Memorandum of Assumptions. April. (Appendix I) As shown in Table 3.2-8, trips from passenger cars would account for 244 of the 372 total daily trips generated by the proposed project, while trucks would account for 128 of the total daily trips generated by the proposed project.

Industrial land use projects, including warehouse projects, can be expected to have longer than average truck trip lengths compared to the default trip length in CalEEMod (5.0 miles to 12.8 miles for Napa County). To estimate mobile source emissions from trucks during project operations, a oneway truck trip length of 35.6 miles was assumed based on a study of industrial warehouse travel behavior in American Canyon.
24 The truck trips are assigned to “refrigerated warehouse-no rail” land use and passenger vehicle trips are assigned to a “user defined industrial” land use so that different trip lengths can be assigned to the truck and passenger vehicle trips. The CalEEMod model output can be found in Appendix B.

Table 3.2-9 shows the adjusted fleet mixes applied in the operational portion of each CalEEMod run.

The fleet mix for the operational passenger-vehicles-only CalEEMod run used the light-duty automobile (LDA), light-duty one-axle truck (LDT1), light-duty two-axle truck (LDT2), and mediumduty vehicle (MDV) classes to represent a reasonable assumption that employees would use lightduty vehicles, medium-duty vehicles, and pickup trucks as their personal vehicles. The trucks are modeled as a combination of medium heavy and heavy heavy-duty (HHD) categories based on the previously mentioned industrial warehouse travel study. 25 Table 3.2-9: Vehicle Type Classification
CalEEMod Run Classification Fleet Mix Applied in Modeling Passenger Vehicles (employee trips) LDA 51.6%
LDT1 5.6%
LDT2 24.9%
MDV 17.9%
24 Fehr and Peers. 2022. American Canyon Industrial Warehouse Travel Behavior Data. June. 25 Fehr and Peers. 2022. American Canyon Industrial Warehouse Travel Behavior Data. June. 690
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-31 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx CalEEMod Run Classification Fleet Mix Applied in Modeling Passenger Vehicle Mix Total 100%
Trucks HHD 85.1%
MHD 14.9%
Heavy-Duty Truck Mix Total 100%
Notes:

HHD = heavy heavy-duty
LDA = light-duty automobile
LDT1 = light-duty one-axle truck
MHD = medium heavy-duty
MDV = medium-duty vehicle
Source: Appendix B.

The proposed warehouse is designed to accommodate wine storage. However, no TRU would be used while trucks are on-site. Based on similar uses nearby, most inbound trailers would not have TRUs as they would only be hauling directly from the winery. Outbound long-haul trailers would not be running the refrigeration units while at the loading dock as they would initially be loaded. No trucks would be at the loading dock longer than 30 minutes. These assumptions are input into the modeling accordingly.

Other Emission Sources
Area Sources
In addition to typical mobile- and energy-source emissions, long-term operational emissions also include area source emissions. Area source emissions include occasional architectural coating activities for repainting and maintenance of the warehouse building associated with the proposed project. CalEEMod assumes that repainting occurs at a rate of 10 percent of the buildings per year.

Therefore, on average, it is assumed that the building would be fully repainted every 10 years.

Other area source emissions include consumer products that involve solvents that emit VOCs during use. CalEEMod includes default consumer product use rates based on building square footage. The default emission factors developed for CalEEMod were used for consumer products associated with parking uses. Electric forklifts would be used during project operation. Lastly, CalEEMod default emission factors for landscape maintenance equipment were used in this analysis.

Water/Wastewater
GHG emissions from this sector are associated with the embodied energy used to supply treat and distribute water, and then treat wastewater and fugitive GHG emissions from wastewater treatment.

Indoor water consumption is based on applicant-provided information.

Energy
As discussed in the project description, the proposed project would not include natural gas plumbing or appliances. Emissions from this sector are principally from use of electricity for space and water 691
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-32 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx heating at the proposed buildings. The estimated energy consumption is based on consumption rate of the adjacent use26 and extrapolated by project square footage.27 Indirect Emissions
For GHG emissions, CalEEMod contains calculations to estimate indirect GHG emissions. Indirect emissions are emissions where the location of consumption or activity is different from where actual emissions are generated. For example, electricity would be consumed at the proposed project site; however, emissions associated with producing that electricity are generated off-site at a power plant.

CalEEMod includes calculations for indirect GHG emissions for electricity consumption, water consumption, and solid waste disposal. For water consumption, CalEEMod calculates embedded energy (e.g., treatment, conveyance, distribution) associated with providing each gallon of potable water to the project site. For solid waste disposal, CalEEMod calculates GHG emissions generated as solid waste generated by the proposed project decomposes in a landfill. For electricity-related emissions, CalEEMod contains default electricity intensity factors for various utilities throughout California. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) 2021 intensity factors28were used for the facility operations starting with the 2025 buildout year conservatively assuming the base plan.

Refrigerants
During operation, there may be leakages of refrigerants (hydrofluorocarbons) from air conditioners and any refrigeration systems. Hydrofluorocarbons are typically used for refrigerants, which are longlived GHGs. The type of refrigerant may vary depending on regulations in place at the time and emissions are based on leakage rates and other variables. CalEEMod defaults were used for these estimates. This presents a conservative estimate as recent GHG regulations are phasing in refrigerants with lower GWP.

Vegetation
The project site is currently undeveloped and contains small areas of wetland and some vegetation.

Therefore, there is currently some carbon sequestration occurring on-site. The project applicant proposes to plant trees and integrate landscaping into the proposed design, which would provide carbon sequestration. However, the number of trees to be planted is unknown and data are insufficient to accurately determine the impact that the existing landscaping has on carbon sequestration. For this analysis, it was assumed that the loss and addition of carbon sequestration that are due to the proposed project would be balanced; therefore, emissions due to carbon sequestration were not included.
26 City of American Canyon. Final Initial Study for SDG Commerce 217 Distribution Center Project (PL20-0008). 27 The proposed project would take advantage of cool night air and would include solar improvements, which would result in some reduction in energy use. These features were not quantified as to represent a conservative analysis. 28 California Energy Commission. 2023. Power Source Disclosure Program: Annual Power Content Labels for 2021. Website:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/power-source-disclosure/power-content-label/annual-power-content-2.

Accessed December 10, 2023.
692
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-33 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Dispersion Modeling
An air dispersion model is a mathematical formulation used to estimate air quality impacts at specific locations (receptors) surrounding a source of emissions given the rate of emissions and prevailing meteorological conditions. The air dispersion model applied in this assessment was the AERMOD Version 22112. Specifically, the AERMOD model was used to estimate levels of air emissions at sensitive receptor locations from project construction PM10 exhaust emissions. The AERMOD model provides a refined methodology for estimating localized construction and operational impacts by utilizing long-term, measured representative meteorological data for the project site and representative construction and operational schedules.

Terrain elevations were obtained for the project site using United Stated Geology Survey (USGS) 1/3 arc-second Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) DEMS processed by the EPA Terrain Preprocessor (AERMAP) model, the AERMOD terrain data pre-processor. The rural dispersion option was used to describe air dispersion in the local vicinity of the project. The air dispersion model assessment utilized 5 years (2013-2017) of BAAQMD-preprocessed meteorological data for the Napa County Airport Station (KAPC 23155) which is located approximately 1.8 miles north of the project site.

The AERMOD model was used to estimate levels of air emissions at sensitive receptor locations from project construction PM10 exhaust and on-road diesel truck exhaust. Receptors within the AERMOD model were placed at locations up to 1,500 meters from the project site in a nested risk-grid with a spacing of 25 meters up to 250 meters and then receptors of 100 meters spacing up to 1,000 meters from the project site. Discrete residential receptors were placed on residences in the neighborhood to the southeast as well as the single closest residence located 850 feet to the east of the project site. All receptors were placed conservatively at ground level.

Air Dispersion Modeling Assumptions–Construction
Each construction emission source to be evaluated requires geometrical and emission release specifications for use in the air dispersion model. The emission source configurations applied in this assessment are shown in Table 3.2-10.

The on-site construction area sources were assumed to cover the entire project site. Emissions from the on-site construction exhaust sources were assumed to be emitted at 5 meters above ground to account for the top of equipment exhaust stacks where emissions are released to the atmosphere and the increase in emission height due to its heated exhaust. The off-site (on-road) construction vehicle emissions were represented in the AERMOD model as line volume sources with a release height of 11.2 feet (3.4 meters) for diesel vehicles.

Table 3.2-10: Summary of Construction Diesel Emission Source Configurations Emission Source Type Configuration Relevant Assumptions Off-Road Construction
Equipment
Area Source (Sitewide) • Area Source of height 5 meters to account for plume rise from exhaust.
• Emission factors: CalEEMod
693
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-34 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Emission Source Type Configuration Relevant Assumptions Heavy-Duty Haul Truck
Traffic
Line Volume Sources • Truck travel was estimated for projectgenerated off-site travel extending on Commerce Boulevard within 1,000 feet of the
project site
• Emission factors: CalEEMod (EMFAC2021)
Source: Appendix B.

The construction emissions were assumed to be distributed over the project area with a working schedule of up to 8 hours per day and five days per week. Emissions were adjusted by a factor of 4.2 in AERMOD “Variable Emission” Option to convert 8-hour, 5 day per week construction emissions for use with a 24 hours per day, 365 days per year averaging period.

Health Risk Assessment
The primary TAC of concern for the proposed project would be diesel exhaust, characterized by the emissions of DPM as a surrogate, emitted both during construction and operation. The emissions of potential DPM associated with construction activities would be transient, temporary, and occur in varying locations within the project site. The exposure assessment for construction is limited to emissions over the time that construction is expected to occur (i.e., less than 1 year).

Exhaust emissions of DPM (as PM10 exhaust) were obtained from the CalEEMod Version 2022.1 for the unmitigated emissions construction scenarios utilized for the criteria pollutant analysis (Appendix A). DPM emissions to be evaluated include on-site diesel exhaust from construction equipment and from diesel vendor and haul trucks along Commerce Boulevard. Air dispersion modeling (described above) was utilized to determine the concentration of DPM at different locations off-site from the proposed project. Receptors included off-site workers, residents and identified school receptors within the area of impact.

The concentration output files from AERMOD were postprocessed in the Hotspots Analysis and Reporting Program (HARP) Air Dispersion Modeling and Risk Tool (ADMRT) to determine the concentration of DPM at off-site receptors for the modeled emission scenarios. The HARP ADMRT program uses the concentrations, along with equations from the Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, 29 to estimate the project’s cancer and
non-cancer chronic health risks. For DPM, the only exposure pathway is inhalation, and the HARP ADMRT tool evaluates exposure from this single pathway.30 The risk assessment was carried out using recommend ARB/CAPCOA Risk Management Policy assumptions. 29 Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program. Risk Assessment Guidelines– Guidance Manal for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. February. Website:
https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf. Accessed November 28, 2023. 30 California Air Resources Board (ARB) and California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2015. Risk Management Guidance for Stationary Sources of Air Toxics. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/toxics/rma/rmgssat.pdf.

Accessed November 13, 2023.
694
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-35 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx The Health Risk Assessment (HRA) evaluates cancer and chronic hazard risks for construction at the Maximally Exposed Individual Resident (MEIR), Maximally Exposed Individual Worker (MEIW), and at other sensitive receptors of interest, such as schools.

