Swainson’s hawk does not require habitats that contain many perches because it most often searches for prey aerially, therefore it can occupy habitats with few or no perches except the nest tree. Swainson's hawks are regular summer visitors and breeders throughout the western states. In the fall months, most Swainson’s hawks migrate to Argentina before returning to the United States to breed in the late spring (typically April). For decades, Argentina farmers were spraying insecticides over habitats that included gregarious night roosts of the Swainson’s hawk, killing many thousands of these hawks. This practice was halted in the last 10 years and the Swainson’s hawk population appears to be dramatically responding in California. While in the 1970s through 1990s there were only two relatively small populations of Swainson’s hawks that remained resident in California yearround in the Davis area and in the Sacramento River Delta, resident and migrant populations of the Swainson’s hawks are now dramatically expanding their nesting distribution in California since insecticide use over Argentinian wintering grounds was halted. For example, Swainson’s hawks were never recorded nesting in the Napa County area until relatively recently. 8 The closest known record for nesting Swainson’s hawk is 1.5 miles north of the project site (CNDDB Occurrence No. 2839). No individual Swainson’s hawk or nests have been observed on the project site or in the vicinity of the project site during the 11 surveys conducted by Pinecrest on the SDG Commerce 220 site or the seven surveys conducted by FCS on the adjacent SDG Commerce 217 site between January and July 2023. However, the eucalyptus trees growing adjacent to the project site could provide suitable nesting habitat. Therefore, there is the possibility that Swainson’s hawks could nest near this project site in future years.
Western Burrowing Owl
The western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) is a California Species of Special Concern. Its nest, eggs, and young are also protected under California Fish and Game Code (FGC §§ 3503, 3503.5, and 3800). The burrowing owl is also protected from direct take under the MBTA (50 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 10.13).
Burrowing owl occurs in open, dry annual or perennial grasslands, deserts, and scrublands characterized by low-growing vegetation. This species utilizes, modifies, and nests in burrows 8 Monk & Associates (M&A). 2020. Revised Biological Resource Analysis SDG Commerce 217 Distribution Center. March 2, 2020. 737
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-16 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 created by other species, most notably the California ground squirrel. They may also on occasion dig their own burrows or use human-caused objects such as concrete culverts or rip-rap piles for cover.
The closest CNDDB record within the last 10 years was documented 2.7 miles north of the project site (CNDDB Occurrence No. 935). No evidence of burrowing owl activity was observed during the 11 surveys conducted by Pinecrest on the SDG Commerce 220 site, or the seven surveys conducted by FCS on the adjacent SDG Commerce 217 site between January and July 2023. Furthermore, no California ground squirrel burrows were observed, and no other burrows, dens, or human-caused objects were observed that would provide suitable nesting habitat for burrowing owl. However, it cannot be ruled out entirely that a vagrant burrowing owl may visit the site under unlikely circumstances before the start of construction.
Northern Harrier
The northern harrier (Circus hudsonius) is a California Species of Special Concern. This raptor is protected under California Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5 that protects nesting raptors and their eggs/young and is also protected from direct take under the MBTA (50 CFR 10.13). Northern harriers build grass-lined nests on the ground within dense, low-lying vegetation in a variety of habitats, though they are typically found nesting in grassland or marsh habitats. They usually nest on level to near level ground. This species is particularly vulnerable to ground predators such as coyotes (Canis latrans), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), and various snake species.9 The closest CNDDB record was documented 2.8 miles west of the project site (CNDDB Occurrence No. 29). No individual northern harriers or nests have been observed on the site or in the vicinity of the project site during the 11 surveys conducted by Pinecrest on the SDG Commerce 220 site or the seven surveys conducted by FCS on the adjacent SDG Commerce 217 site between January and July 2023. Northern harriers have the potential to nest in the open ruderal habitats on-site that provide marginal nesting habitat for this species. However, it should be noted that due to the recent grading on the project site 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 effectively eliminated the non-native grassland throughout much of the site. Although there is the possibility that northern harriers could nest on or near this project site in the future, site conditions due to recent grading would reduce the potential for northern harrier to occur on-site.
Golden Eagle
The golden eagle is a migratory California resident that resides in rolling foothills, mountain areas, sage-juniper flats, and deserts from sea level to 11,500 feet (3,833 meters). It feeds mostly on lagomorphs and rodents, and occasionally other mammals, birds, reptiles, and some carrion. The golden eagle hunts in open terrain including grasslands, deserts, savannas, and early successional stages of forest and shrub habitats. It is known to hunt in pairs and pirate food from other predators.
This species nests in large trees in open areas on cliffs. The breeding season for the golden eagle ranges from January through August, with a peak in March through July. 9 Monk & Associates (M&A). 2020. Revised Biological Resource Analysis SDG Commerce 217 Distribution Center. March 2, 2020. 738
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-17
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 closest CNDDB record was documented 4.5 miles southeast of the project site (CNDDB Occurrence No. 40). No individual golden eagles or nests have been observed on the site or in the vicinity of the project site during the 11 surveys conducted by Pinecrest on the SDG Commerce 220 site or the seven surveys conducted by FCS on the adjacent SDG Commerce 217 site between January and July 2023. Regardless, the eucalyptus trees growing adjacent to the project site could provide suitable nesting habitat. Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that golden eagles could nest near this project site in the future.
White-tailed Kite
The white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) is a whitish falcon-shaped raptor. This sensitive bird is designated by CDFW as a Fully Protected Species (FGC § 3511). Fully protected animal species may not be taken or possessed at any time and no licenses or permits may be issued for their take except for collecting these species for necessary scientific research and relocation of the bird species for the protection of livestock.
Nesting white-tailed kite habitat consists mainly of oak and sycamore woodlands, but the birds also use mature willows. White-tailed kite nests have been documented in a variety of tree species, including oak (Quercus sp.), cottonwood (Populus sp.), willow (Salix sp.), California sycamore (Platanus racemosa), and elder (Acer sp.).
10 Nests are placed near the top of dense oak, willow, or other tree stand approximately 20-100 feet above ground.11 Nest trees have a dense canopy or are within a dense group of trees, such as riparian forest or oak woodland. Adjacent to their nesting woodland must be open foraging grasslands, where the birds can find their small mammal prey.12 White-tail kites forage in undisturbed, open grasslands, meadows, emergent wetlands, farmlands, crops, pastures, and other cultivated habitats. The white-tailed kite preys mostly on voles, but also takes other small, diurnal mammals, and occasionally birds, insects, reptiles, and amphibians.
The closest CNDDB record was documented 5.3 miles north of the project site (CNDDB Occurrence No. 181). Several white-tailed kite individuals were observed foraging over the site or in the vicinity of the project site during the 11 surveys conducted by Pinecrest on the SDG Commerce 220 site and the seven surveys conducted by FCS on the adjacent SDG Commerce 217 site between January and July 2023. This species was observed on the following dates during 2023 surveys: March 20, April 4, April 5, April 6, April 7, April 24, April 28, and July 2. These individuals were observed to be continually harassed by several crows who were observed loitering around the eucalyptus grove.
After continued interactions with the crows, white-tailed kite individuals flew off to the southwest out of sight and the location of their nest could not be determined.
The eucalyptus trees growing adjacent to the project site could provide suitable nesting habitat.
Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that white-tailed kite could nest within relevant disturbance distance.
10 Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). 2007. Draft Ecological Baseline Report for the Butte Regional Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan. Prepared for the Butte County Association of Governments. May 2007. 11 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 1988. California’s Wildlife, Volume II: Birds. State of California Resources Agency.
Sacramento, California. 12 Gallagher, Sylvia. 1997. Atlas of Breeding Birds, Orange County, California. Sea and Sage Audubon Press, Irvine, CA. 739
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-18 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 Protected Nesting Birds (Including All Special-status Bird Species) In addition to the specific special-status bird species discussed in more detail above, the active nests of most resident and migratory (game and non-game) birds (including the nests of additional specialstatus bird on-site) are protected by the MBTA and/or Fish and Game Code; and are therefore categorized as “special-status” wildlife functional group during this time. While a juvenile, redshouldered hawk was observed perched off-site within a large eucalyptus tree to the north of the SDG Commerce 217 site during the 2023 surveys, no active nests were observed.
The project site is adjacent to eucalyptus groves which provide nesting opportunities for different taxa of birds, and the site itself contains the potential for ground nesters. Although the site has been significantly disturbed in the past, the grassland on-site may provide marginal foraging opportunities to support nesting and rearing habitat. Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that protected bird nests are present on or within the disturbance distance of the project site during the nesting season (typically considered to last from February 1 to August 31 for most species).
Bats (Including Special-status Bats)
The project site is adjacent to eucalyptus groves which offer potentially viable roosting habitat for bat species. There is a CNDDB recorded presence of bat species 5.2 miles northwest of the project site (CNDDB Occurrence No. 44). Bats could potentially use cavities in trees to roost and forage over the grassland and shrubland. Of the special-status bat species that have potential to occur in the region, the pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) would be more likely to roost in natural features, such as the adjacent eucalyptus grove rather than artificial structures.
Roosts are used during the daytime to seek refuge; at night between foraging excursions to rest, digest prey, seek refuge from predators or poor weather conditions, or for social purposes; and in winter for hibernation. Adult females and their young use some particularly secure roosts as maternity roosts. The number of bats occupying a given roost can vary from a solitary individual to a large colony, depending on the species. Roosting sites are very sensitive to human disturbance, especially when bats are hibernating or rearing young.
At dusk, bats leave their roosts to forage for insects in nearby ponds or riparian habitats. Bats generally prey on insect species that are locally abundant near water bodies. Ecotone areas (areas of transition between habitats) are also used as foraging areas. The grassland habitat of the project site and eucalyptus grove adjacent has foraging and roosting potential for bat species. Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that bat roosts are within disturbance distance of the project site.
Western Pond Turtle
The western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) is a California Species of Special Concern. This species feeds on aquatic plant material (including pond lilies), beetles, fishes, frogs, and a variety of invertebrate species. Pond turtles require basking sites such as partially submerged logs, rocks, mats of floating vegetation, or open mud banks. Turtles slip from basking sites to underwater retreats at the approach of humans or potential predators. In colder areas, this species hibernates underwater in bottom mud.
740
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-19
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 closest CNDDB record was documented 0.4 mile northeast of the project site (CNDDB Occurrence No. 552). No western pond turtle individuals or nests have been observed on the site or in the vicinity of the project site during the 11 surveys conducted by Pinecrest on the SDG Commerce 220 site or the seven surveys conducted by FCS on the adjacent SDG Commerce 217 site between January and July 2023. While there are seasonal wetland features present on-site, there are no ponds or streams on-site that would be suitable for foraging or breeding. It cannot be ruled out entirely that a vagrant western pond turtle may be present on-site under unlikely circumstances before start of construction and could potentially be impacted by the project.
Monarch Butterfly
The monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) is listed as Candidate under the Endangered Species Act, and wintering roosts are protected under the Fish and Game Code.
Preferred monarch habitat is filled with diverse nectar sources which support monarchs and native bees. Native milkweeds (Asclepias spp.) and other nectar sources provide monarchs with breeding habitat, resting, and refueling stops during migration, and food at overwintering sites.
Overwintering habitats consist of tree groves that typically occur within 1.5 miles of the Pacific coastline, or within the San Francisco Bay Area, where the proximity to large water bodies moderate temperature fluctuations. Overwintering begins in September or October. Suitable grove conditions include temperatures above freezing, high humidity, dappled sunlight, access to water and nectar, and protection from high winds and storms. Monarchs will select the native Monterey pine, Monterey cypress, western sycamore, and other native tree species when they are available, but will also utilize non-native eucalyptus species if other optimal habitat conditions are met. During breeding season in the late spring and summer, female monarch butterflies will lay their eggs on the underside of young leaves or flower buds of milkweeds. Caterpillars then hatch within 3-5 days and begin to feed on milkweed leaves that provide energy and protective toxic compounds that protect the caterpillars from predation. Within a month, the caterpillars will grow, produce a chrysalis, and emerge as fully formed adult butterflies.
While no milkweed has been recorded on-site as confirmed through protocol-level rare plant surveys, see Appendix C.3: 220 Commerce Plant Survey Report. The project site is bounded by dense stands of eucalyptus trees, potentially suitable for overwintering monarchs. Overwintering colonies have been documented on Mare Island, approximately 7 miles to the south. For these reasons, the presence of overwintering monarchs within disturbance distance cannot be ruled out.
State or Federally Protected Waters and Wetlands
There are four wetlands features present within the project site as shown on Exhibit 3.3-2, and in Appendix C.3: Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Map, SDG Commerce 220 Project Site. 13 The
USACE issued a PJD on August 30, 2023, which includes 0.023 acre of seasonal wetlands and 0.042 acre of linear wetlands mapped within the project site. These wetlands have surface hydrologic connectivity to North Slough, which flows to the Napa River. The Napa River is a traditional navigable 13 Monk & Associates (M&A). 2023. Request for Reverification of Jurisdictional Determination and a PJD SDG Commerce 220 Project Site; USACE File Number: 2011-00322N American Canyon, California. May 31, 2023. 741
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-20 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 water. Consequently, the seasonal wetlands identified within the project site would likely be subject to USACE and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdiction.
Wildlife Movement Corridors and Nursery Sites
A wildlife corridor is an area of habitat connecting wildlife populations that can be separated by natural and anthropogenic dispersal barriers, including rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, development, or human disturbance. Wildlife corridors allow an exchange of individuals between populations, which may help prevent the negative effects of inbreeding and reduced genetic diversity (via genetic drift) that often occur within isolated populations. The project site and adjacent areas are not identified by CDFW (The Critical Linkages: Bay Area and Beyond project; BIOS 6)14 as critical linkages. CDFW describes critical linkages as essential to maintain or restore functional connectivity among wildlands for all species or ecological processes of interest in the California Bay Area. Critical linkages are a vital adaptation strategy to conserve biodiversity during climate change.
The project site has been subject to decades of varying degrees of anthropogenic disturbances.
More recently, adjacent developments include the construction of SDG Commerce 330 to the south and the current construction of SDG Commerce 217 to the north. Dense industrial developments are located north of the project site while a school and single-family residences are found to the south.
Therefore, non-volant wildlife movement through the site is limited, and the site does not connect habitats suitable for sustainable wildlife populations. Wildlife may utilize the off-site eucalyptus grove and aquatic habitats (e.g., North Slough and Napa River) to the west for dispersal; however, the proposed project would be set back from the eucalyptus grove and aquatic habitats.
There are no native wildlife nursery sites present within the project site.
3.3.4 - Regulatory Framework
Federal
Clean Water Act–Section 404
The USACE administers Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), which regulates the discharge of dredge and fill material into waters of the United States.
As of the preparation of this report on October 26, 2023, the final “Revised Definition of Waters of the United States” rule was published in the Federal Register on January 18, 2023, and took effect on March 20, 2023. However, the final rule is not currently operative in certain states and for certain parties due to litigation. Moreover, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and USACE (hereafter known as the agencies) are in receipt of the U.S. Supreme Court’s May 25, 2023, decision in the case of Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency. On August 29, 2023, the U.S. EPA and Department of the Army issued a final rule to amend the final “Revised Definition of ‘Waters of the United States’” rule, published on January 18, 2023. This final rule conforms the definition of “waters of the United States” to the U.S. Supreme Court’s May 25, 2023, decision in the case of Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency. In light of this decision, the agencies will interpret the 14 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS 6): The Critical Linkages: Bay Area & Beyond project. Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/bios/. Accessed September 14, 2023. 742
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-21
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx phrase “waters of the United States” consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision in Sackett. 15 As a
result of ongoing litigation, the agencies are interpreting “waters of the United States” consistent with the pre-2015 regulatory regime until further notice.
Therefore, since the agencies are interpreting “waters of the United States” consistent with the pre2015 regulatory regime until further notice, our analysis follows 40 Code of Federal Regulations 230.3(s) in effect under the pre-2015 regulatory regime, which defines “waters of the United States“ as follows:
1. All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
2. All interstate waters including interstate wetlands.
3. All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation, or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters:
a) Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or
b) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or
c) Which are used or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
4. All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under this definition.
5. Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs(s) (1) through (4) of this section.
6. The territorial sea.
7. Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that are themselves wetlands) identified in paragraphs(s) (1) through (6) of this section; waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons designed to meet the requirements of the CWA (other than cooling ponds as defined in 40 Code of Federal Regulations 423.11(m) which also meet the criteria of this definition) are not waters of the United States.
Clean Water Act–National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Requirements In 1972, the CWA was amended to provide that the discharge of pollutants to waters of the United States from any point source is unlawful unless the discharge is in compliance with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The 1987 amendments established a framework for regulating municipal, industrial, and construction-related stormwater discharges under the NPDES Program. On November 16, 1990, the EPA published final regulations that establish stormwater permit application requirements for specified categories of industries. The regulations 15 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. Website: https://www.epa.gov/wotus/current-implementation-watersunited-states. Accessed September 14, 2023. 743
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-22 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 provide that discharges of stormwater from construction projects that encompass one or more acres of soil disturbance are effectively prohibited unless the discharge is in compliance with an NPDES permit.
The State Water Board has developed a general construction stormwater permit to implement the requirements for the federal NPDES permit. The permit requires submittal of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply, fees, and the implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that specifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would prevent construction pollutants from entering stormwater and keep products of erosion from migrating off-site into downstream receiving waters. The Construction General Permit includes post-construction requirements that include no increase in overall site runoff or the concentration of drainage pollutants and requires implementation of Low Impact Development (LID) design features. The Construction General Permit is implemented and enforced by California’s nine RWQCBs.
The RWQCBs have also adopted requirements for NPDES stormwater permits for medium and large municipalities, and the State Water Board has adopted a General Permit for the discharge of stormwater from small municipal storm sewer systems. This General Permit requires projects to develop and implement a post-construction Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) to reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable.
Federal Endangered Species Act
The United States Congress passed the Endangered Species Act in 1973 to protect those species that are endangered or threatened with extinction. The Endangered Species Act is intended to operate in conjunction with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to help protect the ecosystems upon which endangered and threatened species depend. The Endangered Species Act establishes an official listing process for plants and animals considered in danger of extinction, requires development of specific plans of action for the recovery of listed species, and restricts activities perceived to harm or kill listed species or affect critical habitat (16 USC 1532 and 1536).
The Endangered Species Act prohibits the “take” of endangered or threatened wildlife species. “Take” is defined as harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing, or collecting wildlife species, or any attempt to engage in such conduct (16 USC 1532).
Taking can result in civil or criminal penalties. Federal regulation 50 Code of Federal Regulations 17.3 further defines the term “harm” in the take definition to mean any act that actually kills or injures a federally listed species, including significant habitat modification or degradation. Therefore, the Endangered Species Act is invoked when the property contains a federally listed threatened or endangered species that may be affected by a permit decision.
In the event that listed species are involved and a USACE permit is required for impacts to jurisdictional waters, the USACE must initiate consultation with the USFWS or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (16 USC 1536; 40 CFR § 402). Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires federal agencies to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or adversely modify critical habitat (16 USC 1536). In the regulations found at 50 Code of Federal Regulations 402.2, destruction or adverse modification is defined as a “direct or indirect alteration that appreciably 744
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-23
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx diminishes the value of critical habitat for both the survival and recovery of a listed species.” Critical habitat is defined in Endangered Species Act Section 3(5)(A) as specific areas within the geographical range occupied by a species where physical or biological features “essential to the conservation of the species” are found and that “may require special management considerations or protection.” Critical habitat may also include areas outside the current geographical area occupied by the species that are nonetheless “essential for the conservation of the species.” Critical habitat designations identify, with the best available knowledge, those biological and physical features (primary constituent elements) which provide for the life history processes essential to the conservation of the species.
If formal consultation is required, USFWS or NOAA Fisheries will issue a Biological Opinion stating whether the permit action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the listed species, recommending reasonable and prudent measures to ensure the continued existence of the species, establishing terms and conditions under which the proposed project may proceed, and authorizing incidental take of the species.
For discretionary permit actions by non-federal entities, Section 10 of the Endangered Species Act provides a mechanism for obtaining take authorization through submittal and approval of a Habitat Conservation Plan that details species impacts, measures to minimize or mitigate such impacts, and funding mechanisms to implement mitigation requirements.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The MBTA implements international treaties devised to protect migratory birds and any of their parts, eggs, and nests from activities such as hunting, pursuing, capturing, killing, selling, and shipping, unless expressly authorized in the regulations or by permit. The regulations governing migratory bird permits are in 50 Code of Federal Regulations Part 13 General Permit Procedures and 50 Code of Federal Regulations Part 21 Migratory Bird Permits. Most bird species within California fall under the provisions of the MBTA. Excluded species include non-native species such as house sparrow, starling, and ring-necked pheasant and native game species such as quail.
On December 22, 2017, the United States Department of Interior’s Office of the Solicitor issued Memorandum M-37050, which states an interpretation that the MBTA does not prohibit the accidental or “incidental” taking or killing of migratory birds. In response to the Trump administration’s attempted changes to the MBTA, eight states, including California, filed suit in September of 2018, arguing that the new interpretation inappropriately narrows the MBTA and should be vacated. On August 11, 2020, the Southern District of New York ruled in favor of the longstanding interpretation of the MBTA to protect migratory birds, reinstating the historical ban on incidental take. Just days before leaving office, the Trump administration finalized its pullback of MBTA regulations, despite the ruling of the federal court. On his first day in office, President Biden placed Trump’s changes to the MBTA on hold, pending further review. 745
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-24 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 State
CEQA Guidelines
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires public agencies to evaluate potential impacts to special-status species and their habitat. The following CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist questions serve as thresholds of significance when evaluating the potential impacts of a proposed project on biological resources. Impacts are considered significant if a project would:
• Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as being a Candidate, Sensitive, or Special-status in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS.
• Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. • Have a substantial adverse effect on federally and State-protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the CWA (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. • 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 native wildlife nursery sites.
• Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
• Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan.
Oak Woodlands Conservation Act
California Senate Bill (SB) 1334, the Oak Woodlands Conservation Act, became law on January 1, 2005, and was added to the CEQA statutes as 21083.4. This statute requires that a county must determine whether or not a project will result in a significant impact on oak woodlands and, if it is determined that a project may result in a significant impact on oak woodlands then the county shall require one or more of the following mitigation measures:
• Conserve oak woodlands through the use of conservation easements. • Plant an appropriate number of trees, including maintenance of plantings and replacement of failed plantings.
• Contribute funds to the Oak Woodlands Conservation Fund for the purpose of purchasing oak woodlands conservation easements.
• Other mitigation measures developed by the county.
Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act/Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act As stated in Section 401 of the CWA, “any applicant for a federal permit for activities that involve a discharge to waters of the State, shall provide the federal permitting agency a certification from the 746
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-25
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx State in which the discharge is proposed that states that the discharge will comply with the applicable provisions under the Federal Clean Water Act.” Therefore, before the USACE will issue a Section 404 permit, applicants must apply for and receive a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB.
California Endangered Species Act
The State of California enacted CESA in 1984. The CESA is similar to the Endangered Species Act but pertains to State-listed endangered and threatened species. CESA requires State agencies to consult with the CDFW when preparing CEQA documents. CESA generally prohibits the taking of State-listed endangered or threatened plant and wildlife species; however, for projects resulting in impacts to State-listed species, the CDFW may authorize take through issuance of an ITP pursuant to Section 2081 of the California Fish and Game Code. Section 2081 requires preparation of mitigation plans in accordance with published guidelines that require, among other things, measures to fully mitigate impacts to State-listed species. The CDFW exercises authority over mitigation projects involving State-listed species, including those resulting from CEQA mitigation requirements. No authorization of take under Section 2081 is permitted for species listed in State statutes as Fully Protected Species.
Where Fully Protected Species are involved, projects must be designed to avoid all take of the species. The CDFW cannot issue an ITP until the CEQA Lead Agency has provided documentation in the form of a Notice of Determination that the proposed project has complied with CEQA.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife–Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code requires any person, governmental agency, or public utility proposing any activity that will divert or obstruct the natural flow or change the bed, channel or bank of any river, stream, or lake, or proposing to use any material from a streambed, to first notify the CDFW of such proposed activity. Based on the information contained in the notification form and a possible field inspection, the CDFW may propose reasonable modifications in the proposed construction as would allow for the protection of fish and wildlife resources. Upon request, the parties may meet to discuss the modifications. If the parties cannot agree and execute a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement, then the matter may be referred to arbitration. The CDFW cannot issue a Streambed Alteration Agreement until CEQA compliance has been achieved, usually through the CEQA Lead Agency providing documentation in the form of a Notice of Determination that the Lead Agency has complied with CEQA by preparing a negative declaration or Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
CDFW’s regulations implementing the Fish and Game Code define the relevant rivers, streams, and lakes over which the agency has jurisdiction to constitute “all rivers, streams, lakes, and streambeds in the State of California, including all rivers, streams and streambeds which have intermittent flows of water” (Title 14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] § 720). The CDFW takes jurisdiction under its Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement Program for any work undertaken in or near a river, stream, or lake that flows at least intermittently through a bed or channel. The CDFW does not have a methodology for the identification and delineation of the jurisdictional limits of streams except for the general guidance provided in A Field Guide to Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements, Section 1600-1607 California Fish and Game Code.
9 In making jurisdictional determinations, the
CDFW staff typically rely on field observation of physical features that provide evidence of water 747
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-26 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 flow through a bed and channel such as observed flowing water, sediment deposits and drift deposits and that the stream supports fish or other aquatic life. Riparian habitat is not specifically mentioned in the Fish and Game Code provisions governing Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement, but the CDFW often asserts jurisdiction over areas within the flood plain of a body of water where the vegetation (grass, sedges, rushes, forbs, shrubs, and trees) is supported by the surface or subsurface flow.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife–Fish and Game Code Section 3503, 3503.5, and 3513.
The State of California also incorporates the protection of non-game birds and birds of prey, including their nests, in Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code.
Under Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5, it is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nests or eggs of any bird. Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5 makes it unlawful to take or possess birds of prey (hawks, eagles, vultures, owls) or destroy their nests or eggs. In December of 2018, California issued new guidance specifying that State law includes “a prohibition on incidental take of migratory birds, notwithstanding any federal reinterpretation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act” by the Department of Interior.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Survey Guidelines For locating nesting Swainson’s hawks, CDFW recommends using the “Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley” dated May 31, 2000. This set of survey recommendations was developed by the Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee to maximize the potential for locating nesting Swainson’s hawks, and thus reducing the potential for nest failures as a result of project activities/disturbances. In summary, surveys should be conducted in a manner that maximizes the potential to observe the adult Swainson’s hawks, as well as the nest/chicks. To meet the CDFW recommendations for mitigation and protection of Swainson’s hawks, surveys should be conducted for a 0.5-mile radius around all project activities, and if active nesting is identified within the 0.5-mile radius, consultation with CDFW to determine nesting buffers is required under these guidelines. The guidelines provide specific recommendations regarding the number of surveys based on when the project is scheduled to begin and the time of year the surveys are conducted.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Special-status Native Plant Survey Protocol For conducting botanical surveys to detect special-status plant species, CDFW developed survey protocols identified in “Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities” dated March 20, 2018. Botanical field surveys provide information used to determine the potential environmental effects of proposed projects on special-status plants as required by law (e.g., CEQA, CESA, federal Endangered Species Act).
According to the protocol, botanical field surveys should be conducted in a manner which maximizes the likelihood of locating special-status plants and sensitive natural communities that may be present. Botanical field surveys should be floristic in nature, meaning that every plant taxon that occurs in the project area is identified to the taxonomic level necessary to determine rarity and listing status. “Focused surveys” that are limited to habitats known to support special-status plants or that are restricted to lists of likely potential special-status plants are not considered floristic in 748
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-27
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx nature and are not adequate to identify all plants in a project area to the level necessary to determine whether they are special-status plants.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation CDFW issued survey protocols for conducting burrowing owl breeding and nonbreeding season surveys and pre-construction surveys in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation dated March 7, 2012.
In summary, for breeding season surveys, a minimum of four survey visits shall be conducted: 1) at least one site visit between February 15 and April 15, and 2) a minimum of three survey visits, at least three weeks apart, between April 15 and July 15, with at least one visit after June 15. The survey shall be conducted in all portions of the project site that fit the description of habitat in Appendix A of the staff report. Surveys shall be walked in straight-line transects spaced 7 meters (m) to 20 m apart, adjusting for vegetation height and density. At the start of each transect and at least every 100 m, the surveyor shall scan the entire visible project area for burrowing owls using binoculars and record all potential burrows used by burrowing owls as determined by the presence of one or more burrowing owls, pellets, prey remains, whitewash, or decoration. For nonbreeding season surveys, the methods described above for breeding season surveys are followed, but at least four visits, spread evenly, are conducted throughout the nonbreeding season.
Pre-construction surveys, referred to as “take avoidance surveys” in the staff report, are intended to detect the presence of burrowing owls on a project site at a fixed period in time and inform necessary take avoidance actions. Take avoidance surveys may detect changes in owl presence such as colonizing owls that have recently moved onto the site, migrating owls, resident burrowing owls changing burrow use, or young of the year that are still present and have not dispersed. In summary, survey methodology for pre-construction surveys should be conducted no less than 14 days prior to initiating ground disturbance activities.
California Native Plant Society
The CNPS, a nongovernmental organization, has no regulatory authority but provides information that is often used by regulatory bodies. The CNPS maintains a list of plant species native to California that have low numbers, limited distribution, or are otherwise threatened with extinction. This information is published in the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. Potential impacts to populations of CNPS-listed plants receive consideration under CEQA review, especially for those plant species included in Lists 1 and 2. The following identifies the definitions of the CNPS listings:
• Rank 1A: Plants presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere. • Rank 1B: Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere. • Rank 2A: Plants presumed extirpated in California but more common elsewhere. • Rank 2B: Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. • Rank 3: Plants about which more information is needed. • Rank 4: Watch List: Plants of limited distribution.
749
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-28 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 Local
City of American Canyon
General Plan
The City of American Canyon General Plan sets forth the following goals, objectives, and policies relevant to biological resources on the project site:
Goal 8 Protect and preserve the significant habitats, plants and wildlife that exist in the City and its Planning Area.
Objective 8.1 Maintain data and information regarding areas of significant biological value within the Planning Area to facilitate resource conservation and the appropriate management of development.
Policy 8.1.1 Acquire and maintain the most current information available regarding the status and location of sensitive biological elements (species and natural communities) within the City and, as appropriate, within the Sphere of Influence and Urban Limit Line.
Policy 8.1.4 Regularly monitor and review developments proposed within the City’s Planning Area to assess their impacts on local biological resources and to recommend appropriate mitigation measures that the developer and/or government agency can implement.
Objective 8.2 Balance the preservation of natural habitat areas, including coastal saltmarsh, mixed hardwood forest, oak savanna, and wetland and riparian habitats, with new development in the City.
Policy 8.2.1 Land use applications for developments located within sensitive habitats, including coastal saltmarsh, mixed hardwood forest, oak savanna, and riparian habitats (see Figure 8-1) [General Plan], or with areas potentially occupied by vernal pools (see Figure 8-2) [General Plan] shall be accompanied by sufficient technical background data to enable an adequate assessment of the potential for impacts on these resources, and possible measures to reduce any identifiable impacts. In addition to examining Figure 8-1 [General Plan] for information on these sensitive habitats, an on-site assessment shall be conducted by a City approved qualified Biologist to determine whether sensitive habitats exist on-site, in instances where the potential for significant impacts exists, the applicant must submit a Biological Assessment Report prepared by a qualified professional.
Objective 8.3 Protect natural drainages and riparian corridors within the American Canyon Planning Area.
Policy 8.3.1 Review proposed developments in wetlands and riparian habitats to evaluate their conformance with the following policies and standards:
750
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-29
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx a. The development plan shall fully consider the nature of existing biological resources and all reasonable measures shall be taken to avoid significant impacts, including retention of sufficient natural open space and undeveloped buffer zones.
b. Development shall be designed and sited to preserve watercourses, riparian habitat, vernal pools, and wetlands in their natural condition, unless these actions result in an unfeasible project, in which case habitat shall be replaced in accord with subsection “g” (below).
c. Where riparian corridors are retained, they shall be protected by an adequate buffer with a minimum 100-foot protection zone from the edge of the tree, shrub, or herb canopy . . .
d. Development shall incorporate habitat linkages (wildlife corridors) to adjacent open spaces, where appropriate and feasible.
e. Development shall incorporate fences, walls, vegetative cover, or other measures to adequately buffer habitat areas, linkages, or corridors from built environment. f. Roads and utilities shall be located and designed such that conflicts with biological resources, habitat areas, linkages or corridors are avoided where feasible.
g. Future development shall utilize appropriate open space or conservation easements in order to protect sensitive species or their habitats. h. Future development shall mitigate unavoidable adverse impacts to waters of the United States, wetlands, and riparian habitats (pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act and the California Fish and Game Code, Section 1600 et seq.) by replacement on an in-kind basis. Furthermore, replacement shall be based on a ratio determined by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and/or United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to account for the potentially diminished habitat values of replacement habitat. Such replacement should occur on the original development site, whenever possible. Alternatively, replacement can be affected, subject to State and federal regulatory approval, by creation or restoration of replacement habitats elsewhere (off-site but preferably within the City’s Planning Area), protected in perpetuity by provision for an appropriate conservation easement or dedication.
Policy 8.3.5 Establish a network of open spaces along the City’s natural drainages and riparian corridors and link significant biological habitats. Any recreational use of these areas shall be designed to avoid damaging sensitive habitat areas.
Policy 8.3.6 Preserve and integrate the City’s natural drainages in new development, as opposed to their channelization or undergrounding, emphasizing opportunities for the development of pedestrian paths and greenbelts along their lengths throughout the City.
Objective 8.4 Protect local vernal pools as well as the habitats of endangered species living within American Canyon’s Planning Area.
751
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-30 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 Policy 8.4.1 Require that development plans incorporate all reasonable mitigation measures to avoid significantly impacting vernal pools for projects located within American Canyon’s Planning Area.
Policy 8.4.2 Preserve, where possible, the habitat of several in-fact endangered species, including those shown on Figure 8-2 and listed in Table 8-1, as well as those that may be considered by the City in the future.
Policy 8.4.3 Encourage activities that improve the biological value and integrity of the City’s natural resources through vegetation restoration, control of alien plants and animals, and landscape buffering.
Municipal Code
Municipal Code Chapter 18.40.110 sets forth the City’s Tree Ordinance. The ordinance states that existing trees shall be preserved on the site unless otherwise approved by the City Council as a part of the site development plans. Additionally, unless specifically approved by the City Council, any tree removed shall be replaced on the site. Replacement trees shall be a minimum size of a 24-inch box of the same species unless specifically approved by the City Council.
3.3.5 - Methodology
Literature Review
A literature review was conducted to analyze existing documentation regarding biological resources and habitat conditions within the project site and vicinity and is summarized below.
Existing Documentation
As part of the literature review, an FCS Biologist compiled and analyzed existing environmental documentation for the project site and relevant areas in its vicinity. This documentation included literature pertaining to the habitat requirements of special-status species with the potential to occur in the project vicinity and federal register listings, protocols, and species data provided by the USFWS, CDFW, and CNPS. Additionally, FCS reviewed and evaluated all available supporting documentation provided by the applicant, including a finalized USACE jurisdictional determination, and species-specific studies and habitat assessments. These documents are attached to this BRA (Appendix C.2: Commerce Court 217 supporting documents; and Appendix C.3: Commerce Court 220 supporting documents), and include the following:
SDG Commerce 217 Documents
• Monk & Associates (M&A). 2020. Revised Biological Resource Analysis SDG Commerce 217 Distribution Center. City of American Canyon, California. March 2020. • Monk & Associates (M&A). 2020. Addendum Letter to CEQA Biology Report Discussing Proposed Borrow Site SDG Commerce 217 Distribution Center. September 2020. • FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS). 2023. Pre-Construction Surveys and Implementation of CEQA Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3, BIO-4, and BIO-5 per the Mitigation Monitoring and 752
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-31
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx Reporting Program for the Commerce 217 Warehouse Project, American Canyon, California.
April 2023.
• RSA+. 2023. Commerce 217 Distribution Center Borrow Site Grading Plan. March 2023.
SDG Commerce 220 Documents
• Pinecrest Research Corp., Inc. 2023. Special-Status Animal Survey Report. August 2023. • Pinecrest Research Corp., Inc. 2023. Special-Status Plant Survey Report. July 2023. • Monk & Associates (M&A). 2023. Request for Reverification of Jurisdictional Determination and a PJD SDG Commerce 220 Project Site; USACE File Number: 2011-00322N American Canyon, California. May 2023.