Estimation of Cancer Risks
Cancer risks are estimated as the upper-bound incremental probability that an individual would develop cancer as a direct result of exposure to potential carcinogens over a specified exposure duration. The cancer risk attributed to a chemical is calculated by multiplying the chemical intake or dose at the human exchange boundaries (e.g., lungs) by the chemical-specific cancer potency factor (CPF). Cancer risk is expressed in terms of risk per million exposed individuals. A risk level of 10 in a million implies a likelihood (or risk) that up to 10 persons out of one million equally exposed people would contract cancer if exposed continuously (24 hours per day) to the levels of TACs over a specified duration of time. This risk would be an excess cancer risk that is in addition to any environmental cancer risk borne by a person not exposed to these TACs.

The health risks associated with the exposure to these concentrations are then calculated for each individual receptor based on dose and response parameters. Factors such as an individual’s age and body weight and breathing rate determine the dose. Individuals also have varying responses due to a number of factors, with children being more susceptible to health effects due to development.

OEHHAs Risk assessment procedures were modified in 201531 to account for early childhood health effects and age sensitivity factors are applied to the cancer health risk values. An age sensitivity factor of 10 is applied for infants with exposure starting in the third trimester until age 2. Children from ages 2 to 16 are assumed to be 3 times more sensitive than adults. No adjustments are made for adult exposure for ages greater than 16. OEHHA Health Risk assessment protocols specify HRAs for residential exposure should start with exposure starting at third trimester and this approach is used for both the Construction and Operational HRA for the proposed project.

The analysis utilized the Risk Management Guidance for evaluating an individual receptor based on a 30-year residential exposure over a 70-year averaging period.32 Specifically, the policy recommends using the 95th percentile breathing rate for age groups less than 2 years old and the 80th percentile breathing rate for age groups that are greater than or equal to 2 years old. The construction exposure period is less than two years and as per OEHHA guidance, exposure was evaluated starting in the third trimester and conservatively evaluated exposure for ages less than 2 years based on the 95th percentile breathing rate.

Residential Cancer Risk
Residents less than 16 years of age are assumed to be exposed continuously 24 hours per day, 7 days per week and represent the maximally exposed sensitive receptor. The Construction HRA considers exposure starting in third trimester of pregnancy for 11 months. 31 Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2015. Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. February. Website: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf. Accessed November 15, 2023. 32 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2015. Risk Management Guidance for Stationary Sources of Air Toxics. May. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/toxics/rma/rma_guidancedraft052715.pdf. Accessed December 8, 2023. 695
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-36 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Off-site Worker Cancer Risk
Workers are assumed to have exposure 8 hours per day, 250 days per year and therefore experience a lower dose than residents at the same location. In addition, workers are assumed to be 16 years of age or older and age sensitivity factors are not applied to the risk values. Worker inhalation rates are specified to account for moderate activity. Finally, because AERMOD calculates a concentration based on a 365 day per year, 24-hour averages, receptors such as workers may experience higher than estimated coincident exposures when the source emits only when the receptor is present. One of the methods to address the higher exposure is to apply a worker adjustment factor (WAF) in HARP2 to align the worker hours with the times when the source is emitting. It should be noted that this method can be applied for adjusting the cancer risk for workers or students but not for residents. The WAF is estimated by first adjusting for the hours that a source is emitted and then making a corresponding adjustment accounting for the hours when a receptor would be present at the site: A worker adjustment factor of 4.2 is used in this analysis to properly evaluate the risks to off-site workers. The factor adjusts the AERMOD 24 -hour, 7 day a week average to the concentrations coincident with the 5-day, 8-hour week construction schedule when DPM is emitted.

School Cancer Risk
Similarly, students would be present less than 24 hours per day and utilizing exposure times of less than 24 hours. AERMOD long-term concentrations may underestimate student risk. The use of the residential cancer risk to evaluate maximum risk at student locations would provide a conservative estimate since it would assume students are exposed to the entirety of the source emissions. It would also encompass all student age ranges since the exposure for residential risk starts at the third trimester of pregnancy.

Estimation of Chronic Non-Cancer Hazards
An evaluation of potential non-cancer effects of chronic chemical exposures was also conducted.

Risk characterization for non-cancer health hazards from TACs is expressed as a hazard index (HI).

The HI is a ratio of the predicted concentration of the project’s emissions to a concentration considered acceptable to public health professionals, termed the Reference Exposure Level (REL).

The HI assumes that chronic exposures to TACs adversely affect a specific organ or organ system (toxicological endpoint) of the body. For each discrete chemical exposure, target organs presented in regulatory guidance were used. To calculate the HI, each chemical concentration or dose is divided by the appropriate toxicity REL. For compounds affecting the same toxicological endpoint, this ratio is added together. Where the total equals or exceeds 1, a health hazard is presumed to exist.

To quantify non-carcinogenic impacts, the chronic HI is derived by using the annual average concentration of TAC as derived from the air dispersion model (µg/m3 ). This value is then compared
to the REL above which a significant impact is assumed to occur (µg/m3 ).

OEHHA has defined a REL for Diesel Exhaust of 5 µg/m3
. The principal toxicological endpoint
assumed in this assessment was the respiratory system via the inhalation exposure pathway. DPM does not have any identified short-term or acute RELs.
696
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-37 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Estimation of Acute Non-Cancer Hazards
The project’s non-cancer acute health risks were not estimated because OEHHA has not established an acute REL for DPM and there are no acute non-cancer risk values associated with DPM.

3.2.4 - Thresholds of Significance
Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines is a sample Initial Study Checklist that includes questions for determining whether impacts to air quality are significant. These questions reflect the input of planning and environmental professionals at the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research and the California Natural Resources Agency, based on input from stakeholder groups and experts in various other governmental agencies, nonprofits, and leading environmental consulting firms. On the subject of air quality, Appendix G states that, “[w]here available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.” As a result, many lead agencies derive their significance criteria from the questions posed in Appendix G and input from relevant air districts. The City has chosen to do so for this project.

Additional guidance on the significance of air quality impacts is found in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15065, subdivision (a)(4), which provides that a lead agency shall find that a project may have a significant effect on the environment if “the environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.” According to the California Supreme Court, this “mandatory finding of significance” applies to potential effects on public health from environmental impacts such as those associated with air pollutant emissions from projects. (California Business Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369, 386- 392.)
In light of the foregoing, the proposed project would have a significant effect related to air quality if the project would:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard;
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (and thereby possibly cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly); or d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

Significance Criteria
The preceding thresholds of significance are stated in general terms. It is therefore desirable to formulate additional, more precise thresholds based on guidance from the BAAQMD, as is encouraged in Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines. As explained earlier, BAAQMD’s 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines were prepared to assist in evaluating air quality impacts of projects and plans 697
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-38 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx proposed within the Bay Area. The guidelines provide recommended procedures for evaluating potential air quality impacts during the environmental review process, consistent with CEQA requirements, and include recommended thresholds of significance, mitigation measures, and background air quality information. They also include recommended assessment methodologies for air toxics, odors, and GHGs. The analysis below was prepared using these BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.

Regional Significance Criteria
Table 3.2-11: shows the BAAQMD’s criteria for regional significance for project construction and operations.

Table 3.2-11: BAAQMD Regional (Mass Emissions) Air Pollutant Significance Thresholds Pollutant
Construction Phase Operational Phase
Average DailyEmissions
(pounds/day)
Average DailyEmissions
(pounds/day)
Maximum
Annual Emissions
(tons/year)
ROG 54 54 10
NOX 54 54 10
PM10 82 (Exhaust) 82 15
PM2.5 54 (Exhaust) 54 10
PM10 and PM2.5 Fugitive Dust Best Management
Practices
None None
Notes:

NOX = oxides of nitrogen
PM10 = particulate matter, including dust, 10 micrometers or less in diameter PM2.5 = particulate matter, including dust, 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter ROG = reactive organic gas
Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2022. April. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines.

In developing the above significance thresholds, the BAAQMD considers the emission levels for which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. If a project were to exceed the emission thresholds in Table 3.2-11:, that project’s emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions. Known health effects related to ozone include worsening of bronchitis, asthma, and emphysema and a decrease in lung function. Health effects associated with PM include premature death of people with heart or lung disease, nonfatal heart attacks, irregular heartbeat, decreased lung function, and increased respiratory symptoms. Reducing emissions would further contribute to reducing possible health effects related to criteria air pollutants. However, for projects that exceed the emissions thresholds shown in Table 3.2-11:, it is speculative to determine how exceeding regional thresholds would affect the number of days the region is in nonattainment—as mass emissions are not linearly correlated with concentrations of emissions—or how many additional individuals in the Air Basin would be affected by the health effects cited above. 698
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-39 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx In Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (Friant Ranch, LP) (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502, 510, 517-522, the California Supreme Court held generally that an EIR should “make a reasonable effort to substantively connect a project's air quality impacts to likely health consequences.” A possible example of such a connection would be to calculate a project’s “impact on the days of nonattainment per year” (Id. at pp. 521). But the court recognized that there might be scientific limitations on an agency’s ability to make the connection between air pollutant emissions and public health consequences in a credible fashion, given limitations in technical methodologies (Id. at pp. 520-521). Thus, the court acknowledged that another option for an agency preparing an EIR might be “to explain why it was not feasible to provide an analysis that connected the air quality effects to human health consequences” (Id. at p. 522).

For Napa County where the project is located, the BAAQMD is the primary agency responsible for ensuring the health and welfare of sensitive individuals to elevated concentrations of emissions in the Air Basin. At present, the BAAQMD has not provided any methodology to assist local governments in reasonably and accurately assessing the specific connection between mass emissions of ozone precursors (e.g., ROG and NOX) and other pollutants of concern on a regional basis and any specific effects on public health or regional air quality concentrations that might result from such mass emissions. The City has therefore concluded that it is not feasible to predict how mass emissions of pollutants of regional concern from the proposed project could lead to specific public health consequences, changes in pollutant concentrations, or changes in the number of days for which the SFBAAB will be in nonattainment for regional pollutants.

Ozone concentrations, for instance, depend upon various complex factors, including the presence of sunlight and precursor pollutants, natural topography, nearby structures that cause building downwash, atmospheric stability, and wind patterns. Because of the complexities of predicting ground level ozone concentrations related to the NAAQS and CAAQS, it is not possible to link health risks to the magnitude of emissions exceeding the significance thresholds. To achieve the healthbased standards established by the EPA, the air districts prepare air quality management plans that detail regional programs to attain the Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS). However, if a project within the BAAQMD exceeds the regional significance thresholds, the proposed project could contribute to an increase in health effects in the basin until the attainment standards are met in the Air Basin.

On the other hand, it is technically feasible to predict with reasonable accuracy the potential localized health consequences of localized pollutants such as TACs and PM2.5. As discussed below, a HRA has been prepared that addresses the potential for additional incidences of cancer resulting from both the construction-related emissions and the operational emissions of the proposed project.

Consistency with Air Quality Plan
The applicable air quality plan is BAAQMD’s 2017 Bay Area Clean Air Plan, which identifies measures to:
• Reduce emissions and reduce ambient concentrations of air pollutants; 699
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-40 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx • Safeguard public health by reducing exposure to the air pollutants that pose the greatest health risk, with an emphasis on protecting the communities most heavily affected by air pollution; and
• Reduce GHG emissions to protect the climate.