Topographic Maps and Aerial Photographs
An FCS Biologist reviewed current USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map(s) and aerial photographs as a preliminary analysis of the existing conditions within the project site and immediate vicinity.16 Information obtained from the topographic maps included elevation, general watershed information, and potential drainage feature locations using Google Earth in conjunction with the EPA Watershed Assessment, Tracking, and Environmental Results System (WATERS).17 Aerial photographs provided a perspective of the current site conditions relative to on-site and off-site land use, vegetation community locations, and potential locations of wildlife movement corridors.
Soil Surveys
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has published soil surveys that describe the soil series (i.e., group of soils with similar profiles) occurring within a particular area.18 These profiles include major horizons with similar thickness, arrangement, and other important characteristics.
These series are further subdivided into soil mapping units that provide specific information regarding soil characteristics. Many special-status plant species have a limited distribution based exclusively on soil type. Therefore, pertinent USDA soil survey maps were reviewed to determine the existing soil mapping units within the project site and to inform whether the soil conditions on-site are potentially suitable for any special-status plant species. However, NRCS soil maps utilize an approximately 1.4-acre minimum mapping unit, and line placement may not be accurate on a large (i.e., parcel-level) scale.
Special-status Species Database Search
An FCS Biologist compiled a list of threatened, endangered, and otherwise special-status species previously recorded within the project vicinity based on a search of the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) database,
19 the CNDDB, and the CNPS Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) 16 United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2022. 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. 17 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2022. Watershed Assessment, Tracking and Environmental Results System (WATERS). Website: https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/waters-watershed-assessment-tracking-environmental-results-system.
Accessed September 14, 2023. 18 Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. Web Soil Survey (WSS). United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).
Website: https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed September 14, 2023. 19 United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2023. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC). Website:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed September 14, 2023. 753
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-32 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 of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California for the Cuttings Wharf, California USGS 7.5- minute Topographic Quadrangle Map, and the eight surrounding quadrangles. 20,21 The CNDDB
Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS 6) was used to determine the distance between the known occurrences of special-status species and the project site.22 Field Surveys and Focused Surveys
FCS Biologists familiar with the biological resources of the region conducted field surveys on December 2, 2022, and March 17, 2023. The objective of the field surveys was to ascertain general site conditions, wildlife use, and identify whether existing vegetation communities provide suitable habitat for special-status plant or wildlife species. Potentially sensitive areas identified during the literature review were ground-truthed during the field survey for mapping accuracy. Special attention was paid to sensitive habitats and areas potentially supporting special-status floral and faunal species.
Wildlife species detected during the reconnaissance-level surveys by sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other signs were recorded. Notations were made regarding suitable habitat for those special-status species determined to have the potential to occur within the project site.23 Appropriate field guides were used to assist in species identification during surveys, such as Peterson, Reid, and Stebbins.24,25,26 Online resources such as eBird and California Herps were also consulted, as necessary. 27,28 M&A performed 10 field surveys on the greater 35-acre project site before it was subdivided into three lots (SDG Commerce 217, SDG Commerce 220, and SDG Commerce 330). Consequently, the SDG Commerce 220 project site was included in these surveys which were conducted on March 1 and April 27, 2006; June 14, 2011; February 14, March 21, and June 12, 2012; May 18, 2017; March 30, 2018; December 19 and December 27, 2019. Additional details concerning these surveys can be found in Appendix C.1 [Appendix D.1] of this document.
Pre-construction Surveys for SDG Commerce 217
Seven pre-construction surveys were conducted by FCS between January 18 and April 7, 2023, for a total of approximately 30 survey hours. Surveys were conducted for the entirety of the Commerce 217 project site and relevant adjacent areas (which included the adjacent SDG Commerce 220 site).
Surveys were conducted pursuant to the January 2021 Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Commerce 217 Warehouse Project. Surveys included nesting birds 20 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2023. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) RareFind 5 California Natural Diversity Database Query for Special-Status Species. Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx.
Accessed September 14, 2023. 21 California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2022. California Native Plant Society Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory. Website:
http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/. September 14, 2023. 22 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS 6). Website:
https://map.dfg.ca.gov/bios/. Accessed September 14, 2023. 23 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. 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. 24 Peterson, T.R. 2010. A Field Guide to Birds of Western North America, 4th Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 25 Reid, F. 2006. A Field Guide to Mammals of North America, 4th Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 26 Stebbins, R.C. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Third Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 27 eBird. 2022. Online bird occurrence database. Website: http://ebird.org/content/ebird/. Accessed September 14, 2023. 28 California Herps. 2022. A Guide to the Amphibians and Reptiles of California. Website: http://www.californiaherps.com/. Accessed September 14, 2023.
754
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-33
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx (including Swainson’s hawk) and burrowing owl detection. Surveys for western pond turtle adults and nests were also performed simultaneously while walking the site. Survey methods followed established procedures and applicable protocols, including the Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley (Protocol) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation.
29,30 Survey equipment included high-quality binoculars and a high-quality spotting scope. Surveys were conducted during the appropriate times of day (including peak bird detection periods between sunrise and 10:00 a.m.). Additional details concerning these surveys can be found in Appendix C.1: SDG Commerce Court 220 BRA [Appendix D.1: SDG Commerce Site 217 Documents].
Special-status Animal Surveys for SDG Commerce 220
Eleven special-status animal surveys were conducted between January 18 and July 2, 2023, by Pinecrest for the entirety of the Commerce 220 project site. Surveys were conducted by Dr.
Christopher DiVittorio to determine the presence or absence of several special-status species, including burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, nesting raptors, nesting passerine birds, and western pond turtle. Survey methods followed established procedures and applicable protocols, including the Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley, and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. 31,32 Survey equipment included highquality binoculars and a high-quality spotting scope. Surveys were conducted during the appropriate times of day (including peak bird detection periods between sunrise and 10:00 a.m.). Additional details concerning these surveys can be found in Appendix C.1: SDG Commerce Court 220 BRA [Appendix D.2: SDG Commerce Site 220 Documents] of this document.
Protocol-level Rare Plant Surveys for SDG Commerce 220
Protocol-level rare plant surveys were conducted by Pinecrest during the growing season of 2023. An early-season site visit was performed on March 20. Mid-season site visits were performed on April 6, April 7, and May 29. A late-season site visit was also performed on July 2. Between the mid-season and late-season site visits, the majority of the site was graded; thus, the late-season site visit focused on remaining vegetation surrounding the areas of disturbance. Rare plants recorded and mapped in the field, if present, include all plants that are federal or State-listed as Rare, Threatened, or Endangered, all federal and State candidates for listing, all plants included in Lists 1 through 4 of the CNPS Inventory, and plants that qualify under the definition of “rare” in CEQA Guidelines Section 15380.
Botanical surveys were performed by Dr. Christopher DiVittorio, with secondary identification on voucher and photograph specimens made by Dr. Zoya Akulova. During the site visit, Dr. DiVittorio surveyed the entirety of the project area using methods as specified in the CDFW publication titled Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Plant Populations and 29 Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee. 2000. Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, May 31, 2000. 30 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. State of California Natural Resource Agency Department of Fish and Game. March 7, 2012. 31 Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee. 2000. Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, May 31, 2000. 32 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. State of California Natural Resource Agency Department of Fish and Game. March 7, 2012. 755
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-34 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 Sensitive Natural Communities.33 Surveys were conducted by walking the entire project area on foot in parallel lines approximately 15 feet apart, identifying every species that was flowering, and making note of any species that were past flowering or that had not yet flowered. Voucher specimens were taken of any species that required identification in the laboratory. All terminology follows currently accepted nomenclature as described in The Jepson Manual. Additional details concerning these surveys can be found in Appendix C.1: SDG Commerce Court 220 BRA, Section 3:
Methods, of this document.
Wildlife Movement Corridors
Wildlife movement corridors link areas of suitable wildlife habitat that are otherwise separated by natural and anthropogenic dispersal barriers, including rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, development, or human disturbance. Urbanization and the resulting fragmentation of open space areas create isolated “islands” of wildlife habitat, forming separated populations. Corridors act as an effective link between populations.
The project site was evaluated for evidence of a wildlife movement corridor during the reconnaissance-level survey and review of aerial photographs, and CDFW’s BIOS 6 information on Bay Area Linkages. The focus of this study was to determine whether a change in land use at the project site could have significant impacts on the regional movement of wildlife. Conclusions are based on the information compiled during the literature review, aerial photographs, USGS topographic maps and resource maps for the vicinity; the field survey; and professional experience with the desired topography, habitat, and resource requirements of the special-status species potentially utilizing the project site and vicinity.
3.3.6 - Thresholds of Significance
Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines is a sample Initial Study checklist that includes questions for determining whether impacts to biological resources are significant. These questions reflect the input of planning and environmental professionals at the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) 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. They also reflect the requirements of laws other than CEQA that protect biological resources (e.g., the federal CWA, the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the Endangered Species Act and CESA, and the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act). As a result, many lead agencies derive their significance criteria from the questions posed in Appendix G. The City has chosen to do so for this project.
Additional guidance on the significance of biological resource impacts is found in CEQA Guidelines Section 15065, subdivision (a)(1), which provides that a lead agency shall find that a project may have a significant effect on the environment if “[t]he project has the potential to: . . . substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; [or]substantially reduce the number or 33 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities. March 20, 2018. 756
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-35
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species[.]” The “mandatory findings of significance” are also found in the Appendix G sample Initial Study checklist, though near the end.
In light of the foregoing, the proposed project would have a significant effect related to biological resources if the proposed project would:
a) 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.
b) 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. (Refer to Section 7, Effects Found not to be Significant)
c) 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.
d) 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.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan. (Refer to Section 4, Effects Found not to be Significant) g) Substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species. h) Cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels. i) Threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. (Refer to Section 4, Effects Found not to be Significant)
j) Substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species.
3.3.7 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the development of the project and provides mitigation measures where appropriate.
757
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-36 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 Special-status Species
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.
Impact Analysis
This impact analysis addresses thresholds a), g), and h).
Special-status Plant Species
No rare or special-status plant species were observed during the appropriately timed protocol-level floristic surveys (see Section 3.3.3, Special-status Plant Species) and are therefore determined to be absent from the site. This result is also supported by M&A’s March 2020 BRA, which additionally states that in the recent past, blue gum eucalyptus trees covered most of the project site dating back for several decades; these trees emit allelopathic (growth inhibiting) chemicals from their leaves, acorns and bark that prevent other plants from growing under them.34 Therefore, no impacts on special-status or rare plant species are expected to occur due to project construction or operation.
Special-status Wildlife Species
Swainson’s Hawk
Potentially suitable Swainson’s hawk nesting trees are located adjacent to the project site. If a Swainson’s hawk nest is active near the project site during construction, the proposed project could cause indirect harm to the species through the noise, light and other human-caused disturbances resulting from project construction, which may result in this species abandoning its nests.
No Swainson hawks or nests were observed during the 18 field surveys conducted by FCS and Pinecrest in 2023. Out of an abundance of caution, FCS proposes that the project applicant implement the mitigation measures (MM) BIO-1a and BIO-1b, which require pre-construction surveys and the implementation of avoidance and minimization measures, if needed, to avoid indirect impacts on Swainson’s hawk nesting habitat and to establish adequate nest protection zones to conform with CDFW Guidelines.
35 Western Burrowing Owl
No western burrowing owls have been observed on the project site during the 18 field surveys conducted by FCS and Pinecrest in 2023. Additionally, no suitable burrows or ground squirrels were observed on-site during the surveys. Therefore, the likelihood of presence on the project site is considered to be low. Since the western burrowing owl is a mobile species that could move onto the project site prior to development, pre-construction surveys are recommended out of an abundance of caution. If burrowing owl are present on-site before grading, the proposed project may result in impacts to the western burrowing owl, considered a potentially significant impact pursuant to CEQA. 34 Monk & Associates (M&A). 2020. Revised Biological Resource Analysis SDG Commerce 217 Distribution Center. March 2, 2020. 35 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2000. Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson's Hawk Nesting Surveys in California's Central Valley. Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee. Sacramento, California. May 31, 2000. 758
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-37
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx However, MM BIO-1c is designed to detect, avoid, and passively relocate owls, and therefore, any potential significant impacts on this species would be reduced to less than significant.
Other Protected Nesting Birds (including northern harrier, golden eagle, white-tailed kite and others) Areas adjacent to the project site provide suitable nesting habitat for a variety of species of nesting birds, including special-status bird species such as northern harrier, golden eagle, white-tailed kite, and others. Disturbed grassland and barren areas provide potential nesting opportunities for ground nesting birds. Construction activities that occur during the avian nesting season (generally February 1 to August 31) could disturb protected nesting sites within the construction footprint and within disturbance distance. Grading and the removal of vegetation during the nesting season could result in direct harm to nesting birds, while noise, light, and other construction-related disturbances may cause nesting birds adjacent to the vegetation removal areas to abandon their nests.
No active raptor nests were observed within the project site during the 2023 field surveys conducted by FCS and Pinecrest; however white-tail kite individuals were observed foraging over the project site. Additionally, a juvenile, red-shouldered hawk was observed perched off-site within a large eucalyptus tree to the north of the SDG Commerce 217 site. Although no active nests have been observed on-site, it cannot be ruled out that avian species may nest within disturbance distance of the project site. With implementation of MM BIO-1d, requiring pre-construction nesting bird surveys and avoidance of direct and indirect impacts on nests, potential project-related impacts on protected bird nests can be reduced to a less than significant level under CEQA.
Roosting Bats (including Pallid Bat)
The project site is adjacent to trees that could provide suitable bat roosting habitat, including for special-status bats such as pallid bat. Potential indirect impacts could occur to roosting bats due to the proximity to disturbance distance during project construction. These activities could potentially subject bats to risk of injury or disturbance, and they are likely to avoid using the area until such construction activities have dissipated or ceased. Relocation, in turn, could cause hunger or stress among individual bats by displacing them into adjacent territories belonging to other individuals.
With implementation of MM BIO-1e, requiring pre-construction roosting bat surveys and avoidance of indirect impacts on active bat roosts, potential project-related impacts on protected roosting bats can be reduced to a less than significant level under CEQA.
Western Pond Turtle
No western pond turtles or nests were observed during the 2023 surveys conducted by FCS and Pinecrest. While the site appears to be unlikely to support western pond turtle, it cannot be ruled out entirely that a vagrant western pond turtle may be present on-site under unlikely circumstances before start of construction and could potentially be impacted by the project. Impacts to western pond turtle from the proposed project are considered potentially significant. MM BIO-1f would reduce this impact to a less than significant level through avoidance and minimization measures outlined below.
Monarch Butterfly
There is a potential for the monarch butterfly to overwinter in the eucalyptus woodland adjacent to the site. Construction activities, including dust, noise, and vibration adjacent to overwintering 759
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-38 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 colonies could result in loss of overwintering monarch butterflies. Therefore, MM BIO-1g which includes a pre-construction survey and, if found, avoidance in coordination with USFWS and CDFW are recommended to reduce any potential impacts on monarch butterfly to less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
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 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.
760
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-39
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx
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.
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-site-specific 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.
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 761
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-40 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 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 no-disturbance buffer of 250 feet around active nests of non-listed bird species and a 500-foot no-disturbance buffer around active nests of non-listed 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 project-related 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 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 762
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-41
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx 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 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.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Wetlands and Jurisdictional Features
Impact BIO-2: The proposed project would not 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.
Impact Analysis
This impact analysis addresses threshold c).
763
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-42 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 proposed project would avoid all impacts on potential jurisdictional wetland features through the implementation of a wetland buffer avoidance area (Exhibit 3.3-4). The wetland buffer avoidance area would ensure that construction activities do not impact the on-site jurisdictional wetland features. Upon operation, the project’s stormwater would be directed away from the features.
Additionally, the proposed project would be required to comply with applicable laws and regulations related to jurisdictional waters and wetlands (see Section 3.3.4, Regulatory Framework). These generally applicable laws and regulations are designed to avoid any net loss of area and function.
With implementation of the wetland buffer avoidance area and the application of laws and regulations, potential indirect or residual impacts would be reduced to less than significant under CEQA.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Fish and Wildlife Movement Corridors
Impact BIO-3: 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.
Impact Analysis
This impact analysis addresses thresholds d) and j).
The site does not function as a critical wildlife movement corridor, as discussed in Section 3.3.3, Wildlife Movement Corridors and Nursery Sites, above. This result is consistent with M&A’s March 2020 BRA (Appendix C.2: BRA for CDG 217 ISMND). Certain common wildlife may move within or cross the site; however, it does not function to connect valuable habitats together, but rather it currently funnels wildlife east into a pocket of land generally surrounded with dense developments, including State Route (SR) 29 to the east, commercial and industrial areas to the north, and dense residential subdivision to the south, potentially constituting a population sink. Therefore, potential project-related impacts on wildlife movement are less than significant.
No substantial wildlife nursery sites, including breeding or nesting colonies, breeding ponds, or dens are present on-site. However, individual nesting birds and roosting bats have the potential of being present within disturbance distances seasonally. Potential impacts to individual nesting birds and roosting bats are addressed through the implementation of MM BIO-1a through MM BIO-1e (see above for details). As such, impacts to nursery sites would be less than significant. 764
56390001•10/2023|3.3-4_biological_im pacts.m xd
Exh ibit3.3-4
BiologicalIm pacts
Source:BingAerialIm agery .Monk &AssociatesEnvironm entalConsultants,08/2023.
CITYOFAMER ICANCANYON
SDGCOMMER CE220PR OJECT
ENVIR ONMENTALIMPACTR EPOR T
140 70 0 140
Feet
Legend
Project Site 10.45 acres
25' Wetland Buffer (No Project Impact) 0.65 acre
Permanent Impact 9.80 acres
Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types Project Site Perm Impact No Impact Avena spp.-Bromus spp. Herbaceous Semi-Natural Stand 9.64 acres 9.05 acres 0.59 acre Developed 0.75 acre 0.75 acre 0.00 acre
Seasonal wetland (W) 0.02 acre 0.00 acre 0.02 acre
Linear Wetland (LW) 0.04 acre 0.00 acre 0.04 acre
765
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
766
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-45
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
MM BIO-1a through MM BIO-1e.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Local Policies or Ordinances
Impact BIO-4: The proposed project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
Impact Analysis
This impact analysis addresses threshold e).
The proposed project would not remove any trees as there are no trees located within the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not remove any City-protected trees and no conflicts or impacts would occur.
All work for the proposed project would take place consistent with biological requirements of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance of the City of American Canyon. The project site is designated “Commercial Recreational” by the City of American Canyon General Plan and zoned “Recreation.” The Biological Resources Report provides the detailed assessment of biological resources required by General Plan Policies 8.1.1 and 8.1.4. Studies of sensitive biological resources have been either conducted by FCS and/or Pinecrest as part of the attached Biological Resources Report or were conducted by other consultants and independently reviewed and incorporated into the Biological Resources Report, consistent with General Plan Policy 8.2.1.
Botanical surveys were performed by Dr. Christopher DiVittorio, with secondary identification on voucher and photograph specimens made by Dr. Zoya Akulova during the 2023 flowering season.
The proposed project would construct a wetland buffer avoidance area that would ensure that construction activities do not impact the on-site jurisdictional wetland features. Upon operation, the project’s stormwater would be directed away from the features. These wetland buffer areas are consistent with General Plan Policy 8.3.1.a, which requires the development plan to consider the nature of existing biological resources and all reasonable measures to avoid significant impacts, including retention of sufficient natural open space and undeveloped buffer zones; and General Plan Policy 8.4.3, which encourages activities that improve the biological value and integrity of the City’s natural resources through vegetation restoration, control of alien plants and animals, and landscape buffering. As such, impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
767
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-46 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 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation necessary.
3.3.8 - Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope of the cumulative biological resources analysis is the project vicinity as the project activity would only affect the surrounding project area. Cumulative projects in the geographic scope of the biological resources analysis consist of developed and undeveloped lands primarily near the edge of existing urban development.
This analysis evaluates whether the impacts of the proposed project, together with the impacts of cumulative development, could result in a cumulatively significant impact with respect to biological resources. This analysis also considers whether incremental contribution of impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed project would be significant. Both conditions must apply for a project’s cumulative effects to rise to the level of a significant impact. If there is no impact associated with respect to a particular CEQA threshold, discussion of cumulative impacts is not required.
Accordingly, this cumulative discussion is limited to the potential impacts discussed above.
Special-Status Species
Cumulative projects listed in Chapter 3, Environmental Impact Analysis, Table 3-1 are predominantly located in areas within or adjacent to urban development with limited potential to support specialstatus species. As described in the Regulatory Section herein, numerous laws and regulations are in place to protect biological resource within the cumulative project area, including, but not limited to CESA, federal Endangered Species Act, CWA, and applicable General Plan and Municipal Code requirements. Future projects within the cumulative geographic context would be required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local laws, regulations and policies and all applicable permitting requirements of the regulatory and oversight agencies intended to address potential impacts on biological resources. Standard pre-construction surveys and, if necessary, avoidance procedures would be required for cumulative projects with the potential to impact special-status species. Because cumulative development has limited potential to support special-status species and would be required to comply with the above requirements, cumulative impacts related to specialstatus species would be less than significant.
The proposed project’s incremental contribution to these less than significant cumulative impacts would not be significant with adherence to the mitigation measures related to special-status species identified above (see MM BIO1a through MM BIO-1g) and compliance with other applicable standards and requirements under the comprehensive regulatory framework. Therefore, the proposed project's contribution to cumulative impacts related to special-status species would be less than significant.
Wetland and Jurisdictional Features
The cumulative project area contains undeveloped areas that may support wetland and jurisdictional features. In addition, the Napa River, related tidal lands, and North Slough are located to the south.
Any future development that occurs within the cumulative analysis area would have to take into 768
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-47
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-03 Bio Resources.docx account the potential impacts to wetlands and jurisdictional features and mitigate as required under applicable laws and regulations. As such, cumulative impacts to wetland and jurisdictional features would be less than significant.
As indicated under Impact BIO-2, the proposed project would avoid all impacts on potential jurisdictional wetland features through the implementation of a wetland buffer avoidance area (Exhibit 3.3.-4). As such, the proposed project would not combine with other reasonably foreseeable projects and would have a less than significant contribution to the related impacts. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to the less than significant cumulative impact related to wetlands and jurisdictional features would not be cumulatively considerable.
Fish and Wildlife Movement Corridors
The larger geographic scope for cumulative projects contains various areas that may provide movement corridors for fish and wildlife, primarily the Napa River, related tidal lands and North Slough to the south. However, none of the identified cumulative projects include wildlife corridors that connect to the proposed project site. Other areas surrounding the project site consist primarily of urban development or undeveloped land significantly surrounded by urban development. Any future development that occurs within the cumulative analysis area would have to take into account the potential impacts to these corridors and mitigate as required under applicable laws and regulations. The cumulative projects are primarily located in urban or commercially developed areas and therefore are not likely to significantly impact wildlife movement corridors. Therefore, it can be reasonably assumed that there would be no cumulative impacts to fish and wildlife movement corridors.
As discussed under Impact BIO-3, the site does not function as a critical wildlife movement corridor, is not connected to any corridors present on cumulative project sites and does not otherwise connect valuable habitats together; accordingly, there would be no impacts to wildlife movement corridors. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative impacts related to fish and wildlife movement would not be cumulatively considerable.
Local Policies and Ordinances
Projects listed in Table 3-1 are all located within the City of American Canyon and therefore would be required to abide by applicable local policies and ordinances, such as the City’s Tree Ordinance for subdivisions contained in Municipal Code Section 18.40.110. Consistency with the General Plan and other regulations of the Municipal Code would also be required. Compulsory adherence to these regulations related to biological resources would ensure that impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
As discussed under Impact BIO-4, the proposed project would not remove any City-protected trees and would be consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance designations. Furthermore, the project is consistent with applicable General Plan policies regarding biological resources including assessment of such resources and wetland avoidance and buffer. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to the less than significant cumulative impact related to local policies and ordinances would not be cumulatively considerable.
769
City of American Canyon— SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Biological Resources Draft EIR
3.3-48 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 Level of Cumulative Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of MM BIO-1a through MM BIO-1g.
Level of Cumulative Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. 770
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx
3.4 - Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
3.4.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) setting and potential effects that may result from project implementation on the site and its surrounding area. The descriptions and analysis in this section are based on information provided by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), a records search conducted at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC), archival research, and a pedestrian survey, as presented in the Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment (Phase I CRA) prepared for the proposed project are included in confidential Appendix D.
Recommendations provided in the Phase I CRA pertaining to mitigation of potential impacts are incorporated into this section.
The following public comments pertaining to cultural resources were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP):
• The Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) should analyze the proposed project’s consistency with Assembly Bill (AB) 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18. • The lead agency should consult with applicable California Native American tribes. • A Cultural Resources Assessment should include applicable record searches, a field survey, and measures for inadvertent discovery of cultural and tribal cultural resources.
3.4.2 - Environmental Setting
Overview
The term “cultural resources” encompasses historic resources, archaeological resources, and burial sites, which are generally defined as follows:
• Historic Resources: Historic resources are associated with the recent past. In California, historic resources are typically associated with the Spanish, Mexican, and American periods in the State’s history and are generally less than 200 years old. Historic resources often take the form of buildings, structures, and other elements of the built environment. • Archaeological Resources: Archaeology is the study of artifacts and material culture with the aim of understanding human activities and cultures in the past. Archaeological resources may be associated with prehistoric indigenous cultures as well as later historic periods. • Tribal Cultural Resources: TCRs include sites, features, places, or objects that are of cultural value to one or more California Native American Tribes. • Burial Sites and Cemeteries: Burial sites and cemeteries are formal or informal locations where human remains have been interred. Burial sites may be associated with precontact indigenous cultures as well as later historic periods.
More specifically, cultural resources may be understood as resources that have been formally recognized by a lead agency and/or are listed or determined eligible for listing on the California 771
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft EIR
3.4-2 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) (Public Resources Code [PRC] § 5024.1, Title 14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] § 4852). However, the fact that a resource is not yet identified as a historical resource or found eligible for the CRHR does not preclude a lead agency from determining that said resource is a historical resource pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 5020.1(j) or 5024.1. Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource would constitute a significant effect on the environment.
Cultural Setting
Following is a brief overview of the prehistory, ethnography, and historic background, providing a context in which to understand the background and relevance of sites found in the general project area. This section is not intended to be a comprehensive review of the current academic resources available; rather, it serves as a general overview. Unless otherwise stated, information contained in this section is drawn directly from the Phase I CRA conducted by FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS).
Prehistoric Background
In general, archaeological research in the greater San Francisco Bay Area has focused on coastal areas, where large shellmounds were relatively easily identified on the landscape. This research and its chronological framework, however, is relevant to and has a bearing on our understanding of prehistory in areas north of the San Francisco Bay, including modern American Canyon, Napa County.
Like many California cultural chronologies, the greater San Francisco Bay Area has a complex history.
As synthesized by Milliken et al., three major chronologic frameworks exist for the Bay Area: an Archaic-Emergent temporal structure; the Central California Taxonomic System (CCTS) and a “hybrid system” that is utilized using the overarching CCTS scheme, while further demarcating time depth/period changes regionally, as used in the Archaic-Emergent temporal structure. Specifically, regional cultural patterns and phases are further defined within the San Francisco Bay Area by Dating Scheme D, which utilizes dated Olivella shell bead horizons. Milliken et al. used the term “bead horizons” to define the passage of short periods of time by the shifts in the trade of specific bead types throughout the Bay Area. This builds on Fredrickson, who proposed a chronology for the broader San Francisco Bay Area region. Fredrickson’s chronology is based on material patterns and includes the Windmiller Pattern (4500-3500 Before Present [BP]), Berkeley Pattern (3500-1500 BP) and the Augustine Pattern (1500-250 BP). The Windmiller Pattern is typified by a hunter-gatherer subsistence pattern, which included the exploitation of wild plants, game, and fish. Typical artifacts include clay balls, fishing hooks, fishing spears and ground stone tools. Artifacts from the Berkeley Pattern era reflect an increasing reliance on acorns, as mortars and pestles become more prolific.
The Augustine Period was a period of increasing social complexity. Acorns continued to be the dominant food source and settlement patterns reflected an increasing sedentary lifestyle.
The Lower Archaic, 10,000 to 5500 BP, is typified in the Bay Area by a forager and gatherer lifestyle, as evidenced by the prevalence of milling slabs, hand stones, and large, wide-stemmed and leafshaped projectile points. The Middle Archaic, 5500 to 2500 BP, saw an increase in the presence of ground stone and cut shell beads, indicating that groups in the Bay Area were transitioning to a more sedentary lifestyle; interregional trade was increasing, and as the beads were found in mortuary contexts, that symbolism was becoming a regional identifier. The Early Upper Archaic, 2500 to 1570 772
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-3 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx BP, saw a shift away from cut beads to Olivella beads, and along the Bay, a new emphasis on Haliotis ornaments and bone tools, with net sinkers largely disappearing from assemblages. The Late Upper Archaic, 1570 to 950 BP, further defined by the bead phases M1–M4, is another time of transition, as saucer-shaped Olivella beads disappear from the record and Olivella saddle beads became dominant. The appearance of the saddle shaped Olivella beads coincides with the appearance and increase in Meganos complex dorsal extended burials. The Lower Emergent Period, 950 to 450 BP, is characterized by increasing complexity as beads were being produced for collectors as opposed to being produced primarily as mortuary items. Sedentism and increasing social stratification is evidenced by settlement patterns and mortuary practices. The Terminal Late Period saw change in the North Bay, as clamshell disk beads became prevalent, along with the toggle harpoon, hopper mortar, plain corner-notched arrow-sized projectile points, and magnesite tube beads; however, this was not the case in the South Bay. By 1650, only Olivella-lipped and spire-lopped beads were present.
Settlement patterns north of San Francisco Bay have varied over time. The currently accepted understanding of settlement patterns in this area is that a foraging and hunter-gatherer lifestyle centering on lacustrine resources remained dominant in the region until the Lower to Middle Archaic. At this point, there was a shift from foraging lacustrine resources to developing semipermanent villages near marshes and grasslands, in order to gather those specific resources. This was followed by a shift to foragers residing in residential camps, with more consistent settlement occurring in “collector villages” during the Upper Archaic. By the Emergent Period, collectors were living in semi-permanent villages in oak woodlands, in which residential camps were now located along marshes.
Ethnographic Background
The Patwin
At the time of European contact, the project vicinity was primarily occupied by the Patwin Tribe of California Native Americans. The Patwin occupied the southwest Sacramento Valley from the town of Princeton, north of Colusa, south to San Pablo and Suisun bays, and from the lower hills of the eastern North Coast Ranges to the Sacramento River. Patwin territory extended approximately 40 miles east to west and 90 miles north to south. Based primarily on linguistic variation, the Patwin are the most southern division of the Wintuan population, who are members of the Penutian linguistic stock. Distinction is made between the Hill and River Patwin. Hill Patwin had villages located in valleys along the hills of the Vaca Mountains and Coast Ranges with populations concentrated in Indian, Bear, Capay, Cortina, Long, and Napa valleys. In general, the River Patwin occupied the west banks of the lower Sacramento River below the Feather River as well as the lower reaches of Cache and Putah creeks in the Sacramento Valley. The Hill Patwin villages of Napato and Tulukai lie in close proximity to the project area, and their place names remain part of the regional landscape to this day.
Patwin political organization was centered on the tribelet, which consisted of a primary village with smaller satellite villages governed by a head chief. Tribelets were autonomous and differed from each other with minor cultural variations. The economic and ceremonial activities of each village were administered by a chief whose position was typically passed on patrilineally although some 773
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft EIR
3.4-4 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx chiefs were chosen by village elders. The chief administered subsistence ventures, such as hunting and gathering expeditions, and served as the primary resource distributor.
The Patwin subsistence base varied with the seasons and included gathering seeds and plant resources on the plains, netting migratory waterfowl in the tule marshes, and netting salmon and other fish in the rivers and streams. Acorns were a staple in the Patwin diet and were obtained from communally owned hill and valley oak groves. The Patwin stored acorns in granaries as insurance against famine in poor harvest years. Ethnographic reports indicate the Patwin obtained large game such as deer, tule elk, and antelope by using nets or shooting with bows and arrows. Fish resources were of particular importance to the River Patwin and included perch, sturgeon, salmon, sucker, trout, pike, and other riverine species such as mussels and turtles, which were caught with bone fishhooks, nets, weirs, and seines.
The Patwin trade system included various resources that were exchanged with the Wappo, Nomlake, Southeastern Pomo, and Hill Patwin. The River Patwin obtained obsidian from sources to the west and east. Initially, finished shell beads were obtained from coastal tribes, but later, the River Patwin traded for whole shells from the Pacific Coast and produced the beads themselves. Relationships with nearby tribes and other Patwin tribelets were not always friendly. Patwin relations with Napa Valley groups were strained by provocations primarily incited by poaching; subsequent retaliations resulted in organized battles between individuals or groups or surprise attacks on villages.
Patwin dwellings, sweathouses and dance houses were all semi-subterranean, earth-covered structures. Mortuary practices included burials in cemeteries located at one end of the village, in which the possessions of the deceased were buried with them; at some locations, property was burned near the grave. Typically, only people who died or were killed away from the village were cremated. According to a Hill Patwin informant, “the River people [Patwin] set a corpse upright, then pushed the head down, broke the back, wrapped the body in a skin, and put it in the grave.” In addition, long burial ropes constructed of hemp were wrapped around the deceased, and the River Patwin utilized temporary containers made of tule reeds.
The Southern Wappo
The project site is also in close proximity to the ethnographic territory of the Southern Wappo. The Wappo language belongs to a small family of four languages, including Yuki, Coastal Yuki, and Huchnom. It is divided into five dialects distributed across two major territorial divisions. The smaller area included lands along the southern edge of Clear Lake; the larger ranged from just north of Napa, south to Geyserville and Middletown in the north. The Wappo were known to adopt words from other languages spoken in their vicinity, including Spanish names of objects with which they came into contact as a result of missionization. Of the 100 or known Wappo place names, at least one, cho*nóma, (meaning “abandoned camp”), remains in use as the probable Wappo name for the town of Sonoma. Like their Pomo neighbors, the basic sociopolitical unit was the village, which was usually located on a creek or other water source. Villages included one or two sweathouses as well as houses of varying size. One of the last remaining traditional Wappo villages observed in 1870 consisted of 11 grass houses serving 21 families totaling 92 people. Each house was made of grass thatch over a framework of bent poles and had a separate entrance and smoke-hole for each family inhabiting it.
774
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-5 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Basic tools consisted of wedges, axes, and fire-drills made from stones, sticks, shells, and plants. Like the Pomo, the Wappo had a tradition of creating intricately woven baskets that were both functional and decorative. This tradition, along with several surviving songs and dances attributed to the Wappo, were primary forms of artistic expression. Imported clamshell beads and magnesite cylinders served as units of exchange and items of personal adornment. Food sources included a variety of plants and creatures, including acorns, buckeye, clover, abalone, clams, turtles, salmon, ducks, rabbits, and deer.
The Wappo had at least seven villages in the Geyserville area alone and estimates of their total population range from 5,000 to 8,000. Village chiefs might be elected or appointed, based on the organization of the individual village. Both men and women could occupy the role of chief, and some villages even had multiple chiefs, each with different spheres of influence, including trade, ceremonial roles, and warfare. The Wappo were generally regarded as a peaceful people, except during the Wappo-Pomo War in the early nineteenth century. The Wappo apparently attacked and killed members of the Alexander Valley Pomo who had carried away some Wappo supplies of acorns.
The Pomo sought peace, which was granted immediately; however, the Pomo never returned to their Alexander Valley villages north of Healdsburg. The Wappo also tried to resist Spanish incursions and colonial expansion into their territories, but like the Pomo, their numbers were decimated by smallpox, hostility from the Mexican Army, and later by Euro-American settlements in the 1850s.
Historic Background
The Spanish Period (1769–1821)
Spanish exploration into Suisun Bay and into the Central Valley dates back to the late 1700s. Spanish mission records indicate that by 1800, Patwin inhabitants at Aguastos, the south-central area, and other villages were being taken to Mission Dolores (San Francisco de Asis), and that Mission Sonoma (San Francisco Solano), built in 1823, was baptizing Patwin tribal members until secularization of the missions in 1832-1836. Many Native Americans were not willing to convert. There are numerous accounts of neophytes fleeing the missions, and a series of “Indian Wars” broke out when the Spanish tried to return them to the missions.
The Mexican Period (1821–1848)
With the declaration of Mexican independence in 1821, Spanish control of Alta California ended, although little change actually occurred. Political change did not take place until mission secularization in 1834, when Native Americans were released from missionary control and the mission lands were granted to private individuals. Mission secularization removed the social protection and support on which Native Americans had come to rely. It exposed them to further exploitation by outside interests, often forcing them into a marginal existence as laborers for large ranchos. Following mission secularization, the Mexican population grew as the native population continued to decline. Anglo-American settlers began to arrive in Alta California during this period and often married into Mexican families, becoming Mexican citizens, which made them eligible to receive land grants. In 1846, on the eve of the U.S.-Mexican War (1846 to 1848), the estimated population of Alta California was 8,000 non-natives and 10,000 natives. However, these estimates have been debated. Cook suggests the Native American population was 100,000 in 1850; the U.S.
Census of 1880 reports the Native American population as 20,385. 775
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft EIR
3.4-6 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx During this period, General Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo assumed authority of Sonoma Mission and established a friendly relationship with the Native Americans who were living there. In particular, Vallejo worked closely with Chief Solano, a Patwin who served as Vallejo’s spokesperson when problems with Native American tribes arose. In 1843, Governor Manuel Micheltorena gave General Vallejo the 84,000-acre Soscoe land grant of Rancho Suscolto, which included the present-day Vallejo.
The American Period (1848–Contemporary)
During this period, and prior, Native American populations were declining rapidly because of an influx of Euro-American diseases. In 1832, a party of trappers from the Hudson’s Bay Company, led by John Work, traveled down the Sacramento River, unintentionally spreading a malaria epidemic to Native Californians. Four years later, a smallpox epidemic decimated local populations, and it is estimated that up to 75 percent of the native population died.
After the upheaval of the Bear Flag Revolt in 1846, and the result of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, California became a United States territory. In 1848, James W. Marshall discovered gold at Coloma in modern-day El Dorado County, which started the California Gold Rush into the region that forever altered the course of California’s history. The arrival of thousands of gold seekers in the territory contributed to the exploration and settlement of the entire State. By late 1848, approximately 4 out of 5 men in California were gold miners.
By 1864, California’s Gold Rush had essentially ended. The rich surface and river placers were largely exhausted and the miners either returned to their homelands or stayed to start new lives in California. After the gold rush, people in towns such as Jackson, Placerville, and Sonora turned to other means of commerce, such as ranching, agriculture, and timber production. With the decline of gold mining, agriculture and ranching came to the forefront in the State’s economy. California’s natural resources and moderate climate proved well suited for cultivation of a variety of fruits, nuts, vegetables, and grains.
Local History Napa County
European settlement in the Napa area began with the 1820 establishment of the Sonoma Mission and General Mariano Vallejo’s 1838 reception of a land grant that included the Napa and Sonoma valleys. By 1848, the American population in the area had grown, and farmer Nathan Coombs laid out a town plat for Nappa City (the spelling changed to Napa by the 1870s), which served as the County seat when Napa became one of the original 27 counties of California in 1850.
During the mid-1850s, Napa County began to grow. While gold was being prospected in other areas of the State, Napa County became a center for silver and quicksilver mining. The County’s population began to swell as pioneers, prospectors, and entrepreneurs moved in and set up residence. Two of those entrepreneurs were Edward Turner Bale and Samuel Brannan. Bale completed building the Bale Grist Mill a few miles north of Saint Helena in 1846. Brannan purchased land in the northern end of the valley at the foot of Mount Saint Helena and founded Calistoga. He began developing it as a resort town, taking advantage of the area’s numerous mineral hot springs. He also founded the Napa Valley Railroad Company in 1864 to bring tourists to Calistoga from the San Francisco 776
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-7 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx ferryboats that docked in Vallejo. Other settlers turned to agriculture for their livelihood, primarily raising cattle, grain, and fruit crops.
Orchards and wheat gradually displaced cattle ranching as settlers’ primary source of income, and the first Downtown Napa winery opened in the 1870s. While settlers initially relied on Native labor, Chinese immigrants became a more important source of labor as the Native populations declined in the later decades of the nineteenth century. Napa had a substantial Chinatown by 1886. In 1875, the State of California built the Napa State Hospital for the Insane at the southern edge of town; the City had competed with others around the State for the privilege of hosting the asylum, which brought considerable economic benefit with it in terms of public funding.
The Phylloxera louse infested Napa Valley and killed thousands of grapevines, seriously threatening the local wine industry. Many farmers replaced their grapevines with fruit trees. As discrimination against Chinese immigration climbed throughout the country in the late nineteenth century, Napa’s Chinese population shrank, and farmers began to turn to Italian immigrants as a labor source.
The pattern of economic and population growth established during the war continued through the end of the 1950s. Blue-collar union jobs supported the local economy; by 1960, nearly 2,600 people were employed at Basalt Rock/Kaiser Steel and Napa’s smaller manufacturing plants. Residential construction remained strong; between 1950 and 1957, nearly 5,000 dwelling units were constructed in Napa County, most of which were single-family houses in or near the Napa city limits.
The downtown area remained the seat of County/City government and the commercial center of Napa during the postwar period through the mid-1960s.
The City’s gradual development of a new City Hall, Police Station, and Fire Station at the Downtown Civic Center represented the most significant change to Downtown Napa’s built environment during this era. By 1946, the City was discussing creation of a civic center, initially identifying the former Chinatown at First Street and the Napa River as a potential site. In 1948, the City Council began planning the new City Hall and selected the location along School Street between First Street and Second Street. Between 1951 and 1962, City Hall, the Police Station, and Fire Station No. 1 were constructed at their current locations.
In the 1960s, the local economy began a gradual shift away from its industrial roots. Tourism began to replace manufacturing as an engine of the local economy, but tourists passed through the City of Napa en route to wineries rather than arriving as a destination. State Route (SR) 29, which historically passed through the downtown area on Third Street, was rerouted to the west when a portion of SR-29 became a freeway in the late 1960s. This exacerbated downtown Napa’s commercial decline, along with competition from malls and strip development. The City Council established a Redevelopment Agency in 1968, which was responsible for the destruction of many of Napa’s historic commercial buildings in the early 1970s. Redevelopment efforts failed to re-establish Napa as the commercial heart of Napa County and the downtown area continued to suffer high turnover vacancy rates through the 1990s. This trend was reversed after 2005, when successful flood control measures made investment in the downtown area more attractive. Currently, downtown Napa is a hub of the local hospitality industry, featuring a concentration of hotels, restaurants, and wine tasting rooms.
777
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft EIR
3.4-8 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx The City of American Canyon
Located in southern Napa County, the City of American Canyon was incorporated as a city in 1992.
The history of the City of American Canyon and its economy, growth, and development has been tied to the larger Napa region as a whole. The California Gold Rush brought many settlers to the region but American Canyon itself was largely devoid of gold deposits. Instead, the area was both rich in limestone and ideally suited for farming. In 1852, Simpson Thompson and his two sons established a large farm consisting of 475 acres of orchards and farmland as well as 300 acres of meadowlands for cattle grazing. In the early 1900s, the discovery of rich deposits of limestone led to the development of quarries that could produce over 2,000 barrels of cement per day. However, the exploitation of usable limestone and clay meant that by the 1930s, mining became economically untenable in the region. The economy of the region pivoted toward agriculture, particularly fruit orchards and the farming of wheat.
However, the City’s economy would shift following the Paris Wine Tasting of 1976, better known as the Judgment of Paris. In a blind tasting, a panel of expert sommeliers scored wines from Napa estates such as Heitz Cellars or Stag’s Leap higher than estates that produced First Growth Bordeaux wines. Their judgment sent shockwaves around the wine industry and established Napa as a worldclass wine-growing region. While the region of Calistoga and St. Helena in Napa has been focused on producing top-tier wines and attracting high-end clientele, their success could not exist without the logistic support of the warehouses and distribution centers that grew up in American Canyon. These centers developed in subsequent years following the 1976 Judgment of Paris and provide the backbone for the distribution of domestic and imported wines both in the Bay Area and overseas today.
3.4.3 - Regulatory Framework
Federal
National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), as amended, established the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), which contains an inventory of the nation’s significant prehistoric and historic properties. Under 36 Code of Federal Regulations 60, a property is recommended for possible inclusion on the NRHP if it is at least 50 years old, has integrity, and meets one of the following criteria:
• It is associated with significant events in history, or broad patterns of events. • It is associated with significant people in the past. • It embodies the distinctive characteristics of an architectural type, period, or method of construction; or it is the work of a master or possesses high artistic value; or it represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. • It has yielded, or may yield, information important in history or prehistory.
Certain types of properties are usually excluded from consideration for listing in the NRHP, but they can be considered if they meet special requirements in addition to meeting the criteria listed above. 778
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-9 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Such properties include religious sites, relocated properties, graves and cemeteries, reconstructed properties, commemorative properties, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years.
Archaeological Resources Protection Act
The Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) amended the Antiquities Act of 1906 (16 United States Code [USC] 431–433) and set a broad policy that archaeological resources are important to the nation and should be protected, and required special permits before the excavation or removal of archaeological resources from public or Indian lands. The purpose of the ARPA was to secure, for the present and future benefit of the American people, the protection of archaeological resources and sites that are on public lands and Indian lands, and to foster increased cooperation and exchange of information between governmental authorities, the professional archaeological community, and private individuals having collections of archaeological resources and data that were obtained before October 31, 1979.
American Indian Religious Freedom Act
The American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA) established federal policy to protect and preserve the inherent rights of freedom for Native groups to believe, express, and exercise their traditional religions. These rights include, but are not limited to, access to sites, use and possession of sacred objects, and freedom to worship through ceremonials and traditional rites.
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 sets provisions for the intentional removal and inadvertent discovery of human remains and other cultural items from federal and tribal lands. It clarifies the ownership of human remains and sets forth a process for repatriation of human remains and associated funerary objects and sacred religious objects to the Native American groups claiming to be lineal descendants or culturally affiliated with the remains or objects. It requires any federally-funded institution housing Native American Remains or artifacts to compile an inventory of all cultural items within the museum or with its agency and to provide a summary to any Native American tribe claiming affiliation.
State
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)—CEQA Definition of Historical Resources California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15064.5(a), in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, defines a “historical resource” as:
(1) A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. (2) A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such 779
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft EIR
3.4-10 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant.
(3) Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered a historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. (4) The fact that a resource is not listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, not included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code), or identified in a historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be a historical resource as defined in Public Resources Code Sections 5020.1(j) or 5024.1.
Therefore, under the CEQA Guidelines, even if a resource is not included on any local, State, or federal register, or identified in a qualifying historical resources survey, a lead agency may still determine that any resource is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA if there is substantial evidence supporting such a determination. A lead agency must consider a resource to be historically significant if it finds that the resource meets the criteria for listing in the CRHR.
Archaeological and historical sites are protected pursuant to a wide variety of State policies and regulations, as enumerated in Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. Cultural resources are recognized as nonrenewable resources and receive additional protection under the Public Resources Code and CEQA.
Public Resources Code 5024.1(c)—Definition of a Historic Resource CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a), in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, defines a “historical resource” as a resource that:
1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.
2. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.
3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values.
4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(3)—California Register of Historical Resources Criteria As defined by CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(a)(3)(A-D), a resource shall be considered historically significant if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the CRHR. The CRHR and many local preservation ordinances have employed the criteria for eligibility to the NRHP as a model (see 780
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-11 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx criteria described above under the description of the NHPA), since the NHPA provides the highest standard for evaluating the significance of historic resources. A resource that meets NRHP criteria is clearly significant. In addition, a resource that does not meet NRHP standards may still be considered historically significant at a local or State level.
CEQA Guidelines 15064.5(c)—Effects on Archaeological Resources CEQA Guidelines state that a resource need not be listed on any register to be found historically significant. CEQA Guidelines direct lead agencies to evaluate archaeological sites to determine whether they meet the criteria for listing in the CRHR. If an archaeological site is a historical resource, in that it is listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR, potential adverse impacts to it must be considered. If an archaeological site is considered not to be a historical resource but meets the definition of a “unique archaeological resource” as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2, then it would be treated in accordance with the provisions of that section.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(d)—Effects on Human Remains Native American human remains and associated burial items may be significant to descendant communities and/or may be scientifically important for their informational value. They may be significant to descendant communities for patrimonial, cultural, lineage, and religious reasons.
Human remains may also be important to the scientific community, such as prehistorians, epidemiologists, and physical anthropologists. The specific stake of some descendant groups in ancestral burials is a matter of law for some groups, such as Native Americans (CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(d); PRC § 5097.98). CEQA and other State regulations regarding Native American human remains provide the following procedural requirements to assist in avoiding potential adverse effects on human remains within the contexts of their value to both descendant communities and the scientific community:
• When an initial study identifies the existence or probable likelihood that a project would affect Native American human remains, the lead agency is to contact and work with the appropriate Native American representatives identified through the NAHC to develop an agreement for the treatment and disposal of the human remains and any associated burial items (CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(d); PRC § 5097.98).
• If human remains are accidentally discovered, the County Coroner must be contacted. If the County Coroner determines that the human remains are Native American, the Coroner must contact the NAHC within 24 hours. The NAHC must identify the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to provide for the opportunity to make recommendations for the treatment and disposal of the human remains and associated burial items.
• If the MLD fails to make recommendations within 24 hours of notification or the project applicant rejects the recommendations of the MLD, the Native American human remains and associated burial items must be reburied in a location not subject to future disturbance within the project site (PRC § 5097.98).
• If potentially affected human remains or a burial site may have scientific significance, whether or not it has significance to Native Americans or other descendant communities, then under CEQA, the appropriate mitigation of effect may require the recovery of the scientific 781
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft EIR
3.4-12 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx information of the remains/burial through identification, evaluation, data recovery, analysis, and interpretation (CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(c)(2)).
Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5
Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety code sets forth provisions related to the treatment of human remains. As the code states, “every person who knowingly mutilates or disinters, wantonly disturbs, or willfully removes any human remains in or from any location other than a dedicated cemetery without authority of law is guilty of a misdemeanor” except under circumstances as provided in Section 5097.99 of the Public Resource Code. The regulations also provide guidelines for the treatment of human remains found in locations other than a dedicated cemetery including responsibilities of the Coroner.
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98
Section 5097.98 provides protocol for the discovery of human remains. It states that “when the commission receives notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a County Coroner pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, it shall immediately notify persons believed to be most likely descended from the deceased Native American.” It also sets forth provisions for descendants’ preferences for treatment of the human remains and what should be done if the commission is unable to identify a descendant.
California Public Resources Code Section 5097.91—Native American Heritage Commission Section 5097.91 of the Public Resources Code established the NAHC, whose duties include the inventory of places of religious or social significance to Native Americans and the identification of known graves and cemeteries of Native Americans on private lands. Under Section 5097.91 of the Public Resources Code, a State policy of noninterference with the free expression or exercise of Native American religion was articulated along with a prohibition of severe or irreparable damage to Native American sanctified cemeteries, places of worship, religious or ceremonial sites or sacred shrines located on public property. Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code specifies a protocol to be followed when the NAHC receives notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a County Coroner. Section 5097.5 defines the unauthorized disturbance or removal of archaeological, historic, or paleontological resources located on public lands as a misdemeanor.
California Senate Bill 18—Protection of Tribal Cultural Places SB 18 (California Government Code § 65352.3) incorporates the protection of California traditional tribal cultural places into land use planning for cities, counties, and agencies by establishing responsibilities for local governments to contact, refer plans to, and consult with California Native American Tribes as part of the adoption or amendment of any general or specific plan proposed on or after March 1, 2005. SB 18 requires public notice to be sent to tribes listed on the NAHC SB 18 Tribal Consultation list within the geographical areas affected by the proposed changes. Tribes must respond to a local government notice within 90 days (unless a shorter time frame has been agreed upon by the tribe), indicating whether or not they want to consult with the local government.
Consultations are for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to places, features, and objects described in Sections 5097.9 and 5097.993 of the Public Resources Code that may be affected by the proposed adoption or amendment to a general or specific plan. 782
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-13 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx California Assembly Bill 52—Effects on Tribal Cultural Resources AB 52 was signed into law on September 25, 2014, and provides that any public or private “project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource (TCR) is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.” TCRs include “[s]ites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are eligible for inclusion in the CRHR or included in a local register of historical resources.” Under prior law, TCRs were typically addressed under the umbrella of “cultural resources,” as discussed above. AB 52 formally added the category of “tribal cultural resources” to CEQA and extends the consultation and confidentiality requirements to all projects, rather than just projects subject to SB 18 as previously discussed.
The parties must consult in good faith, and consultation is deemed concluded when either: (1) the parties agree to measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect on a TCR (if such a significant effect exists); or (2) when a party concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached. Mitigation measures agreed upon during consultation must be recommended for inclusion in the environmental document.
AB 52 also identifies mitigation measures that may be considered to avoid significant impacts if there is no agreement on appropriate mitigation. Recommended measures include:
• Preservation in place.
• Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource. • Protecting the traditional use of the resource.
• Protecting the confidentiality of the resource.
• Permanent conservation easements with culturally appropriate management criteria.
California Public Resources Code Section 21074—Effects on Tribal Cultural Resources AB 52 amended the CEQA statute to identify an additional category of resource to be considered under CEQA, called “tribal cultural resources.” It added Public Resources Code Section 21074, which defines “tribal cultural resources” as follows:
(a) “Tribal cultural resources” are either of the following:
(1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
A) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the CRHR.
B) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1.
(2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
783
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft EIR
3.4-14 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Local
City of American Canyon
General Plan
To promote the preservation and restoration of the sites, structures and districts that have architectural, historical, archaeological and/or cultural significance to the City of American Canyon.
Objective 8.19 Ensure that the City's historically and archaeologically significant resources are protected in a manner that preserves and/or enhances the resources' inherent historic value.
Policy 8.19.1 Conduct a comprehensive survey of archaeological and cultural resources and historic vegetation that is based on established criteria and encompasses the entire City and its Sphere of Influence.
Policy 8.19.2 Adopt a Preservation Ordinance that will authorize the City to designate appropriate vegetation or archaeological sites deemed to be of historic, archaeological, or cultural significance an American Canyon City Historic Point, Site or District. Such an ordinance shall conform to State and federal criteria for establishing a preservation ordinance.
Policy 8.19.3 Explore various methods for the future preservation of historic vegetation and archaeological and cultural resources. For example, consider establishing " receiver site" and "adopt a building" programs to preserve historic structures that must be removed from their sites. Additionally, consider utilizing the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Historic Rehabilitation and standards and guidelines prescribed by the State Office of Historic Preservation as the architectural and landscape design standards for rehabilitation, alteration, or additions to sites containing historic resources in order to preserve these structures in a manner consistent with the sites' architectural and historic integrity.
3.4.4 - Methodology
Records Searches and Pedestrian Survey to Identify Existing Cultural Resources The information in this section is based on the Phase I CRA prepared for this project by FCS on March 13, 2023. The Phase I CRA used the following methods to analyze the potential impacts of project implementation:
Northwest Information Center
On November 29, 2022, a records search for the project site and a 0.50-mile radius beyond the project boundaries was conducted at the NWIC located at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park, California. To identify any historic properties or resources, the current inventories of the NRHP, the CRHR, the California Historic Landmarks list, the California Points of Historical Interest list, and the California Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD) for Napa County were reviewed to determine the existence of previously documented local historical resources. 784
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-15 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Results from the NWIC indicate that two resources have been recorded within the 0.5-mile radius (historic resource P-28-000602 and prehistoric resource 483A-001), none of which are located within the project boundaries (Table 3.4-1). In addition, 21 area-specific survey reports are on file within the 0.5-mile radius, one of which (S-000153) linearly transects the project boundary (Table 3.4-2).
This indicates that the project site has been partially surveyed for cultural resources.
Table 3.4-1: Cultural Resources within 0.5-mile Radius of the Project Site Resource No. Resource Description Date Recorded
P-28-000602 CA-NAP-727H Fogarty; AH03 Landscaping/orchard; AH05. Wells/cisterns; AH11. Walls/fences; AH15. Standing structures; AH16. Other 2007
483A-001 No name; AP02 Lithic scatter No year
Source: Northwest Information Center (NWIC) Records Search. November 29, 2022.
Table 3.4-2: Previous Investigations within 0.5-mile Radius of the Project Site Report No. Report Title/Project Focus Author Date
S-000153 Archaeological Impact Evaluation: Proposed Sewage Pipeline, Napa to American Canyon, Napa County,
California
Thomas F. King 1975
S-000153a A Re-examination of an Area of Archaeological Sensitivity near Green Island Road, Napa County, California
David A. Fredrickson 1975
S-000153b Archaeological survey and monitoring along the NapaAmerican Canyon Pipeline right-of-wayLynn Eisenman 1976 S-001012 A preliminary archaeological reconnaissance of the 73.28- acre Maher property, Napa County, California
Thomas L. Jackson 1976
S-002372 Green Island Industrial Park, Napa County, California David Chavez 1980 S-008851 Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Zunino Property and the Department of Fish and Game Tract near
American Canyon, Napa County, California
Suzanne Baker 1986
S-009213 Historic Overview and National Register of Historic Places Evaluation of Site CA-NAP- 727H, Napa County, California Laurence H. Shoup
and Suzanne Baker
1987
S-012439 Cultural Resources Investigations for the Port of Oakland Phase I Dredging, Cultural Resources Evaluation
Avid Chavez 1990
S-017315 An Archaeological Study of the Meyer Property in American Canyon, Napa County, California, APN 058-04-
10 and 058-04-19
Jennifer A. Ferneau 1995
S-017582 Archaeological Reconnaissance, Napa River and Oat Hill Sanitary Landfill Area, Napa County, California
Archaeological
Consulting and
Research Services
No Date
785
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft EIR
3.4-16 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Report No. Report Title/Project Focus Author Date
S-022041 A Cultural Resource Inventory of the Napa Airport Master Environmental Assessment Area, Napa County, California
Katherine Flynn,
William Roop, and
Ronald Melander
1983
S-023924 Historic Properties Inventory for the Proposed City of American Canyon South Napa River Tidal Slough and
Floodplain Restoration Project
Stacey Jordan and
Richard L. Carrico
2001
S-024344 Archaeological Survey of the Cookie Hill Housing Development, Napa County, California
Katherine Flynn 1988
S-029931 Tribotech/SF-06921, 100 Napa Junction Road, American Canyon, California
Scott Billat 2005
S-030746 A Cultural Resources Study for the Hanna Bridge Project, Project #0253605003-32001, City of American Canyon,
Napa County, California
Heidi Koenig 2005
S-034252 An Archaeological Survey of the Green Island Assessment and Reimbursement District, Napa County, California
Thomas M. Origer 1988
S-034253 Cultural Resources Inspection of the Hanna Court Project Area, American Canyon, Napa County, California
Miley Paul Holman 2006
S-035015 Cultural Resources Report for the Napa- Sonoma Marshes Wildlife Area Land Management Plan
Joanne Grant 2008
S-036581 A Cultural Resources Survey for the Oat Hill Winery Condominium Project, Napa Junction Road, American
Canyon, Napa County, California
Vicki R. Beard 2009
S-043823 Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration Project, Napa and
Sonoma Counties, California
No Author 2003
S-049803 Cultural Resources Assessment, Green Island Industrial District Roads Project, City of American Canyon, Napa
County, California
Kara Brunzell and
David Brunzell
2016
S-050025 Archaeological Survey Report for the Napa Junction Elementary School Project, City of American Canyon,
Napa County, California
No Author 2018
S-051238 Cultural Resources Study-SDG Commerce 330 Warehouse Project, City of American Canyon, Napa County, California Solano Archaeological
Services
2018
Notes:
Report listed in Bold transects the project site.
Source: Northwest Information Center (NWIC) Records Search. November 29, 2022.
Historic Aerials
A review of 16 historical aerial photographs from 1948 to 2020 indicate that, from the earliest aerial in 1948 through 1993, the project site was a wooded, undeveloped field. Between 1993 and 2005, industrial and residential development gradually began to occur north and southeast of the project. 786
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-17 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx From 2005 to 2020, there was very little development or expansion in the area surrounding the project. The project site itself remains undeveloped.
Native American Heritage Commission
On November 21, 2022, FCS sent a letter to the NAHC in an effort to determine whether any sacred sites are listed on its Sacred Lands File (SLF) for the Area of Potential Effect (APE). A response was received on December 16, 2022, indicating that the SLF search produced a positive result for Native American cultural resources within the project site. The NAHC included a list of 11 tribal representatives available for consultation. To ensure that all Native American knowledge and concerns over potential TCRs that may be affected by implementation of the proposed project are addressed, a letter containing project information and requesting additional information was sent to each tribal representative on January 2, 2023. No responses have been received to date.
Table 3.4-3: Tribal Consultation
Tribal Contact Date Letter Sent Response from Tribal Contact Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa
Indian Community
Daniel Gomez, Chairman
January 2, 2023
Email.
None
Cortina Rancheria - Kletsel Dehe Band of Wintun
Indians
Charlie Wright, Chairperson
January 2, 2023
USPS
None
Guidiville Indian Rancheria
Donald Duncan, Chairperson
January 2, 2023
Email.
None
Middletown Rancheria of Pomo Indians
Jose Simon, Chairperson
January 2, 2023
Email.
None
Mishewal-Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley
Scott Gabaldon, Chairperson
January 2, 2023
Email.
None
Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area
Charlene Nijmeh, Chairperson
January 2, 2023
Email.
None
Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area
Monica Arellano, Vice Chairwoman
January 2, 2023
USPS
None
Pinoleville Pomo Nation
Leona Willams, Chairperson
January 2, 2023
Email.
None
Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
Anthony Roberts, Chairperson
January 2, 2023
Email.
None
Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
Laverne Bill, Director of Cultural Resources
January 2, 2023
Email.
None
Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
Yvonne Perkins, THPO, Cultural Resources
Chairman
January 2, 2023
Email.
None
Source: FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) 2024
787
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft EIR
3.4-18 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Cultural Resources Pedestrian Survey
On January 6, 2023, FCS Senior Archaeologist Dr. Dana DePietro, PhD, and FCS Archaeologist and Historian Ti Ngo conducted a pedestrian survey for unrecorded cultural resources in the project site.
The project site is rectangular-shaped and is bounded by Commerce Court to the east, an industrial warehouse to the south, North Slough to the west, and undeveloped land (entitled for development as a wine distribution warehouse) to the north.
The survey began in the southeast corner of the project site and moved west and north, using east– west transects spaced at 15-meter intervals. All areas of the project site were closely inspected for culturally modified soils or other indicators of potential historic or prehistoric resources. Because of a high level of vegetation, visibility of native soils was approximately 5 percent across the project site. Visible soils consisted of dark brown alluvial clay (Munsell 7.5 YR 3/2) with inclusions of granite, quartz, and schist stones ranging from 2-5 centimeters. The soil in the southern boundary of the project site contained a mixture of imported fill from adjacent construction.
Survey conditions were documented using digital photographs and field notes. During the survey, the team examined all areas of the exposed ground surface for prehistoric artifacts (e.g., fireaffected rock, milling tools, flaked stone tools, toolmaking debris, ceramics), soil discoloration and depressions that might indicate the presence of a cultural midden, faunal and human osteological remains, features indicative of the former presence of structures or buildings (e.g., postholes, standing exterior walls, foundations), or historic debris (e.g., glass, metal, ceramics).
No indication of historic or prehistoric archaeological resources were found over the course of the pedestrian survey.
3.4.5 - Buried Site Potential
In addition to the pedestrian survey, the potential for yet identified cultural resources in the vicinity was reviewed against geologic and topographic geographic information system data for the general area and information from other nearby projects. The proposed project was evaluated against a set of criteria identified by a geoarchaeological overview of the Central Valley that was prepared for the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Districts 6 and 9.1 This study mapped the “archaeological sensitivity,” or potential to support the presence of buried prehistoric archaeological deposits, throughout the Central Valley based on geology and environmental parameters including distance to water and landform slope. The methodology used in the study is applicable to other parts of California, and concluded that sites consisting of flat, Holocene-era deposits in close proximity to water resources had a moderate to high probability of containing subsurface archaeological deposits when compared to earlier Pleistocene deposits situated on slopes or further away from drainages, lakes, and rivers.
1 Meyer, J., D. Craig Young, and Jeffrey S. Rosenthal. 2010. Volume I: A Geoarchaeological Overview and Assessment of Caltrans District 6 and 9, Cultural Resources Inventory of Caltrans District 6/9 Rural Conventional Highways. Submitted to Central California Department of Transportation, District 6.
788
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-19 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx The project site is flat and situated in close proximity to the Napa River with the Northern Slough along the western portion of the property. According to the geological map of the area by Wagner and Gutierrez, the surface of the project site consists almost entirely of Quaternary alluvial fan deposits, containing Holocene soils.
2 Applying the criteria set forth in Meyer et al. 2010, all Holocene-era deposits have the potential to contain archaeological deposits, which increases with the ease of the slope and proximity to water resources. This, coupled with the presence of a known precontact archaeological resource 1.2 mile to the north of the project footprint, indicates a moderate potential for unanticipated buried cultural resources to be impacted by project construction.
3.4.6 - Thresholds of Significance
According to Appendix G, Environmental Checklist, of the CEQA Guidelines, cultural resources impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed project would be considered significant if the project would:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as pursuant to Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? d) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? e) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1?
f) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or 2 Wagner, D.L., and Gutierrez, C.I., 2017, Preliminary geologic map of the Napa and Bodega Bay 30' x 60' quadrangles, California.
California Geological Survey, Preliminary Geologic Maps PGM-17-04, Scale 1:100.000. 789
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft EIR
3.4-20 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1.
3.4.7 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the development of the project and provides mitigation measures where appropriate.
Historic Resources
Impact CUL-1: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.
Impact Analysis
Historic resources in this context refer to the built environment, mainly buildings and structures over 45 years in age that may be eligible for inclusion on the CRHR or NRHP. Record search results conducted at the NWIC did not identify any historic resources within the project site, but identified one historic resource (P-28-000602) within a 0.5-mile records search radius. The project site’s proximity to the nearby Napa River, the Northern Slough waterway along its western boundary, and the lack of visibility of native soils due to high level of vegetation indicates a moderate potential for unanticipated cultural resources to be found during subsurface construction. FCS considers the potential for the proposed project to have an adverse effect on historic cultural resources to be moderate, creating a potentially significant impact.
Additionally, there is always a possibility that construction-related ground disturbance may uncover previously undiscovered historic cultural resources. As such, FCS recommends Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training for archaeological resources for all construction personnel directly involved with project-related ground disturbance. The WEAP training shall be conducted by an Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology. This is included as Mitigation Measure (MM) CUL-1a. Furthermore, FCS recommends archaeological monitoring during ground-disturbing activities, as outlined in MM CUL-1b below.
Lastly, MM CUL-1c outlines procedures for inadvertent discovery of cultural resources. With incorporation of MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, and MM CUL-1c impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
MM CUL-1a All construction personnel directly involved with project-related 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 790
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-21 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx 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 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.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Archaeological Resources
Impact CUL-2: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. 791
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft EIR
3.4-22 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Impact Analysis
The results of the records search from the NWIC identified one prehistoric archaeological resource (483A-001) located within the 0.5-mile records search radius. Additionally, the SLF search conducted by the NAHC came back positive for TCRs within the project site. No additional archaeological resources were encountered during the pedestrian field survey; however, this may have been due to poor soil visibility at the project site. Furthermore, FCS evaluated the potential for buried sites at the project site. The project site is located on relatively flat terrain and is situated in close proximity to wetlands, the Napa River, and the Northern Slough waterway on its western boundary. There is also a known precontact archaeological site 1 mile to the north of the project site. The combination of these factors suggests a moderate potential for unanticipated buried cultural resources to be impacted by project construction. This potentially significant impact would be reduced to a less than significant level through implementation of MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, and MM CUL-1c.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, and MM CUL-1c.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Human Remains
Impact CUL-3: The proposed project could disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.
Impact Analysis
While no formal cemeteries or areas containing human remains are known to be in the project vicinity, the possibility always exists that construction-related ground disturbance may uncover previously undiscovered human remains. In the unlikely event such a discovery is made, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and Section 5097.98 must be followed. Implementation of MM CUL-3, which details inadvertent discovery procedures, would reduce potential impacts to previously undiscovered human remains to a less than significant level.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
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:
792
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-23 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx
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 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.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Listed or Eligible Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-4: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k). 793
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft EIR
3.4-24 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Impact Analysis
Record search results from the NWIC indicate that there is one prehistoric resource located within a
0.5-mile radius of the project site, and a review of the NAHC SLF was positive for recorded TCRs being located within the project site. On January 2, 2023, FCS sent a letter containing project information to 11 tribal representatives recommended by the NAHC and requesting additional information about TCRs at the project site. No responses have been received to date. However, because the SLF search was positive, impacts are potentially significant. However, implementation of MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-3 would reduce potentially significant impacts to TCRs to a less than significant level.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-3.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Lead Agency Determined Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-5: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1.
Construction
Record search results from the NWIC indicate that there is one prehistoric resource located within a
0.5-mile radius of the project site, and a review of the NAHC SLF was positive for recorded TCRs being located within the project site. On December 1, 2023, in compliance with AB 52, the City of American Canyon sent a letter containing project information to 11 tribal representatives recommended by the NAHC and requesting additional information about TCRs at the project site (Appendix D). No responses have been received to date. Even so, because the SLF search was positive, impacts are potentially significant. However, implementation of MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-3 would reduce potentially significant impacts to TCRs to a less than significant level.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measures
MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-3. Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
794
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-25 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-04 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx
3.4.8 - Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope of the cumulative cultural resources analysis is a 0.5-mile radius of the project site. Cultural resource impacts tend to be localized because the integrity of any given resource depends on what occurs only in the immediate vicinity around that resource, such as disruption of soils; therefore, in addition to the project site (including the off-site construction areas), the area near the project site would be the area most affected by project activities (generally within a 500- foot radius). The results of the cultural resources assessment and tribal consultation indicate that the project will not have a direct impact on any known historic resources, archaeological resources, human remains, or TCRs.
Construction activities associated with development projects in the project vicinity may have the potential to encounter undiscovered cultural resources. These projects would be required to mitigate for impacts through compliance with applicable federal and State laws governing cultural resources. Although there is the possibility that previously undiscovered resources could be encountered by subsurface earthwork activities associated with the cumulative projects, the implementation of construction mitigation measures would ensure that undiscovered cultural resources are not adversely affected by cumulative project-related construction activities, which would prevent the destruction or degradation of potentially significant cultural resources. Although there is the possibility that previously undiscovered cultural resources and TCRs could be encountered by subsurface earthwork activities associated with the cumulative projects, the implementation of construction mitigation measures (MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-3) would ensure that undiscovered TCRs are not adversely affected by cumulative projectrelated construction activities. Given the standard conditions of approval and mitigation measures that cumulative projects would be required to implement, the proposed project, in conjunction with other planned and approved projects, would result in a less than significant cumulative impact related to TCRs.
With the implementation of MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-3, the proposed project would not result in a significant cumulative impact to cultural resources in the City of American Canyon or surrounding area.
Level of Cumulative Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Cumulative Mitigation Measures
Implementation of MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-3.
Level of Cumulative Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. 795
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
796
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx
3.5 - Energy
3.5.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing energy setting in the project area as well as the relevant regulatory framework. This section also evaluates the possible impacts related to energy that could result from implementation of the project. Information in this section is based on project-specific energy calculation outputs included in Appendix A. No public comments were received during the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) scoping period related to energy.
3.5.2 - Existing Setting
Energy Basics
Energy is generally transmitted either in the form of electricity, measured in kilowatts (kW)1 or megawatts (MW),2 or natural gas measured in British Thermal Units (BTU) or cubic feet.3 Fuel, such as gasoline or diesel, is measured in gallons or liters.
Electricity
Electricity is used primarily for lighting, appliances, and other uses associated with the project.
Natural Gas
Natural gas is used primarily for heating, water heating, and cooking purpose and is typically associated with commercial and residential uses.
Fuel
Fuel is used primarily for powering off-road equipment, trucks, and passenger vehicles. The typical fuel types used are diesel and gasoline.
Electricity Generation, Distribution, and Use
State of California
The State of California generated approximately 203,257 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity in 2022.
Approximately 47.8 percent of the energy generated is sourced from thermal energy sources (i.e., coal, natural gas, oil, waste heat/petroleum), with natural gas as the vast majority (47.5 percent of the total generation). Approximately 52.2 percent of the energy generated is sourced from renewable and non-greenhouse gas (GHG) emission sources (i.e., nuclear, hydropower, biomass, geothermal, solar, and wind).
4 Solar energy is the largest source of renewable energy, accounting for
19.9 percent of the total generation.