A project would be determined to conflict with or obstruct implementation of an applicable air quality plan if it would result in substantial new regional emissions not foreseen in the air quality planning process.

Local CO Hotspots
Congested intersections have the potential to create elevated concentrations of CO, referred to as CO hotspots. The significance criteria for CO hotspots are based on the CAAQS for CO, which is 9.0 ppm (8-hour average) and 20.0 ppm (1-hour average). However, with the turnover of older vehicles, the introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of control technology, the SFBAAB is in attainment of the CAAQS and NAAQS, and CO concentrations in the SFBAAB have steadily declined.

Because CO concentrations have improved, the BAAQMD does not require a CO hotspot analysis if all the following criteria are met:
• The project is consistent with an applicable congestion management program established by the County Congestion Management Agency for designated roads or highways, the regional transportation plan, and local congestion management agency plans; and • The project would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour; and
• The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersection to more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or urban street canyon, below-grade roadway).33
Community Risk and Hazards
The BAAQMD’s significance thresholds for local community risk and hazard impacts apply to both the siting of a new source and to the siting of a new receptor. Local community risk and hazard impacts are associated with TACs and PM2.5 because emissions of these pollutants can have significant health impacts at the local level.
• The proposed project would generate TACs and PM2.5 during construction activities that could elevate concentrations of air pollutants at the nearby school and residential sensitive receptors. The thresholds for construction-related local community risk and hazard impacts are the same as for project operations. Construction-related TAC and PM2.5 impacts should be 33 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2022. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. April.

Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/ceqa/ceqa-guidelines-2022/ceqa-guidelines-chapter-4- screening_final-pdf.pdf?rev=ac551d35a52d479dad475e7d4c57afa6&sc_lang=en. Accessed November 29, 2023. 700
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-41 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx addressed on a case-by-case basis, considering each project's specific construction-related characteristics and proximity to off-site receptors, as applicable.34 • The proposed project involves the construction of new warehouse facilities and would be a source of operational TACs and PM2.5 from trucking activity. The BAAQMD thresholds related to siting new sources of TACs and PM2.5 near existing or planned sensitive receptors are applicable.

Since the City of American Canyon does not have a qualified risk reduction plan, a site-specific analysis of TACs and PM2.5 impacts on sensitive receptors was conducted. The thresholds identified below are applied to the proposed project’s construction and operational phases.

Community Risk and Hazards: Project
Project-level emissions of TACs or PM2.5 from individual sources that exceed any of the thresholds listed below are considered a potentially significant community health risk:
• An excess cancer risk level of more than 10 in one million, or a non-cancer (i.e., chronic or acute)HI greater than 1.0 would be a significant cumulatively considerable contribution. • An incremental increase of greater than 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) annual average PM2.5 from a single source would be a significant cumulatively considerable contribution.

Community Risk and Hazards: Cumulative
Cumulative sources represent the combined total risk values of each of the individual sources within the 1,000-foot evaluation zone. A project would have a cumulatively considerable impact if the aggregate total of all past, present, and foreseeable future sources within a 1,000-foot radius from the fence line of a source or location of a receptor, plus the contribution from the proposed project, meets any of these conditions:
• Has excess cancer risk levels of more than 100 in one million or a chronic non-cancer HI (from all local sources) greater than 10.0.
• Exceeds 0.8 μg/m3 annual average PM2.5.

In February 2015, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) adopted additional HRA guidance that includes several efforts to be more protective of children’s health. These updated procedures include age sensitivity factors to account for the higher sensitivity of infants and young children to cancer-causing chemicals, and age-specific breathing rates.35 34 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2022. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. April.

Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-climate/california-environmental-quality-act-ceqa/updated-ceqa-guidelines.

Accessed November 29, 2023. 35 California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. February. Website: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf.

Accessed November 23, 2023.
701
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-42 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Odors
The BAAQMD thresholds for odors are qualitative based on BAAQMD Regulation 7, Odorous Substances. This rule places general limitations on odorous substances and specific emission limitations on certain odorous compounds. Odors are also regulated under BAAQMD Regulation 1, Rule 1-301, Public Nuisance, which states that no person shall discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or the public; or which endangers the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public; or which causes, or has a natural tendency to cause, injury, or damage to business or property. Under BAAQMD Rule 1-301, the BAAQMD has established odor screening thresholds for land uses that have the potential to generate substantial odor complaints, including wastewater treatment plants, landfills or transfer stations, composting facilities, confined animal facilities, food manufacturing, and chemical plants. Table

3.2-12 shows the screening distances for various land uses that are considered to have objectionable odors.36
Table 3.2-12: BAAQMD Odor Screening-level Distances Thresholds Land Use/Type of Operation Project Screening Distance
Wastewater Treatment Plant 2 miles
Wastewater Pumping Facilities 1 mile
Sanitary Landfill 2 miles
Transfer Station 1 mile
Composting Facility 1 mile
Petroleum Refinery 2 miles
Asphalt Batch Plant 2 miles
Chemical Manufacturing 2 miles
Fiberglass Manufacturing 1 mile
Painting/Coating Operations 1 mile
Rendering Plant 2 miles
Coffee Roaster 1 mile
Food Processing Facility 1 mile
Confined Animal Facility/Feed Lot/Dairy 1 mile
Green Waste and Recycling Operations 1 mile
Metal Smelting Plants 2 miles
Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2022. 36 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2022. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. April.

Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-climate/california-environmental-quality-act-ceqa/updated-ceqa-guidelines.

Accessed June 2, 2023.
702
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-43 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx

3.2.5 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the development of the proposed project and provides mitigation measures where appropriate.

Consistency with Air Quality Management Plan
Impact AIR-1: The proposed project could conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.

Impact Analysis
The BAAQMD is responsible for reducing emissions from area, stationary, and mobile sources in the SFBAAB to achieve National and California AAQS. The BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan is a regional and multiagency effort to reduce air pollution in the Air Basin. A consistency determination with the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) plays an important role in local agency project review by linking local planning and individual projects to the 2017 Clean Air Plan. It fulfills the CEQA goal of informing decision-makers of the proposed project's environmental effects under consideration early enough to ensure that air quality concerns are fully addressed. It also provides the local agency with ongoing information as to whether they are contributing to the clean air goals in the 2017 Clean Air Plan.

The BAAQMD compiles the regional emissions inventory for the SFBAAB. In part, the regional population, housing, and employment projections developed by the ABAG are based on cities’ general plan land use designations. These projections form the foundation for the emissions inventory of the 2017 Clean Air Plan. These demographic trends are incorporated into Plan Bay Area, compiled by ABAG and the MTC, to determine priority transportation projects and VMT in the Bay Area. Projects consistent with the local general plan are considered consistent with the regional air quality plan.

The proposed project would build a 219,834-square-foot warehouse on approximately 10.45 acres.

As previously described, demographic trends such as employment and population growth were estimated in ABAG’s Plan Bay Area 2040 based on local general plan land use patterns, which the BAAQMD utilized in part to inform the emissions inventory and projections contained in the 2017 Clean Air Plan.

The project site is designated Commercial Recreation (CR) by the City of American Canyon General Plan and zoned Recreation (REC). A Recreation Zoning District Code Amendment (Ordinance No. 2018-01) was adopted by the City Council on January 16, 2018. The Ordinance allows wine-related warehousing and distribution facilities as a conditionally permitted use within the REC zoning district.

It is unclear whether ABAG’s projections account for the possible conditional uses allowed under certain land use designations. As such, the proposed project would not automatically be considered consistent with employment and VMT growth projections identified in local plans, upon which applicable ambient Air Quality Plans (AQPs) are based. Therefore, further analysis is needed to determine whether the proposed project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
703
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-44 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx With respect to local air quality plans, the City has adopted Ordinance No. 2024-014 which establishes thresholds to evaluate the significance of GHG impact for industrial land use projects.

The industrial project is analyzed against four tiers (whether the project is exempt, whether the project would be consistent with a qualified adopted GHG reduction plan, whether the project incorporates the necessary design elements, and whether the project meets a numeric GHG emissions threshold) to determine its GHG impact significance. As discussed in Section 3.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the proposed project would meet Tier 4 of the City’s GHG threshold and therefore would not conflict with the City’s GHG threshold.

The analysis below evaluates whether the proposed project would conflict with the Clean Air Plan based on the project’s emissions inventory and incorporation of relevant clean air measures contained in the Clean Air Plan.

As noted in Impact AIR-2 below, project-generated emissions would not exceed BAAQMD’s projectlevel significance thresholds and impacts would be less than significant.

Table 3.2-13 identifies the project-applicable control measures in the 2017 Clean Air Plan required by BAAQMD to reduce emissions for a wide range of stationary and mobile sources and the project’s consistency analysis with these control measures. As shown in Table 3.2-13, the proposed project would not conflict with the control measures of the 2017 Clean Air Plan.

Table 3.2-13: Consistency With 2017 Clean Air Plan Control Measures Type Measure Number/Title Consistency Analysis
Stationary Source
Control Measure
SS18: Basin-Wide Combustion Strategy.

Stabilize and then reduce emissions of GHGs,
criteria air pollutant and toxic emissions from
stationary combustion sources throughout the
Air District by first establishing carbon intensity
caps on major GHG sources, and then adopting
new rules to (1) reduce fuel use on a sourcetype by source-type basis, and (2) evaluate alternatives to decarbonize abatement devices.

SS21: New Source Review for Air Toxics.

Propose revisions to Air District Rule 2-5, New
Source Review of Toxic Air Contaminants,
based on OEHHA’s 2015 Health Risk
Assessment Guidelines and ARB/CAPCOA’s
2015 Risk Management Guidance. Revise the
Air District’s Health Risk Assessment trigger
levels for each toxic air contaminant using the
2015 Guidelines and most recent health effects
values.

Consistent. Stationary sources are
regulated directly by the BAAQMD,
which routinely adopts/revises rules or
regulations to implement the Stationary
Source (SS) control measures to reduce
stationary source emissions. Therefore,
any new stationary sources associated
with the proposed project would be
required to comply with BAAQMD’s
regulations. Based on the proposed
warehousing use for the project site, it
is not anticipated that the proposed
project would result in any new major
stationary source emissions.

Additionally, in the event stationary
equipment is installed on-site, it is
anticipated that the equipment would
be small-quantity emitters and would
require review by BAAQMD for
permitted sources of air which would
ensure consistency with the 2017 Clean
Air Plan.

SS 36: PM from Trackout. Consistent with mitigation. BAAQMD’s recommended mitigation measures for
704
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-45 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Type Measure Number/Title Consistency Analysis
Develop new Air District rule to prevent
mud/dirt and other solid trackout from
construction, landfills, quarries and other bulk
material sites.
construction fugitive dust control,
incorporated as MM AIR-1 for this
project, would be implemented to
reduce fugitive dust and trackout during
project construction. In addition, mud
and dirt that may be tracked out onto
the nearby public roads during
construction activities shall be removed
promptly by the contractor based on
BAAQMD’s requirements.

SS 37: PM from Asphalt Operations.

Develop an Air District rule to require
abatement/control of blue smoke emissions
related to asphalt delivery to roadway paving
projects.

Consistent. Asphalt application during
the construction of the proposed
project would be subject to BAAQMD
Regulation 8, Rule 15-Emulsified and
Liquid Asphalts.

Transportation
Control Measures
TR 2: Trip Reduction Programs.

Implement the regional Commuter Benefits
Program (Rule 14-1) that requires employers
with 50 or more Bay Area employees to
provide commuter benefits. Encourage trip
reduction policies and programs in local plans,
e.g., general and specific plans while providing
grants to support trip reduction efforts.

Encourage local governments to require
mitigation of vehicle travel as part of new
development approval, to adopt transit
benefits ordinances in order to reduce transit
costs to employees, and to develop innovative
ways to encourage rideshare, transit, cycling,
and walking for work trips. Fund various
employer-based trip reduction programs.

Consistent. Transportation (TR) control
measures are strategies to reduce
vehicle trips, vehicle use, VMT, vehicle
idling, and traffic congestion to reduce
motor vehicle emissions. Although most
of the TR control measures are
implemented at the regional level—that
is, by MTC or California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans)—the 2017
Clean Air Plan relies on local
communities to assist with the
implementation of some measures.

The proposed project would also be
subject to the Bay Area’s Commuter
Benefits Program, which requires all
employers in BAAQMD’s jurisdiction
that have 50 or more full-time
employees to offer commuter benefits
to their employees. Therefore, the
proposed project is consistent with this
measure.

In addition, MM TRANS-2 requires the
project applicant to develop and
implement a Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) program to
encourage employees to choose nonpersonal vehicle models of transportation for commuting. MM
TRANS-2 would further support the
measure’s trip reduction goals.

TR 9: Bicycle and Pedestrian Access and
Facilities.

Encourage planning for bicycle and pedestrian
facilities in local plans, e.g., general and specific
Consistent. The proposed project would
provide pedestrian circulation
throughout the project site in
accordance with California Disabled
705
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-46 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Type Measure Number/Title Consistency Analysis
plans, fund bike lanes, routes, paths and
bicycle parking facilities.

Accessibility Guidebook (CalDAG) and
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
recommendations and standards. The
proposed project would also provide
three bicycle lockers, each of which
would accommodate up to four bicycles,
for a total of 12 bicycle parking spaces.

The proposed 12 bicycle parking spaces
would be five more than required per
the City’s Zoning Ordinance Chapter

19.14.090 (A), Bicycle Parking
Requirements.

TR 19: Medium and Heavy-Duty Trucks.

Directly provide, and encourage other
organizations to provide, incentives for the
purchase of (1) new trucks with engines that
exceed ARB’s 2010 NOX emission standards for
heavy-duty engines, (2) new hybrid trucks, and
(3) new zero-emission trucks. The Air District
will work with truck owners, industry, ARB, the
California Energy Commission, and others to
demonstrate additional battery-electric and
hydrogen fuel cell zero-emission trucks.

Consistent. The truck fleet used for the
proposed project is required to comply
with the State’s rigorous on-road heavyduty vehicle programs aimed to transition truck fleets from diesel to
Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV). Relevant
regulations include the “omnibus”
regulation, Advanced Clean Truck and
Advance Clean Fleets regulations, and
TRU Arborne Toxics Control Measure
(ACTM), all discussed above in Section

3.2.2-Regulatory Framework.

Energy and
Climate Control
Measures
EN1: Decarbonize Electricity Production.

Engage with PG&E, municipal electric utilities
and CCAs to maximize the amount of
renewable energy contributing to the
production of electricity within the Bay Area as
well as electricity imported into the region.

Work with local governments to implement
local renewable energy programs. Engage with
stakeholders including dairy farms, forest
managers, water treatment facilities, food
processors, public works agencies and waste
management to increase use of biomass in
electricity production.

EN2: Decrease Electricity Demand.

Work with local governments to adopt
additional energy efficiency policies and
programs. Support local government energy
efficiency program via best practices, model
ordinances, and technical support. Work with
partners to develop messaging to decrease
electricity demand during peak times.

Consistent. The Energy and Climate (EN)
control measures are intended to
reduce energy use as a means of
reducing adverse air quality emissions.

Solar would be installed on the project’s
building roof top and would produce an
estimated 235,000 kilowatt-hour (kWh)
per year.

Buildings Control
Measures
BL2: Decarbonize Buildings.

Explore potential Air District rulemaking
options regarding the sale of fossil fuel-based
space and water heating systems for both
Consistent. The proposed project would
not include natural gas plumbing or
appliances and is therefore consistent
with this measure.
706
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-47 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Type Measure Number/Title Consistency Analysis
residential and commercial use. Explore
incentives for property owners to replace their
furnace, water heater or natural gas powered
appliances with zero-carbon alternatives.

Update Air District guidance documents to
recommend that commercial and multi-family
developments install ground source heat
pumps and solar hot water heaters.

Natural and
WorkingLands
Control Measures
NW 3–Carbon Sequestration in Wetlands.

Identify federal, State, and regional agencies,
and collaborative working groups that the Air
District can assist with technical expertise,
research or incentive funds to enhance carbon
sequestration in wetlands around the Bay
Area. Assist agencies and organizations that
are working to secure the protection and
restoration of wetlands in the San Francisco
Bay.

Consistent. The control measure
focuses on increasing carbon
sequestration on wetlands. The
proposed project would preserve the
on-site wetlands and would include the
planting of various ornamental and
shade trees throughout the project site.

These actions would support the State’s
working lands and would therefore
make the proposed project consistent
with this measure.

Waste
Management
Control Measures
WA 4–Recycling and Waste Reduction.

Develop model policies to facilitate local
adoption of ordinances and programs to
reduce the amount of green waste going to
landfills.

Consistent. The control measure
includes strategies to increase waste
diversion rates through efforts to
reduce, reuse, and recycle. The
proposed project would comply with
Assembly Bill (AB) 341, which requires
mandatory commercial recycling for
businesses that generate four cubic
yards or more of commercial solid waste
per week. Additionally, the proposed
project would be required to reduce
construction waste by 75 percent and
use 30 percent recycled content during
the construction of the proposed
facility. Therefore, the proposed project
would not conflict with these WA
control measures.

Water Control
Measures
WR 2–Support Water Conservation.

Develop a list of best practices that reduce
water consumption and increase on-site water
recycling in new and existing buildings;
incorporate into local planning guidance.

Consistent. The 2017 Clean Air Plan
includes measures to reduce water use.

The proposed project would include
water efficiency measures required
under CALGreen. In addition, the
proposed project would include waterefficient indoor fixtures consistent with the requirements of CALGreen and
water-efficient landscaping outdoors.

Super GHG
Control Measures
SL 1–Short-Lived Climate Pollutants.

Reduce methane from landfills and farming
activities through various control measures
listed under waste and agriculture sectors.

Consistent. Super-GHGs include
methane, black carbon, and fluorinated
gases. These compounds are sometimes
referred to as short-lived climate
707
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-48 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Type Measure Number/Title Consistency Analysis
Develop a rule to reduce methane emissions
from natural gas pipelines and processing
operations, and amend regulations to reduce
emissions of methane and other organic gases
from equipment leaks at oil refineries. Enforce
applicable regulations on the servicing of
existing air conditioning units in motor
vehicles, support the adoption of more
stringent regulations by the ARB and/or EPA,
and encourage better HFC disposal practices.
pollutants because their lifetime in the
atmosphere is generally fairly short.

Measures to reduce super-GHGs are
addressed on a sector-by-sector basis in
the 2017 Clean Air Plan. The proposed
project would comply with AB 341,
which mandates commercial recycling
for businesses that generate four cubic
yards or more of commercial solid waste
per week, which could contribute to
reducing methane by diverting waste
from landfills.

Notes:

AG = Agricultural
BL = Buildings
EN = Energy and Climate
FSM = Further Study Measures
NW = Natural and Working Lands
SL = Super GHG (Short-Lived)
SS = Stationary Sources
TR = Transportation
WA = Waste Management
WR = Water Control Measures
Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017, April 19. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan, Spare the Air, Cool the Climate: A Blueprint for Clean Air and Climate Protection in the Bay Area. Website:
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/plans/2017-clean-air-plan/attachment-a_-proposedfinal-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed November 30, 2023.

As shown in Table 3.2-13, the proposed project would not conflict with the relevant clean air measures contained in the Clean Air Plan after mitigation. Nonetheless, the BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines further recommend determining a project’s consistency with the 2017 Clean Air Plan, in part, by determining a project’s consistency with the regional significance thresholds presented in Table 3.2-11.
37 As discussed under Impact AIR-2, the proposed project’s emissions are below BAAQMD’s significance thresholds and would be considered less than significant.

The BAAQMD does not have a bright-line emissions threshold for determining potentially significant impacts related to construction fugitive dust. Instead, the BAAQMD determines a project to result in a potentially significant impact if that project were not to implement construction BMPs to minimize the extent of fugitive dust emissions, such as soil erosion, sediment migration, roadway dust reentrainment, and soil trackout, during project construction. In the absence of specific information related to the proposed project’s intended implementation of construction BMPs to minimize fugitive dust emissions, the proposed project is assumed to not include any construction BMPs. 37 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. Website:
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed June 2, 2023.
708
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-49 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Therefore, Mitigation Measure (MM) AIR-1 would be required to ensure implementation of construction BMPs recommended by the BAAQMD.

Consequently, implementation of MM AIR-1 would sufficiently maintain project construction emissions at less than significant levels. As previously discussed, the BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines recommend determining a project’s consistency with the 2017 Clean Air Plan, in part, by determining a project’s consistency with the BAAQMD significance thresholds. As discussed under Impact AIR-2, the proposed project would not generate emissions which would exceed the BAAQMD’s significance thresholds. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the applicable air quality plan and impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
MM AIR-1 Implement BAAQMD Best Management Practices to Control Dust During Construction
The following dust control measures, as recommended by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), shall be included in the design of the proposed project and implemented during construction:
• All exposed non-paved surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and access roads) shall be watered at least two times per day and/or non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to exposed non-paved surfaces. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered and/or shall maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard. • All visible mud or dirt tracked out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
• All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
• Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes, as required by the California Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ACTM) Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations. Clear signage regarding idling restrictions shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.
• All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
• The prime construction contractor shall post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust complaints. The construction contractor shall take corrective action within 48 hours. The 709
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-50 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx BAAQMD’s and the City’s phone numbers shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Cumulative Criteria Pollutant Emissions Impacts
Impact AIR-2: The proposed project could result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard.

Impact Analysis
This impact is related to the cumulative effect of a project’s regional criteria pollutant emissions. By its nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact resulting from emissions generated over a large geographic region. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants results from past and present development within the Air Basin, and this regional impact is a cumulative impact.

Therefore, new development projects (such as the proposed project) within the Air Basin would contribute to this impact only on a cumulative basis. No single project would be sufficient in size, by itself, to result in nonattainment of regional air quality standards. Instead, a project’s emissions may be individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when evaluated in combination with past, present, and future development projects.