1 1 kW = 1.000 watts; A watt is a derived unit of power that measures rate of energy conversion. 1 watt is equivalent to work being done at a rate of 1 joule of energy per second. In electrical terms, 1 watt is the power dissipated by a current of 1 ampere flowing across a resistance of 1 volt. 2 1 MW = 1 million watts 3 A unit for quantity of heat that equals 100,000 British thermal units. A British thermal unit is the quantity of heat required to raise the temperature of 1 pound of liquid water 1 degree Fahrenheit at a constant pressure of 1 atmosphere. 4 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2022. 2022 Total System Electric Generation. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/datareports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2022-total-system-electric-generation. Accessed November 13, 2023. 797
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Energy Draft EIR
3.5-2 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx In 2019, California ranked second for total energy consumed, but the State’s per capita energy consumption was less than all other states except Rhode Island. In 2021, California was ranked as the fourth-largest electricity producer in the country. The same year, California was the top producer of electricity from solar, geothermal, and biomass energy and was the fourth in conventional hydroelectric power generation.
5 Electricity and natural gas is distributed through the various electric load-serving entities (LSEs) in California. These entities include investor-owned utilities (IOUs), publicly owned LSEs (including publicly owned utilities [POUs]), rural electric cooperatives, community choice aggregators, and electric service providers.6
County of Napa and City of American Canyon
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) provides electricity to many of the cities throughout Napa County (County). Local community choice aggregations (CCAs) can also provide electricity services alternatives to the region’s traditional utility supplier, PG&E. The local CCA for the City of American Canyon (City) is Marin Clean Energy (MCE). With the passing of Senate Bill (SB) 790 in 2011, residential and commercial customers within a local CCA jurisdiction are automatically enrolled in that CCA’s electricity service but retain the ability to opt-out and return to their traditional utility supplier.
According to the California Energy Commission (CEC), Napa County’s energy consumption was approximately 1,029 GWh in 2022.
7As Napa County’s population in 2021 was an estimated 134,300 people,8 the County experienced a per capita electricity consumption of an estimated 7,661 kilowatt hour (kWh) per year.
Project Site
The project site is currently undeveloped and does not consume electricity. MCE would procure, and PG&E would deliver, electricity to the proposed project.
Natural Gas Generation, Distribution, and Use
State of California
Natural gas is used for everything from generating electricity to cooking and space heating to alternative transportation fuel. Natural gas generation (in kWh) represented 10.7 percent of electric power generation in 1990 and increased over the 32-year period to represent 47.8 percent of electric power generation in 2022.
9 5 United States Energy Information Administration. 2022. California State Profile. Website: https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA.
Accessed November 13, 2023. 6 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023. Electric Load-Serving Entities (LSEs) in California Website: https:// www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/electric-load-serving-entities-lses. Accessed November 13, 2023. 7 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023. Electricity Generation by County. Website:
https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx. Accessed November 13, 2023. 8 United States Census Bureau. 2023. QuickFacts Napa County, California. Website:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/napacountycalifornia/PST045222. Accessed November 13, 2023. 9 State of California Energy Commission. 2022. 2022 Total System Electric Generation. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/datareports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2022-total-system-electric-generation. Accessed November 13, 2023. 798
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-3 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx Natural gas-fired generation has become the dominant source of electricity in California, as it currently fuels approximately 45 percent of electricity consumption.10 Because natural gas is a dispatchable resource that provides load when the availability of hydroelectric power generation and/or other sources decrease, use varies greatly from year to year. The availability of hydroelectric resources, the emergence of renewable resources for electricity generation, and overall consumer demand are the variables that shape natural gas use in electric generation.
County of Napa and City of American Canyon
PG&E provides natural gas to the Napa County, including the City of American Canyon. In 2021, Napa County’s natural gas consumption was approximately 37.7 million U.S. Therms, or approximately 3,769,100 Million Metric British Thermal Units (MMBTU).11 As Napa County’s population in in 2021 was an estimated 134,300 people,
12 the County experienced a per capita natural gas consumption of an estimated 28.1 MMBtu per year.
Project Site
The project site is currently undeveloped and does not consume natural gas.
Fuel Use
State of California
California is one of the top producers of petroleum in the nation, with drilling operations occurring throughout the State. A network of crude oil pipelines connects production areas to oil refineries in the Los Angeles area, the San Francisco Bay Area, and the Central Valley. California oil refineries also process Alaskan and foreign crude oil received in the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, and the San Francisco Bay Area. Crude oil production in California and Alaska is in decline, and California refineries have become increasingly dependent on foreign imports.13 Since 2012, foreign suppliers, led by Saudi Arabia, have provided over half of the crude oil refined in California.14,15According to the United States Energy Information Administration (EIA), California’s field production of crude oil has steadily declined since the mid-1980s, totaling approximately 122.3 million barrels in 2022. 16 10 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023. Supply and Demand of Natural Gas in California. Website:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/californias-natural-gas-market/supply-and-demand-natural-gas-california.
Accessed November 13, 2023. 11 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2020. Electricity Generation by County. Website:
https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx. Accessed December 13, 2023. 12 California Department of Finance (CDF). 2022. E-4 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2021-2022 with 2020 Census Benchmark. Website: https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/Demographics/estimates/e-4-population-estimates-for-cities-countiesand-the-state-2021-2022-with-2020-census-benchmark/. Accessed December 13, 2023. 13 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023. Oil Supply Sources to California Refineries. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/datareports/energy-almanac/californias-petroleum-market/oil-supply-sources-california-refineries. Accessed November 13, 2023. 14 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2021. Foreign Sources of Crude Oil Imports to California 2020. Website: https:// www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/californias-petroleum-market/foreign-sources-crude-oil-imports. Accessed November 13, 2023. 15 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023. Oil Supply Sources to California Refineries. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/datareports/energy-almanac/californias-petroleum-market/oil-supply-sources-california-refineries. Accessed November 13, 2023. 16 United States Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2022. California Field Production of Crude Oil. Website:
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mcrfpca2&f=a. Accessed November 13, 2023. 799
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Energy Draft EIR
3.5-4 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx According to the EIA, transportation accounted for approximately 34 percent of California’s total energy demand, amounting to approximately 2,355.5 trillion BTU in 2020. 17 California’s
transportation sector, including rail and aviation, consumed roughly 433 million barrels of petroleum fuels in 2020.
18 The CEC produces the California Annual Retail Fuel Outlet Report, which is a compilation of gasoline and diesel fuel sales data from across the State available at the county level.
According to the CEC, California’s 2022 fuel sales totaled 11,495 million gallons of gasoline and 1,846 million gallons of diesel.19 Napa County fuel sales totaled an estimated 49 million gallons of gasoline and an estimated 7 million gallons of diesel in 2022.20 Alternative Fuels
A variety of alternative fuels are used to reduce petroleum-based fuel demand. The use of these fuels is encouraged through various Statewide regulations and plans, such as the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and SB 32. Conventional gasoline and diesel may be replaced, depending on the vehicle's capability, with transportation fuels including hydrogen, biodiesel, and electricity. Currently, public hydrogen refueling stations exist in California; however, none are in the City.21,22
3.5.3 - Regulatory Framework
Federal
Energy Policy and Conservation Act
Enacted in 1975, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act legislation established fuel economy standards for new light-duty vehicles (autos, pickups, vans, and sport-utility vehicles). The law placed responsibility on the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA), a part of the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), for establishing and regularly updating vehicle standards. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administers the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program, which determines vehicle manufacturers’ compliance with existing fuel economy standards.
Since the inception of the program, the average fuel economy for new light-duty vehicles steadily increased from 13.1 miles per gallon (mpg) for the 1975 model year to 30.7 mpg for the 2014 model year and may increase to 54.5 mpg by 2025. On August 2, 2018, the NHTSA and EPA, operating under the direction of the Trump Administration, proposed the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule. This rule addresses emissions and fuel economy standards for motor vehicles and is separated into two parts as described below.
17 United States Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2022. Table F33: Total Energy Consumption, Price, and Expenditure Estimates, 2020. Website: https://www.eia.gov/state/seds/sep_fuel/html/pdf/fuel_te.pdf. Accessed November 13, 2023. 18 United States Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2022. Table F16: Total Petroleum Consumption Estimates, 2020. Website:
https://www.eia.gov/state/seds/sep_fuel/html/fuel_use_pa.html f. Accessed November 13, 2023. 19 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023. California Retail Fuel Outlet Annual Reporting (CEC-A15) Results. Website:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/transportation-energy/california-retail-fuel-outlet-annual-reporting.
Accessed November 13, 2023. 20 Ibid. 21 United State Department of Energy (DOE). Alternative Fuels Data Center. 2023. Alternative Fueling Station Counts by State. Website:
https://afdc.energy.gov/stations/states. Accessed November 13, 2023. 22 United State Department of Energy (DOE). Alternative Fuels Data Center. 2023. Alternative Fueling Station Locator [Interactive Database]. Website: https://afdc.energy.gov/stations/#/find/nearest?location=American%20Canyon,%20CA. Accessed December 13, 2023.
800
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-5 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx Part One, “One National Program” (84 Federal Register 51310) revokes a waiver granted by the EPA to the State of California under Section 209 of the Clean Air Act to enforce more stringent emission standards for motor vehicles than those required by the EPA for the explicit purpose of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction and, indirectly, criteria air pollutants and ozone precursor emission reduction. This revocation became effective on November 26, 2019, potentially restricting the ability of the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to enforce more stringent GHG emission standards for new vehicles and set zero-emission vehicle mandates in California.
Part Two addresses CAFE standards for passenger cars and light trucks for model years 2021 to 2026.
This rulemaking proposes new CAFE standards for model years 2022 through 2026 and would amend existing CAFE standards for model year 2021. The proposal would retain the model year 2020 standards (specifically, the footprint target curves for passenger cars and light trucks) through model year 2026. The proposal addressing CAFE standards was jointly developed by the NHTSA and EPA, with the EPA simultaneously proposing tailpipe carbon dioxide standards for the same vehicles covered by the same model years. The EPA and NHTSA published final rules to amend and establish national carbon dioxide and fuel economy standards on April 30, 2020 (Part Two of the SAFE Vehicles Rule) (85 Federal Register 24174).
On April 22, 2021, the Biden Administration formally proposed to roll back portions of the SAFE Vehicles Rule, thereby restoring California’s right to enforce more stringent fuel efficiency standards.23 Most recently, on December 21, 2021, the NHTSA finalized rules to repeal the SAFE I Rule. The final rule concludes the SAFE I Vehicles Rule overstepped the agency’s legal authority and established overly broad prohibitions that did not account for a variety of important state and local interests. The final rule ensures the SAFE I Vehicles Rule will no longer form an improper barrier to states exploring creative solutions to address their local communities’ environmental and public health challenges.24
Energy Independence and Security Act
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 was designed to improve vehicle fuel economy and help reduce nationwide dependence on foreign oil. It expands the production of renewable fuels, reducing dependence on oil and confronting global climate change. Specifically, it increases the supply of alternative fuel sources by setting a mandatory Renewable Fuel Standard, requiring fuel producers to use at least 36 billion gallons of biofuel in 2022, and reduces U.S. demand for oil by setting a national fuel economy standard of 35 mpg by 2020. The Act also set energy efficiency standards for lighting (specifically light bulbs) and appliances. The project would be required to install photosensors and energy-efficient lighting fixtures with the requirements of 42 United States Code Section 17001, et seq.
23 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). 2022. Corporate Average Fuel Economy. Website:
https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy. Accessed November 23, 2023. 24 Ibid. 801
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Energy Draft EIR
3.5-6 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx U.S. Executive Order 13693 (Energy Independence and Security Act Expansion) In March 2015, Executive Order 13693 Planning for Federal Sustainability in the Next Decade was signed into action. The goal of this Executive Order is to expand on the Energy Independence and Security Act.
Energy Star Program
In 1992, the EPA introduced Energy Star© as a voluntary labeling program designed to identify and promote energy-efficient products to reduce GHG emissions. The program applies to major household appliances, lighting, computers, and building components such as windows, doors, roofs, and heating and cooling systems. Under this program, appliances that meet specification for maximum energy use established under the program are certified to display the Energy Star© label.
In 1996, the EPA joined with the United State Department of Energy to expand the program, which now also includes qualifying commercial and industrial buildings as well as homes.
State
California Assembly Bill 1493: Pavley Regulations and Fuel Efficiency Standards California Assembly Bill (AB) 1493, enacted on July 22, 2002, required the ARB to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks. Implementation of the regulation was delayed by lawsuits filed by automakers and by the EPA’s denial of an implementation waiver. The EPA subsequently granted the requested waiver in 2009, which was upheld by the by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in 2011.25 The standards were to be phased in during the 2009 through 2016 model years.26 The second phase of the implementation for the Pavley Bill was incorporated into amendments to the Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) Program referred to as LEV III or the Advanced Clean Cars program.
The Advanced Clean Car Program combines the control of smog-causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package of requirements for model years 2017 through 2025.
The regulation is anticipated to reduce GHGs from new cars by 34 percent from 2016 levels by 2025.
The new rules will reduce pollutants from gasoline and diesel-powered cars and deliver increasing numbers of zero-emission technologies, such as full battery electric cars, newly emerging plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (EVs), and hydrogen fuel cell cars. The regulations will also ensure adequate fueling infrastructure is available for the increasing numbers of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles planned for deployment in California.27
Advanced Clean Cars II was adopted in November 2022. The Advanced Clean Cars II regulations will rapidly scale down light-duty passenger car, pickup truck, and SUV emissions starting with the 2026 model year through 2035. The regulations are two-pronged. First, they amend the Zero-emission Vehicle Regulation to require an increasing number of zero-emission vehicles and rely on currently available advanced vehicle technologies, including battery-electric, hydrogen fuel cell electric, and 25 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2013. Clean Car Standards—Pavley, Assembly Bill 1493. Website:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccms/ccms.htm. Accessed June 30, 2023. 26 California Air Resources Board (ARB). Advanced Clean Cars Summary. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019- 12/acc%20summary-final_ac.pdf. Accessed June 30, 2023. 27 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2011. Status of Scoping Plan Recommended Measures. Website:
https://calcarbondash.org/cc/scopingplan/sp_measures_implementation_timeline.pdf. Accessed June 30, 2023. 802
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-7 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, to meet air quality and climate change emissions standards. These amendments support Governor Newsom’s 2020 Executive Order N-79-20 that requires all new passenger vehicles sold in California to be zero emissions by 2035. Second, the Low-emission Vehicle Regulations were amended to include increasingly stringent standards for gasoline cars and heavier passenger trucks to continue to reduce smog-forming emissions.
In October 2023, ARB launched a new effort to consider potential amendments to the Advanced Clean Cars II regulations, including updates to the tailpipe greenhouse gas emission standard and limited revisions to the Low-emission Vehicle and Zero-emission Vehicle regulations.
These regulations rapidly scale down emissions of light-duty passenger cars, pickup trucks, and SUVs and require an increased number of zero-emission vehicles to meet air quality and climate change emissions goals.
California Senate Bill 1078: Renewable Electricity Standards First established in 2002 under SB 1078, California Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) requires retail sellers of electric services to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent by 2020 and 50 percent by 2030.28 In 2018, SB 100 further increased California’s RPS and required retail sellers and local publicly owned electric utilities to procure eligible renewable electricity for 44 percent of retail sales by the end of 2024, 52 percent by the end of 2027, and 60 percent by the end of 2030; and that ARB should plan for 100 percent eligible renewable energy resources and zerocarbon resources by the end of 2045. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and the CEC jointly implement the RPS program. The CPUC’s responsibilities include: (1) determining annual procurement targets and enforcing compliance; (2) reviewing and approving each investor-owned utility’s renewable energy procurement plan; (3) reviewing contracts for RPS-eligible energy; and (4) establishing the standard terms and conditions used in contracts for eligible renewable energy.
Senate Bills 350, 100, and 1020
The Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015 (SB 350) requires the amount of electricity generated and sold to retail customers per year from eligible renewable energy resources to be increased to 50 percent by December 31, 2030. This act also requires doubling of the energy efficiency in existing buildings by 2030.
Adopted on September 10, 2018, SB 100 supports the reduction of GHG emissions from the electricity sector by accelerating the State’s RPS Program (last updated by SB 350). SB 100 requires electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 44 percent by 2024, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045.
Senate Bill 1020 (SB 1020), signed into law on September 16, 2022, requires renewable energy and zero-carbon resources to supply 90 percent of all retail electricity sales by 2035, 95 percent by 2040, and 100 percent by 2045. All State agencies’ facilities must be served by 100 percent renewable and 28 California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program. Website:
https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/rps/. Accessed November 27, 2023. 803
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Energy Draft EIR
3.5-8 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx zero-carbon resources by 2030. SB 1020 also requires the CPUC, CEC, and ARB to issue a joint progress report outlining the reliability of the electrical grid with a focus on summer reliability and challenges and gaps. Additionally, SB 1020 requires the CPUC to define energy affordability and use energy affordability metrics to develop protections, incentives, discounts, or new programs for residential customers facing hardships due to energy or gas bills.
California Code of Regulations Title 24
Part 6 (Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings) California Code of Regulations Title 24 Part 6 (California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings), was first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficient technologies and methods. Energy efficient buildings require less electricity; therefore, increased energy efficiency reduces fossil fuel consumption and decreases GHG emissions. The 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards went into effect on January 1, 2020. The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards became effective on January 1, 2023.29
Part 11 (California Green Building Standards Code)
California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 11, is a comprehensive and uniform regulatory code for all residential, commercial, and school buildings that went in effect January 1, 2011. The Code is updated on a regular basis, with the most recent update consisting of the 2022 California Green Building Code Standards that became effective January 1, 2023.30 Local jurisdictions are permitted to adopt more stringent requirements, as State Law provides methods for local enhancements. The Code recognizes that many jurisdictions have developed existing construction and demolition ordinances, and defers to them as the ruling guidance provided they provide a minimum 50-percent diversion requirement. The Code also provides exemptions for areas not served by construction and demolition recycling infrastructure. The California Building Code (CBC) provides the minimum standard that buildings need to meet in order to be certified for occupancy, which is generally enforced by the local building official.
California Public Utilities Code
The CPUC regulates privately owned telecommunication, electric, natural gas, water, railroad, rail transit, and passenger transportation companies. It is the responsibility of the CPUC to (1) assure California utility customers safe, reliable utility service at reasonable rates; (2) protect utility customers from fraud; and (3) promote a healthy California economy. The Public Utilities Code, adopted by the legislature, defines the jurisdiction of the CPUC. 29 California Energy Commission. 2023. Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-andtopics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022-building-energy-efficiency. Accessed December 18, 2023. 30 Ibid. 804
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-9 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx Local
City of American Canyon
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 energy use at the local level and improve energy efficiency and conservation:
Objective 8.22 Minimize transportation-related energy consumption.
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 8.22.2 Encourage the clustering of residential structures.
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.
Policy 8.23.2 Require that new City buildings be energy efficient.
Objective 8.24 Increase public awareness of energy conservation needs and means in order to encourage informed choices about energy conservation by the general public.
Policy 8.24.1 Cooperate with local utilities to provide energy conservation information to the public.
Policy 8.24.2 Develop public and/or public-private energy conservation educational programs for City employees and the public.
805
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Energy Draft EIR
3.5-10 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx Objective 8.25 Increase the energy efficiency of City operations to save energy, reduce municipal costs, and provide an example to the private sector.
Policy 8.25.1 Introduce concepts of energy efficiency and lifecycle costing to City planning and operating decisions and to the design of all major City facilities.
Policy 8.25.2 Work with other agencies and utility companies to develop safe, economical and renewable energy resources.
Policy 8.25.3 Consider participating in energy conservation demonstration projects and promoting the use of treatment technologies that provide for the reuse of waste and water treatment by products, such as sludge and methane gas.
3.5.4 - Methodology
The approach to analyzing energy impacts is based on Public Resources Code Section 21100(b)(3), which states an EIR shall include “mitigation measures proposed to minimize significant effects on the environment, including, but not limited to, measures to reduce the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy.” Guidance for implementing this section is provided in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix F (Energy Conservation). CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(b) further explains, “This [energy] analysis may be included in related analyses of air quality, GHG emissions, transportation or utilities in the discretion of the lead agency.” Consistent with that approach, additional discussion of the physical environmental impacts associated with production of energy is also included in the other resource chapters of this EIR, including but not limited to Section 3.2, Air Quality; Section 3.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Section
3.13, Transportation; and Section 3.14, Utilities and Service Systems.
Energy consumption is analyzed herein in terms of construction and operational energy.
Construction energy demand accounts for anticipated energy consumption during construction of development facilitated by the proposed project, such as fuel consumed by construction equipment and construction workers’ vehicles traveling to and from the construction site. Operational energy demand accounts for the anticipated energy consumption during operation of the development facilitated by the project, such as fuel consumed by cars and trucks and electricity consumed for building power needs, including but not limited to lighting, water conveyance, and air conditioning.
3.5.5 - Thresholds of Significance
The lead agency utilizes the criteria in the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist to determine whether impacts related to energy are significant environmental effects. Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? 806
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-11 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx Significance Criteria
Impact ENER-1: Wasteful, Inefficient, or Unnecessary Energy Consumption The methodology employed under Impact ENER-1, which focuses on determining whether the proposed project would result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, follows the guidance provided in Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines as well as the analytical precedent set by League to Save Lake Tahoe Mountain etc. v. County of Placer (2022) (75 Cal.App.5th 63, 164-168).
According to Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines, the goal of conserving energy is translated to include decreasing overall per capita energy consumption; decreasing reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, and oil; and increasing reliance on renewable energy sources. In League to Save Lake Tahoe Mountain etc. v. County of Placer, the Appellate Court concluded that the analysis of wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary energy consumption was not adequate because it did not consider whether additional renewable energy features can be added to the project.
The proposed project would be considered to result in a potentially significant impact if it would result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Considering the guidance provided by Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines and the Appellate Court decision in League to Save Lake Tahoe Mountain etc. v. County of Placer, the proposed project would be considered to result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources if it would conflict with the following energy conservation goals:
• Decreasing overall per capita energy consumption;
• Decreasing reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, or oil; and • Increasing reliance on renewable energy sources.
Impact ENER-2: Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Plan Consistency This impact discussion focuses on project consistency with a local plan or policy adopted for the purpose of improving energy efficiency or reliance on renewable energy sources. Impact ENER-2 focuses on project consistency with relevant policies intended to improve energy efficiency and encourage the use of renewable energy sources. As such, the proposed project would be determined to conflict with the applicable energy efficiency or renewable energy plan if it would not adhere to applicable energy consumption related measures included in the City’s General Plan.
3.5.6 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the development of the project and provides mitigation measures where appropriate.
Energy Use
Impact ENER-1: The proposed project would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation.
807
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Energy Draft EIR
3.5-12 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx Impact Analysis
A discussion of the proposed project’s anticipated energy usage is presented below. Energy use consumed by the proposed project was estimated and includes electricity and fuel consumption for project construction and operation. Energy calculations are included as part of Appendix B.
Construction Impacts
For purposes of this analysis, the project construction schedule was assumed to begin in September 2024 and conclude in August 2025. If the construction schedule moves to later years, construction emissions would likely decrease because of improvements in technology and more stringent regulatory requirements as older, less efficient equipment is replaced by newer and cleaner equipment. The proposed project would require site preparation, grading, building construction, architectural coating, and paving. The construction phase would require energy for the manufacture and transportation of building materials, preparation of the site (e.g., grading), and the actual construction of the building. Petroleum-based fuels such as diesel fuel and gasoline would be the primary sources of energy for these tasks.
The types of on-site equipment used during construction of the proposed project could include gasoline- and diesel-powered construction and transportation equipment, including trucks, graders, tractors, and cranes. Construction equipment is estimated to consume a total of approximately 32,838 gallons of diesel fuel over the entire construction duration (Appendix B).
Fuel use associated with construction vehicle trips generated by the proposed project was also estimated; trips include construction worker trips, haul truck trips for material transport, and vendor trips for construction material deliveries. Fuel use from these vehicles traveling to the project site was based on (1) the projected number of trips the proposed project would generate during construction, (2) average trip distances by trip type, and (3) fuel efficiencies estimated in the ARB EMFAC mobile source emission model. The specific parameters used to estimate fuel usage are included in Appendix B. In total, the proposed project is estimated to generate 453,615 VMT and consume 29,325 gallons of combined gasoline and diesel for vehicle travel during construction. In total, project construction is expected to consume 62,162 gallons of combined gasoline and diesel from on-site equipment and construction vehicle trip fuel use.
The overall construction schedule and process is already designed to be efficient in order to avoid excess monetary costs. For example, equipment and fuel are not typically used wastefully due to the added expense associated with renting the equipment, maintaining it, and fueling it. Therefore, the opportunities for future efficiency gains during construction are limited. Therefore, it is anticipated that the construction phase of the proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy. Construction-related energy impacts would be less than significant.
Operational Impacts
The proposed project would consume energy as part of building operations and transportation activities. Project energy consumption is summarized in Table 3.5-1. 808
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-13 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx Table 3.5-1: Estimated Annual Project Energy Consumption in 2025 Energy Consumption Activity Annual Consumption
Electricity Consumption 659,500 kWh
Building Natural Gas Consumption 0 kBTU
Operational Fuel Consumption-Natural Gas 13,980 gallons Operational Fuel Consumption-Gasoline 42,129 gallons
Operational Fuel Consumption–Diesel 249,798 gallons
Operational Fuel Consumption–Electricity 35,233 kWh
Notes:
kBTU = kilo-British Thermal Unit
kWh = kilowatt-hour
VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled
Source: Appendix B.
Operation of the proposed warehouse would consume an estimated 659,500 kWh of electricity on an annual basis. Natural gas would not be utilized as a building fuel. The proposed project’s building would be designed and constructed in accordance with the latest adopted energy efficiency standards, which are based on the State’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards. These are widely regarded as the most advanced building energy efficiency standards and compliance would ensure that building energy consumption would not be wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary. The proposed project would also install solar on the building roof top and would produce an estimated 235,000 kWh per year. Furthermore, the proposed 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. Furthermore, the proposed project would use electric forklifts.
Project-related vehicle trips would consume an estimated 291,927 gallons of gasoline and diesel annually and would involve activities and travel routes typical of a warehouse-type project. The fossil fuels consumed by the project annually would decrease and shift to electricity consumption as the on-road passenger vehicle and heavy-duty truck fleets shift from gasoline and diesel to zeroemission electric vehicles per compliance with State regulations. Thus, transportation fuel consumption would not be wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary. Impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
809
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Energy Draft EIR
3.5-14 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Standards Consistency Impact ENER-2: The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
Impact Analysis
The proposed project would be served with electricity provided by PG&E. In 2021, PG&E obtained
47.7 percent of its electricity from renewable energy sources. 31 PG&E also offers a 50 percent and
100 percent solar choice that source 70.9 and 93.9 percent of its power mix from eligible renewable energy sources respectively, as well as a Green Saver option that sources 89.9 percent of its power mix from eligible renewable energy sources.32 The utility would be required to meet the future objective of 60 percent of electricity from renewable energy sources by 2030. The proposed warehouse building would be designed in accordance with Title 24, California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential Buildings. These standards include minimum energy efficiency requirements related to building envelope, mechanical systems (e.g., heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] and water heating systems), and indoor and outdoor lighting. The incorporation of the Title 24 standards into the design of the proposed project would ensure that the proposed project would not result in the use of energy in a wasteful manner. In addition, the proposed project would install solar on the building roof top and would produce an estimated 235,000 kWh per year.
Furthermore, the proposed building would be insulated and refrigerated at approximately 58°F, 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.
The proposed project would comply with existing State energy standards and with energy conservation policies contained in the General Plan. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with State or local renewable or energy efficiency objectives. Impacts would be less than significant.
The proposed project’s compliance with Title 24 standards and other applicable regulations, as well as the use of solar panels on the building roof and use of cool night air via intake louvers and fans would ensure that the proposed project would not conflict with any of the General Plan energy conservation policies related to the proposed project’s building, mechanical systems, or indoor and outdoor lighting. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
31 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023. Annual Power Content Labels for 2021. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programsand-topics/programs/power-source-disclosure/power-content-label/annual-power-content-2. Accessed November 14, 2023. 32 Ibid. 810
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-15 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx
3.5.7 - Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative impacts occur when the incremental effects of a project are significant when combined with similar impacts from other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects in a similar geographic area. The geographic scope of the cumulative energy analysis is the portion of PG&E’s service area that covers the City. Cumulative projects considered as part of this cumulative analysis include the proposed project, other cumulative projects identified in Section 4 Cumulative Effects of this EIR, and other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects within the PG&E service area that covers the City.
Concerning electricity and natural gas, cumulative projects would be required to comply with applicable provisions of Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen. Specifically, the buildings and other improvements that would be constructed as part of the various cumulative projects would be required to be designed in accordance with Title 24, California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings as applicable. These standards include minimum energy efficiency requirements related to building envelope, mechanical systems (e.g., HVAC and water heating systems), and indoor and outdoor lighting. Future cumulative development would also be required to meet even more stringent energy efficiency requirements through local and Statewide policy, such as Title 24, Part 6, which would require, for example, that newly constructed residential homes include on-site photovoltaic solar systems, with some exceptions.
Furthermore, PG&E—which supplies electricity to the project site and vicinity—would be required by SB 100 to incrementally increase the proportion of renewable electricity generation supplying its in-state retail sales until it reaches 100 percent carbon-free electricity generation by 2045. Electricity would also be consumed during construction of the cumulative projects from the use of construction trailers and any electrically driven equipment, vehicles, or tools. Electricity consumed during construction of the cumulative projects would also be subject to the renewable electricity generation requirements established by SB 100, as PG&E would be the anticipated electricity supplier for the cumulative project areas. The incorporation of these regulations into the design of the cumulative projects would ensure that they would not result in the inefficient, unnecessary, or wasteful consumption of electricity or natural gas, and thus they would not have a significant cumulative impact.
Similarly, the proposed project’s energy use would be limited to that which is necessary for the construction and operation of the proposed project. As discussed above, the proposed project would be required to comply with applicable Statewide and local policies and standards pertaining to energy efficiency and can reasonably be assumed to pursue greater energy efficiencies, to the extent commercially practicable in its operation, in the interest of reducing operating costs. In addition, the proposed project be built as all-electric and would not utilize natural gas during construction or operations. As such, the proposed project’s incremental contribution to the less than significant cumulative impact would not be considerable with respect to energy consumption in the form of electricity and natural gas. Cumulative projects would be required to comply with California Code of Regulations Title 13, Sections 2449(d)(3) and 2485, that limit idling from both on-road and off-road diesel-powered equipment and are enforced by the ARB. Additionally, various federal and State regulations, including the LCFS, Pavley Clean Car Standards, and LEV Program, would serve to reduce the transportation fuel demand of cumulative projects.
811
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Energy Draft EIR
3.5-16 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-05 Energy.docx Compliance with the aforementioned regulations by the cumulative projects would ensure that they would not result in the inefficient, unnecessary, or wasteful consumption of fuel and their cumulative impact would be less than significant. As discussed in more detail above, the proposed project would consume vehicle fuel during both construction and operation. As previously discussed, the proposed project would also be required to use fuels which conform to various federal and State regulations, such as the LCFS, Pavley Clean Car Standards, and LEV Program. In addition, the proposed project would consume fuels in an amount necessary to construct and operate the proposed project and would not consume excessive amounts of fuel beyond what is necessary in the interest of avoiding unnecessary construction or operation costs. Therefore, the proposed project’s incremental contribution to the less than significant cumulative impact would not be considerable with respect to the wasteful or inefficient use of energy.
Considering the information provided above, the proposed project would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on energy consumption and would not conflict with any renewable energy plans. Cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
812
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx
3.6 - Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
3.6.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing geology, soils, and seismicity setting and potential effects from project implementation on the site and its surrounding area. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on information from the California Geological Survey, information provided by the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation prepared by Krazan and Associates, Inc., dated July 2023 (Krazan). The report is provided in Appendix E.
No public comments pertaining to geology, soils, and seismicity were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP).
3.6.2 - Environmental Setting
Regional Geology
The site is located in the southern portion of the Napa Valley, which is characterized as a relatively large northwest-trending alluvial valley within the Northern California Coast Range geomorphic province. The valley is at the southernmost end of the Mayacamas Mountains. South of the City of Napa, the hills on the western side of the valley terminate at the marshes bordering the northern end of San Pablo Bay; the hills on the northeast continue to near Sulphur Springs Mountain near the City of Vallejo. The bedrock ridges on each side of the Napa Valley trend northwest, parallel to the general north-northwest structural trend of the North Coast Ranges. Pre-Quaternary bedrock is generally restricted to the foothills, but locally there are low knolls or hills of Tertiary-age bedrock in the central and western parts of the valley. Quaternary alluvial fan deposits shed from the hills on the east, and fluvial deposits associated with the Napa River and its tributary valleys comprise the youngest deposits within the Napa Valley.1
Within the region, the San Andreas Fault system distributes shearing across a complex assemblage of primarily right-lateral, strike-slip, parallel, and sub-parallel faults that include the Hayward and Calaveras Faults and others (see the “Faulting” section of this report). The mountainous topography west of Napa Valley resulted from the latest Pliocene and Quaternary uplift associated with the younger structures.
Local Geology
Geologic mapping indicates that the near-surface deposits at and in the vicinity of the project site are late Pleistocene to Holocene-age fan deposits composed of sand, gravel, silt, and clay that are moderately to poorly sorted and moderately to poorly bedded. 2,3 The project site is on Quaternity
alluvial fan (Qf) deposits. The Qf deposits are described as gently sloping, fan-shaped, relatively undissected alluvial surfaces.
1 Cornerstone Earth Group. 2017. Geotechnical Investigation. 2 Krazan and Associates, Inc. (Krazan). 2023. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, Proposed SDG Commerce 220, LLC, Distribution Center, 1055 Commerce Court, American Canyon, California. July 25, 2023. 3 Bezore, S.P., C.E. Randolph-Loar, and R.C. Witter (Bezore et al.). 2002. Geologic map of the Cuttings Wharf 7.5-minute quadrangle, Napa and Solano counties, California: A digital database. Preliminary Geologic Maps PGM-02-01. California Geological Survey. Map.
Scale 1:24,000.
813
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Draft EIR
3.6-2 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx Seismicity
The term seismicity describes the effects of seismic waves that are radiated from an earthquake as it ruptures. While most of the energy released during an earthquake results in permanent ground displacement, as much as 10 percent may dissipate immediately in the form of seismic waves.
In 2015, the 2014 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities(WGCEP)4 presented the Third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3). According to this report, the San Francisco Bay Area has an estimated 72 percent chance of experiencing an earthquake of magnitude (M) 6.7 or higher over the next 30 years (from when the study was conducted in 2014). 5 The UCERF3
also provides estimates for the West Napa Fault (1.9 percent), Hayward-Rodgers Creek (13.3 percent), and Green Valley Fault (4.4 percent), which are in proximity to the project site. 6 To understand the implications of seismic events, a discussion of faulting and seismic hazards follows.
Faulting
Faults form in rocks when stresses overcome the internal strength of the rock, resulting in a fracture.
Large faults develop in response to large, regional stresses operating over a long time, such as those stresses caused by the relative displacement between tectonic plates. According to the elastic rebound theory, these stresses cause strain to build up in the earth’s crust until enough strain has built up to exceed the strength along a fault and cause a brittle failure. The slip between the two stuck plates or coherent blocks generates an earthquake. Following an earthquake, strain will build once again until the occurrence of another earthquake. The magnitude of slip is related to the maximum allowable strain that can be built up along a particular fault segment. The greatest build up in strain that is due to the largest relative motion between tectonic plates or fault blocks over the longest period of time will generally produce the largest earthquakes. The distribution of these earthquakes is a study of much interest for both hazard prediction and analysis of active deformation of the earth’s crust. Deformation is a complex process, and strain caused by tectonic forces is not only accommodated through faulting but also by folding, uplift, and subsidence, which can be gradual or in direct response to earthquakes.
Faults are mapped to determine earthquake hazards since they occur where earthquakes tend to recur. A historic plane of weakness is more likely to fail under stress and strain than a previously unbroken block of crust. Faults are, therefore, a prime indicator of past seismic activity, and faults with recent activity are presumed to be the best candidates for future earthquakes. However, since slip is not always accommodated by faults that intersect the surface along traces, and since the orientation of stresses and strain in the crust can shift, predicting the location of future earthquakes 4 Also referred to as WGCEP 2014, this is a working group composed of seismologists from the United States Geological Survey (USGS), California Geological Survey (CGS), Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC), and California Earthquake Authority (CEA). 5 Field, E. H., Glenn P. Biasi, Peter Bird, Timothy E. Dawson, Karen R. Felzer, David D. Jackson, Kaj M. Johnson, Thomas H. Jordan, Christopher Madden, Andrew J. Michael, Kevin R. Milner, Morgan T. Page, Tom Parsons, Peter M. Powers, Bruce E. Shaw, Wayne R.