As discussed above, BAAQMD sets emission thresholds for NOx, PM10, PM2.5, CO, and ROG. NOX emissions are of concern because of potential health impacts from exposure to NOX emissions during both construction and operation and as a precursor in the formation of airborne ozone. PM10 and PM2.5 are of concern during construction because of the potential to emit exhaust emissions from the operation of off-road construction equipment and fugitive dust during earth-disturbing activities (construction fugitive dust). CO emissions are of concern during project operation because operational CO hotspots are related to increases in on-road vehicle congestion and potential health effects. ROG emissions are also important because of their participation in the formation of ground level ozone. Ozone is a respiratory irritant and an oxidant that increases susceptibility to respiratory infections and can cause substantial damage to vegetation and other materials. Elevated ozone concentrations result in reduced lung function, particularly during vigorous physical activity. This health problem is particularly acute in sensitive receptors such as the sick, elderly, and young children.

The cumulative analysis focuses on whether a specific project would result in cumulatively considerable emissions. According to Section 15064(h)(4) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the existence of significant cumulative impacts caused by other projects alone does not constitute substantial evidence that the project’s incremental effects would be cumulatively considerable.

Rather, the determination of cumulative air quality impacts for construction and operational emissions is based on whether the proposed project would result in regional emissions that exceed the BAAQMD regional thresholds of significance for construction and operations on a project level.

The significance thresholds represent the allowable amount of emissions each project can generate without generating a cumulatively considerable contribution to regional air quality impacts. 710
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-51 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Therefore, a project that would not exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance on the project level also would not be considered to result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to these regional air quality impacts. Construction and operational emissions are discussed separately below.

Construction
During construction, fugitive dust would be generated from site grading and other earthmoving activities. The majority of this fugitive dust would remain localized and deposited near the project site; however, fugitive dust's potential impacts exist unless control measures are implemented to reduce this source's emissions. Exhaust emissions would also be generated from the operation of the off-road construction equipment and on-road construction vehicles.

Construction Fugitive Dust
The BAAQMD does not recommend a numerical threshold for fugitive dust PM emissions. Instead, the BAAQMD bases the determination of significance for fugitive dust on the consideration of the control measures to be implemented, referred to as BMPs. If all appropriate emissions control measures are implemented for a project as recommended by the BAAQMD, then fugitive dust emissions during construction are not considered significant. Therefore, the BAAQMD determines a project to result in a potentially significant impact if that project were not to implement construction BMPs to minimize the extent of fugitive dust emissions, such as soil erosion, sediment migration, roadway dust re-entrainment, and soil trackout, during project construction. In the absence of specific information related to the proposed project’s intended implementation of construction BMPs to minimize fugitive dust emissions, the proposed project is assumed to not include any construction BMPs. Therefore, MM AIR-1 would be required to ensure implementation of construction BMPs recommended by the BAAQMD irrespective of the emissions reductions achieved by those BMPs. With the incorporation of this mitigation, short-term construction impacts associated with violating an air quality standard or contributing substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation would be less than significant for fugitive dust.

Construction Air Pollutant Emissions: ROG, NOX, PM10, PM2.5 CalEEMod, Version 2022.1, was used to estimate the proposed project’s construction emissions.

CalEEMod provides a consistent platform for estimating construction and operational emissions from various land use projects and is the model recommended by the BAAQMD for estimating project emissions. Estimated construction emissions are compared with the applicable thresholds of significance established by the BAAQMD to assess ROG, NOX, exhaust PM10, and exhaust PM2.5 construction emissions to determine significance for this impact.

At the time of this analysis, the construction of the proposed project was anticipated to begin in the third quarter of 2024 and be completed 11 months later. If the construction schedule moves to later years, construction emissions would likely decrease because of improvements in technology and more stringent regulatory requirements.

Construction activities such as grading, excavation, and travel on unpaved surfaces would generate dust and lead to elevated concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5. According to the project site plans and applicant-provided information, an estimated 1,000 cubic yards of soil are anticipated to be imported during site grading activities. The operation of construction equipment results in exhaust 711
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-52 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx emissions, which include ROG and NOX. Table 3.2-14 presents construction-period emissions that would result from the development of the proposed project. As shown in Table 3.2-14, constructionrelated criteria pollutant emissions would not exceed BAAQMD thresholds.

Table 3.2-14: Unmitigated Construction Emissions
Construction Activity
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (Tons)

ROG NOX
PM10
(Exhaust)
PM2.5
(Exhaust)
Site Preparation (2024) 0.019 0.180 0.008 0.007
Grading (2024) 0.038 0.387 0.016 0.014
Building Construction (2024) 0.053 0.405 0.015 0.014
Building Construction (2025) 0.123 0.930 0.032 0.030
Paving (2025) 0.012 0.079 0.004 0.003
Architectural Coating (2025) 0.277 0.010 0.000 0.000
Total Construction Emissions (Tons) 0.522 1.992 0.075 0.069 Average Daily Emissions
Total Construction Emissions (Pounds) 1,044 3,984 149 137 Average Daily Construction Emissions (Pounds/Day) 4.2 15.9 0.60 0.55 BAAQMD Significance Thresholds 54 54 82 54
Significant Impact? No No No No
Notes:

This analysis relies on a 250-day construction schedule, consistent with the construction schedule and modeling results contained in Appendix A.

BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District
NOx = nitrogen oxides
PM10 = particulate matter, including dust, 10 micrometers or less in diameter PM2.5 = particulate matter, including dust, 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter ROG = reactive organic gases
Source: Appendix A.

Operation
Operational Air Pollutant Emissions: ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 Operational emissions would include area, energy, and mobile sources. Area sources would include emissions from architectural coatings, consumer products, and landscape equipment. Energy sources include emissions from the combustion of natural gas for water heaters and other heat sources. Mobile sources include exhaust and road dust emissions from the automobiles that would travel to and from the project site. Pollutants of concern include ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5.

Project operations were analyzed at full buildout immediately following the completion of construction in August 2025 as a conservative estimate of operational emissions beginning in the earliest year of full operation. During full operation, the proposed project is expected to generate 712
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-53 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx

1.69 trips per 1,000 square feet or an estimated 372 daily trips. 38 A recent American Canyon
industrial warehouse travel collection study39 was used to apportion the trips between passenger vehicles (244 daily) and medium-duty (19 daily) and heavy-duty truck (109 daily) trips. An average truck trip length of 35.6 miles was also assumed, based on eight existing Napa County industrial warehousing sites in full operation.40
Operational emission estimates for the proposed project are contained in Table 3.2-15. For detailed assumptions used to estimate emissions, see Appendix B.

Table 3.2-15: Unmitigated Operational Emissions
Emissions Source
ROG NOX PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Tons per Year
Area 1.10 0.01 0.002 0.002
Energy – – – –
Mobile–Trucks 0.055 3.615 0.772 0.237
Mobile–Passenger Vehicles 0.116 0.095 0.312 0.080
Stationary – – – –
Total (tons/year) 1.27 3.72 1.09 0.32
Significance Threshold (Tons/Year) 10 10 15 10
Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No
Total Average (pounds/day)2 7.0 20.4 6.0 1.7
Significance Threshold (Tons/Year) 54 54 82 54
Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No
Notes:
1 Totals may not add up due to rounding. Calculations use unrounded results. 2 Pounds/day emissions data is derived from tons/year emissions data by converting tons to pounds. 365 working days per year is assumed to estimate average daily emission rates. lb. = pounds
ND = No Data
NOX = oxides of nitrogen
PM10 = particulate matter 10 microns in diameterPM2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter ROG = reactive organic gases
Source: CalEEMod Output (see Appendix A).
38 W-Trans. 2023. 1055 Commerce Court Memorandum of Assumptions. April. 39 Fehr and Peers, 2022. Memorandum, American Canyon Industrial Warehouse Travel Behavior Data, from Joe Livaich, Buzz Oates Construction, Inc., June 16, 2023. 40 Ibid.
713
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-54 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Table 3.2-15 indicates that the proposed project would result in operational-related criteria air pollutants or ozone precursors below the BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance for all criteria pollutants.

Operational Carbon Monoxide Hotspot
The CO emissions from traffic generated by the proposed project are a concern at the local level.

Congested intersections can result in high, localized concentrations of CO.

The BAAQMD recommends a screening analysis to determine whether a project has the potential to contribute to a CO hotspot. The screening criteria identify when site-specific CO dispersion modeling is necessary. The proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to air quality for local CO if all the following screening criteria are met:

1. The project is consistent with an applicable congestion management program established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways, regional transportation plan, and local congestion management agency plans; and

2. The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour; and

3. The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or urban street canyon, below-grade roadway).

SR-29, located approximately 4,800 feet east of the project site, would experience the most traffic volume as compared to other roadways in the vicinity. The segment of SR-29 near the project site has a peak-hour traffic volume of 2,900 vehicle trips as of 2021.41,42 Therefore, the proposed project would not result in any nearby intersection having peak-hour traffic volumes exceeding 44,000 vehicles per hour.

Nonetheless, CO hotspots can occur when a transportation facility’s design or orientation prevents the adequate dispersion of CO emissions from vehicles, resulting in the accumulation of local CO concentrations. The design or orientation of a transportation facility that may prevent the dispersion of CO emissions include tunnels, parking garages, bridge underpasses, natural or urban canyons, below-grade roadways, or other features where vertical or horizontal atmospheric mixing is substantially limited. Adjacent roadways that would receive new vehicle trips generated by the proposed project do not include roadway segments where vertical or horizontal atmospheric mixing is substantially limited.

Finally, the proposed project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy of the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. As discussed in 41 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2021. Traffic Volumes for All Vehicles on CA State Highways. Website:
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census. Accessed November 30, 2023. 42 Postmile of the nearest SR-29 segment is obtained from Caltrans Postmile Services. Website:
https://postmile.dot.ca.gov/PMQT/PostmileQueryTool.html?. Accessed November 20, 2023. 714
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-55 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Section 3.13, Transportation, General Plan Policy 4.6 indicates that industrial uses should be located in the City’s north industrial area to minimize the impacts of truck traffic on residential neighborhoods. The proposed project is located adjacent to similar warehouse projects, and with the redesign of Commerce Court as a cul-de-sac, the roadway connection to the residential neighborhood to south of the project is not available, and truck traffic would be required to access the site via Green Island Road. As the proposed project would minimize truck traffic impacts on residential neighborhoods, the proposed project would not conflict with this policy.

Therefore, based on the above criteria, the proposed project would not exceed the CO screening criteria and would have a less than significant impact related to CO.

The proposed project would generate criteria pollutant and ozone precursor emissions during construction and operation; however, as previously indicated, emissions would be below BAAQMD thresholds and therefore would have less than significant effects in this respect.

The proposed project would generate construction fugitive dust. The BAAQMD does not have a bright-line emissions threshold for determining potentially significant impacts related to construction fugitive dust. Instead, the BAAQMD determines a project to result in a potentially significant impact if that project were not to implement construction BMPs to minimize the extent of fugitive dust emissions, such as soil erosion, sediment migration, roadway dust re-entrainment, and soil trackout, during project construction. In the absence of specific information related to the proposed project’s intended implementation of construction BMPs to minimize fugitive dust emissions, the proposed project is assumed to not include any construction BMPs. Therefore, MM AIR-1, discussed above, would be required to ensure implementation of construction BMPs recommended by the BAAQMD irrespective of the emissions reductions achieved by those BMPs.

Consequently, implementation of MM AIR-1 would sufficiently reduce project construction emissions to less than significant levels.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
Implement MM AIR-1.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Sensitive Receptors Exposure to Pollutant Concentrations Impact AIR-3: The proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Impact Analysis
The proposed project could expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations if it causes or contributes significantly to elevated pollutant concentration levels. As described in Section 3.2.1, 715
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-56 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Environmental Setting, beneath Table 3.2-4, the closest sensitive receptors include a single-family residence located approximately 850 feet east of the project site, Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School located approximately 1,200 feet south of the project site, and a neighborhood located approximately 1,600 feet south of the project site. Unlike regional emissions, localized emissions are typically evaluated in terms of air concentration rather than mass so they can be more readily correlated to potential health effects. As the proposed project would constitute the development of 219,834 square feet of industrial warehouse space and the operation of heavy-duty trucking fleets, a construction and operational HRA was prepared for the proposed project and is contained in Appendix B. The results of the HRA are summarized below.

Construction
Table 3.2-16 presents a summary of the results of the HRA prepared for the proposed project during project construction. The HRA analyzes the proposed project’s construction emissions over a period of 11 months consistent with the BAAQMD’s Health Risk Assessment Guidelines.43 The HRA also analyzes the proposed project’s impacts at the maximally impacted receptor, which is a residence, the closest off-site worker receptor and the school receptor exposure at the Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School.

As shown in Table 3.2-16, health risks resulting from the construction of the proposed project were found to be less than the BAAQMD’s project-level significance thresholds.

Table 3.2-16: Summary of Construction Health Risks at the Maximum Impacted Receptor Impact Scenario UTM E UTM N
Cancer Risk1
(risk per million)
Chronic NonCancer
Hazard Index2
TAC
Concentration3
(µg/m3)
Residential MIR Impact 563979 4226674 0.8 0.001 0.0044
Worker MIR Impact 563625 4226775 1.0 0.019 0.0925
School MIR Impact 563877 4226209 0.2 0.002 0.00112
Thresholds of Significance 10 1 0.3
Exceeds Individual Source Threshold? No No No
Notes:

DPM = diesel particulate matter
MIR = Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor
REL = Reference Exposure Level
TAC = toxic air contaminants
µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter 1 Cancer risk is identified by multiplying the risk sum from HARP2 by 1,000,000. 2 Chronic non-cancer hazard index was estimated by dividing the annual DPM concentration (as PM2.5 exhaust) by the DPM REL of 5 µg/m3. 3 TAC concentration taken from AERMOD is always at the MIR identified from the project air dispersion models. The school MIR was identified as the Napa Junction Elementary School.

Emissions Source: Appendix B.

Thresholds Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2022. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. April. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-climate/california-environmental-quality-actceqa/updated-ceqa-guidelines. Accessed November 30, 2023. 43 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2016. BAAQMD Air Toxics NSR Program Health Risk Assessment Guidelines.

December. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/permitmodeling/hra_guidelines_12_7_2016_clean-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed September 16, 2023. 716
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-57 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Community Health Risk Assessment
A community HRA was conducted for construction in accordance with BAAQMD recommendations.

The cumulative health risk values were determined by adding the health risk values from refined modeling of the proposed project construction to the screening-level health risk values from each individual stationary and mobile source within a 1,000-foot radius of the site. The HRA revealed that the main sources of health risks come from existing sources (i.e., roadways) rather than the proposed project. The analysis results presented in the HRA, contained in Appendix B, are shown in Table 3.2-17. As shown therein, health risks to nearby sensitive receptors would not exceed the BAAQMD community health risk significance thresholds. As the proposed project did not result in an exceedance of project-level BAAQMD significance thresholds, the proposed project would not result in a potentially significant impact and the proposed project’s impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Table 3.2-17: Summary of Construction Health Risks at the Maximum Impacted Receptor Source Source Type
Distance
from MIR1
(feet)
Cancer Risk
(per million)
Chronic
HI
PM2.5
Concentration
(µg/m3)
Project
Residential MIR Diesel Construction
Equipment, Trucking
Fleets, and Passenger
Vehicles
— 0.8 0.001 0.0044
Roadways — 1.19 0.003 0.025
Cumulative Health Risks
Cumulative Maximum with Project DPM Emissions 2 0.004 0.029 BAAQMD’s Cumulative Thresholds of Significance 100 10 0.8 Threshold Exceedance? No No No
Notes:

BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District
DPM = diesel particulate matter
HI = health index
MIR = Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor
ND = No Data
PM2.5 = particulate matter, including dust, 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter 1 The residential MIR located at 563979 UTM E 4226674 UTM N was identified as the primary MIR here as it would experience the greatest health impact between residential and school receptors. 2 Assumes emissions remain constant with time. Values represent the greatest identified among all MIRs presented in this analysis, including the two previously identified residences and the previously identified school.

Source: Appendix A.
717
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-58 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Analysis
For project operation, potential TAC emissions would be from the exhaust of the trucks entering, exiting, and idling on the site. Diesel exhaust particulate emissions from on-road heavy-duty trucks are substantially less than those from off-road construction equipment and are dispersed over a larger linear roadway path. Projects with the potential for health risk from DPM are those with high level of truck traffic or sites where trucks with TRUs (small diesel engines used to run refrigeration devices on trucks) idle for a significant amount of time. The ARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook provides guidance on levels of activity that could result in a potential impact:44 Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a distribution center (that accommodates more than 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating transport refrigeration units [TRUs] per day, or where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week).

The traffic analysis estimates the daily HHD truck trips accessing the project site would be 128 trips, which is 64 HHD trucks per day. Since these project HHD truck trips are less than the 100-truck advisory threshold in the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook, an operational HRA is not necessary and therefore not analyzed in this study. As previously discussed, no TRUs would be operated while on-site. Therefore, risks due to DPM from this level of truck traffic would be less than significant.

Best Management Practices for Warehouses
The California Attorney General published a list of best practices for warehouse development that aim to reduce air quality emissions and health risks to sensitive receptors.45 The ARB Concept Paper for the Freight Handbook also provides best practices for warehouse projects. 46 The design of the
proposed project considered and is consistent with many of these best practices.

The proposed project includes the following design features and best management strategies, to minimize and reduce air quality and health risk impacts:
• As discussed in Chapter 2, Project Description, the proposed project would provide adequate amounts of on-site parking to prevent trucks and other vehicles from parking or idling on public streets and to reduce demand for off-site truck yards. • As shown in Exhibit 2-4a, facility entry and exit points from the public street were placed away from sensitive receptors south and east of the project. • Rooftop Solar Photovoltaic system with Battery Storage would be provided as required by Title 24 Part 6 Section 140.10(a).
• Heat pump for space Conditioning in Single-Zoned Office Spaces would be provided as required by Title 24 Part 6 Section 140.4(a).2.
44 California Air Resources Board (ARB). Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. 2005. Website:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/california-air-resources-board-air-quality-and-land-use-handbook-acommunity-health-perspective.pdf. Accessed November 16, 2023. 45 California Office of the Attorney General. 2022. Warehouse Projects: Best Practices and Mitigation Measures to Comply with the California Environmental Quality Act. Website: https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/warehouse-best-practices.pdf. Accessed November 14, 2023. 46 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2020. California Sustainable Freight Initiative: Concept Paper for the Freight Handbook.

Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/concept-paper-freight-handbook. Accessed November 14, 2023. 718
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-59 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx • The proposed project would provide electrical Infrastructure ready to support future ZEV medium heavy-duty trucks (MHDT) and heavy heavy-duty trucks (HHDT), as required by California Building Standards Code (CBC) 5.106.5.4.1 Electric vehicle charging readiness requirements for warehouses with planned off-street loading spaces. • Water-efficient landscaping would be provided in accordance with Municipal Code Chapter

16.14 Water-Efficient Landscaping.
• Low-flow water fixtures would be provided per CALGreen Building Code Section 4.303.1. • Energy-efficient light-emitting diode (LED) lighting would be provided per the California Energy Code.
• The proposed project would use compliant low-GWP refrigerants per ARB HFC regulation.

As shown above, the proposed project incorporates many best practices for warehouse development. It is worth noting that one of the best practices is to site warehouse facilities at least 1,000 feet from the nearest sensitive receptors. Although the proposed project is within 1,000 feet of residential uses, the above health risk impact analysis demonstrates that the proposed project would not have significant impacts on the nearest receptors.

Carbon Monoxide Hotspot
As discussed in Impact AIR-2, the proposed project would not generate sufficient vehicle traffic during project operation to substantiate creating a CO hotspot. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with regard to exposing sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of CO emissions. As such, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts related to exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Objectionable Odors Exposure
Impact AIR-4: The proposed project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

Impact Analysis
Construction
During construction activities, construction equipment exhaust and application of asphalt and architectural coatings would temporarily generate odors. Any construction-related odor emissions would be temporary and intermittent. Additionally, noxious odors would be confined to the immediate vicinity of the construction equipment. It is anticipated that by the time such emissions reach any sensitive receptor sites, they would be diluted to well below any air quality or odor concern level. Therefore, construction odor impacts would be less than significant. 719
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Air Quality Draft EIR

3.2-60 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx Operation
The proposed project would construct and operate a wine storage warehouse and distribution center. Operation of this type of project would likely not generate objectionable odors that may affect a substantial number of nearby receptors. The types of uses that are considered to have objectionable odors include wastewater treatments plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations (e.g., auto body shops), dairy farms, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing facilities.

Minor sources of odors that would be generated by the proposed project, such as exhaust from mobile sources, are not typically associated with numerous odor complaints, but are known to have temporary and less concentrated odors. The nearest sensitive receptor is a single-family residence located approximately 850 feet east of the project site. Because of distance from this sensitive receptor, operation of the proposed project would not have an impact related to odors.

Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

3.2.6 - Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope of the cumulative air quality analysis is the SFBAAB, which covers all or portions of the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Sonoma, and Solano. Air quality is impacted by topography, dominant air flows, atmospheric inversions, location, and season; therefore, using the Air Basin represents the area most likely to be impacted by air emissions. The BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines cumulative significance criteria are used in the cumulative analysis of air quality.

In developing thresholds of significance for air pollutants, BAAQMD established numerical thresholds for determining when a project‘s individual contributions would be cumulatively considerable. If a project does not exceed the identified significance thresholds, its emissions would not be cumulatively considerable, resulting in less than significant air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions.

Criteria Pollutants
By its nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact resulting from emissions generated over a large geographic region. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development within an air basin, and this regional impact is a cumulative impact. In other words, new development projects (such as the project) within the SFBAAB would contribute to this impact only on a cumulative basis. No single project would be sufficient in size, by itself, to result in nonattainment of regional air quality standards. Instead, a project’s emissions may be individually limited but cumulatively considerable when taken in combination with past, present, and future 720
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.2-61 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-02 Air Quality.docx development projects. All new development that would result in an increase in air pollutant emissions above those assumed in regional AQPs would contribute to cumulative air quality impacts.

The cumulative analysis focuses on whether the proposed project would result in cumulatively considerable emissions. According to Section 15064(h)(4) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the existence of significant cumulative impacts caused by other projects alone does not constitute substantial evidence that a project’s incremental effects would be cumulatively considerable. Rather, the determination of cumulative air quality impacts for construction and operational emissions is based on whether a project would result in regional emissions that exceed the BAAQMD regional thresholds of significance. Projects, such as the proposed project, that generate emissions below the significance thresholds would be considered consistent with regional air quality planning efforts and would not generate cumulatively considerable emissions. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a cumulative impact related to construction or operation criteria pollutants.