Thatcher, Ray J. Weldon II, and Yuehua Zeng (Field et al.). 2015. Long-Term Time-Dependent Probabilities for the Third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3). Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 105. April 2015. 6 Ibid. 814
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-3 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx is complicated. Earthquakes sometimes occur in areas with previously undetected faults or along faults previously thought inactive.
The West Napa, Green Valley, Hayward-Rogers Creek, Mount Diablo Thrust, Calaveras, and San Andreas faults are the closest in proximity to the project site. 7 Predominate faults and their
characteristics are summarized in Table 3.6-1.
Table 3.6-1: Fault Summary
Fault Type
Relationship to Project Site Maximum
Credible
Earthquake
Direction Distance (miles) (magnitude)
West Napa Normal-Oblique West 0.8 6.50
Green Valley Right-Lateral Strike-Slip East 8.0 6.50
Hayward-Rogers Creek Right-Lateral Strike-Slip West 11.0 7.00 Sources: Cornerstone Earth Group. 2017.
Krazan & Associates Inc. 2021. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Proposed SDG Commerce 224 Distribution Center 1055 Commerce Court American Canyon, California. January 18.
West Napa Fault
The West Napa Fault begins under San Pablo Bay and travels north through American Canyon and up the west side of the Napa Valley to the vicinity of Saint Helena. The West Napa Fault is designated an Alquist-Priolo Special Study Area. On August 24, 2014, a magnitude 6.0 earthquake (known as the South Napa Earthquake) occurred on the West Napa Fault. Prior to the 2014 South Napa Earthquake, the last major seismic event on the West Napa Fault was a magnitude 5.2 temblor whose epicenter was near Yountville in September 20008
.
Exhibit 3.6-1 depicts the location of the West Napa Earthquake Fault Zones in relation to the project site. As shown in the exhibit, the project site is not within the West Napa Fault Zone.
Seismic Hazards
Seismic hazards pose a substantial danger to property and human safety and are present because of the risk of naturally occurring geologic events and processes impacting human development.
Therefore, the hazard is influenced as much by the conditions of human development as by the frequency and distribution of major geologic events. Seismic hazards present in California include ground rupture along faults, strong seismic shaking, liquefaction, ground failure, landsliding, and slope failure.
7 Krazan. 2021. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Proposed SDG Commerce 224 Distribution Center 1055 Commerce Court American Canyon, California. January 18. 8
United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2014. M6.0-6km NW of American Canyon. 815
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
816
56390001 • 03/2024 | 3.6-1_earthquake_fault_zone CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON SDG COMMERCE 220 PROJECT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Exhibit 3.6-1
Earthquake Fault Zone Map
Source: California Conservation. California Geological Survey. 01/11/2018.
I
Project Site
817
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
818
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-7 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx Fault Rupture
Fault rupture is a seismic hazard that affects structures sited above an active fault. The hazard from fault rupture is the movement of the ground surface along a fault during an earthquake. Typically, this movement takes place during the short time of an earthquake, but it also can occur slowly over many years in a process known as creep. Most structures and underground utilities cannot accommodate the surface displacements of several inches to several feet commonly associated with fault rupture or creep.
Following the August 24, 2014, seismic event on the West Napa Fault, fault rupture was observed on two Napa County Airport taxiways and various roadways in Napa County, including State Route (SR) 121 and Old Sonoma Road.
Ground Shaking
The severity of ground shaking depends on several variables, such as earthquake magnitude, epicenter distance, local geology, thickness, seismic wave-propagation properties of unconsolidated materials, groundwater conditions, and topographic setting. Ground shaking hazards are most pronounced in areas near faults or with unconsolidated alluvium.
Based on observations of damage from recent earthquakes in California (e.g., San Fernando 1971, Whittier-Narrows 1987, Landers 1992, Northridge 1994), ground shaking is responsible for 70 to 100 percent of all earthquake damage. The most common type of damage from ground shaking is structural damage to buildings, which can range from cosmetic stucco cracks to total collapse. The overall level of structural damage from a nearby large earthquake would likely be moderate to heavy, depending on the characteristics of the earthquake, the type of ground, and the condition of the building. Besides damage to buildings, strong ground shaking can cause severe damage from falling objects or broken utility lines. Fire and explosions are also hazards associated with strong ground shaking.
During the 2014 South Napa Earthquake, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) instrument readings at monitoring sites in Napa and Vallejo reported peak ground acceleration values ranging from 19.8 to 40.7 percent of gravity, which corresponds to “strong” and “very strong” ground shaking. Following the earthquake, more than 200 persons sought treatment at local hospitals, more than 150 buildings were “red tagged,”9 and numerous utility lines experienced ruptures or leaks that disrupted service.
Ground Failure
Ground failure includes liquefaction, the liquefaction-induced phenomena of lateral spreading, and lurching.
Liquefaction is a process by which sediments below the water table temporarily lose strength during an earthquake and behave as a viscous liquid rather than a solid. Liquefaction is restricted to certain geologic and hydrologic environments, primarily recently deposited sand and silt in areas with high groundwater levels. The process of liquefaction involves seismic waves passing through saturated 9 A red tagged building is considered uninhabitable without further assessment or repair under the California Building Standards Code.
819
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Draft EIR
3.6-8 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx granular layers, distorting the granular structure, and causing the particles to collapse. This causes the granular layer to behave temporarily as a viscous liquid, resulting in liquefaction.
Liquefaction can cause the soil beneath a structure to lose strength, which may result in the loss of foundation-bearing capacity. This loss of strength commonly causes the structure to settle or tip.
Loss of bearing strength can also cause light buildings with basements, buried tanks, and foundation piles to rise buoyantly through the liquefied soil.
Lateral spreading is lateral ground movement, with some vertical component, caused by liquefaction. In effect, the soil rides on top of the liquefied layer. Lateral spreading can occur on relatively flat sites with slopes less than 2 percent, under certain circumstances, and can cause ground cracking and settlement.
Lurching is the movement of the ground surface toward an open face when the soil liquefies. An open face could be a graded slope, stream bank, canal face, gully, or other similar feature.
Landslides and Slope Failure
Landslides and other forms of slope failure form in response to the long-term geologic cycle of uplift, mass wasting, and disturbance of slopes. Mass wasting refers to a variety of erosional processes from gradual downhill soil creep to mudslides, debris flows, landslides, and rock fall—processes that are commonly triggered by intense precipitation, which varies according to climactic shifts.
Often, various forms of mass wasting are grouped together as landslides, which are generally used to describe the downhill movement of rock and soil.
Geologists classify landslides into several different types that reflect differences in the type of material and type of movement. The four most common types of landslides are translational, rotational, earth flow, and rock fall. Debris flows are another common type of landslide similar to earth flows, except that the soil and rock particles are coarser. Mudslide is a term that appears in non-technical literature to describe a variety of shallow, rapidly moving earth flows.
Surface Profile/Geomorphology
The project site predominantly consists of vacant land. Surface soils have a loose consistency and contain a moderate amount of grass and weeds. The site gently slopes from east to west.
Soil Borings and Subsurface Profile
Subsurface soil conditions were explored by Krazan & Associates by drilling 24 borings at the project site to depths ranging from approximately 10 to 50 feet below the existing grade. In addition, three bulk subgrade samples were obtained for testing.10
In general, surface soils at the project site consist of approximately 6 to 12 inches of soft silty clay or sandy clary or very loose silty sand. These soils are disturbed, have low strength characteristics, and 10 Krazan. 2023. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, Proposed SDG Commerce 220, LLC, Distribution Center, 1055 Commerce Court, American Canyon, California. July 25, 2023
820
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-9 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx are highly compressible when saturated. Within portions of the site, there is approximately 6 to 12 inches of fill materials. Beneath the loose surface soils and fill material, there is approximately 17.5 feet of stiff to hard sandy clary, silty clay, and medium dense/very stiff clayey sand/sandy clay. These soils are moderately strong and slightly to moderately compressible. The clayey soils have a moderate to high potential for expansion. Below 18.5 feet, there are layers of predominately stiff to very stiff sandy clay and silty clary, and medium dense silty sand/sandy silt were encountered. This soil contained varying amounts of gravel. They are moderately strong and slightly compressible.11 Paleontological Resources
The project site is on Quaternity alluvial fan deposits. The area within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site contains other Holocene deposits, Pleistocene alluvial fan deposits, the Pliocene Huichica Formation, and Cretaceous granitic rocks. Pleistocene alluvial fan deposits have the potential to be fossiliferous; however, the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP) database lists no vertebrate or plant fossils in any of the forementioned geologic units in Napa County. The nearest Pleistocene vertebrate locality is approximately 10 miles southeast of American Canyon, in Solano County.
3.6.3 - Regulatory Framework
Federal
National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) was established by the United States Congress when it passed the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977, Public Law 95–124. In establishing the NEHRP, Congress recognized that earthquake-related losses could be reduced through improved design and construction methods and practices, land use controls and redevelopment, prediction techniques and early warning systems, coordinated emergency preparedness plans, and public education and involvement programs. The four basic goals remain unchanged:
• Develop effective practices and policies for earthquake loss reduction and accelerate their implementation.
• Improve techniques for reducing earthquake vulnerabilities of facilities and systems. • Improve earthquake hazards identification and risk assessment methods and their use. • Improve the understanding of earthquakes and their effects.
Several key federal agencies contribute to earthquake mitigation efforts. There are four primary NEHRP agencies:
• National Institute of Standards and Technology of the Department of Commerce • National Science Foundation
• USGS of the Department of the Interior
11 Krazan. 2023.Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, Proposed SDG Commerce 220, LLC, Distribution Center, 1055 Commerce Court, American Canyon, California. July 25, 2023.
821
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Draft EIR
3.6-10 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security Implementation of NEHRP priorities is accomplished primarily through original research, publications, and recommendations to assist and guide State, regional, and local agencies in the development of plans and policies to promote safety and emergency planning.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program, authorized by Section 402(p) of the federal Clean Water Act, controls water pollution by regulating point sources, such as construction sites and industrial operations that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required to control discharges from a project site, including soil erosion, to protect waterways. A SWPPP describes the measures or practices to control discharges during both the construction and operational phases of the project. A SWPPP identifies project design features and structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to control, prevent, remove, or reduce stormwater pollution from the site, including sediment from erosion.
State
California Building Standards Code
The 2022 California Building Code (2022 CBC) is another name for the body of regulations known as the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, which is a portion of the California Building Standards Code. The 2022 CBC incorporates by reference the International Building Code requirements with necessary California amendments. Title 24 is assigned to the California Building Standards Commission, which, by law, is responsible for coordinating all building standards.
Compliance with the 2022 CBC requires (with very limited exceptions) that structures for human occupancy be designed and constructed to resist the effects of earthquake motions. The Seismic Design Category for a structure is determined in accordance with either California Building Code Section 1613–Earthquake Loads or the American Society of Civil Engineers Standard No. 7-05, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. In brief, based on the engineering properties and soil-type of soils at a proposed site, the site is assigned a Site Class ranging from A to F.
The Site Class is then combined with Spectral Response (ground acceleration induced by earthquake) information for the location to arrive at a Seismic Design Category ranging from A to D, of which D represents the most severe conditions. The classification of a specific site and related calculations must be determined by a qualified Geotechnical Engineer and are site specific.
Finally, the 2022 CBC requires that a geotechnical investigation be prepared for all new buildings that are 4,000 square feet or larger, as well as for smaller buildings if they meet certain criteria. The geotechnical investigation must be prepared by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer and address the classification and investigation of the soil, including requirements for geotechnical designs necessary to meet standards for reducing exposure to geological hazards. 822
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-11 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Public Resources Code [PRC] Sections 2621 to 2630) was passed in 1972 to provide a Statewide mechanism for reducing the hazard of surface fault rupture to structures used for human occupancy. The main purpose of the Act is to prevent the siting of buildings used for human occupancy across the traces of active faults. It should be noted that the Act addresses the potential hazard of surface fault rupture and is not directed toward other earthquake hazards, such as seismically induced ground shaking or landslides.
The law requires the State Geologist to identify regulatory zones (known as Earthquake Fault Zones or Alquist-Priolo Zones) around the surface traces of active faults and to depict these zones on topographic base maps, typically at a scale of 1 inch to 2,000 feet. Earthquake Fault Zones vary in width, although they are often 0.75 mile wide. Once published, the maps are distributed to the affected cities, counties, and State agencies for their use in planning and controlling new or renewed construction. With the exception of single-family wood frame and steel-frame dwellings that are not part of a larger development (i.e., four units or more), local agencies are required to regulate development within the mapped zones. In general, construction within 50 feet of an active fault zone is prohibited.
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (PRC §§ 2690–2699.6), which was passed in 1990, addresses earthquake hazards other than surface fault rupture. These hazards include strong ground shaking, earthquake-induced landslides, liquefaction, or other ground failures. Much like the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act discussed above, these seismic hazard zones are mapped by the State Geologist to assist local government in the land use planning process. The Act states, “it is necessary to identify and map seismic hazard zones in order for cities and counties to adequately prepare the safety element of their general plans and to encourage land use management policies and regulations to reduce and mitigate those hazards to protect public health and safety.” The Act also states, “cities and counties shall require, prior to the approval of a project located in a seismic hazard zone, a geotechnical report defining and delineating any seismic hazard.” Local
City of American Canyon
General Plan
The City of American Canyon (City) General Plan sets forth the following guiding and implementing policies relevant to geology, soils, and seismicity:
Goal 9 Reduce the potential level of death, injury, property damage, economic and social dislocation (i.e., business closures and homelessness due to structural damage) and disruption of vital services that could result from earthquake damage.
Goal 9C Ensure that seismic, geologic, and soils hazards that might affect areas designated for human use or habitation are properly mitigated or avoided entirely prior to development.
823
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Draft EIR
3.6-12 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx Objective 9.1 Protect life, ensure public safety, substantially reduce the damage to and ensure the orderly evacuation of building occupants following a seismic event.
Policy 9.1.1 Promote the collection of relevant data on fault location and the history of fault displacement as a basis for future refinement of fault zone policies and development standards. Particular attention should be paid to the West Napa Fault that is generally depicted in Figure 9-1 and should be evaluated in conjunction with proposed development. Based on predevelopment studies, limitations on new development shall be imposed if necessary in the identified fault areas.
Policy 9.1.2 Implement mandatory development restrictions and investigation requirements (by the State, under the Alquist-Priolo Act, or by the City) on that portion of the West Napa Fault Zone located within American Canyon and its Planning Area.
Policy 9.1.3 Require that any building intended to have occupancy be located at least 50 feet from either side of an active or potentially active fault.
Objective 9.2 Protect health and life safety, and reduce the level of potential property damage from the adverse effects of strong seismic ground shaking by implementing effective, state-of-the-art standards for seismic design of structures in the City.
Policy 9.2.1 Require that development be designed in accordance with seismic requirements of the Uniform Building Code.
Objective 9.3 Protect life and essential lifelines (e.g., gas, electricity, water), reduce the risk of property damage due to liquefaction, and promote the collection of more complete information on liquefaction susceptibility throughout the Planning Area.
Policy 9.3.1 Avoid development in areas with known liquefaction risk. If these areas cannot be avoided, require a qualified geologist, hydrologist, or civil engineer to determine the liquefaction potential at proposed development sites.
Policy 9.3.2 Require the submittal of liquefaction mitigation plans for proposed developments located in areas determined to have a high level of liquefaction risk.
Objective 9.4 Protect life, ensure safety, and substantially reduce the potential level of property damage from landslides, mudflows, slope failures and soil hazards. Promote the collection and utilization of more complete information on slope instability potential throughout the City and Planning Area.
Policy 9.4.5 Review proposals for new development and expansion of existing development in areas that are susceptible to collapsible or expansive soils and require adequate mitigation of these hazards.
824
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-13 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx Municipal Code
American Canyon Municipal Code, Chapter 16.02 adopts the California Building Code; as such, all new construction within the city limits is required to adhere to its seismic safety standards. The City of American Canyon Community Development Department is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the Building Code.
3.6.4 - Methodology
This analysis section is based on the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation prepared by Krazan and Associates in July 2023 (Appendix E). FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) also obtained information about faults and seismic hazards from sources including the USGS, the United States Department of Agriculture, and the City of American Canyon General Plan. FCS also conducted a records search of the UCMP database in June 2023.
3.6.5 - 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 geology and soils are significant environmental effects. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
3.6.6 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the proposed project and provides mitigation measures where necessary.
825
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Draft EIR
3.6-14 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx Seismic Hazards
Impact GEO-1: The proposed project may expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects associated with seismic hazards.
Impact Analysis
This impact evaluates potential exposure to seismic hazards, including fault rupture, strong ground shaking, ground failure and liquefaction, and landslides, and addresses whether the project could exacerbate any such hazards. Each issue is discussed separately.
Fault Rupture
There are no active earthquake faults within the project site; refer to Exhibit 3.6-1. For these reasons, the proposed project would not be subject to fault rupture during a seismic event nor would it exacerbate exposure to fault rupture hazards. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
Strong Ground Shaking
The project site is located in a seismically active region of California and is susceptible to strong ground shaking during a seismic event, which constitutes a potentially significant impact. The Geotechnical Engineering Investigation prepared by Krazan & Associates proposes several recommendations that address seismic ground shaking hazards, including seismic provisions from Section 1613.2.2 of the 2019 CBC. These recommendations are included as Mitigation Measure (MM) GEO-1 and updated to 2022 CBC as necessary. The implementation of this mitigation measure would ensure that the proposed project is not exposed to strong ground shaking hazards. Impacts would be less than significant.
Ground Failure and Liquefaction
The Geotechnical Engineering Investigation evaluated the potential for soil liquefaction during a seismic event using the LIQUEFYPRO computer program (Version 5.9d) developed by CivilTech Software. Conservative estimates for earthquake magnitude, peak horizontal ground surface acceleration, and groundwater depth were used as inputs. It was determined that soils below a depth of 10 feet have a slight to very low potential for liquefaction under seismic shaking due to predominately medium dense/stiff to very stiff sandy and clayey soils. The analysis also indicates that the total and differential seismic induced settlement is not anticipated to exceed 1 and 2/3 inch, respectively. This level of risk for liquefaction and settlement are not considered significant, and no mitigation is required.
Landslides
The project site contains relatively flat relief. There are no slopes near the project site that may be susceptible to landsliding during a seismic event, which precludes the possibility of the proposed project being susceptible to landsliding. Thus, the proposed project would not exacerbate exposure to such hazards. Impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact (ground shaking).
826
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-15 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx Mitigation Measures
MM GEO-1 Prior to the issuance of the building permit, recommendations from the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation prepared by Krazan & Associates [Draft EIR Appendix E] shall be incorporated into all project plans and applicable constructionrelated permits and submitted to the City of American Canyon for review and approval.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Erosion
Impact GEO-2: The proposed project may result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.
Impact Analysis
The proposed project would involve grading, building construction, paving, and utility installation activities that may cause erosion and sedimentation. This includes construction activities associated with the proposed project. Left unabated, the accumulation of sediment in downstream waterways could result in the blockage of flows, potentially causing increased localized ponding or flooding. As such, MM HYD-1 in Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, requires the implementation of stormwater quality control measures during construction activities to prevent pollutants from entering downstream waterways. Standard stormwater pollution prevention measures would include implementing structural and nonstructural control measures within and around disturbed areas to prevent soil and pollutants from leaving the project site. With implementation of MM HYD-1, impacts would be less than significant.
Upon project completion, the majority of the site would consist of impermeable surfaces, thereby reducing the risk of erosion on-site. Implementation of the project’s Stormwater Control Plan (Appendix F) would ensure that erosion would not occur on-site during operation by implementing Low Impact Development design concepts, including stormwater control measures such as the proposed on-site retention basin.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of MM HYD-1.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. 827
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Draft EIR
3.6-16 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx Unstable Geologic Location
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 in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse.
Impact Analysis
The stability of the underlying geologic units and soils are functions of their constituents. For example, soils with high organic or fill content would generally be considered unsuitable to support urban development. Likewise, soils that are composed of well-compacted alluvium would generally be considered suitable to support urban development. As further explained in Impact GEO-1, the project site is not located in an area with significant risks of landslide or liquefaction. The site is underlain by Quaternity alluvial fan deposits and is not susceptible to subsidence or collapse.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
Expansive Soil
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.
Impact Analysis
Beneath 6 to 12 inches of the loose surface soils and fill materials, approximately 17 feet of stiff to hard sandy clay, silty clay, and medium dense/very stiff clayey sand/sandy clay were encountered during the soil borings conducted by Krazan & Associates. Field and laboratory tests suggest that these soils are moderately strong and slightly to moderately compressible. The clayey soils had a moderate to high potential for expansion. The Geotechnical Engineering Investigation proposes several recommendations that address expansive soils, including either recompaction of surface soils with non-expansive engineered fill or lime treatment. These recommendations are required by MM GEO-1. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure GEO-1.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. 828
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-17 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx Paleontological Resources
Impact GEO-5: The proposed project may directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
Impact Analysis
As described above, the project site is located on Quaternity alluvial fan deposits. Pleistocene alluvial fan deposits have the potential to be fossiliferous. However, the UCMP database lists no vertebrate or plant fossils in any of the forementioned geologic units in Napa County. The nearest Pleistocene vertebrate locality is approximately 10 miles southeast of American Canyon, in Solano County. As such, the potential for the proposed project to uncover vertebrate or plant fossils is low. Although it is extremely unlikely, it is always possible for unknown paleontological resources to be discovered during ground-disturbing activities. MM GEO-5 outlines procedures in case of an inadvertent discovery. Impacts would be less than significant with this mitigation incorporated.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
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.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
3.6.7 - Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope of the cumulative geology, soils, and seismicity analysis is the project vicinity.
Adverse effects associated with geologic, soil, and seismic hazards tend to be site specific, because each project site has its own geologic and soils conditions, and each project has its own design characteristics, localized within the area near the project site most affected by project activities (generally within a 0. 5-mile radius).
Past, present, and future development projects in the project vicinity have the potential to exacerbate exposure to seismic hazards. The project site may be subject to strong ground shaking during an earthquake; thus, MM GEO-1 requires the project applicant to implement all recommendations of the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, including all California Building Standards Code applicable requirements into project plans. Other nearby past, present, and reasonably foreseeable development projects may exacerbate exposure to similar potential seismic hazards and have been and would be required to comply with the relevant State and local laws designed to mitigate seismic hazards and mitigation measures imposed under CEQA. Therefore, the 829
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Draft EIR
3.6-18 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx proposed project in conjunction with other cumulative development would not expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death in the event of a major earthquake; fault rupture; ground shaking; seismic-related ground failure; landslide; or liquefaction.
Regarding soil erosion, development activities could lead to increased erosion rates on-site soils, which could cause unstable ground surfaces and increased sedimentation in nearby streams and drainage channels. MM HYD-1 requires implementation of standard stormwater pollution prevention measures to ensure earthwork activities do not result in substantial erosion off-site. This mitigation, in turn, would have to comply with the NPDES stormwater permitting program, which regulates water quality originating from construction sites. The NPDES program, which governs projects Statewide (and nationwide), requires the preparation and implementation of SWPPPs for construction activities that disturb more than 1 acre and the implementation of BMPs that ensure the reduction of pollutants during stormwater discharges, as well as compliance with all applicable water quality requirements. The proposed project would be required to comply with these regulations, as have and would other nearby past, present, and reasonably foreseeable development projects. Therefore, the proposed project in conjunction with other nearby cumulative development would not have a cumulatively significant impact associated with erosion.
The project site contains native soils that have expansive characteristics, which may exacerbate exposure of project structures to expansive soil hazards. MM GEO-1 requires the project applicant to implement all recommendations of the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation and incorporate them into project plans. Other nearby past, present, and reasonably foreseeable development projects could be exposed to expansive soil hazards and, therefore, have been and would be required to implement similar mitigation measures based on State and local regulations and CEQA requirements. As such, the proposed project, in conjunction with other nearby past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would not have a cumulatively significant impact associated with expansive soils.
Paleontological resource impacts tend to be localized because the integrity of any given resource depends on what occurs in the immediate vicinity around that resource, such as disruption of soils; therefore, in addition to the project site itself, the area near the project site would be the area most affected by project activities (generally within a 0.5-mile radius). While the likelihood of an unknown paleontological resources to be discovered on-site is low, MM GEO-5 requires assessment and, if deemed appropriate, salvage of any discovered paleontological resources thereby reducing impacts to less than significant. Similarly, construction activities associated with cumulative development projects in the project vicinity may have the potential to encounter undiscovered paleontological resources. These cumulative projects listed in Table 3-1 would be required to mitigate for impacts through compliance with applicable federal and State laws governing paleontological resources.
Therefore, the proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable planned and approved projects in the vicinity, would not have a cumulatively significant impact related to geology, soils, and seismicity.
830
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-19 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/56390001 Sec03-06 Geology.docx Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure GEO-1, MM HYD-1, and MM GEO-5.
Level of Cumulative Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. 831
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
832
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx
3.7 - Greenhouse Gas Emissions
3.7.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions setting and potential effects from project implementation on the project site and its surrounding area. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on project-specific information and modeling results utilizing California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2022.1. The Greenhouse Gas Analysis is included in this Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) as Appendix A. Public comments were received during the EIR scoping period concerning the increase in GHG emissions due to the proposed industrial use.
3.7.2 - Environmental Setting
Greenhouse Gases and Global Emission Sources
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are referred to as GHGs. The effect is analogous to the way a greenhouse retains heat. Prominent GHGs that naturally occur in the Earth’s atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), and ozone. Anthropogenic (human-caused) GHG emissions include releases of these GHGs plus release of human-made gases with high global warming potential (GWP) (ozone-depleting substances such as chlorofluorocarbons [CFCs]1 and aerosols, hydrofluorocarbons [HFCs], perfluorocarbons [PFCs], and sulfur hexafluoride [SF6]). The GWP is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere. The GWP of a gas is essentially a measurement of the radiative forcing of a GHG compared with the reference gas, CO2.
Individual GHG compounds have varying potential for contributing to global warming. For example, CH4 is 25 times as potent as CO2, while SF6 is 22,200 times more potent than CO2 on a molecule-permolecule basis. To simplify reporting and analysis, methods have been set forth to describe emissions of GHGs in terms of a single gas. The most commonly accepted method for comparing GHG emissions is the GWP methodology defined in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reference documents.2 The IPCC defines the GWP of various GHG emissions on a normalized scale that recasts all GHG emissions in terms of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), which compares the gas in question to that of the same mass of CO2 (by definition, CO2 has a GWP of 1). The GWP of a GHG is a measure of how much a given mass of a GHG is estimated to contribute to global warming. Thus, to describe how much global warming a given type and amount of GHG may cause, the CO2e is used. A CO2e is the mass emissions of an individual GHG multiplied by its GWP. As such, a high GWP represents high absorption of infrared radiation and a long atmospheric lifetime compared to CO2. One must also select a time horizon to convert GHG emissions to equivalent CO2 emissions to account for chemical reactivity and lifetime differences among various GHG species.
The standard time horizon for climate change analysis is 100 years. Generally, GHG emissions are quantified in terms of metric tons (MT) of CO2e (MT CO2e) emitted per year. 1 CFCs destroy stratospheric ozone. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer prohibited CFCs production in 1987. 2 United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Geneva, Switzerland. 833
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-2 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx Units commonly used to describe the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere are parts per million (ppm), parts per billion (ppb), and parts per trillion (ppt), referring to the number of molecules of the GHG in a sampling of 1 million, 1 billion, or 1 trillion molecules of air. Collectively, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 are referred to as high GWP gases. CO2 is by far the largest component of worldwide CO2e emissions, followed by CH4, nitrous oxide (N2O), and high GWP gases, in order of decreasing contribution to CO2e.
The primary human processes that release GHGs include the burning of fossil fuels for transportation, heating, and electricity generation; agricultural practices that release CH4, such as livestock grazing and crop residue decomposition; and industrial processes that release smaller amounts of high GWP gases. Deforestation and land cover conversion have also been identified as contributing to global warming by reducing the Earth’s capacity to remove CO2 from the air and altering the Earth’s albedo or surface reflectance, thus allowing more solar radiation to be absorbed.
Specifically, CO2 emissions associated with fossil fuel combustion are the primary contributors to human-induced climate change. CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions associated with human activities are the next largest contributors to climate change.
Global Climate Change Issue
Climate change is a global problem because GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants and hazardous air pollutants (also called toxic air contaminants), which are pollutants of regional and local concern. Pollutants with localized air quality effects have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes, approximately 1 day; by contrast, GHGs have long atmospheric lifetimes, several years to several thousand years. GHGs persist in the atmosphere for a long enough time to be dispersed around the globe.
Although the exact lifetime of any particular GHG molecule depends on multiple variables and cannot be pinpointed, more CO2 is currently emitted into the atmosphere than is sequestered. CO2 sinks, or reservoirs, include vegetation and the ocean, which absorb CO2 through photosynthesis and dissolution, respectively. These are two of the most common processes of CO2 sequestration. Of the total annual human-caused CO2 emissions, approximately 54 percent is sequestered through ocean uptake, Northern Hemisphere forest regrowth, and other terrestrial sinks within a year, whereas the remaining 46 percent of human-caused CO2 emissions is stored in the atmosphere.3 Similarly, effects of GHGs are borne globally, as opposed to the localized air quality effects of criteria air pollutants and hazardous air pollutants. The quantity of GHGs that it takes to ultimately result in climate change is not precisely known and cannot be quantified, and no single project would be expected to measurably contribute to a noticeable incremental change in the global average temperature, or to global or local climates or microclimate.
Emissions of GHGs have the potential to adversely affect the environment because such emissions contribute, on a cumulative basis, to global climate change. A cumulative discussion and analysis of project impacts on global climate change is presented in this Draft EIR because, although it is unlikely that a single project will contribute significantly to climate change, cumulative emissions from many projects affect global GHG concentrations and the climate system. 3 Seinfeld, J. H. and S.N. Pandis. 1998. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics from Air Pollution to Climate Change. John Wiley & Sons. 834
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-3 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx Although the international, national, State, and regional communities are beginning to address GHGs and the potential effects of climate change, worldwide GHG emissions will likely continue to rise over the next decades.
Climate and Topography
Climate is the accumulation of daily and seasonal weather events over a long period of time, whereas weather is defined as the condition of the atmosphere at any particular time and place. For a detailed discussion of existing regional and project site climate and topography, see Section 3.2, Air Quality.
Existing GHG Emissions
California GHG Inventory
As the second largest emitter of GHG emissions in the U.S. and the 12th to 16th largest GHG emissions emitter in the world, California contributes a large quantity (369.3 MMT CO2e in 2020) of GHG emissions to the atmosphere.4 Emissions of CO2 are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion and are attributable in large part to human activities associated with transportation, industry/ manufacturing, electricity and natural gas consumption, and agriculture. In California, the transportation sector is the largest emitter at 38 percent of GHG emissions, followed by industry/ manufacturing at 23 percent of GHG emissions (Figure 3.7-1).5 Source: California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2022. California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory–2020 Edition. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory-data. Accessed November 24, 2023.
Figure 3.7-1: 2010 California Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector 4 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2022. California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory – 2020 Edition. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory-data. Accessed November 24, 2023. 5 Ibid. 835
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-4 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx City of American Canyon
Based on the City of American Canyon’s 2012 Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan (EECAP), the City generated approximately 120,201 MT of CO2e in 2010.6 On-road transportation was the major source accounting for 39.9 percent of the total, largely due to passenger vehicles, but also commercial trips and buses. Commercial/industrial energy was the second largest source of emissions at 27 percent. Residential energy usage represented 18 percent, and solid waste and wastewater represented 7 percent each. Off-road transportation accounted for 2 percent.
Agriculture accounted for less than 1 percent of emissions.
Climate Change Trends and Effects
CO2 accounts for more than 75 percent of all anthropogenic GHG emissions, the atmospheric residence time of CO2 is decades to centuries, and global atmospheric concentrations of CO2 continue to increase at a faster rate than ever previously recorded. Thus, the warming impacts of CO2 will persist for hundreds of years after mitigation is implemented to reduce GHG concentrations.
Substantially higher temperatures, more extreme wildfires, and rising sea levels are just some of the direct effects experienced in California.7,8 As reported by the California Natural Resources Agency in 2009, despite annual variations in weather patterns, California has seen a trend of increased average temperatures, more extreme hot days, fewer cold nights, longer growing seasons, less winter snow, and earlier snowmelt and rainwater runoff. Statewide average temperatures increased by about
1.7°F (degrees Fahrenheit) from 1895 to 2011, and a larger proportion of total precipitation is falling as rain instead of snow.9 Sea level rose by as much as 7 inches along the California coast over the last century, leading to increased erosion and adding pressure to the State’s infrastructure, water supplies, and natural resources.
These observed trends in California’s climate are projected to continue in the future. Research indicates that California will experience overall hotter and drier conditions with a continued reduction in winter snow (with concurrent increases in winter rains), as well as increased average temperatures and accelerating sea level rise. The frequency, intensity, and duration of extreme weather events such as heat waves, wildfires, droughts, and floods will also change.10 In addition, increased air pollution and spread of insects potentially carrying infectious diseases will also occur as the climate-associated temperature and associated species clines shift in latitude. 6 City of American Canyon. 2012. Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan. Website:
https://www.cityofamericancanyon.org/home/showpublisheddocument/5024. Accessed November 22, 2023. 7 California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA). 2009. 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy: A Report to the Governor of the State of California in Response to Executive Order S-13-2008. Website:
http://resources.ca.gov/docs/climate/Statewide_Adaptation_Strategy.pdf. Accessed November 22, 2023. 8 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2012. Our Changing Climate 2012: Vulnerability & Adaptation to the Increasing Risks from Climate Change in California. Website: http://www.energy.ca.gov/2012publications/CEC-500-2012-007/CEC-500-2012-007.pdf.
Accessed November 22, 2023. 9 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2006. Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 to 2004. Draft Final Report. CEC-600-2006-013-D. Website: http://www.energy.ca.gov/2006publications/CEC-600-2006-013/CEC-600-2006-013-D.PDF.
Accessed November 22, 2023. 10 California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA). 2009. 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy: A Report to the Governor of the State of California in Response to Executive Order S-13-2008. Website: http://resources.ca.gov/docs/climate /Statewide_Adaptation_Strategy.pdf. Accessed November 22, 2023. 836
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-5 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx The following is a summary of climate change factors and predicted trends specific to California.
In California, climate change may result in consequences such as the following.11,12 • A reduction in the quality and supply of water from the Sierra snowpack. If heat-trapping emissions continue unabated, more precipitation will fall as rain instead of snow, and the snow that does fall will melt earlier, reducing the Sierra Nevada spring snowpack by as much as 70 to 90 percent. This can lead to challenges in securing adequate water supplies. It can also lead to a potential reduction in hydropower.
• Increased risk of large wildfires. If rain increases as temperatures rise, wildfires in the grasslands and chaparral ecosystems of Southern California are estimated to increase by approximately 30 percent toward the end of the twenty-first century because more winter rain will stimulate the growth of more plant “fuel” available to burn in the fall. In contrast, a hotter, drier climate could promote up to 90 percent more Northern California fires by the end of the century by drying out and increasing the flammability of forest vegetation. • Reductions in the quality and quantity of certain agricultural products. The crops and products likely to be adversely affected include wine grapes, fruit, nuts, and milk. • Exacerbation of air quality problems. If temperatures rise to the medium warming range, there could be 75 to 85 percent more days with weather conducive to ozone formation in Los Angeles and the San Joaquin Valley, relative to today’s conditions. This is more than twice the increase expected if rising temperatures remain in the lower warming range. This increase in air quality problems could result in an increase in asthma and other health-related problems. • A rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of coastal businesses and residences. During the past century, sea levels along California’s coast have risen about 7 inches. If emissions continue unabated and temperatures rise into the higher anticipated warming range, sea level is expected to rise an additional 22 to 35 inches by the end of the century. Elevations of this magnitude would inundate coastal areas with salt water, accelerate coastal erosion, threaten vital levees and inland water systems, and disrupt wetlands and natural habitats. • An increase temperature and extreme weather events. Climate change is expected to lead to increases in the frequency, intensity, and duration of extreme heat events and heat waves in California. More heat waves can exacerbate chronic disease or heat-related illness. • A decrease in the health and productivity of California’s forests. Climate change can cause an increase in wildfires, an enhanced insect population, and establishment of non-native species. 11 California Climate Change Center (CCCC). 2006. Our Changing Climate, Assessing the Risks to California: A Summary Report from the California Climate Change Center. July 2006. CEC-500-2006-077. Website: http://www.scc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/pdf/climate_change /assessing_risks.pdf. Accessed January 11, 2024. 12 Moser et al. 2009. Moser, Susie, Guido Franco, Sarah Pittiglio, Wendy Chou, Dan Cayan. 2009. The Future Is Now: An Update on Climate Change Science Impacts and Response Options for California. California Energy Commission, PIER Energy-Related Environmental Research Program. CEC-500-2008-071. Website: http://www.energy.ca.gov/2008publications/CEC-500-2008-071/CEC-500-2008- 071.PDF. Accessed January 11, 2024
837
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-6 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx
3.7.3 - Regulatory Framework
Regulations relevant to the analysis are discussed below.