Toxic Air Contaminants
Construction and Operational Emissions at the Site and Maximum Impacted Receptor As discussed previously, localized risks are primarily associated with exposure to TAC emissions.

Operation of the proposed project would not contribute to significant operational TAC emissions.

Potential cumulative sources of TAC emissions could occur during construction or operation impacting the nearby Maximally Impacted Sensitive Receptor. Sensitive receptors could be impacted by new stationary sources in the vicinity of the site (e.g., dry cleaners, diesel backup generators, and gasoline stations) or by the construction or operation of other developments. Any proposed new stationary source of TAC emissions would be subject to BAAQMD permit requirements, which involves New Source Review for air toxics and an evaluation of health risks.47 Freeways, major roadways and railroads are also significant sources of TAC emissions of diesel particulate; however, land use and zoning restrictions preclude these from becoming new significant sources of TAC exposure in the project area and they do not figure into cumulative considerations. The final potential sources of TACs for a cumulative risk would be diesel exhaust exposure from off-road sources such as construction equipment from other land use development. New construction from other development projects are a potential additional source of TAC emissions and risk to sensitive receptors; however, the CEQA process and current BAAQMD thresholds for cumulative community risk would consider these impacts. In these cases, sensitive receptors for other cumulative projects would be considered in their environmental planning analysis under BAAQMD risk thresholds. This would ensure that there are no significant impacts to these sensitive receptors and risks would be less than significant.

Level of Cumulative Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
47 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2023. Regulation 2 Rule 2: New Source Review. Website:
https://www.baaqmd.gov/rules-and-compliance/rules/reg-2-rule-2-new-source-review. Accessed November 17, 2023. 721

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
722
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-1
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx

3.3 - Biological Resources

3.3.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing biological setting and potential effects from implementation of the proposed project on the project site and the surrounding area. This section also identifies mitigation measures to reduce these potential effects to less than significant levels where applicable.

Descriptions and analysis in this section are based, in part, on a Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) prepared by First Carbon Solutions (FCS), including field and focused surveys. Additional information used for analysis includes wildlife and floristic rare plant surveys, conducted by Pinecrest Research Corporation (Pinecrest); Jurisdictional Determination Reverification and previous field surveys, conducted by Monk & Associates (M&A); and analyses completed for the adjacent Commerce 217 project. All supporting documents are contained in Appendix C of this Draft EIR.

Within Appendix C are three subfolders: Appendix C.1 contains the Commerce Court 220 BRA; Appendix C.2 contains Commerce Court 217 supporting documents; and Appendix C.3 contains Commerce Court 220 supporting documents.

The following public comments pertaining to biological resources were received in response to the Notic of Preparation (NOP):
• The Draft EIR should evaluate environmental impacts given that the project site has already been cleared of vegetation and graded.
• The Draft EIR should evaluate the ability of animals to utilize the wetland and provide recommendations.
• The Draft EIR should ensure that the wetland is monitored and protected. • The Draft EIR should evaluate the effect of lighting and noise from the warehouses on birds and wildlife.
• The Draft EIR must evaluate impacts on California Endangered Species Act (CESA) species in order to receive an Incidental Take Permit (ITP).
• The Draft EIR must evaluate impacts on nesting birds pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
• The Draft EIR should provide sufficient information regarding the environmental setting or “baseline” for habitats of special-status plant, fish, and wildlife species located and potentially located within the project site.
• The Draft EIR should describe aquatic habitats, such as wetlands, as well as any sensitive natural communities occurring on or adjacent to the project site. • The Draft EIR should describe City regulations regarding wetland set back distances. • The Draft EIR should include habitat descriptions and the potential for species occurrences from multiple sources, such as aerial imagery, historical and recent survey data, field reconnaissance, scientific literature, databases from relevant agencies, etc. 723
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR

3.3-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx • The Draft EIR should include surveys for special-status species and rare plants and recommended protocols.
• The Draft EIR should describe direct and indirect impacts related to the loss or modification of breeding, nesting, dispersal and foraging habitat as well as the obstruction of movement corridors.
• The Draft EIR should describe direct and indirect impacts related to permanent and temporary habitat disturbances associated with ground disturbance, noise, lighting, reflection, air pollution, traffic, etc.
• The Draft EIR should describe cumulative impacts to biological resources.

3.3.2 - Project History
The project site is a portion of a larger, 35.85-acre site that was subsequently subdivided into three lots in February 2021 (SDG Commerce 217, SDG Commerce 220, and SDG Commerce 330). The southern parcel (SDG Commerce 330) was developed in 2020. The northern parcel (SDG Commerce 217) was entitled in 2021 and at the time of this writing is currently being developed. The central parcel (SDG Commerce 220) is the project site evaluated in this analysis.

While the BRA site boundary includes a total of 10.17 acres, project site boundaries were subsequently increased to 10.45 acres to include adjacent, off-site improvement areas. However, field surveys for the BRA and additional supporting studies did include the entire 10.45-acre project site, as these areas were located within original survey buffer areas. Please see Section 2.0 (Project Description) for further details regarding project site boundaries.

It should be noted that as part of the SDG Commerce 217 development (located directly north of the project site), much of the SDG Commerce 220 project site was graded between May 29 and July 2, 2023, to procure existing, stockpiled soil for use as clean fill material for the SDG Commerce 217 site (Appendix C.2: BRA for SDG 217 ISMND). As a part of the SDG Commerce 217 project, M&A authored an Addendum Letter to CEQA Biology Report Discussing Proposed Borrow Site in September 2020 which analyzed grading impacts (Appendix C.2: Addendum to Biological Constraints).

Additionally, an approved grading plan was issued by the City of American Canyon in March 2023 (Appendix C.2: Borrow Site Grading Plan).

3.3.3 - Environmental Setting
The project site is located in the City of American Canyon, which is part of the greater north San Francisco Bay Area (Exhibit 2-1). The project site is located within the Cuttings Wharf, California, United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangle Map.

The project area is generally located in the northern portion of the City of American Canyon, where commercial development is the dominant land use. The project site is bordered by a eucalyptus grove and North Slough beyond which is the Napa River (west), a parcel entitled for a wine distribution warehouse known as SDG Commerce 217 (north), Commerce Court, beyond which is a 724
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-3
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx paintball recreation area (east), and a wine distribution warehouse known as SDG Commerce 330 (south); refer to Exhibit 2-2.

Soils, Typography, and Hydrology
The project area experiences a Mediterranean climate characterized by warm, dry summers and cool, wet winters. The project area typically exhibits annual low/high temperatures between 40-80°F (degrees Fahrenheit) and an annual average rainfall of approximately 20 inches.

Soil survey information for the project site was obtained from the National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey.1 The NRCS Web Soil Survey (WSS) depicts one soil type within the project site (Exhibit 3.3-1); Haire clay loam (148), 2 to 9 percent slopes. Haire Clay Loam is characterized as alluvium, derived from sedimentary rock. These soils are moderately well drained and non-saline to very slightly saline.

The 10.45-acre project site is currently undeveloped land. A linear wetland (LW1) and three isolated wetlands (W1, W2, and W3) are located within the northern portion of the property. The location and extent of each wetland is shown on Exhibit 3.3-2, Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types. The project site is relatively flat with elevations ranging from 13 to 25 feet above sea level.

The ground is undulating due to past land use disturbances including eucalyptus tree removal in 2012. The site slopes gently to the west toward the North Slough and the Napa River.

In 2023, M&A reverified a 0.023 acre of seasonal wetlands and 0.042 acre of linear wetlands within the delineation survey area (Exhibit 3.3-2). These wetlands have surface hydrologic connectivity to North Slough, which flows to the Napa River to the west. The Napa River is a traditional navigable water.

Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types
Vegetation communities are assemblages of plant species growing in an area of similar biological and environmental factors. The following section describes the vegetation communities and land cover types present in the project area. The location and extent of each vegetation community is shown on Exhibit 3.3-2.

Non-native Annual Grassland–Avena spp.–Bromus spp. Herbaceous Semi-Natural Alliance This vegetation type is typically described by being dominated by non-native annual grasses and annual or perennial forbs from dense to sparse cover with less than 10 percent tree or shrub cover.

With a few exceptions, the plants are dead through the summer and fall dry season, persisting as seeds. This community usually occurs below 3,000 feet and is the most common herbaceous vegetation type of the region. This vegetation type is classified by the Manual of California Vegetation (MCV) as Avena spp.–Bromus spp. Herbaceous Semi-Natural Alliance, which has broad membership rules, but is dominated by a non-native annual grass species. The herb layer in this alliance is generally less than 1.2 meters and vegetation cover ranges from open to continuous. 1 United States Department of Agriculture. 2023. National Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey. Website:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed September 27, 2023. 725
726
56390001• 09/2023| 3.3-1_soils.m xd
Exh ibit3.3-1
SoilsMap
Source:BingAerial Im agery.USDASoilsDataMart,CountyofAm erican Canyon.

CIT YOFAMERICANCANYON
SDGCOMMERCE220PROJECT

ENVIRONMENT ALIMPACT REPORT
140 70 0 140
Feet
Legend
Project Site 10.45 acres
Soil Classification
148 - Haire clay loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes 10.45 acres 727

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
728
56390001• 10/2023| 3.3-2_veg_land_cover.m xd
Exhibit3.3-2
Vegetation Com m unitiesand
LandCoverT ypes
Source:BingAerialIm agery.Monk &AssociatesEn vironm entalCon sultants,08/2023.

CIT YOFAMERICANCANYON
SDGCOMMERCE220PROJECT

ENVIRONMENT ALIMPACT REPORT
200 100 0 200
Feet
Legend
Project Site 10.45 acres
Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types
Avena spp.-Bromus spp. Herbaceous Semi-Natural Stand 9.64 acres Developed 0.75 acre
Seasonal wetland (W) 0.02 acre
Linear Wetland (LW) 0.04 acre
729

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
730
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-9
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx Trees and shrubs may be present at low cover. This community is found on various substrates including foothills, waste spaces, rangelands, and openings in woods.

The vast majority of the project site is generally considered non-native annual grassland, with a species composition that trends strongly toward ruderal. Individual scattered shrubs (including coyote brush [Baccharis pilularis]) and eucalyptus saplings and resprouts are not considered their own vegetation type due to small patch size, but rather a component of the grassland matrix (see membership rules, below).

The most predominant grass species within the project site included wild oats (Avena sp), canarygrass (Phalaris aquatica), medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae), and wall barley (Hordeum murinum), but equally dominant are ruderal species including mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), stinkwort (Dittrichia graveolens), Italian rye grass (Festuca perennis), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), slender wild oat (Avena barbata), common vetch (Vicia sativa), red-stem filaree (Erodium cicutarium), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), bristly ox-tongue (Helminthotheca echioides), California burclover (Medicago polymorpha), and cut-leaf geranium (Geranium dissectum).

As previously noted, large areas of this vegetation type were graded between May 29 and July 2, 2023 (see Appendix C.2: Borrow Site Grading Plan; and Addendum to Biological Constraints). The grading did not encroach into the wetlands features or associated wetland buffer areas. The grading effectively eliminated the non-native grassland throughout much of the site.

Seasonal Wetland
Seasonal wetland habitat is present on the project site (Exhibit 3.3-2), reflecting current conditions.