Federal
Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule
On September 27, 2019, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) published the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One: One National Program. The SAFE Rule Part One revokes California’s authority to set its own GHG emissions standards and to adopt its own Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandates.
On April 30, 2020, the EPA and the NHTSA published Part Two of the SAFE Vehicles Rule, which revised corporate average fuel economy and CO2 emissions standards for passenger cars and trucks of model years 2021-2026, such that the standards increase by approximately 1.5 percent each year through model year 2026, as compared to the approximately 5 percent annual increase required under the 2012 standards.13
State
Assembly Bill 1493 Pavley Regulations and Fuel Efficiency Standards California Assembly Bill (AB) 1493, enacted on July 22, 2002, required the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks. Implementation of the regulation was delayed by lawsuits filed by automakers and by the EPA’s denial of an implementation waiver. The EPA subsequently granted the requested waiver in 2009, which was upheld by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in 2011.14 The standards were to be phased in during the 2009 through 2016 model years.15 The second phase of the implementation for the Pavley Bill was incorporated into Amendments to the Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) Program referred to as LEV III or the Advanced Clean Cars program.
The Advanced Clean Car Program combines the control of smog-causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package of requirements for model years 2017 through 2025.
The regulation is anticipated to reduce GHGs from new cars by 34 percent from 2016 levels by 2025.
The new rules will reduce pollutants from gasoline and diesel-powered cars, and deliver increasing numbers of zero-emission technologies, such as full battery electric vehicles (EVs), newly emerging plug-in hybrid EVs and hydrogen fuel cell cars. The regulations will also ensure adequate fueling infrastructure is available for the increasing numbers of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles planned for deployment in California.16
13 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). 2020. The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient 'SAFE' Vehicles Rule. March.
Website: https://www.nhtsa.gov/corporate-average-fueleconomy/safe#:~:text=The%20Safer%20Affordable%20Fuel%2DEfficient%20(SAFE)%20Vehicles%20Rule%2C,model%20years%2020 21%20through%202026. Accessed January 11, 2024. 14 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2013. Clean Car Standards—Pavley, Assembly Bill 1493. Website:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccms/ccms.htm. Accessed January 11, 2024. 15 California Air Resources Board (ARB). Advanced Clean Cars Summary. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019- 12/acc%20summary-final_ac.pdf. Accessed January 11, 2024. 16 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2011. Status of Scoping Plan Recommended Measures. Website:
https://calcarbondash.org/cc/scopingplan/sp_measures_implementation_timeline.pdf. Accessed January 11, 2024. 838
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-7 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx Advanced Clean Cars II was adopted in November 2022. The Advanced Clean Cars II regulations will rapidly scale down light-duty passenger car, pickup truck and SUV emissions starting with the 2026 model year through 2035. The regulations are two-pronged. First, they amend the ZEV Regulation to require an increasing number of ZEVs, and rely on currently available advanced vehicle technologies, including battery electric, hydrogen fuel cell electric and plug-in hybrid EVs, to meet air quality and climate change emissions standards. These amendments support Governor Newsom’s 2020 Executive Order N-79-20 that requires all new passenger vehicles sold in California to be zero emissions by 2035. Second, the LEV Regulations were amended to include increasingly stringent standards for gasoline cars and heavier passenger trucks to continue to reduce smog-forming emissions.
In October 2023, staff launched a new effort to consider potential amendments to the Advanced Clean Cars II regulations, including updates to the tailpipe GHG emission standard and limited revisions to the LEV and ZEV regulations.
These regulations rapidly scale down emissions of light-duty passenger cars, pickup trucks and SUVs and require an increased number of ZEVs to meet air quality and climate change emissions goals.
Assembly Bill 32
The California State Legislature enacted AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.
AB 32 requires that GHGs emitted in California be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. “Greenhouse gases” as defined under AB 32 include CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6. Since AB 32 was enacted, a seventh chemical, nitrogen trifluoride, has also been added to the list of GHGs.
The ARB is the State agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of GHGs. The ARB approved the 1990 GHG emissions level of 427 MMT CO2e on December 6, 2007.17 Therefore, to meet the State’s target, emissions generated in California in 2020 are required to be equal to or less than 427 MMT CO2e. Emissions in 2020 in a Business as Usual (BAU) scenario were estimated to be 596 MMT CO2e, which do not account for reductions from AB 32 regulations.18 At that rate, a 28 percent reduction was required to achieve the 427 MMT CO2e 1990 inventory. In October 2010, ARB prepared an updated 2020 forecast to account for the effects of the 2008 recession and slower forecasted growth. Under the updated forecast, a 21.7 percent reduction from BAU is required to achieve 1990 levels.19 On July 11, 2018, the ARB announced that the State has meet its target of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels.20
17 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2007. Staff Report. California 1990 Greenhouse Gas Level and 2020 Emissions Limit. November 16, 2007. Website: https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/pubs/reports/staff_report_1990_level.pdf. Accessed January 11, 2024. 18 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. (includes edits made in 2009) Climate Change Scoping Plan, a framework for change.
Website: https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_scoping_plan.pdf. Accessed January 11, 2024. 19 California Air Resources Board (ARB). GHG 2020 Business-as-Usual Emissions Projection. 2014 Edition BAU Emissions Projection.
Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-bau. Accessed January 11, 2024. 20 California Air Resources Board. 2018. Climate Pollutants Fall Below 1990 Levels for First Time. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/climate-pollutants-fall-below-1990-levels-first-time. Accessed January 11, 2024. 839
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-8 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan
The ARB Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) contains measures designed to reduce the State’s emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020 to comply with AB 32.21 The Scoping Plan identifies recommended measures for multiple GHG emission sectors and the associated emission reductions needed to achieve the year 2020 emissions target—each sector has a different emission reduction target. Most of the measures target the transportation and electricity sectors. As stated in the Scoping Plan, the key elements of the strategy for achieving the 2020 GHG target included energy efficiency programs, renewable energy expansion, Cap-and-Trade, establishing targets for transportation-related GHGs, and the high GWP fee program.
The ARB approved the First Update to the Scoping Plan on May 22, 2014. The First Update builds upon the Initial Scoping Plan with new strategies and recommendations.
Senate Bill 375—the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 Senate Bill (SB) 375 was signed into law on September 30, 2008. According to SB 375, the transportation sector is the largest contributor of GHG emissions, which emits over 40 percent of the total GHG emissions in California. SB 375 states, “Without improved land use and transportation policy, California will not be able to achieve the goals of AB 32.” SB 375 does the following: (1) requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to include sustainable community strategies in their regional transportation plans for reducing GHG emissions, (2) aligns planning for transportation and housing, and (3) creates specified incentives for the implementation of the strategies.
Senate Bill 32 and the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update The Governor signed SB 32 in September 2016, giving the ARB the statutory responsibility to include the 2030 target previously contained in Executive Order B-30-15 in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update. SB 32 states that “In adopting rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions authorized by this division, the State [air resources] board shall ensure that Statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40 percent below the Statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit no later than December 31, 2030.” The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update addressing the SB 32 targets was adopted on December 14, 2017.
2022 ARB Scoping Plan
The 2022 Scoping Plan22 establishes a scenario by which the State may achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier, and it outlines a technologically feasible, cost-effective, and equity-focused path for achieving this climate target. The 2022 Scoping Plan addresses the latest climate-related legislation and direction from current Governor Gavin Newsom, who, by his signing of AB 1279, required the State to reduce Statewide anthropogenic GHG emissions to at least 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045 and to maintain net negative GHG emissions thereafter. The 2022 Scoping Plan relies on the 21 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. (includes edits made in 2009) Climate Change Scoping Plan, a framework for change.
Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_scoping_plan.pdf. Accessed January 11, 2024. 22 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2022 Scoping Plan. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ab-32-climatechange-scoping-plan/2022-scoping-plan-documents. Accessed January 11, 2024. 840
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-9 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx aggressive reduction of fossil fuels in all Statewide sectors and accelerating existing carbon reduction programs. Aspects of the 2022 Scoping Plan’s scenario include:
• Rapidly moving to zero-emission transportation by electrifying cars, buses, trains, and trucks. • Phasing out the use of fossil gas used for heating homes and buildings. • Clamping down on chemicals, refrigerants, and other high GWP gases. • Providing communities with sustainable options for walking, biking, and public transit to reduce reliance on cars.
• Continuing to develop solar arrays, wind turbine capacity, and other resources that provide clean, renewable energy.
• Scale up options such as renewable hydrogen and biomethane for end uses that are hard to electrify.
ARB estimates that successfully achieving the outcomes called for by the 2022 Scoping Plan will reduce demand for liquid petroleum by 94 percent and total fossil fuel by 86 percent in 2045, relative to 2022. The 2022 Scoping Plan also emphasizes the role of natural and working lands and carbon capturing technologies to address residual emissions and achieve net negative emissions.
Senate Bill 350: Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act As enacted in 2015, this law establishes clean energy, clean air, and GHG emissions reduction goals, as well as increasing California’s renewable electricity procurement goals from 33 percent to 50 percent by 2030. The bill further requires the State to double the energy efficiency in existing buildings by 2030.23
Senate Bill 100: Renewable Portfolio Standard Program
On September 10, 2018, former Governor Newsom signed SB 100, requiring California electricity utility providers to supply all in-state end users with electricity sourced from renewable or carbonfree sources by 2045. Specifically, SB 100 accelerates previously established renewable goals and requires that the program achieve 100 percent of electricity sourced from carbon-free sources by the end of 2045, with interim milestones of 50 percent by the end of 2026 and 60 percent by 2030.
Executive Orders Related to GHG Emissions
California’s Executive Branch has taken several actions to reduce GHGs through the use of Executive Orders. Although not regulatory, they set the tone for the State and guide the actions of State agencies.
Executive Order S-3-05
Former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced on June 1, 2005, through Executive Order S3-05, the following reduction targets for GHG emissions:
• By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels.
23 California Legislative Information (California Leginfo). 2015. Senate Bill 350 Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015. Website:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB350. Accessed January 11, 2024. 841
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-10 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx • By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels.
• By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.
The 2050 reduction goal represents what some scientists believe is necessary to reach levels that will stabilize the climate. The 2020 goal was established to be a mid-term target. Because this is an Executive Order, the goals are not legally enforceable for local governments or the private sector.
Executive Order S-01-07—Low Carbon Fuel Standard
The Governor signed Executive Order S 01-07 on January 18, 2007. The order mandates that a Statewide goal shall be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020. In particular, the Executive Order established a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and directed the Secretary for Environmental Protection to coordinate the actions of the California Energy Commission (CEC), ARB, University of California, and other agencies to develop and propose protocols for measuring the “lifecycle carbon intensity” of transportation fuels. The ARB adopted the LCFS on April 23, 2009.
The LCFS was subject to legal challenge in 2011. Ultimately, on August 8, 2013, the Fifth District Court of Appeal (California) ruled that the ARB failed to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Administrative Procedure Act when adopting regulations for LCFS. In a partially published opinion, the Court of Appeal directed that Resolution 09-31 and two Executive Orders of the ARB approving LCFS regulations promulgated to reduce GHG emissions be set aside.
However, the Court tailored its remedy to protect the public interest by allowing the LCFS regulations to remain operative while ARB complies with the procedural requirements it failed to satisfy.
To address the Court ruling, the ARB was required to bring a new LCFS regulation to the Board for consideration in February 2015. The proposed LCFS regulation was required to contain revisions to the 2010 LCFS as well as new provisions designed to foster investments in the production of the low carbon fuels, offer additional flexibility to regulated parties, update critical technical information, simplify and streamline program operations, and enhance enforcement. The Final Rulemaking Package adopting the regulation was filed with the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) on October 2, 2015. The OAL approved the regulation on November 16, 2015. In 2018, the Board approved amendments to the regulation, which included strengthening and smoothing the carbon intensity benchmarks through 2030 in-line with California's 2030 GHG emission reduction target enacted through SB 32, adding new crediting opportunities to promote ZEV adoption, alternative jet fuel, carbon capture and sequestration, and advanced technologies to achieve deep decarbonization in the transportation sector. 24
Executive Order B-30-15
On April 29, 2015, former Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. issued an Executive Order to establish a California GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The Governor’s Executive Order aligns California’s GHG reduction targets with those of leading international governments ahead of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris late 2015. The Executive Order sets 24 California Air Resource Board (ARB). 2023. LCFS Regulation. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/low-carbon-fuelstandard/lcfs-regulation. Accessed January 11, 2024. 842
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-11 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx a new interim Statewide GHG emission reduction target to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 in order to ensure California meets its target of reducing GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 and directs the ARB to update the Climate Change Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of MT CO2e. The Executive Order also requires the State’s climate adaptation plan to be updated every 3 years and for the State to continue its climate change research program, among other provisions.
Executive Order N-79-20
Executive Order N-79-20 directs the State to require that, by 2035, all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be ZEVs.
ARB Advanced Clean Truck and Advanced Clean Fleet Regulations 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.
ARB Advanced Clean Cars II Rule
Adopted by the ARB in August 2022, the Advanced Clean Cars II regulation supports the implementation of Executive Order N-79-20 and requires that by 2035, all new passenger cars, trucks, and SUVs sold in California will be zero emissions.25 Small Off-Road Engine Regulations
Small Off-Road Engine (SORE) Regulations will require that most newly manufactured SORE, such as those found in leaf blowers, lawn mowers, and other equipment, be zero-emission starting 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 zeroemission standards starting in 2028.26 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 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, 25 California Air Resource Board (ARB). Proposed Advanced Clean Cars II Regulations. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ourwork/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program/advanced-clean-cars-ii. Accessed January 11, 2024. 26 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 January 11, 2024. 843
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-12 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), compressed natural gas, and electric forklifts ≥25 horsepower (hp). 27 The regulation sets fleet average emission level requirements that decreases each year to encourage the use of EV and low-emissions engines.
The ARB is currently working on drafting a zero-emission forklift measure to drive greater deployment of zero-emission forklifts within fleets throughout the State. The intent of this proposed rule is to phase out any propane forklifts 13 years or older beginning in 2026 for use in California.
The new change would also mean facilities would not be able to purchase new propane forklifts beginning in 2026. The measure is currently in rulemaking and scheduled for Board consideration in September 2023.28
California Regulations and Building Standards Codes
California has a long history of adopting regulations to improve energy efficiency in new and remodeled buildings. These regulations have kept California’s energy consumption relatively flat even with rapid population growth.
California Code of Regulations Title 13: Motor Vehicles California Code of Regulations, Title 13: Division 3, Chapter 10, Article 1, Section 2485: Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling.29 This measure seeks to reduce public exposure to diesel particulate matter (DPM) and other air contaminants by establishing idling restrictions, emission standards, and other requirements for heavy-duty diesel engines and alternative idle-reduction technologies to limit the idling of diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles. Any person that owns, operates, or causes to operate any diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicle must not allow a vehicle to idle for more than 5 consecutive minutes at any location or operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system for greater than 5 minutes at any location when within 100 feet of a restricted area.
California Code of Regulations, Title 13: Division 3, Chapter 9, Article 4.8, Section 2449: General Requirements for In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets. This measure regulates NOX, DPM, and other criteria pollutant emissions from in-use, off-road diesel-fueled vehicles. This measure also requires each fleet to meet fleet average requirements or demonstrate that it has met “Best Available Control Technology” requirements. Additionally, this measure requires medium and large fleets to have a written idling policy that is made available to operators of the vehicles informing them that idling is limited to 5 consecutive minutes or less.
Title 20 Appliance Efficiency Regulations
California Code of Regulations, Title 20: Division 2, Chapter 4, Article 4, Sections 1601-1608:
Appliance Efficiency Regulations regulates the sale of appliances in California. The Appliance Efficiency Regulations include standards for both federally regulated appliances and non-federally 27 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 January 11, 2024. 28 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2023. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/zero-emission-forklifts. Accessed January 11, 2024. 29 California Air Resource Board (ARB). Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling.
Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/atcm-to-limit-vehicle-idling. Accessed January 11, 2024. 844
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-13 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx regulated appliances. Twenty-three categories of appliances are included in the scope of these regulations. The standards within these regulations apply to appliances that are sold or offered for sale in California, except those sold wholesale in California for final retail sale outside the State and those designed and sold exclusively for use in recreational vehicles or other mobile equipment.
Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards
California Code of Regulations Title 24 Part 6: California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, was first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficient technologies and methods. Energy efficient buildings require less electricity; therefore, increased energy efficiency reduces fossil fuel consumption and decreases GHG emissions. The current version of Title 24 adopted by the CEC was effective on January 1, 2020. CEC recently approved the latest 2022 Energy Code, which became effective on January 1, 2023.30 All newly constructed buildings shall have a solar photovoltaic (PV) system installed, including high-rise multifamily housing, offices, retail, warehouse, and hotel uses.
Title 24 California Green Building Standards Code
California Code of Regulations Title 24 Part 11 code is a comprehensive and uniform regulatory code for all residential, commercial, and school buildings that went into effect on January 1, 2011. The code is updated on a regular basis, with the current version consisting of the 2022 California Green Building Code Standards Code (CALGreen) that became effective January 1, 2023.31 Local jurisdictions are permitted to adopt more stringent requirements, as State law provides methods for local enhancements. California Building Standards Code (CBC) provides the minimum standard that buildings need to meet in order to be certified for occupancy, which is generally enforced by the local building official.
CALGreen standards distinguish between residential and nonresidential occupancy. Recent additions to the code are requirements related to EV charging infrastructure, water conservation and recycling, and changes made to avoid conflicts with California energy efficiency standards under Title 24, Part 6. Local jurisdictions are permitted to adopt more stringent requirements, as State law provides methods for local enhancements. State building code provides the minimum standard that buildings need to meet in order to be certified for occupancy, which is generally enforced by the local building official.
The latest update, 2022 California Green Building Standards Code went into effect on January 1, 2023. The revised code significantly increases the Mandatory Measures for EV charging requirements for both new residential and commercial buildings.
New nonresidential buildings must follow a regulatory schedule that specifies the minimum number of EV Capable, EV Ready and EV Equipped Spaces. The 2022 update requires the addition of required EV service equipment (EVSE) spaces. EVSE means “installed charging receptacles or permanently 30 California Energy Commission (CEC ). 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programsand-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022-building-energy-efficiency. Accessed January 11, 2024. 31 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2021. CEC Approves 2022 CALGreen Building Standards Code. Website:
http://calenergycommission.blogspot.com/2021/10/cec-approves-2022-calgreen-building.html. Accessed January 11, 2024. 845
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-14 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx installed chargers.” These are the number of charging receptacles/stations that are required to be fully installed.
CALGreen 2022 update includes mandatory nonresidential measures for site development EV charging under Section 5.106.5.3 Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging. To comply with CALGreen EV charging requirements, the proposed project would be required to meet the following standards:
• The transformer, main service equipment and subpanels shall meet the minimum power requirement in Table 5.106.5.4.1 to accommodate the dedicated branch circuits for the future installation of EVSE.
• The construction documents shall indicate one or more location(s) convenient to the planned off-street loading space(s) reserved for medium- and heavy-duty ZEV charging cabinets and charging dispensers, and a pathway reserved for routing of conduit from the termination of the raceway(s) or busway(s) to the charging cabinet(s) and dispenser(s). • Raceway(s) or busway(s) originating at a main service panel or a subpanel(s) serving the area where potential future medium- and heavy-duty EVSE will be located and shall terminate in close proximity to the potential future location of the charging equipment for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles.
• Load to the future location of the charging for medium- and heavy-duty ZEVs. For warehouses with greater than 256,000 square feet, 400 KVA of additional capacity required for raceway, busway, transformer and panel.
Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance
The Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Ordinance) was required by AB 1881 Water Conservation Act. The bill required local agencies to adopt a local Landscape Ordinance at least as effective in conserving water as the Model Ordinance by January 1, 2010. Reductions in water use of 20 percent consistent with (SBX-7-7) 2020 mandate are expected under the Ordinance. Former Governor Brown’s Drought Executive Order of April 1, 2015 (Executive Order B-29-15) directed the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) to update the Ordinance through expedited regulation. The California Water Commission approved the revised Ordinance on July 15, 2015, which became effective on December 15, 2015. New development projects that include landscaped areas of 500 square feet or more are subject to the Ordinance. The update requires:
• More efficient irrigation systems.
• Incentives for graywater usage.
• Improvements in on-site stormwater capture.
• Limits on the portion of landscapes that can be planted with high water use plants. • Reporting requirements for local agencies.
Senate Bill 97 and the CEQA Guidelines Revisions
Passed in August 2007, SB 97 added Section 21083.05 to the Public Resources Code. SB 97 states “(a) On or before July 1, 2009, the Office of Planning and Research shall prepare, develop, and transmit to the Resources Agency guidelines for the mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG 846
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-15 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx emissions as required by this division, including, but not limited to, effects associated with transportation or energy consumption. (b) On or before January 1, 2010, the Resources Agency shall certify and adopt guidelines prepared and developed by the Office of Planning and Research pursuant to subdivision (a).”
The 2010 CEQA Amendments first guided public agencies regarding the analysis and mitigation of the effects of GHG emissions in CEQA documents. The 2010 CEQA Amendments fit within the existing CEQA framework by amending existing CEQA Guidelines to reference climate change. The 2010 CEQA Amendments also revised Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines, which focuses on energy conservation, and the sample environmental checklist in Appendix G was amended to include GHG questions.
• The most recent 2018 CEQA Amendments expanded upon the previous guidance by specifying that:
- The lead agency should focus its analysis on the reasonably foreseeable incremental contribution of the project’s emissions to the effects of climate change. A project’s incremental contribution may be cumulatively considerable even if it appears relatively small compared to Statewide, national, or global emissions. The agency’s analysis should consider a timeframe that is appropriate for the project. The agency’s analysis also must reasonably reflect evolving scientific knowledge and State regulatory schemes. - In determining the significance of impacts, the lead agency may consider a project’s consistency with the State’s long-term climate goals or strategies, provided that substantial evidence supports the agency’s analysis of how those goals or strategies address the project’s incremental contribution to climate change and its conclusion that the project’s incremental contribution is not cumulatively considerable.
A lead agency may use a model or methodology to estimate GHG emissions resulting from a project.
The lead agency has the discretion to select the model or methodology it considers most appropriate to enable decision-makers to intelligently take into account the proposed project’s incremental contribution to climate change. The lead agency must support its selection of a model or methodology with substantial evidence. The lead agency should explain the limitations of a particular model or methodology selected for use.
California Supreme Court GHG Ruling
In a November 30, 2015 ruling, the California Supreme Court in Center for Biological Diversity v.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife on the Newhall Ranch project concluded that whether the project was consistent with meeting Statewide emission reduction goals is a legally permissible criterion of significance, but the significance finding for the project was not supported by a reasoned explanation based on substantial evidence. The Court offered potential solutions on pages 25-27 of the ruling to address this issue, as summarized below:
Specifically, the Court advised that:
847
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-16 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx • Substantiation of Project Reductions from BAU. A lead agency may use a BAU comparison based on the Scoping Plan’s methodology if it also substantiates the reduction a particular project must achieve to comply with Statewide goals (page 25). • Compliance with Regulatory Programs or Performance Based Standards. A lead agency “might assess consistency with AB 32’s goal in whole or part by looking to compliance with regulatory programs designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from particular activities” (page 26). • Compliance with GHG Reduction Plans or Climate Action Plans. A lead agency may utilize “geographically specific GHG emission reduction plans” such as Climate Action Plans (CAPs) or GHG emission reduction plans to provide a basis for the tiering or streamlining of project-level CEQA analysis (page 26).
• Compliance with Local Air District Thresholds. A lead agency may rely on “existing numerical thresholds of significance for greenhouse gas emissions” adopted by, for example, local air districts (page 27).
3.7.4 - Bay Area Air Quality Management District
Plan Bay Area 2050: Strategy for a Sustainable Region
On October 21, 2021, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) adopted Plan Bay Area 2050, an integrated transportation and land use strategy through 2050 that updates the nine-county region’s long-range plan to meet the requirements of SB 375. Working in collaboration with cities and counties, the Plan Bay Area 2050 advances initiatives to expand housing and transportation choices, create healthier communities, and build a stronger regional economy. Plan Bay Area 2050 remains on track to meet a 20 percent per capita reduction of GHG emissions by 2035 from 2005 conditions.32 Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2050 Climate Resolution Goals In 2013, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Board of Directors approved a Resolution (No. 2013-11) adopting a GHG goal and a commitment to developing a regional climate protection strategy that commits to the following:
• Setting a goal for the Bay Area region to reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
• Developing a Regional Climate Protection Strategy to make progress toward the 2050 goal and to complement existing climate action efforts at the State, regional, and local levels. • Preparing a work program to guide the BAAQMD climate protection activities in the near term.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2017 Clean Air Plan The BAAQMD adopted the 2017 Clean Air Plan on April 19, 2017, to comply with State air quality planning requirements set forth in the California Health and Safety Code. The 2017 Clean Air Plan 32 Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). 2021. Plan Bay Area 2050.
October 21.
848
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-17 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx includes a wide range of control measures designed to decrease emissions of the air pollutants that are most harmful to Bay Area residents, such as particulate matter, ozone, and toxic air contaminates (TACs), to reduce emissions of CH4 and other “super-greenhouse gases” that are potent climate pollutants in the near term; and to decrease emissions of carbon dioxide by reducing fossil fuel combustion.
The proposed control strategy for the 2017 Clean Air Plan consists of 85 specific control measures targeting a variety of local, regional, and global pollutants. The control measures have been developed for stationary sources, transportation, energy, buildings, agriculture, natural and working lands, waste management, water, and Super GHG pollutants. Implementation of some of the control measures could involve retrofitting, replacing, or installing new air pollution control equipment, changes in product formulations, or construction of infrastructure that have the potential to create air quality impacts.
The BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines set forth criteria for determining consistency with the 2017 Clean Air Plan. In general, a project is considered consistent if the project (1) supports the primary goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan, (2) includes control measures, and (3) does not interfere with implementation of the 2017 Clean Air Plan measures.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines The purpose of the BAAQMD’s 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines is to assist lead agencies in evaluating air quality and GHG impacts of projects and plans proposed in the Air Basin. The most recent version of the CEQA Air Quality Guidelines was revised April 2023 and includes revisions made to address the Supreme Court’s opinion (California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, December 2015).33 The BAAQMD’s 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines contain instructions on how to evaluate, measure, and mitigate air quality impacts generated from land development construction and operation activities. They focus on criteria air pollutant, GHG, TAC, and odor emissions generated from plans or projects and are intended to help lead agencies navigate through the CEQA process. The 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines are presented as advisory recommendations based on substantial evidence to assist local agencies.
The BAAQMD’s 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines provide recommended significance thresholds for GHGs for land use development projects and plans. The new thresholds state that if a project would contribute its “fair share” of what will be required to achieve California’s long-term climate goal of carbon neutrality by 2045, then a reviewing agency can find that the impact will not be significant because the project will help to solve the problem of global climate change. The thresholds for new land use projects require projects to meet either of one of two enumerated Criteria “A” or “B” detailed in Table 3.7-1. If a land use development project cannot demonstrate consistency with 33 In March 2012, the Alameda County Superior Court ordered BAAQMD to set aside use of the significance thresholds within the BAAQMD 2010 CEQA Guidelines and cease dissemination until they complete an assessment of the environmental effects of the thresholds in accordance with CEQA. The Court found that the thresholds, themselves, constitute a “project” for which environmental review is required. In August 2013, the First District Court of Appeal reversed the Alameda County Superior Court’s decision. The Court held that adoption of the thresholds was not a “project” subject to CEQA because environmental changes that might result from their adoption were too speculative to be considered “reasonably foreseeable” under CEQA. In December 2015, the California Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal's decision and remanded the matter back to the appellate court to reconsider the case in light of the Supreme Court's opinion. 849
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-18 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx Criterion A or Criterion B, then that project would result in a potentially significant impact related to the generation of direct and indirect GHG emissions.
Table 3.7-1: BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance for Greenhouse Gases Thresholds for Land Use Projects (Must Include A or B)
A. Projects must include, at a minimum, the following project design elements:
1. Buildings
a. The project will not include natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing (in both residential and nonresidential development).
b. The project will not result in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy usage as determined by the analysis required under CEQA Section 21100(b)(3) and Section 15126.2(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines.
2. Transportation
a. 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) or meet a locally adopted Senate Bill 743 VMT target, reflecting the recommendations provided in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research’s Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA:
i. Residential projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per capita ii. Office projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per employee iii. Retail projects: no net increase in existing VMT
b. Achieve compliance with off-street electric vehicle requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2.
B. Projects must be consistent with a local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b).
Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2022. CEQA Guidelines. April 20.
Project consistency with Criteria A is based on incorporating project design criteria based on key attributes consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan and states long-term carbon neutrality goals.
Projects incorporating these elements would be contributing their “fair share” of what will be required to achieve California’s long-term climate goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. These include criteria for building energy design (elimination of natural gas) as well as criteria related to reduction in transportation emissions via Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) reductions and installation of EV charging infrastructure.
Project consistency with Criterion B involves demonstrating compliance with a local “qualified” GHG plan. CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b) allows projects and plans to be analyzed through a streamlined or tiered approach utilizing an adopted Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan. A “qualified” reduction strategy capable of being utilized for a streamlined or tiered analysis under CEQA must meet the following requirements:
• Quantify GHG emissions, both existing and projected over a specified time period, resulting from activities within a defined geographic area;
850
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-19 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx • Establish a level, based on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to GHG emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be cumulatively considerable; • Identify and analyze the GHG emissions resulting from specific actions or categories of actions anticipated within the geographic area;
• Specify measures or a group of measures, including performance standards, that substantial evidence demonstrates, if implemented on a project-by-project basis, would collectively achieve the specified emissions level;
• Establish a mechanism to monitor the plan’s progress toward achieving the level and to require amendments if the plan is not achieving specified levels; and • Be adopted in a public process following environmental review.
As discussed below under Local Regulations, and Approach to Analysis, the City of American Canyon has adopted its own GHG threshold standards for industrial uses, which will be used to evaluate the proposed project’s GHG impact significance.
Local
City of American Canyon Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan The proposed project is within the jurisdiction of the City of American Canyon, which has adopted an Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan (EECAP) as discussed above in the Regulatory Framework section. The EECAP outlines a course of action to reduce community-wide GHG emissions generated within the City of American Canyon. The EECAP includes two measures to reduce energy-related emissions from new nonresidential projects: (1) Participation in PG&E’s Savings by Design program for nonresidential construction programs and (2) incorporation of energy efficiency improvements beyond Title 24 for new nonresidential construction. The City would impose the requirements of these measures as applicable through the project Conditions of Approval. The EECAP establishes emission reduction goals to reduce GHG emissions in the City by 15 percent below the 2020 business-as-usual emissions level, consistent with AB 32. Because the EECAP was prepared based on the 2020 GHG targets, which are now superseded by the 2030 GHG targets established in SB 32, the EECAP would not apply for streamlining.
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 climate change and reduce the community’s GHG emissions at the local level and improve energy efficiency and conservation. Under Resolution 2021-60, the General Plan was updated September 7, 2021, to include additional climate change and adaptation policies. The following objectives and policies from the City’s General Plan are relevant to GHG emissions and energy conservation:
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.
851
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-20 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx 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.
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.
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 8.22.2 Encourage the clustering of residential structures.
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.
Policy 8.23.2 Require that new City buildings be energy efficient.
Objective 8.24 Increase public awareness of energy conservation needs and means in order to encourage informed choices about energy conservation by the general public.
Policy 8.24.1 Cooperate with local utilities to provide energy conservation information to the public.
Policy 8.24.2 Develop public and/or public-private energy conservation educational programs for City employees and the public.
852
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-21 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx Objective 8.25 Increase the energy efficiency of City operations to save energy, reduce municipal costs, and provide an example to the private sector.
Policy 8.25.1 Introduce concepts of energy efficiency and lifecycle costing to City planning and operating decisions and to the design of all major City facilities.
Policy 8.25.2 Work with other agencies and utility companies to develop safe, economical and renewable energy resources.
Policy 8.25.3 Consider participating in energy conservation demonstration projects and promoting the use of treatment technologies that provide for the reuse of waste and water treatment by products, such as sludge and methane gas.
In addition to the above General Plan policies related to GHG emissions and energy consumption, the City adopted a Climate Emergency Proclamation on November 16, 2021.
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.
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 853
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-22 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx 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 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 854
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-23 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx 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 potential 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 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. 855
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-24 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx
3.7.5 - Thresholds of Significance
The lead agency utilizes the criteria in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist to determine whether GHG emission impacts are significant environmental effects. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
3.7.6 - Approach to Analysis
In developing its 2022 GHG significance thresholds, BAAQMD analyzed what new land use development projects will require to achieve California’s long-term climate goal of carbon neutrality by 2045, thereby better representing what design elements new land use development projects need to incorporate to sufficiently contribute to achieving the State’s goal. BAAQMD established thresholds recommendations for residential and commercial projects, but did not recommend a threshold for industrial land uses. Unlike residential and commercial projects, industrial land uses’ GHG emissions primarily come from mobile sources like truck emissions.
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has developed a threshold of significance for industrial land uses that is supported by substantial evidence and captures the significant sources of GHG impacts.
The City adopted its own GHG thresholds for industrial projects, which combines BAAQMD’s baseline threshold with the SCAQMD’s threshold will capture the presently known GHG emissions from industrial land uses. The City’s GHG thresholds are shown above under Local Regulations and have been used for this analysis. Accordingly, the analysis below addresses both Impact GHG-1 and Impact GHG-2.
3.7.7 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the project and provides mitigation measures where necessary.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Conflict with Plan, Policy, or Regulation that Reduces 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. and
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.
856
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-25 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx Impact Analysis
Both construction and operational activities have the potential to generate GHG emissions. The proposed project would generate GHG emissions during temporary (short-term) construction activities such as site grading, operation of construction equipment, operation of on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, hauling of materials to and from the project site, asphalt paving, and construction worker vehicle trips. On-site construction activities would vary depending on the level of construction activity.
Long-term, operational GHG emissions would result from project-generated vehicular traffic, operation of any landscaping equipment, off-site generation of electrical power over the life of the proposed project, the energy required to convey water to and wastewater from the project site, the emissions associated with the hauling and disposal of solid waste from the project site, and any fugitive refrigerants from air conditioning or refrigerators.
Global climate change is not confined to a particular project area and is generally accepted as the consequence of global industrialization over the last 200 years. A typical project, even a very large one, does not generate enough GHG emissions on its own to influence global climate change significantly; hence, the issue of global climate change is, by definition, a cumulative environmental impact. Therefore, this section measures the proposed project’s incremental contribution to the cumulative environmental impact. The following is a discussion of the proposed project’s contribution to GHG emissions during both the construction and operation phases. The proposed project’s GHG emissions are quantified for informational purposes only.
Construction
At the time of this analysis, the construction of the proposed project was anticipated to begin in the third quarter 2024 and be completed 11 months later. The proposed project’s construction emissions are presented in Table 3.7-2. As vehicle and equipment fuel efficiencies and emission control standards continue to incrementally improve with each year, project construction emissions are likely to decrease nominally from what is shown in Table 3.7-2 should the construction schedule move to later years. Therefore, the construction GHG emissions contained in Table 3.7-2 represent a conservative assessment of project construction emissions. CalEEMod outputs which detail the GHG emissions during each construction phase are shown in Appendix B.
Table 3.7-2: Proposed Project Construction GHG Emissions Construction Year Total MT CO2e per year (approx.)
2024 252
2025 352
Entire Construction Duration (2024-2025)
Total 604
Amortized over 30 years 20
Notes:
Because of rounding, total MT CO2e may be marginally different from CalEEMod output. 857
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-26 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx Construction Year Total MT CO2e per year (approx.)
MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents
Source: Appendix B
As shown above, the proposed project would generate approximately 604 MT CO2e during construction.
Operation
Operational or long-term emissions occur over the life of the project. Project operations were modeled for the 2025 operational year, immediately following the completion of construction.
Sources for operational emissions are summarized below and are described in more detail in Section
3.2. Sources for operational GHG emissions include:
• Motor Vehicles: These emissions refer to GHG emissions contained in the exhaust from the cars and trucks that would travel to and from the project site. • Area Sources: These emissions refer to those produced during activities such as landscape maintenance.
• Electricity: These emissions refer to those generated by off-site power plants to supply electricity required for the proposed project.
• Electricity generated by on-site solar improvements: This is the estimated electricity that would be generated by the project’s solar infrastructure. This is calculated manually (i.e., outside of CalEEMod) to account for the energy generated on-site that would offset some electricity needs from off-site power plants.
• Water Transport: These emissions refer to those generated by the electricity required to transport and treat the water to be used on the project site. • Waste: These emissions refer to the GHG emissions produced by decomposing waste generated by the proposed project.
Table 3.7-3 presents the estimated annual GHG emissions from the proposed project’s operational activities. As shown in Table 3.7-3, the proposed project would generate approximately 3,112 MT CO2e per year after the inclusion of 20 MT CO2e per year from project construction. CalEEMod outputs which detail the GHG emissions during operation and calculations for solar energy generated by the proposed project, are shown in Appendix B.
Table 3.7-3: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHG Emissions Source GHG Emissions (MT CO2e per year)
Mobile–Trucks 3003
Area 5
Energy–Electricity 29
858
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-27 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx GHG Emissions Source GHG Emissions (MT CO2e per year)
Energy–On-site Solar1 (10)
Water/Waste 65
Amortized Construction Emissions 20
Total Annual Project Emissions 3,112
Notes:
MT CO2e = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent 1 These emissions are calculated manually (i.e., not reflected in CalEEMod) to estimate the amount of electricity that would be generated by the proposed solar improvements.
Totals were summed using unrounded numbers and may not appear to sum exactly due to rounding.
Source: Appendix B.
For informational purposes, Table 3.7-4 is provided to illustrate the proposed project’s downward trend of GHG emissions as the State advances regulations on 1) reducing GHG emissions from truck fleet and landscaping equipment and 2) increasing renewable energy use. Relevant regulations that would achieve future GHG emissions include but not limited to:
• SB 100, requiring California electricity utility providers to supply all in-state end users with electricity sourced from renewable or carbon-free sources by 2045; and • Executive Order N-79-20 which requires transition to ZEV short-haul/drayage trucks, heavyduty long-haul trucks, and off-road equipment.
Calculations detailing the reduction in project operational GHG emissions as a result of compliance with the aforementioned regulations are shown in Appendix B.
Table 3.7-4: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emission Beyond Buildout Year (Compliance with Applicable Regulations)
Construction Year 2025 2030 2045
Mobile 3,003 2,343 364
Area (Landscape Equipment) 5 0 0
Energy–Electricity 19 19 0
Water/Waste 65 65 65
Construction (Amortized) 20 20 20
Total Annual (in Metric Ton) 3,112 2,447 449
The exact truck fleet that would be used by the proposed project is unknown. However, if the project’s truck fleet meets the “priority fleet” designation under the Advanced Clean Fleet (ACF) rule,1 the project’s truck fleet would be subject to additional regulations that would result in further mobile source GHG reductions:
Total Annual if project fleet is considered “priority” under ACF 3,003 2,056 128 Notes:
ACF = Advanced Clean Fleet
859
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-28 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx Construction Year 2025 2030 2045
1 The ACF regulation applies to fleets performing drayage operations, those owned by State, local, and federal government agencies, and high priority fleets. High priority fleets are entities that own, operate, or direct at least one vehicle in California, and that have either $50 million or more in gross annual revenues, or that own, operate, or have common ownership or control of a total of 50 or more vehicles (excluding light-duty package delivery vehicles). The regulation affects medium- and heavy-duty on-road vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating greater than 8,500 pounds, off-road yard tractors, and light-duty mail and package delivery vehicles.
Project Impact
As previously discussed, the City adopted its own GHG thresholds for industrial projects (Ordinance No. 2024-013), including the proposed project. As shown above in Local Regulations, the GHG thresholds consist of four tiers that the project can be evaluated against to determine its GHG impact significance.
The proposed project is evaluated against each of the four tiers:
Tier 1–CEQA exemption: The proposed project is not exempt from CEQA, therefore this tier does not apply.
Tier 2–Qualified GHG reduction plan: The EECAP was prepared based on the 2020 GHG targets, which are now superseded by the 2030 GHG targets established in SB 32. Therefore, the EECAP would not apply for streamlining.
Tier 3–Project design elements: The proposed buildings would be all-electric design which satisfies the first design element that prohibits natural gas appliances or plumbing. As demonstrated in Section 3.5, Energy, the proposed project would not result in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy usage; therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the second design element. However, as discussed in Section 3.13, the proposed project would have a significant and unavoidable VMT impact. As such, this tier does not apply to the proposed project.
Tier 4–Screening threshold: The last tier relates to project emissions in exceedance of SCAQMD’s 10,000 MT CO2e per year screening threshold for industrial uses and stationary projects. As shown in Table 3.7-3 and Table 3.7-4, the proposed project’s construction and operation GHG emissions would be far below the 10,000 MT CO2e per year screening threshold. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with this tier and would not have a significant GHG impact.
Furthermore, although the proposed project is not required to implement the industrial sustainability measures that were recently adopted by the City, which only applies to projects for which a Notice of Preparation is issued after March 1, 2024 (Ordinance No. 2024-013), the proposed project includes similar design features such as the use of zero-emission forklifts and solar panels.
The proposed solar panels would be installed on the project’s building roof top, which would produce an estimated 235,000 kilowatt-hour (kWh) per year.
In summary, the proposed project would satisfy Tier 4 of the City’s GHG standards. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
860
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-29 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
3.7.8 - Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope of the cumulative GHG emissions analysis is the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB), which covers all or portions of the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Sonoma, and Solano. In a larger sense, however, the relevant geographic area is the entire Earth, as explained by the California Supreme Court. “[B]ecause of the global scale of climate change, any one project’s contribution is unlikely to be significant by itself.” (Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish and Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal.4th 204, 219.) “’With respect to climate change, an individual project's emissions would most likely not have any appreciable impact on the global problem by themselves, but they would contribute to the significant cumulative impact caused by greenhouse gas emissions from other sources around the globe. The question therefore becomes whether the proposed project’s incremental addition of greenhouse gases is “cumulatively considerable” in light of the global problem, and thus significant.’” (Id., quoting Crockett, Addressing the Significance of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Under CEQA:
California's Search for Regulatory Certainty in an Uncertain World (July 2011) Golden Gate U. Envtl.
L.J. 203, 207–208).)
The proposed project would emit new GHG emissions, as would other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects within the Air Basin. The BAAQMD provides guidance for evaluating whether a project would contribute its “fair share” of what will be required to achieve California’s long-term climate goal of carbon neutrality by 2045, in which case a reviewing agency can find that the impact will not be significant because the project will help to solve the problem of global climate change.
The analysis showed that the proposed project would have a less than significant GHG impact and as such, would result in a less than signfiicant cumulative impact as well. Therefore, the proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development in the Air Basin and around the world, would not result in a significant cumulative GHG emissions impact. The proposed project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable and thus less than significant.
Level of Cumulative Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
861
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Draft EIR
3.7-30 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-07 GHG.docx Level of Cumulative Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
862
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx
3.8 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials
3.8.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing hazards and hazardous materials setting and the potential effects from project implementation on the site and its surrounding area. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared by Cameron-Cole, LLC on April 27, 2023, included in this Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) as Appendix G.
No public comments pertaining to hazards and hazardous materials were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP).
3.8.2 - Environmental Setting
Hazardous Materials
Hazardous materials, as defined by the California Code of Regulations, are substances with certain physical properties that could pose a substantial present or future hazard to human health or the environment when improperly handled, disposed of, or otherwise managed. Hazardous materials are grouped into the following four categories, based on their properties:
• Toxic: Causes human health effects
• Ignitable: Has the ability to burn
• Corrosive: Causes severe burns or damage to materials • Reactive: Causes explosions or generates toxic gases
Hazardous waste is any hazardous material that is discarded, abandoned, or slated to be recycled.
The criteria that define a material as hazardous also define a waste as hazardous. If improperly handled, hazardous materials and hazardous waste can result in public health hazards if released into the soil or groundwater or through airborne releases in vapors, fumes, or dust. Soil and groundwater having concentrations of hazardous constituents higher than specific regulatory levels must be handled and disposed of as hazardous waste when excavated or pumped from an aquifer.
The California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Sections 66261.20-24 contains technical descriptions of toxic characteristics that could cause soil or groundwater to be classified as hazardous waste.
Common Hazardous Materials
Asbestos
Asbestos is the name given to a number of naturally occurring, fibrous silicate minerals mined for their useful properties, such as thermal insulation, chemical and thermal stability, and high tensile strength. Asbestos is commonly used for acoustic insulation, thermal insulation, fireproofing, and in other building materials. Asbestos is made up of microscopic bundles of fibers that may become airborne when asbestos-containing materials are damaged or disturbed. When these fibers get into the air, they may be inhaled into the lungs, where they can cause significant health problems. The California Occupational Health and Safety Administration (Cal/OSHA) defines asbestos-containing construction materials as any material that contains more than 0.1 percent asbestos by weight. 863
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hazards and Hazardous Materials Draft EIR
3.8-2 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx There are no structures on the project site; thus, there is no basis to assume presence of asbestoscontaining materials.
Lead
Lead is a highly toxic metal that was used until the late 1970s in a number of products, most notably in paint. Lead may cause a range of health effects, from behavioral problems and learning disabilities to seizures and death. Primary sources of lead exposure are deteriorating lead-based paint, leadcontaminated dust, and lead-contaminated soil. Both the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Department of Health Services define lead paint as containing a minimum of 0.5 percent by weight. Lead-containing waste materials with a concentration greater than 0.1 percent are considered hazardous waste by California law.
There are no structures on the project site; thus, there is no basis to assume presence of lead-based paint.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are mixtures of synthetic chemicals with similar chemical structures. PCBs can range from oily liquids to waxy solids. Because of their non-flammability, chemical stability, high boiling point, and electrical insulating properties, PCBs were used in hundreds of industrial and commercial applications, including electrical, heat transfer, and hydraulic equipment; as plasticizers in paints, plastics, and rubber products; in pigments, dyes, and carbonless copy paper; and many other applications. Electrical transformers are one of the most common sources of PCBs.
There are no structures or electrical transformers on the project site thus, there is no basis to assume presence of PCBs.
Radon
Radon is a carcinogenic, radioactive gas resulting from the natural breakdown of uranium in soil, rock, and water. Radon gas enters a building through cracks in foundations and walls. Once inside the building, radon decay products may become attached to dust particles and inhaled, or the decayed radioactive particles alone may be inhaled and cause damage to lung tissue. The EPA has established a safe radon exposure threshold of 4 picocuries per liter of air (pCi/l).
The California Department of Health Services has conducted more than 48,000 indoor radon tests in more than 1,700 zip codes through the State, including in the 94503 (American Canyon) zip code. A total of 18 tests have been conducted in the 94503 zip code, none of which yielded indoor radon levels above 4 pCi/l1
.
1 California Department of Health Services. 2016. California Indoor Radon Levels. Website:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CEH/DRSEM/CDPH%20Document%20Library/EMB/Radon/Radon%20Test%20Results.pdf.
Accessed March 17, 2023.
864
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-3 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx Low-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields
Electrical transmission and distribution lines emit extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs), which have been suspected to be linked to cancer. However, scientific research has never conclusively established a link between EMFs and cancer. In 2007, the World Health Organization issued a report titled “Extremely Low-Frequency Fields, Environmental Health Criteria Monograph No. 238” that concluded that evidence between extremely low-frequency EMFs and childhood leukemia is not strong enough to be considered causal, although it did note that the issue still was of concern. The same report indicated that there is inadequate evidence or no evidence linking lowfrequency EMFs and health effects associated with all other diseases.
The nearest high voltage electrical transmission line (i.e., tower line) is located 1.7 miles south of the project site.
Aviation
The Napa County Airport is located 1.65 miles north of the project site and is within Zone D of the Napa County (County) Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). The County-owned airport consists of three runways, ranging from 2,500 to 5,930 feet in length.2 The airport averages 446 operations per day and 163,000 operations annually (the Federal Aviation Administration [FAA] defines an “operation” as one takeoff or landing).
3 The County ALUCP contemplates aviation activity at Napa County Airport increasing to 575 operations per day (or approximately 210,000 operations annually).4 Phase I ESA
A Phase I ESA was prepared by Cameron-Cole, LLC on April 27, 2023, to evaluate the presence or likely presence of hazardous substances within the project site. Cameron-Cole used historical resources, personal interviews, and federal and State agency files regarding site operations and past historical use, as well as site reconnaissance to inform their conclusions.
Recognized Environmental Conditions
A recognized environmental condition (REC) is defined as the presence of either:
• Hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the project site to a release to the environment
• The likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the project site due to a release or likely release to the environment, or • The presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the project site under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. 2 County of Napa. Flight Planning. Website: https://www.countyofnapa.org/1012/FlightPlanning#:~:text=Napa%20County%20Airport%20%2D%20APC&text=Runways%3A,%3A%20134.0%2C%20Double%20tandem%3A% 20120.0. Accessed April 16, 2024. 3 Napa County Airport Land Use Commission. 1999. Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. December 15. 4 Ibid. 865
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hazards and Hazardous Materials Draft EIR
3.8-4 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx The Phase I ESA did not identify any RECs at the time of the report.
Record Searches
Cameron-Cole performed a query of Envirosite for a comprehensive government agency information search in accordance with American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) International Standard E1527-21. The project site was not identified in any of the standard or other ascertainable records databases searched.
Through the review of historical sources, Cameron-Cole identified that the property at 2 Eucalyptus Drive, which is directly east of the project site, was listed in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and the Napa County Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) databases. Note that this property historically included the project site until approximately 2012. In 1990, the property was inspected by Napa County officials. Two 10,000-gallon underground storage tanks (USTs), one 3,000-gallon UST, 55-gallon drums, and hazardous materials were observed in a section of the property east of the project site. These items have since been removed from the adjoining property. The site has undergone two Phase I ESAs as well as a Limited Site Investigation including soil sampling.
The record search identified off-site points of interest with respect to interpreted groundwater flow direction, which is inferred to flow west (Table 3.8-1). However, it was determined that none of the sites in the surrounding areas present an environmental threat to the subject property.
Table 3.8-1: Off-site Points of Interest
Name
Relationship to Project Site
(approximate) Summary
SDG Commerce 330 420 feet south No violations are listed for this site. 2 Eucalyptus Drive
(Napa Junction Elementary School)
1,229 feet southeast This site is listed as a dredge/fill site.
No violations are listed for the
project site.
American Canyon Wastewater
Treatment Facility
1,021 feet northwest Sewage treatment facility.
California Hazardous Material
Incident Report System (CHMIRS)–
CA database description mentions
a sewage release into a tributary of
the Napa River in 2014. The release
is contained but unrecoverable.
DOCKET database lists the site with
the Enforcement Action Case
Number CA-200018545.
The site has an NPDES Individual
Permit, which is expired.
The site is listed in the Enforced
Permit Compliant Facilities (PCS
866
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-5 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx Name
Relationship to Project Site
(approximate) Summary
ENF) database, which is the federal
equivalent of NPDES, as a State
Clean Water Act Penalty.
No other databases list violations
for the site.
Source: Cameron-Cole 2023.
Site Reconnaissance
Cameron-Cole conducted a site reconnaissance on March 13, 2023, to determine the presence or absence of hazardous substance or petroleum product storage areas or spills as indicated by stressed vegetation, soil staining, storage tanks, drums, etc.
A very minimal oil sheen was observed on a puddle of water in the western portion of the project site. The sheen was determined to be de minimis and is likely attributed to naturally occurring oils from the historic eucalyptus groves on and adjacent to the project site. Furthermore, a de minimis amount of household waste was noted during site reconnaissance. No hazardous waste was observed during the site reconnaissance. Several rock piles were present throughout the project site.
A large mound of soil was observed on the southern edge of the project site. The property owner stated that the soil observed on the project site was excess soil placed there during the development of the adjoining property to the south.
Historical Use and Soil Testing
The Phase I ESA found, through the review of historical and aerial photographs, that the project site may have historically been used for agricultural purposes, which commonly is associated with the use of pesticides, herbicides, or fertilizers. However, no evidence of improper applications, releases, or potential releases of agricultural chemicals were noted in the report. As such, the possible historic use of the subject property for agricultural purposes is not considered an REC.
The project site contained a eucalyptus tree grove that existed from at least 1937 through approximately 2012 and was used for paintball activities from approximately 1992 until approximately 2012. A Limited Site Investigation of the 2 Eucalyptus Drive property (of which the project site was formerly a part of), prepared by ICES on April 19, 2019, included soil testing from within the project site. Total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel (TPHd) was detected above the reported residential Environmental Screening Level (ESL) from soils within the project site, but it is assumed to be the result of the natural oil compounds in eucalyptus trees. Further, the levels of TPHd detected are below the current ESL. Arsenic and vanadium were also identified at concentrations above the stated Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) in project site soil samples but were within background levels for area soils. As such, the concentrations of TPHd, arsenic, and vanadium identified during the 2010 Limited Site Investigation in soils on the project site are not considered recognized environmental conditions for the subject property. 867
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hazards and Hazardous Materials Draft EIR
3.8-6 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx
3.8.3 - Regulatory Framework
Federal
Federal Toxic Substances Control Act and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act The Federal Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) regulate the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous waste. The regulatory program is administered by the EPA. It mandates that hazardous waste be tracked from the point of generation to their ultimate fate in the environment. This includes detailed tracking of hazardous materials during transport and permitting of hazardous material handling facilities. RCRA was amended in 1984 by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Act (HSWA), which affirmed and extended the “cradle to grave” system of regulating hazardous wastes. The HSWA also prohibited the use of certain techniques for the disposal of some hazardous wastes and provided the framework for a regulatory program designed to prevent releases from USTs. The program establishes tank and leak detection standards, including spill and overflow protection devices for new tanks and performance standards to ensure that the stored material will not corrode the tanks.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) introduced active federal involvement to emergency response, site remediation, and spill prevention, most notably the Superfund program. The Act was intended to be comprehensive in encompassing both the prevention of and response to uncontrolled hazardous substances releases.
The Act deals with environmental response, providing mechanisms for reacting to emergencies and to chronic hazardous material releases. In addition to establishing procedures to prevent and remedy problems, it establishes a system for compensating appropriate individuals and assigning appropriate liability. It is designed to plan for and respond to failure in other regulatory programs and to remedy problems resulting from action taken before the era of comprehensive regulatory protection.
Transportation of Hazardous Materials
The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act of 1974, as amended, is the basic statute regulating hazardous materials transportation in the United States. Transportation of hazardous materials is regulated by the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) Office of Hazardous Materials Safety. The Office of Hazardous Materials Safety formulates, issues, and revises hazardous materials regulations under the Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Law. The hazardous materials regulations cover hazardous materials definitions and classifications, hazard communications, shipper and carrier operations, training and security requirements, and packaging and container specifications. The hazardous materials transportation regulations are codified in 49 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 100-185.
The hazardous materials transportation regulations require carriers transporting hazardous materials to receive training in the handling and transportation of hazardous materials. Training requirements include pre-trip safety inspections; use of vehicle controls and equipment, including emergency equipment; procedures for safe operation of the transport vehicle; instruction on the properties of 868
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-7 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx the hazardous material being transported; and loading and unloading procedures. All drivers must possess a commercial driver’s license as required by 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 383.
Vehicles transporting hazardous materials must be properly placarded. In addition, the carrier is responsible for the safe unloading of hazardous materials at the site, and operators must follow specific procedures during unloading to minimize the potential for an accidental release of hazardous materials.
State
Cortese List
The provisions in Government Code Section 65962.5 are commonly referred to as the “Cortese List.” The list, or a site’s presence on the list, has bearing on the local permitting process as well as on compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). While Government Code Section 65962.5 makes reference to the preparation of a “list,” many changes have occurred related to webbased information access since 1992 and this information is now largely available on the websites of GeoTracker and EnviroStor. Those requesting a copy of the Cortese “list” are now referred directly to the appropriate information resources contained on the internet web sites (e.g., GeoTracker and EnviroStor).
Handling and Storage of Hazardous Waste
The handling and storage of hazardous materials is regulated on the federal level by the EPA under the CERCLA as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA). Under SARA Title III, a nationwide emergency planning and response program was established that imposed reporting requirements for businesses that store, handle, or produce significant quantities of hazardous or acutely toxic substances as defined under federal laws. SARA Title III required each state to implement a comprehensive system to inform federal authorities, local agencies, and the public when a significant quantity of hazardous, acutely toxic substances are stored or handled at a facility.
In California, the handling and storage of hazardous materials is regulated by Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code. Under Sections 25500-25543.3, facilities handling hazardous materials are required to prepare a Hazardous Materials Business Plan. The business plan provides information to the local emergency response agency regarding the types and quantities of hazardous materials stored at a facility and provides detailed emergency planning and response procedures in the event of a hazardous materials release. In the event that a facility stores quantities of specific acutely hazardous materials above the thresholds set forth by the California code, facilities are required to prepare a Risk Management Plan and California Accidental Release Plan, which provide information on the potential impact zone of a worst-case release and requires plans and programs designed to minimize the probability of a release and mitigate potential impacts.
California Hazardous Waste Control Law
The California Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL) is administered by the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) to regulate hazardous wastes. While the HWCL is generally more stringent than RCRA, until the EPA approves the California program, both the State and federal laws apply in California. The HWCL lists 791 chemicals and approximately 300 common materials that may 869
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hazards and Hazardous Materials Draft EIR
3.8-8 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx be hazardous; establishes criteria for identifying, packaging, and labeling hazardous wastes; prescribes management controls; establishes permit requirements for treatment, storage, disposal, and transportation; and identifies some wastes that cannot be disposed of in landfills.
The California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Chapter 11, Article 2, Section 66261.10 defines hazardous waste as a substance that may:
(1) Cause, or significantly contribute to, an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible or incapacitating reversible, illness; or (2) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, or disposed or otherwise managed.
According to California Code of Regulations Title 22, substances having a characteristic of toxicity, ignitability, corrosivity, or reactivity are considered hazardous waste. Hazardous wastes are hazardous substances that no longer have a practical use, such as material that has been abandoned, discarded, spilled, or contaminated or is being stored prior to proper disposal.
Toxic substances may cause short-term or long-lasting health effects, ranging from temporary effects to permanent disability or death. For example, toxic substances can cause eye or skin irritation, disorientation, headache, nausea, allergic reactions, acute poisoning, chronic illness, or other adverse health effects if human exposure exceeds certain levels. (The level depends on the substance involved.) Carcinogens (substances known to cause cancer) are a special class of toxic substances. Examples of toxic substances include most heavy metals, pesticides, and benzene (a carcinogenic component of gasoline). Ignitable substances are hazardous because of their flammable properties. Gasoline, hexane, and natural gas are examples of ignitable substances. Corrosive substances are chemically active and can damage other materials or cause severe bums upon contact. Examples include strong acids and bases such as sulfuric (battery) acid or lye. Reactive substances may cause explosions or generate gases or fumes. Explosives, pressurized canisters, and pure sodium metal (which reacts violently with water) are examples of reactive materials.
Other types of hazardous materials include radioactive and biohazardous materials. Radioactive materials and wastes contain radioisotopes, which are atoms with unstable nuclei that emit ionizing radiation to increase their stability. Radioactive waste mixed with chemical hazardous waste is referred to as “mixed wastes.” Biohazardous materials and wastes include anything derived from living organisms. They may be contaminated with disease-causing agents, such as bacteria or viruses.
The Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law of 1985 (Business Plan Act) requires that any business that handles hazardous materials prepare a business plan that must include details, including floor plans, of the facility and business conducted at the site, an inventory of hazardous materials that are handled or stored on the site, an emergency response plan, a training program in safety procedures and emergency response for new employees, and an annual refresher course in the same topics for all employees.
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act (California Water Code, Section 13000, et seq.) established the authority of the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) and provided 870
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-9 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) with the primary responsibility of the protection of water quality in the State of California.
Hazardous Materials Worker Safety
Cal/OSHA and the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) are the agencies responsible for assuring worker safety by developing and enforcing workplace safety regulations in the handling and use of chemicals in the workplace. Cal/OSHA standards are generally more stringent than federal regulations. The employer is required to monitor worker exposure to listed hazardous substances and notify workers of exposure (8 CCR §§ 337-340, Chapter 3.2). The regulations specify requirements for employee training, availability of safety equipment, accident prevention programs, and hazardous substance exposure warnings.
California Fire Code
California Code of Regulations, Title 24, also known as the California Building Standards Code, contains the California Fire Code at Part 9. The California Fire Code includes provisions and standards for emergency planning and preparedness, fire service features, fire protection systems, hazardous materials, fire flow requirements, and fire hydrant locations and distribution. The Fire Code requires two points of vehicular access for any nonresidential building 30 feet tall or higher.
California Department of Transportation and California Highway Patrol The California Vehicle Code Section 31303 requires that hazardous materials be transported via routes with the least overall travel time and prohibits the transportation of hazardous materials through residential neighborhoods. In California, the California Highway Patrol (CHP) is authorized to designate and enforce route restrictions for the transportation of hazardous materials. To operate in California, all hazardous waste transporters must be registered with the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Unless specifically exempted, hazardous waste transporters must comply with the CHP Regulations, the California State Fire Marshal Regulations, and the USDOT Regulations. In addition, hazardous waste transporters must comply with Division 20, Chapter 6.5, Article 6 and 13 of the California Health and Safety Code and Title 22, Division 4.5, Chapter 13 of the California Code of Regulations, both of which are administered by the DTSC.
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
There are nine RWQCBs throughout the State. The San Francisco Bay RWQCB has jurisdiction over the City of American Canyon. Individual RWQCBs function as the lead agencies responsible for identifying, monitoring, and cleaning up LUSTs. Storage of hazardous materials in USTs is regulated by the State Water Board, which oversees the nine RWQCBs.
California State Aeronautics Act
The State Aeronautics Act, Public Utilities Code Section 21001, et seq. are the foundation for the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Division of Aeronautics aviation policies. The Division issues permits for and annually inspects hospital heliports and public use airports, makes recommendations regarding proposed school sites within 2 miles of an airport runway, and authorizes helicopter landing sites at/near schools. Aviation system planning provides for the integration of aviation into transportation system planning on a regional, Statewide, and national 871
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hazards and Hazardous Materials Draft EIR
3.8-10 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx basis. The Division of Aeronautics administers noise regulation and land use planning laws that foster compatible land use around airports and encourages environmental mitigation measures to lessen noise, air pollution, and other impacts caused by aviation. The Division of Aeronautics also provides grants and loans for safety, maintenance, and capital improvement projects at airports.
Local
City of American Canyon
General Plan
The City of American Canyon General Plan sets forth the following guiding and implementing policies relevant to hazards and hazardous materials:
Goal 1N Ensure the compatibility of development within American Canyon with the Napa County Airport.
Objective 1.27 Ensure that lands in American Canyon are developed in a manner which protects them from the noise and operational impacts of, and does not adversely constrain, the Napa County Airport.
Policy 1.27.2 Review all applications for new development, expansion of existing uses, and reuse within Napa County Airport Compatibility Zones “A” through “E” for compliance with the appropriate use and development conditions.
Goal 6A Maintain a high level of fire protection and emergency services to City/District businesses and residences.
Objective 6.3 Ensure that the Fire District’s facility, manpower and equipment needs keep pace with the City’s growth.
Policy 6.3.1 Require that City planning staff work closely with Fire District officials to ensure that fie facilities and personnel are expanded commensurably to serve the needs of the City’s growing population and development base.
Policy 6.4.3 Require, through the development review process, that all structures and facilities subject to the District’s jurisdiction adhere to City, State, and federal regulatory standards such as the Uniform Building and Fire Codes and other applicable safety guidelines.
County of Napa
Napa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
The ALUCP governs land use around two Napa County aviation facilities: the Napa County Airport and Parrett Field in Angwin. The ALUCP was adopted by the Napa County Airport Land Use 872
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-11 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx Commission in April 1991 and revised in December 1999. The project site is within Zone D of the ALUCP.
5 Flight Hazards
The ALUCP identifies two categories of flight hazards: physical obstructions and land use characteristics.
Physical obstructions are associated with tall objects or structures. The ALUCP establishes a height restriction ranging from 50 feet to 185 feet above ground level.
Land use characteristics involve uses that may produce hazards to aviation. Specific characteristics prohibited within the airport land use planning boundaries are listed below:
• Glare or distracting lights, which could be mistaken for airport lights • Sources of dust, steam, or smoke that may impair pilot visibility • Sources of electrical interference with aircraft communications or navigation • Any use that may attract large flocks or birds, especially landfills or certain agricultural uses Zone D
The ALUCP provides the following description of Zone D in Table 3-1:
Common Traffic Pattern: This area is defined by the flight pattern of each airport and illustrated in the respective “Airport Impact Areas” figures contained in Part III.
These areas are routinely overflown by aircraft operating to and from the airport with frequent single-event noise intrusion. Overflights in these areas can range from near the traffic pattern altitude (about 1,000 feet above the ground) to as low as 300 feet above the ground. Accident risk varies from low to moderate. Areas where aircraft are near pattern altitude (e.g., downwind leg) have the lowest risk. In areas where aircraft are at lower altitudes (especially on circle-to-land instrument approaches), a moderate level of risk exists.
The ALUCP establishes the following standards for Zone D:
• Maximum density recommendation of 100 persons per acre inside structures for nonresidential uses.
• Maximum density recommendation of 150 persons per acre (both indoors and outdoors) for nonresidential uses.
• Residential uses are prohibited.
• Uses hazardous to flight are prohibited (i.e., features that attract large numbers of birds and sources of smoke, glare, distracting lights, or electrical interference). • Overflight easement or deed restrictions are required. 5 Napa County Airport Land Use Commission. 1999. Napa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. 873
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hazards and Hazardous Materials Draft EIR
3.8-12 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx • Building envelopes and approach surfaces are required on all development plans within 100 feet of approach zones.
• Clustering is encouraged to maximize open land areas. • Noise level reduction measures may be required for noise-sensitive uses.
The ALUCP states that most nonresidential uses are considered “normally acceptable” within Zone D.
Schools, libraries, hospitals, nursing homes, large shopping malls, amphitheaters, and ponds are identified as “not normally acceptable” within Zone D.
Hazard Mitigation Plan and Emergency Operation Plan
The City of American Canyon is included in the Napa County Hazard Mitigation Plan, which provides an explanation of prevalent hazards within the County and how those hazards may affect the County.
The Plan identifies mitigation strategies to respond to the potential hazards, including actions to achieve the greatest risk reduction based upon available resources.6 The City of American Canyon is also included in the County of Napa Emergency Operation Plan which addresses coordinated and planned response to extraordinary emergency situations within the County. The Plan is a guide for the response to, management of, and recovery from emergencies.7
3.8.4 - Methodology
FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) evaluated potential impacts on hazards and hazardous materials based on a Phase I ESA and site reconnaissance prepared by Cameron-Cole, LLC on April 27, 2023.
3.8.5 - Thresholds of Significance
The lead agency utilizes the criteria in the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist to determine whether hazards and hazardous materials impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed project would be considered significant if the project would:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) 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 it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
6 Napa County. 2020. Hazard Mitigation Plan. Website: https://www.cityofamericancanyon.org/government/publicsafety/emergency-preparedness/hazard-mitigation-plan. Accessed May 31, 2023. 7 Napa County. 2016. Emergency Operations Plan. Website: https://www.cityofamericancanyon.org/government/publicsafety/emergency-preparedness/hazard-mitigation-plan. Accessed May 31, 2023. 874
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-13 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx e) For a project located within 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, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working the project area? f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires? (Refer to Section 4, Effects Found Not To Be Significant.)
3.8.6 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the development of the project and provides mitigation measures where appropriate.
Routine Transport, Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset 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 through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment.
Impact Analysis
This impact assesses both threshold (a) and (b).
Construction
Construction activities would entail the use of heavy equipment on the project site. Potential hazardous materials transported, used, or disposed of during project construction would be limited to commonly used substances such as gasoline, diesel, oil, grease, mechanical fluids, paints, and cleaning solvents. Construction equipment would be serviced by trained technicians and potentially hazardous materials would be stored in secured facilities. Furthermore, the safe handling of these commonly used substances is governed by occupational health and safety laws and regulations and construction contract requirements. Therefore, the use of this equipment and these substances during construction would not present any undue risks to the public or the environment.
Operation
The proposed wine warehouse would be used for distribution, fulfillment, and storage of a nonhazardous commodity (wine). No large quantity hazardous materials handling would occur.
The proposed end user would be expected to handle small quantities of commonly used hazardous substances such as cleaning solvents, diesel, gasoline, grease/degreasers, mechanical fluids, and oil as part of daily operations. Given the small quantities involved and the characteristics of use (e.g., routine maintenance and cleaning), their use would not be considered a potential significant risk to human health or the environment. The use of acutely hazardous materials of any quantity that have the potential to result in releases that could potentially expose substantial numbers of people or the environment to harm is not anticipated by project end uses. 875
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hazards and Hazardous Materials Draft EIR
3.8-14 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx Furthermore, as summarized in Section 3.7.2, Environmental Setting, the project site does not have RECs or conditions that would create a risk of release of hazardous materials during ground disturbance or during operation of the proposed project.
American Canyon Water Reclamation Facility
The American Canyon Water Reclamation Facility is located approximately 1,021 feet northwest of the project site. Gaseous chlorine is typically used during wastewater treatment and can pose a significant risk to human health because of its properties. In this case, the Water Reclamation Facility does not handle or store gaseous chlorine, which precludes the possibility of the proposed project being exposed to such a release.
Agricultural Chemicals
The project site does not support cultivated agriculture. Aerial photographs and historic topographical maps indicate that the project site has not supported cultivated agricultural production since the 1950s. Thus, there is no basis to assume presence of agricultural chemicals, including herbicides and pesticides.
Hazardous Building Materials
The project site does not contain any structures. Aerial photographs and historic topographical maps indicate that the project site has not supported structures in the past; thus, there is no basis to assume the presence of hazardous building materials including asbestos, lead, or PCBs.
Radon
The California Department of Health Services has conducted more than 48,000 indoor radon tests in more than 1,700 zip codes through the State, including in the 94503 (American Canyon) zip code. A total of 18 tests have been conducted in the 94503 zip code, none of which yielded indoor radon levels above 4 pCi/l. Moreover, the proposed project proposes slab-on-grade construction, which has a low susceptibility to radon intrusion. In contrast, buildings with subsurface spaces such as basements or parking garages have a much higher susceptibility to radon intrusion.
Electromagnetic Fields
There are no high voltage electrical facilities (e.g., tower lines) within 0.5 mile of the project site. As such, the proposed project site would not be exposed to high levels of low-frequency EMFs.
Conclusion
In summary, the construction and operational activities of the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials and would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment. Impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
876
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-15 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
Exposure of Schools to Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-2: The proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.
Impact Analysis
Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School is located 1,000 feet southeast of the project site, which is less than 0.25 mile.
However, the proposed wine warehouse would be used for distribution, fulfillment, and storage of a non-hazardous commodity (wine). No large quantity hazardous materials handling would occur.
Furthermore, the proposed end user would be expected to handle small quantities of commonly used hazardous substances such as cleaning solvents, diesel, gasoline, grease/degreasers, mechanical fluids, and oil as part of daily operations. Given the small quantities involved and the characteristics of use (e.g., routine maintenance and cleaning), their use would not be considered a potential risk to Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School. Impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
Government Code Section 65962.5 Sites–Cortese List
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.
Impact Analysis
Cortese List
The project site is not listed on the Cortese List, which includes various hazardous materials databases compiled to Government Code 65962.5.
Two sites within 0.75 mile of the project site are listed on the Cortese List. Both are listed as “Case Closed,” signifying that the regulatory agency with jurisdiction has determined that no further action is necessary. Thus, they do not pose a risk to human health or the environment and the proposed project would not be exposed to hazards or hazardous materials from past uses of the project site or the site vicinity. Impacts would be less than significant. 877
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hazards and Hazardous Materials Draft EIR
3.8-16 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
Airports
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.
Impact Analysis
The project site is located 1.65 miles south of the Napa County Airport and is within Zone D of the Napa County ALUCP.
As explained in Section 3.5.6 of this Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR), the California Supreme Court, in California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369, 377, has held generally “agencies subject to CEQA generally are not required to analyze the impact of existing environmental conditions on a project’s future users or residents.” However, the Court recognized that the Legislature has created an exception with respect to noise, safety, and land use compatibility issues near airports (Id. at p. 391). Public Resources Code Section 21096[a] creates special rules for EIRs prepared for projects either “situated within airport land use compatibility plan boundaries” or, where no such plan is in place, “within two nautical miles of a public airport or public use airport.” Such EIRs must use “the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook” published by the Division of Aeronautics of the Department of Transportation as a technical resource.