Over the past 12 years, the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has twice verified its jurisdiction via delineations, as explained below.

In 2011, the USACE confirmed 0.049-acre of wetlands and 0.004-acre of “other waters” adjacent to the former gravel road on the eastern edge of the project site. On December 6, 2011, the USACE confirmed the extent of its jurisdiction on the project site (USACE File Number 2011-00322N). This determination expired on January 31, 2017, so M&A conducted a reverification wetland delineation of the project site on November 16, 2016. The map was field confirmed by the USACE on May 18, 2017, and an approved jurisdictional determination (AJD) was issued on May 16, 2018. It should be noted that the 2018 AJD included one isolated wetland that is no longer part of the project site.

In 2023, M&A reverified and mapped 0.023 acre of seasonal wetlands (W1-W3) and 0.042 acre of linear wetlands (LW1) within the project site. On August 30, 2023, the USACE issued a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) (Appendix C.3: Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Map, SDG Commerce 220 Project Site).

Vegetation observed within the seasonal wetlands included non-native and native species. Nonnative species included spiny-fruit buttercup (Ranunculus muricatus; facultative wetland [FACW]) and Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis; facultative [FAC]). Native species included creeping spikerush (Eleocharis macrostachya; obligate wetland species [OBL]), brown-headed rush (Juncus 731
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR

3.3-10 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx phaeocephalus; FACW) and spreading rush (Juncus patens; FACW). Mapped wetlands on the project site remain inundated and/or saturated seasonally for sufficient duration to satisfy wetland hydrology criteria. Hydrological indicators in the mapped wetlands include the presence of oxidized rhizosphere (a “primary” hydrological indicator) as well as biotic crust. Soil matrix colors in the wetland area identified in the field were noted as 10YR 3/2 with redoximorphic features. Soil matrix colors in areas mapped as non-hydric soils were noted as 10YR 3/3 and 10YR 3/2, with insufficient redoximorphic features. These wetland features were not impacted during the grading that occurred within upland portions of the project site between May 29 and July 2, 2023.

Developed
While not a natural habitat type, urban/developed areas typically consist of buildings, hardscape such as asphalt or concrete, and other human-caused structures. Such areas typically provide little habitat value to most wildlife species. On-site, this landcover type can be found within the southeastern corner in the form of a construction trailer, a staging area, and a paved road that allows access into the site via Commerce Boulevard. The paved road runs half the length of the southern border of the project site (Exhibit 3.3-2).

Sensitive Natural Communities
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) maintains a list of natural communities that classifies vegetation types found within the State of California and ranks them based on rarity.

Communities ranked S1-S3 are considered sensitive natural communities.2 Wetlands and riparian habitats are also typically considered sensitive natural communities and are addressed below.

Seasonal Wetland Community
Vegetation observed within the seasonal wetlands included non-native and native species. As indicated in subsection 3.3.3, Seasonal Wetland, non-native species included spiny-fruit buttercup (Ranunculus muricatus) and Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis). Native species included creeping spikerush (Eleocharis macrostachya), brown-headed rush (Juncus phaeocephalus) and spreading rush (Juncus patens). Naturally occurring seasonal wetland vegetation communities can be considered sensitive natural communities. However, due to the nature of these wetlands, presence of non-native species, and lack of special-status plant species, the seasonal wetlands on-site would not be considered a sensitive natural community. Additionally, the proposed project would avoid all wetland features through the implementation of a wetland buffer avoidance area (Exhibit 3.3-4).

Common Wildlife
The vegetation community and land cover types discussed above provide habitat for numerous wildlife species. Wildlife activity during the 2023 field surveys consisted primarily of avian species, including Say's phoebe (Sayornis saya), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), western bluebird (Sialia mexicana), Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna), lesser goldfinch (Spinus psaltria), yellowrumped warbler (Setophaga coronate), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), and California towhee (Melozone crissalis). Additionally, Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys 2 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2023. Natural Communities List, Sacramento: California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Website: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities#sensitive%20natural%20communities. Accessed August 21, 2023.
732
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-11
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx bottae) burrows, black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), and Columbian black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus ssp. columbianus) were observed. Notably, no signs of current or past presence of California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi) burrows were observed on-site during the 2023 surveys.

In general, FCS and Pinecrest field surveys found that the conditions related to wildlife habitat are consistent with the results presented in the March 2020 M&A BRA which lists the following common wildlife species as observed on or near the project site: wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), Say's phoebe, American crow, mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), black-tailed jackrabbit, California meadow vole (Microtus californicus), Botta’s pocket gopher, and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus ), among others, all of which have been observed on the project site. Red-shouldered hawk, tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor), Nuttall’s woodpecker (Picoides nuttallii), and northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), among others, likely nest in the eucalyptus trees that surround the project site. Chestnut-backed chickadee (Poecile rufescens), brown creeper (Certhia americana), American robin (Turdus migratorius), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), spotted towhee (Pipilo maculatus), California towhee (Pipilo crissalis), dark-eyed junco (Junco hyemalis), Bullock’s oriole (Icterus bullockii) and western gray squirrel (Sciurus griseus) were also observed in the immediate project vicinity.

Wildlife use is expected to have decreased since M&A’s surveys because these surveys were conducted prior the construction of the warehouse to the south (SDG Commerce 330) and before the current construction began on the warehouse to the north (SDG Commerce 217). A comprehensive list of wildlife and plant species observed by FCS and Pinecrest can be found in Appendix C.3: 220 Commerce Animal Survey Report, and 220 Commerce Plant Survey Report.

Special-status Species
Special-status species include those species listed by the federal and state governments as endangered, threatened, or rare or candidate species for these lists. Endangered or threatened species are protected by the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended, the California Native Plant Protection Act of 1977, and the California Endangered Species Act of 1970. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides additional protection for unlisted species that meet the “rare” or “endangered” criteria defined in Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15380. Special-status species also include those species listed by the CDFW as Species of Concern which face extirpation in California if current population and habitat trends continue, those identified as Fully Protected in the California Fish and Game Code (a designation that provides additional protection to those animals that are rare or face possible extinction), and bird species designated as Bird Species of Conservation Concern by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). These State and federal Species of Concern must be evaluated in the context of evaluation under CEQA. Under Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15380, mentioned above, many Biologists and the lead agencies for whom they work evaluate impacts to plant species on California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Lists 1 and 2. Special-status species included in CEQA review also include bat species that have been designated with conservation priority by the Western Bat Working Group. 733
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR

3.3-12 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx The CDFW maintains records for the distribution and known occurrences of special-status species and sensitive habitats in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). The CNDDB is organized into map areas based on 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle maps produced by the United States Geologic Survey (USGS). All known occurrences of special-status species are mapped onto quadrangle maps maintained by the CNDDB. The database gives further detailed information on each occurrence, including specific location of the individual, population, or habitat (if possible) and the presumed current state of the population or habitat.

Special-status Plant Species
The CNDDB and CNPS list 45 special-status or sensitive plant species that have been recorded within the Cuttings Wharf, California, USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map and the eight surrounding quadrangles (Appendix C.1: SDG Commerce Court 220 BRA [Appendix C: Database Searches]). 3,4,5
The CNDDB occurrences within the vicinity of the project site are shown on Exhibit 3.3-3. A list of all plant species recorded on-site during the protocol-level floristic surveys is included in Appendix C.3:
220 Commerce Plant Survey Report. No rare or special-status plant species were observed during the appropriately timed protocol-level floristic surveys and are therefore determined to be absent from the site.

Special-Status Wildlife Species
The CNDDB identifies 43 federal and State-listed threatened and/or endangered wildlife species and State Species of Special Concern that have been recorded within the Cuttings Wharf, California, USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map and the eight surrounding quadrangles (Appendix C.1: SDG Commerce Court 220 BRA [Appendix C: Database Searches]).6,7 The CNDDB occurrences within the vicinity of the project site are shown on Exhibit 3.3-3. Thirty-five of these species are unlikely to occur on-site, as discussed in the Special-status Wildlife Species Habitat Value Evaluation Table (Appendix C.1: SDG Commerce Court 220 BRA [Appendix B: Special-Status Species Tables, Table 2]).

The remaining eight species (and functional groups like nesting birds and roosting bats that include special-status species) could have at least theoretical potential to occur on-site, perhaps as vagrant, dispersing, or foraging individuals, and are therefore discussed in more detail below. 3 United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2023. National Geospatial Program. Website: https://www.usgs.gov/core-sciencesystems/national-geospatial-program/us-topo-maps-america?qt-science_support_page_related_con=4#qtscience_support_page_related_con. Accessed September 14, 2023. 4 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2023. CNDDB RareFind 5 California Natural Diversity Database Query for Specialstatus Species. Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx. Accessed September 14, 2023. 5 California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2023. California Native Plant Society Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory. Website:
http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/. Accessed September 14, 2023. 6 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2023. CNDDB RareFind 5 California Natural Diversity Database Query for SpecialStatus Species. Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx. Accessed September 14, 2023. 7 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2023. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS 6). Website:
https://map.dfg.ca.gov/bios/. Accessed September 14, 2023. 734
56390001•09/2023|3.3-3_CNDDB.m xd CITYOFAMER ICANCANYON SDGCOMMER CE220PR OJECT

ENVIR ONMENTALIMPACTR EPOR T
Exh ibit3.3-3
CNDDBSpecial-Status
SpeciesOcc urrences
Source:Bing StreetIm ag ery.CaliforniaNaturalDiversityDatabase(CNDDB),Aug ust2023. 8 4 0 8
Miles
Legend
Project Site
CNDDB
Symbology
Plant (80m)
Plant (specific)
Plant (non-specific)
Plant (circular)
Animal (80m)
Animal (specific)
Animal (non-specific)
Animal (circular)
Terrestrial Comm. (80m)
Terrestrial Comm. (specific)
Terrestrial Comm. (non-specific)
Terrestrial Comm. (circular)
Aquatic Comm. (80m)
Aquatic Comm. (specific)
Aquatic Comm. (non-specific)
Aquatic Comm. (circular)
Multiple (80m)
Multiple (specific)
Multiple (non-specific)
Multiple (circular)
Sensitive EO's (Commercial only)
CNDDBversion 08/2023.PleaseNote:

Th eoccurrences sh ow n on th is m ap representth eknow n locations ofth espec ieslisted h ere asofth ed ateofth is version.Th erem aybead d itionaloccurrences orad d itionalspecies w ith in th isareaw h ich h avenotyetbeen surveyed and /orm apped .Lack ofinform ation in th e CNDDBaboutaspecies oran areacan neverbeused as proofth atno specialstatus species occurin an area.
735

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
736
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-15
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx Swainson's hawk inhabits open to semi-open areas at low to middle elevations in valleys, dry meadows, foothills, and level uplands. It nests almost exclusively in trees and will nest in almost any tree species that is at least 10 feet tall.

Foraging habitats include grasslands, alfalfa fields, fallow fields, beet, tomato, and other low growing row or field crops, dry-land and irrigated pasture, and rice land when not flooded. Swainson's hawk generally forages in open habitats with short vegetation containing small mammals, reptiles, birds, and insects. Its primary prey in the Central Valley is California meadow vole. Agricultural areas are often preferred over more natural grassland habitats due to larger prey populations. During the nesting season Swainson’s hawk usually forage within 2 miles of the nest.