The Napa County ALUCP states that most nonresidential uses are considered “normally acceptable” within Zone D. Schools, libraries, hospitals, nursing homes, large shopping malls, amphitheaters, and ponds are identified as “not normally acceptable” within Zone D. In addition, uses that are hazardous to flight are prohibited (i.e., features that attract large numbers of birds and are sources of smoke, glare, distracting lights, or electrical interference). The proposed project’s wine warehouse end use is nonresidential in nature and, thus, would be acceptable within Zone D.
Finally, there are no project attributes that would produce sources of smoke, glare, distracting lights, or electrical interference. Therefore, the proposed project complies with the applicable safety requirements of Zone D. As such, the proposed project would not create aviation safety hazards for persons residing or working within 2 miles of the Napa County Airport. Impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
878
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-17 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx Emergency Response and Evacuation
Impact HAZ-5: The proposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
Impact Analysis
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. In addition, internal connection to the SDG Commerce 217 Warehouse to the north and the SDG Commerce 330 Warehouse to the south would also be provided. Accordingly, the proposed project would provide two points of emergency access and, thus, would comply with California Fire Code requirements.
The bike path south of the Commerce Court cul-de-sac, which provides provide connection to Eucalyptus Drive, has a gated Emergency Vehicle Access point. This would be available for emergency response and evacuation to and from the project site.
Furthermore, no aspect of the proposed project would conflict with the Napa County Emergency Operations Plan or Hazards Mitigation Plan.
For these reasons, the proposed project would provide sufficient emergency access and would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
3.8.7 - Cumulative Impacts
For most topics, the geographic scope of the cumulative hazards and hazardous materials analysis is the project area. Adverse effects of hazards and hazardous materials tend to be localized; therefore, the area near the project area would be most affected by project activities. For the transport of hazardous materials, the geographic scope includes local and regional transportation facilities.
The proposed project would not result in any significant impacts associated with hazardous materials because there is no evidence of contamination from past uses and any use or storage of hazardous materials during construction or operations would be subject to compliance with regulatory requirements and mitigation measures. Accordingly, all project-related impacts associated with hazardous materials were found be less than significant. As with the proposed project, other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects have been and would continue to be required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local regulatory requirements regarding the transport of hazardous materials, cleanup of hazardous materials, and the use and storage of hazardous 879
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hazards and Hazardous Materials Draft EIR
3.8-18 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-08 Hazards.docx materials during construction and operation. Additionally, hazardous material impacts tend to be localized to individual project sites. Consequently, no significant cumulative impacts would occur.
Therefore, the proposed project, in conjunction with other past, approved, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, would not have a cumulatively significant impact related to hazards and hazardous materials.
Level of Cumulative Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
880
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hydrology and Water Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.9-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx
3.9 - Hydrology and Water Quality
3.9.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing hydrology and water quality setting and potential effects from project implementation on the site and its surrounding area. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on the Hydrology Report, Hydraulic Calculations, and Stormwater Control Plan prepared by RSA, provided in Appendix G. Additional information was obtained through site reconnaissance, review of project plans, and review of resources, including the City of American Canyon General Plan, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Bulletin 118, the Clean Water Act 303(d) list, and the Western Regional Climate Center.
No public comments pertaining to hydrology and water quality were received in response to the Notice of Preparation.
3.9.2 - Environmental Setting
Climate and Meteorology
The City of American Canyon (City) is characterized by a Mediterranean climate with warm summers, mild winters, and moderate precipitation. Temperatures in American Canyon range from an average monthly low of 38.3°F (degrees Fahrenheit) in January to an average monthly high of 82.1°F in September. Average annual rainfall is 24.6 inches with the majority occurring from November to March. General meteorological data for the American Canyon area, as measured at the Napa State Hospital weather station,
1 are presented in Table 3.9-1.
Table 3.9-1: American Canyon Meteorological Summary
Month
Temperature (°F) Average Precipitation
Average Low Average High (inches)
January 38.3 57.0 5.14
February 40.8 61.5 4.38
March 42.0 65.0 3.35
April 43.7 69.6 1.65
May 47.6 74.6 0.68
June 51.3 79.8 0.21
July 53.4 81.9 0.02
August 53.2 81.7 0.06
September 51.5 82.1 0.31
October 47.9 76.5 1.36
1 Western Regional Climate Center. 2022. Napa State Hospital (WRCC ID# 046074). Website: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgibin/cliMAIN.pl?ca6074. Accessed December 11, 2023. 881
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hydrology and Water Quality Draft EIR
3.9-2 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx Month
Temperature (°F) Average Precipitation
Average Low Average High (inches)
November 42.6 65.9 2.98
December 38.8 57.6 4.50
Annual Average 45.9 71.1 24.66
Notes:
°F = degrees Fahrenheit
Averages derived from measurements taken between January 1, 1893, and June 10, 2016, at Napa State Hospital (WRCC ID# 046074).
Source: Western Regional Climate Center. 2023.
Regional Hydrology
The project site is located within the 426-square-mile Napa River Watershed. The Napa River drains 47 tributaries along its 55-mile length from the headwaters of Mount St. Helena in the Mayacamas Mountain Range at approximately 3,700 feet above mean sea level to San Pablo Bay, part of San Francisco Bay.
Within the large Napa River Watershed, major land cover types are forest (35 percent), grassland/rangeland (23 percent), and agriculture (19 percent). The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (San Francisco Bay RWQCB) indicates that two-thirds of the agricultural land is vineyards and urban development covers approximately 8 percent of the watershed. 2 The
majority of streams in the Napa Valley have been altered by urbanization, agriculture, and grazing.
Since the 1800s, large sections of the Napa River have been straightened, the banks hardened, flows redirected, and several levees constructed.
Local Hydrology
At a more local scale, the project site is within the North Slough watershed. North Slough begins in the Sulfur Springs Mountains northeast of American Canyon and meanders to the southwest through the Green Island Business Park and Wetlands Edge Park to its confluence with the Napa River. North Slough is located immediately west of the project site.
The predominant soil type at the project site is Haire Clay Loam, which is identified as Hydraulic Soil Group D.3
Storm Drainage
The project site is undeveloped and does not have any existing storm drainage facilities. Runoff either ponds on-site and percolates into the soil or sheet flows into the municipal storm drainage 2 San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (San Francisco Bay RWQCB). Basin Plan. 3 RSA. 2023. Hydrology Report for SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center, American Canyon, CA. Project #4122068.0. July 21, 2023. 882
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hydrology and Water Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.9-3 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx facilities within Green Island Road. Runoff from the project site moves via surface flows to the west, where it is ultimately conveyed through the North Slough to the Napa River.4 Surface Water Quality
The Napa River is listed as impaired on the Clean Water Act 303(d) list for pathogens and sediment/siltation. These pollutants are a result of agriculture, urban runoff, and storm sewers; land development; and construction. The Napa River was previously listed on the Clean Water Act 303(d) list for nutrients; however, the RWQCB de-listed the Napa River for this pollutant in 2014 (Resolution Number R2-2014-0006).
Groundwater
The project site is located within the 40,500-acre Napa-Sonoma Lowlands Groundwater Subbasin.
The subbasin consists primarily of alluvium and alluvial fans that were deposited at and near the mouths of the Napa River and Sonoma Creek adjacent to San Pablo Bay. To a lesser extent, portions of the City are underlain by sandstone and mudstone/shale, of which the former comprises some of the more productive water-bearing units within the region. The City of American Canyon does not maintain any municipal groundwater wells; however, as many as 41 private wells have been identified that draw from the subbasin within and near the City. Nearly all of these wells reported relatively low-flow rates, ranging from 0.5 gallon per minute (gpm) to 45 gpm. 5 Groundwater Quality
Groundwater quality in the Napa-Sonoma Lowlands Subbasin is generally suitable for municipal and agricultural uses. Primary constituents of concern are high total dissolved solids (TDS), nitrate, boron, and organic compounds. High TDS are typically found in wells in areas closest to the San Francisco Bay. The DWR indicates that the Napa-Sonoma Lowlands Subbasin shows a TDS range of 50 to 300 milligrams per liter (mg/L) with an average of 185 mg/L.
3.9.3 - Regulatory Framework
Clean Water Act
Section 303 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to adopt water quality standards for all surface waters of the United States. Water quality standards are typically numeric, although narrative criteria based upon biomonitoring methods may be employed where numerical standards cannot be established or where they are needed to supplement numerical standards (see description of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, below). Standards are based on the designated beneficial use(s) of the water body. Where multiple uses exist, water quality standards must protect the most sensitive use.
Section 401 of the CWA requires any person applying for a federal permit or license that may result in the discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States (including wetlands) to obtain a state water quality certification. In California, such certifications are administered by the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) through the nine RWQCBs (see a description of 4 RSA. 2023. Hydrology Report for SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center, American Canyon, CA. Project #4122068.0. July 21, 2023. 5 California Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2003. Bulletin 118: Napa-Sonoma Lowlands Groundwater Subbasin. 883
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hydrology and Water Quality Draft EIR
3.9-4 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx State regulations below). In order to acquire certification, it must be demonstrated that the activity complies with all applicable water quality standards, limitations, and restrictions. No license or permit by a federal agency may be granted until 401 certification has been granted. Section 401 water quality certifications are typically required prior to obtaining a Section 404 permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
Section 402 of the CWA mandates that certain types of construction activity comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater program.
In California, any construction activity (with the exception of certain industrial activities, none of which are proposed for this project) that disturbs at least 1 acre is covered under the NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (General Permit) (Order WQ 2022-0057-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002) issued by the State Water Board and implemented and enforced by RWQCBs.
Pursuant to Section 402 of the CWA and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, municipal stormwater discharges in the City of American Canyon are regulated under the San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, MS4 Order No. 2013-0001-DWQ (General Permit). In 1987, Congress amended the CWA to mandate controls on discharges from municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s). Acting under the federal mandate and the California Water Code, California RWQCBs require cities, towns, and counties to regulate activities that can result in pollutants entering their storm drains. All municipalities prohibit non-stormwater discharges to storm drains and require residents and businesses to use Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize the amount of pollutants in runoff. The Municipal Regional Permit is overseen by the San Francisco Bay RWQCB. On February 5, 2013, the State Water Board reissued the Phase II Stormwater NPDES Permit for small MS4s. Provision E.12, “Post-Construction Stormwater Management Program,” mandates municipalities to require specified features and facilities—to control pollutant sources, runoff volumes, rates, and durations and to treat runoff before discharge from the site—be included in development plans of projects that create or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface as conditions of issuing approvals and permits. The new requirements continue a progression of increasingly stringent requirements since 1989.
Provision E.12 required all municipal permittees to implement these requirements by June 30, 2015, to the extent allowed by applicable law. This includes projects requiring discretionary approvals that have not been deemed complete for processing and discretionary permit projects without vesting tentative maps that have not requested and received an extension of previously granted approvals.
In July of 2014, the Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA), through the BASMAA Phase II Committee, created the BASMAA Manual to assist applicants for development approvals to prepare submittals to demonstrate that their projects comply with the NPDES permit requirements. Applicants who seek development approvals for applicable projects should follow the manual when preparing their submittals. The manual is designed to ensure compliance with the requirements and promote integrated Low Impact Development (LID) design.
Section E.12.c of the General Permit pertains to LID and how it relates to hydromodification management. This permit provision requires that stormwater discharges not cause an increase in the 884
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hydrology and Water Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.9-5 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx erosion potential of the receiving stream over the existing condition. Increases in runoff flow and volume must be managed so that the post-project runoff does not exceed estimated pre-project rates and durations where such increased flow and/or volume is likely to cause increased potential for erosion of creek beds and banks, silt pollutant generation, or other adverse impacts on beneficial uses due to increased erosive force.
Section 404 of the CWA requires that a permit be obtained from the USACE prior to any activity associated with discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands.
State
Water Quality Statutes and Regulations
Section 303(d) of the CWA requires that the State Water Board identify surface water bodies within California that do not meet established water quality standards. Once identified, the affected water body is included in the State Water Board “303(d) Listing of Impaired Water Bodies” and a comprehensive program must then be developed to limit the amount of pollutant discharges into that water body. This program includes the establishment of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) for pollutant discharges into the designated water body. The most recent 303(d) listing for California was approved by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2010.
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969 authorized the State Water Board to provide comprehensive protection for California’s waters through water allocation and water quality protection. The State Water Board implements the requirement of the CWA Section 303, indicating that water quality standards have to be set for certain waters by adopting water quality control plans under the Porter-Cologne Act. The Porter-Cologne Act established the responsibilities and authorities of the nine RWQCBs, which include preparing water quality plans for areas in the region, identifying water quality objectives, and issuing NPDES permits and Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs). Water quality objectives are defined as limits or levels of water quality constituents and characteristics established for reasonable protection of beneficial uses or prevention of nuisance.
The Porter-Cologne Act was later amended to provide the authority delegated from the EPA to issue NPDES permits. The San Francisco Bay RWQCB has jurisdiction over the project site.
Post-construction stormwater controls to satisfy requirements of the NPDES Program are permitted under the Phase II Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit (Order R2-2015- 0049). Facilities must be designed to evapotranspire, infiltrate, harvest/use, and bio treat stormwater. As of July 1, 2016, hydromodification management procedures are required.
Projects disturbing more than 1 acre of land during construction are required to comply with the General Permit. General Permit activities are regulated at a local level by the RWQCB pursuant to a general permit. No site-specific authorization is needed. To obtain coverage under the General Permit, a project applicant must provide a Notice of Intent (NOI), a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and other documents required by Attachment B of the General Permit. Activities subject to the General Permit include clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground, such as grubbing or excavation.
885
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hydrology and Water Quality Draft EIR
3.9-6 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx The General Permit uses a risk-based permitting approach and mandates certain requirements based on the project risk level (Level 1, Level 2, or Level 3). The project risk level is based on the risk of sediment discharge and the receiving water risk. The sediment discharge risk depends on project location and timing (such as wet season versus dry season activities). The receiving water risk depends on whether the proposed project would discharge to a sediment-sensitive receiving water.
The determination of the project risk level would be made when the NOI is filed (once more details of the timing of the construction activity are known).
The performance standard in the General Permit is that dischargers minimize or prevent pollutants in stormwater discharges and authorized non-stormwater discharges through the use of controls, structures, and BMPs. A SWPPP must be prepared by a qualified SWPPP developer who meets the certification requirements in the General Permit. The purpose of the SWPPP is (1) to help identify the sources of sediment and other pollutants that could affect the quality of stormwater discharges, and (2) to describe and ensure the implementation of BMPs to reduce or eliminate sediment and other pollutants in stormwater as well as non-stormwater discharges resulting from construction activity. Examples of BMPs include silt fencing, street sweeping, and inspection. Operation of BMPs must be overseen by a qualified SWPPP practitioner who meets the requirements outlined in the permit.
Section 1600–1616 of the California Fish and Game Code requires that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) be notified of activity that will: substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of any river, stream, or lake; substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake; or deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it may pass into any river, stream, or lake. If CDFW determines that the activity may substantially adversely affect fish and wildlife resources, a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement will be prepared that outlines reasonable conditions necessary to protect natural resources threatened by the proposed activity.
Stormwater Guidance Publications
California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA), a professional organization, has published guidance for stormwater management. The organization’s Stormwater Best Management Handbook provides guidance for compliance with State stormwater regulations for construction. The Handbook provides detailed monitoring guidance and inspection forms, including a SWPPP Template. The handbook addresses selection and implementation of BMPs to eliminate or to reduce the discharge of pollutants and control or reduce impacts to the hydrologic cycle associated with development and redevelopment activities.
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) also has published a Stormwater Quality Handbook Construction Site Best Management Practices Manual that provides similar guidance for transportation projects.
886
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hydrology and Water Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.9-7 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx Local
City of American Canyon
General Plan
The City of American Canyon General Plan sets forth the following guiding and implementing policies relevant to hydrology and water quality:
Goal 10 Protect the lives and property of American Canyon’s residents and visitors from flood hazards.
Objective 10.1 Design both new development and redevelopment projects in a manner that minimizes hazards associated with flooding.
Policies
Policy 10.1.1 Retain and enhance natural watercourses, including perennial and intermittent streams, as the City’s primary flood control channels whenever feasible.
Policy 10.1.4 Ensure that stormwater drainage is designed for peak flow conditions.
Policy 10.1.5 Prohibit the development of structures designed for human occupancy within the 100-year floodplain, unless flood hazards are adequately mitigated. Mitigation can be accomplished by building foundations a minimum of one (1) foot above the 100- year flood elevation, or by other means approved by the City Engineer.
Policy 10.1.12 Require that proposed developments within the 100-year floodplain submit information regarding the flood hazard prepared by a qualified Civil Engineer or Hydrologist.
Policy 10.1.13 Require that proposed developments within the 100-year floodplain submit plans to adequately mitigate flood hazards and demonstrate that such improvements will not create or increase downstream or upstream flood hazards.
Stormwater Management
As required under State Water Board Order No. 2013-001 DWQ, the City of American Canyon maintains a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) (NPDES Permit No. CAS 612007). As one element of that program, the City requires regulated projects to address post-construction stormwater quality. The City of American Canyon requires regulated projects, such as this one, to prepare a Stormwater Control Plan in accordance with the Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association–Post-Construction Manual. The Stormwater Control Plan must include postconstruction stormwater treatment measures such as bioretention facilities and source control BMPs. The SWMP must also address ongoing maintenance of those facilities.
In addition, the City requires that a Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Study be prepared to determine whether there are significant impacts. Storm drain design is required to conform to Section 4 of the City’s Engineering Standard Plans and Specifications for Public Improvements. Those 887
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hydrology and Water Quality Draft EIR
3.9-8 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx standards require, among other things, that post-development runoff be no greater than 90 percent of pre-development runoff.
3.9.4 - Methodology
FCS conducted site reconnaissance of the project vicinity in November 2022. Additional information was provided by review of project plans and review of resources, including the City of American Canyon General Plan, the DWR Bulletin 118, the CWA 303(d) list, and the Western Regional Climate Center.
3.9.5 - Thresholds of Significance
The lead agency utilizes the criteria in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist to determine whether hydrology and water quality impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed project would be considered significant if the project would:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
c) 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?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? (Refer to Section 4, Effects Found not to be Significant) e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? (Refer to Section 4, Effects Found not to be Significant)
3.9.6 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the development of the proposed project and provides mitigation measures where appropriate.
888
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hydrology and Water Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.9-9 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx 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.
Impact Analysis
This analysis assesses the potential for the proposed project to degrade surface water quality in downstream water bodies.
The potential for the proposed project to degrade water quality arises from (1) short-term land disturbance from construction activities and presence of contaminants associated with construction machinery, and (2) long-term changes to land use and drainage patterns that may increase the delivery of sediments, nutrients, organic compounds, trash/debris, and other contaminants to waterways tributary to the Napa River. Left unabated, increased loading of such pollutants could cause geomorphic change in downstream channel reaches, degrade habitat, and undermine TMDL and other water quality requirements.
Construction activities would disturb the entire 10.45 acres of the project site and would include grading, building construction, paving, and utility installation. Construction would require the use of gasoline and diesel-powered heavy equipment, such as bulldozers, backhoes, water pumps, and air compressors. Chemicals, such as gasoline, diesel fuel, lubricating oil, hydraulic oil, lubricating grease, automatic transmission fluid, paints, solvents, glues, and other substances, could be used during construction. An accidental release of any of these substances could degrade the quality of the surface water runoff and adversely affect receiving waters. As such, Mitigation Measure (MM) HYD-1 is proposed, requiring the development and implementation of a SWPPP to outline site-specific stormwater quality control measures (such as BMPs) during construction activities to prevent pollutants from entering downstream waterways. With implementation of MM HYD-1, constructionrelated water quality impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.
As part of the proposed project, the parcel’s stormwater runoff would be directed to the proposed detention/bioretention pond via storm drain pipes. The stormwater detention/bioretention pond is designed to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate and treat the stormwater in conformance with federal, State, and regional requirements. The roof drains will be connected to the proposed detention/bioretention pond and storm drain systems surrounding the building by way of down spouts on the exterior of the building.
According to the Hydrology Report, the proposed project would result in a net decrease in peak stormwater runoff rates from the existing conditions. The proposed stormwater detention and treatment satisfies the City of American Canyon Engineering Standards Plans and Specifications (ESPS) and the BASMAA Stormwater Control Plan standards.6
A Stormwater Control Plan was prepared for the proposed project and is included as Appendix G.
The Stormwater Control Plan has been reviewed and verified by the City of American Canyon to ensure the proposed stormwater controls are adequate pursuant to the requirements of Order No. 6 RSA. 2023. Hydrology Report for SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center, American Canyon, CA. Project #4122068.0. July 21, 2023. 889
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hydrology and Water Quality Draft EIR
3.9-10 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx R2-2015-0049 (or a more recent permit) and that an operation and maintenance program is in place to ensure the long-term functionality of the stormwater controls.
As indicated in the Stormwater Control Plan, post-construction typical urban contaminants associated with roadways, parking areas, and rooftops will be introduced to the project site.
Moreover, the increase in impervious surface coverage increases the efficiency by which sediment and other pollutants are delivered downstream. Concentration of flow by the storm drain system could increase the erosive energy of flows, thereby increasing sediment supply from the project site.
Runoff from landscaped areas may also contain residual pesticides and nutrients. Consequently, there is potential for long-term degradation of runoff water quality from the implementation of the proposed project.7
Utilizing a three-tiered LID/BMP design approach, the proposed project would implement the following post-construction stormwater management methods:
• Provide site-specific designed BMPs to maintain pre-development runoff characteristics, protect sensitive resource areas, and attempt to minimize new impervious areas. The site has been designed to limit the amount of disturbed area and new impervious areas. • Utilize source control BMPs that use structural controls and operational procedures to limit pollutants at their source. The proposed project would implement the following source control BMPs: mark “No Dumping! Flows to River” on storm drain inlets; plumb interior floor drains to sanitary sewer; carefully manage pesticide use for landscaped areas; post “Do Not Dump Hazardous Materials Here” on refuse areas; utilize enclosed trash compactors; grade loading docks to minimize run-on and contain spills; and drain parking areas to bioretention planters.
• Utilize treatment control BMPs designed to reduce the amount of pollutants in stormwater and to reduce runoff rates or volumes. All new impervious areas would be routed through either a bioretention basin or an infiltration planter. The floors of bioretention basins would be amended with a layer of gravel overlain by a layer of specialized biosoil. The biosoil shall be a sandy loam material to promote infiltration while allowing for vegetation to establish. An underdrain shall be installed to facilitate infiltration as the local soils have low infiltration potential. Bioretention basins have been configured to drain within 48 hours to prevent vector concerns.
The pollution prevention measures, BMPs, LID design concepts, and ongoing maintenance requirements provided in the Stormwater Control Plan shall be implemented during construction to control stormwater pollution from operational activities and facilities. Additionally, MM HYD-1 requires the development and implementation of a SWPPP to outline site-specific stormwater quality control measures during construction activities to prevent pollutants from entering downstream waterways. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. 7 RSA. 2023. Stormwater Control Plan for a Regulated Project for Commerce 220 Distribution Center, American Canyon, CA. #4122068.0. July 21, 2023.
890
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hydrology and Water Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.9-11 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
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. • 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.
891
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hydrology and Water Quality Draft EIR
3.9-12 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx 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.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Groundwater
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.
Impact Analysis
This analysis assesses the potential for the proposed project to deplete groundwater supplies (overdraft) or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge.
Groundwater Overdraft
The proposed project would be served with potable and recycled water service provided by the City of American Canyon; potable and recycled water infrastructure currently exist within Commerce Court. The City of American Canyon Public Works Department provides potable and nonpotable water to a service area of approximately 30 square miles that encompasses city limits and its sphere of influence. The City obtains its water supply from a variety of sources, all of which (except for recycled water) are imported from outside of the City. Imported water is mostly sourced from the State Water Project (SWP) and purchased from the Napa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (FCWCD) and the City of Vallejo.
The City of American Canyon does not maintain any municipal groundwater wells; however, as many as 41 private wells have been identified that draw from the subbasin within and near the City. The proposed project would not rely on groundwater wells as a water supply source. Therefore, the proposed project would not exacerbate groundwater overdraft (to the extent that it exists) or conflict with the provisions of a sustainable groundwater management plan. Impacts would be less than significant.
Groundwater Recharge
The proposed project would result in an increase in additional pervious surfaces. However, the project site is at a relatively low elevation and is near the Napa River; thus, groundwater levels tend to be high and soils in the lowest portions of the site are often saturated. Accordingly, the groundwater water recharge potential of the project site is limited. The proposed project includes a groundwater basin where stormwater would be allowed to infiltrate into the soils, contributing to groundwater recharge. In addition, the on-site wetlands would be preserved and would continue to contribute to groundwater recharge. For these reasons, impacts to groundwater recharge would be less than significant.
892
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Hydrology and Water Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.9-13 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
Drainage
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.
Impact Analysis
The proposed project would result in the development of a 219,834-square-foot wine storage and distribution center on the 443,005-square-foot project site. Thus, the proposed project would increase the amount of impervious surface coverage on the project site and would create the potential for increased runoff leaving the project site that may create potential flooding conditions in downstream waterways. However, the Hydrology Report indicates that the proposed project would result in a net decrease in peak stormwater runoff rates, and the proposed detention and treatment would satisfy the City of American Canyon ESPS and the BASMAA stormwater standards.
The proposed project would install a storm drainage system designed for a 100-year/24-hour storm event, consistent with the City’s engineering standards plan and specifications. Inlets would capture surface runoff, where it would enter an underground piping system that would convey stormwater to the proposed detention/bioretention pond.
In accordance with applicable provisions of Section C.3 of the San Francisco Bay RWQCB Municipal Regional Permit (Order No. R2-2015-0049, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008 or a more recent permit), the proposed project would implement LID stormwater management methods into the on-site storm drainage system consisting of rainwater harvesting and use, infiltration, evapotranspiration, or biotreatment.
Collectively, these measures would serve to slow, reduce, and meter the volume of runoff leaving the project site and ensure that the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site through the addition of impervious surfaces or result in substantial erosion. Impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
893
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Hydrology and Water Quality Draft EIR
3.9-14 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-09 Hydrology.docx Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
3.9.7 - Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope of the cumulative hydrology and water quality analysis is the North Slough watershed, which generally encompasses the areas south of Green Island Road on the west side of State Route (SR) 29. Hydrologic and water quality impacts tend to be localized to a watershed; therefore, the area within the North Slough watershed would be most affected by project activities.
The proposed project would involve short-term construction and long-term operational activities that would have the potential to degrade water quality in downstream water bodies. These activities are subject to regulatory requirements that would ensure no significant adverse impacts would occur. MM HYD-1 would require implementation of various construction and operational water quality control measures that would prevent the release of pollutants into downstream waterways.
These measures include preparation of a SWPPP in accordance with the requirements of the Statewide Construction General Permit and compliance with the Municipal Regional Permit, including implementation of BMPs and LID features.
Other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects that propose new development have been and would be required to implement similar mitigation measures in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. The combined implementation of construction and operation water quality control measures by other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects would avoid, or reduce to a less than significant level, any related cumulative impacts on downstream waterways including North Slough and the Napa River.
All other project-related hydrology impacts were found to be less than significant and did not require mitigation (e.g., groundwater and drainage). Other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects that result in groundwater and drainage impacts have been and would be required to comply with applicable laws and regulations designed to protect groundwater resources and ensure adequate drainage facilities are provided for all projects and include facilities to prevent and reduce runoff from development sites.
Therefore, the proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable planned and approved projects in the vicinity, would not have a cumulatively significant impact related to hydrology and water quality.
Level of Cumulative Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of MM HYD-1
Level of Cumulative Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. 894
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx
3.10 - Land Use
3.10.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing land use and potential effects from project implementation on the site and its surrounding area. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on-site reconnaissance and review of the City of American Canyon General Plan, the American Canyon Municipal Code, and the Napa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP).
The following public comments pertaining to land use were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP):
• A commenter requested that the proposed project avoid land use conflicts between warehouses and sensitive receptors and mitigate the impacts of any unavoidable land use conflicts.
• A commenter asked whether a warehouse development is allowed on land zoned for Recreation.
3.10.2 - Environmental Setting
Land Use
Project Site
The project site contains undeveloped land that gently slopes 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 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. Chapter 2, Project Description, Exhibit 2-3 provides photographs of the project site.
Surrounding Area
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.
895
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-2 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx South
A wine distribution warehouse known as SDG Commerce 330 is located south of the project site.
This parcel totals 15.24 acres. Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School is located further to the south.
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.
Land Use Designations
Project Site
The project site is designated Commercial Recreation (CR) by the City of American Canyon General Plan1 and zoned Recreation (REC).2 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.
A Recreation Zoning District Code Amendment (Ordinance No. 2018-01) was adopted by the City Council on January 16, 2018. The adopted Ordinance was “to make winery uses more feasible” and allows wine-related wareshousing and distribuiton facilities as conditionally permitted uses within the REC zoning district.
Surrounding Land Uses
Table 3.10-1 summarizes the surrounding land uses. As shown in the table, all surrounding properties are designated for either industrial or public use.
Table 3.10-1: Surrounding Land Use Designations
Land Use
Relationship to
Project Site
Land Use Designation
General Plan Zoning
American Canyon Water Reclamation Facility West Public Public Eucalyptus grove West Commercial
Recreation
Recreation
SDG Commerce 217
(Warehouse under construction)
North Commercial
Recreation
Recreation
Eucalyptus grove/Residence East Commercial
Recreation
Recreation
SDG Commerce 330
(Existing Warehouse)
South Commercial
Recreation
Recreation
1 City of American Canyon. 1992. General Plan. 2
City of American Canyon. 2022. Zoning Ordinance.
896
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-3 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Land Use
Relationship to
Project Site
Land Use Designation
General Plan Zoning
Source: City of American Canyon Public Map. Website:
https://gis.countyofnapa.org/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=7138cfe804e34f43a03f6bb603439965. Accessed February 28, 2023.
Napa County Airport
The Napa County Airport is located 1.65 miles north of the project site. The County-owned airport occupies approximately 824 acres and contains three runways (ranging from 2,510 to 5,931 feet in length), associated taxiways and tarmacs, a control tower, approximately 200 hangars, approximately 160 tie-down spaces, and a helicopter pad. The airport averages 148 operations per day and 54,020 operations annually. (The Federal Aviation Administration defines an “operation” as one takeoff or landing).
Per the Napa County ALUCP, the project site is located within Napa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Zone D (Common Traffic Pattern). Zone D is defined as the area where structures are routinely over flown by aircraft at altitudes of 300 to 1,000 feet with frequent single-event noise intrusion3
.
3.10.3 - Regulatory Framework
State
State Aeronautics Act
The State Aeronautics Act requires each county with an airport to establish an Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) to regulate land use around airports to protect public safety and ensure that land uses near airports do not interfere with aviation operations. The Napa County ALUCP regulates land use around the Napa County Airport, as well as two other aviation facilities in the County, by requiring compliance with the policies of the plan. In certain circumstances, local governments may override the decisions of the ALUC.
Local
City of American Canyon
General Plan
The City of American Canyon General Plan provides a blueprint for future development within American Canyon and the Sphere of Influence. The American Canyon Council adopted its most recent General Plan on November 3, 1994. The General Plan contains the following chapters: land use, housing, economic development, circulation, utilities, public facilities and services, parks and recreation, natural historic/cultural resources, geology, flooding, and noise. Each chapter establishes goals and policies to guide future land use activities and development within the General Plan boundaries. Note that the Circulation Element was comprehensively updated in 2013, the Housing Element was comprehensively updated in 2015, and incremental amendments have been made to 3 Napa County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). 1991, as amended 1999. Napa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. 897
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-4 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx the Land Use Element over time and as recently as 2021. In early 2020, the City initiated the General Plan Update process. The update will ensure that the City grows according to current community needs and priorities. The expected completion date is unknown as of the writing of this document.
Commercial Recreation
The City of American Canyon General Plan designates the project site as CR. According to Goal 1H of the General Plan, commercial recreation centers are intended to provide for the development of commercial enterprises that capitalize upon the natural environmental setting and resources of the City. Typical permitted uses include recreation vehicle parks, interpretative nature centers and conference facilities and similar uses. Density is to be determined based on characteristics of site and resources. Policy 1.21.4 indicates that the appropriate scale of development should be determined on a case-by-case basis to account for the specific environmental characteristics of a site and nature of the proposed project in areas designated as CR.
American Canyon Zoning Ordinance
American Canyon Municipal Code Title 19 contains the Zoning Ordinance. The project site is designated “Recreation” by the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance indicates the purpose of the Recreation zone is to maintain adequate open space, preserve important environmental resources, accommodate passive recreation, preclude development or activities in wetlands and significant habitats, and support compatible commercial activities which capitalize on local and regional agricultural vineyard resources. Zoning Ordinance (No. 2018-01) was adopted by the City Council on January 16, 2018 expanding the Zoning to “allow limited non-winery uses with a conditional use permit.” Per Municipal Code Section 19.15.020, winery related uses, including such activities as bottling, storage, logistics, distribution, wine packing and wine-related services, are conditionally permitted within the Recreation zone subject to approval of a use permit by the planning commission. However, when a discretionary application subject to a CEQA environmental review requires a statement of overriding considerations, the City Council is the approval authority (Municipal Code 19.01(C,D), Relationship to other Regulations and Requirements).
County of Napa
Napa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
The Napa County ALUCP governs land use around two Napa County aviation facilities: the Napa County Airport and Parrett Field in Angwin. The ALUCP was adopted by the Napa County ALUC in April 1991, revised in December 1999, and is currently being updated with an expected completion date of late fall 2023 or spring/summer 2024.
Noise
Table 2-1 of the ALUCP identifies acceptable aviation noise levels by land use. For warehouse and light industrial uses, aviation noise levels of up to 60 A-weighted decibel (dBA) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) are listed as “clearly acceptable” and noise levels between 60 and 65 dBA CNEL are listed as “normally acceptable.” Noise levels between 65 and 75 dBA CNEL are listed as “marginally acceptable.”
898
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-5 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Flight Hazards
The ALUCP identifies two categories of flight hazards: physical obstructions and land use characteristics.
Physical obstructions are associated with tall objects or structures. The ALUCP establishes a height restriction ranging from 50 feet to 185 feet above ground level.
Certain land use activities may pose hazards to aviation. Specific characteristics that should be avoided within the airport land use planning boundaries are listed below:
• Glare or distracting lights, which could be mistaken for airport lights. • Sources of dust, steam, or smoke that may impair pilot visibility. • Sources of electrical interference with aircraft communications or navigation. • Any use that may attract large flocks or birds, especially landfills or certain agricultural uses.
Zone D
The ALUCP provides the following description of Zone D in Table 3-1:
Common Traffic Pattern: This area is defined by the flight pattern of each airport and illustrated in the respective “Airport Impact Areas” figures contained in Part III.
These areas are routinely overflown by aircraft operating to and from the airport with frequent single-event noise intrusion. Overflights in these areas can range from near the traffic pattern altitude (about 1,000 feet above the ground) to as low as 300 feet above the ground. Accident risk varies from low to moderate. Areas where aircraft are near pattern altitude (e.g., downwind leg) have the lowest risk. In areas where aircraft are at lower altitudes (especially on circle-to-land instrument approaches) a moderate level of risk exists.
The ALUCP establishes the following standards for Zone D:
• Maximum density recommendation of 100 persons per acre inside structures for nonresidential uses.
• Maximum density recommendation of 150 persons per acre (both indoors and outdoors) for nonresidential uses.
• Residential uses are prohibited.
• Uses hazardous to flight are prohibited (i.e., features that attract large numbers of birds and sources of smoke, glare, distracting lights, or electrical interference). • Overflight easement or deed restrictions are required. • Building envelopes and approach surfaces are required on all development plans within 100 feet of approach zones.
• Clustering is encouraged to maximize open land areas. • Noise level reduction measures may be required for noise-sensitive uses. 899
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-6 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx The ALUCP states that most nonresidential uses are considered “normally acceptable” within Zone D.
Schools, libraries, hospitals, nursing homes, large shopping malls, amphitheaters, and ponds are identified as “not normally acceptable” within Zone D.
3.10.4 - Methodology
FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) evaluated the potential for land use impacts through site reconnaissance and review of applicable land use policy documents. FCS performed site reconnaissance on the project site and surrounding land uses in November 2022. Photographs were taken of the project site and surrounding land uses to document existing conditions. FCS reviewed the City of American Canyon General Plan, the American Canyon Zoning Ordinance, and the Napa County ALUCP to identify applicable policies and provisions that pertain to the proposed project. The proposed project’s plans were reviewed to evaluate consistency with General Plan and Zoning Ordinance’s standards.
3.10.5 - 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 land use are significant environmental effects. Thus, the proposed project would have a significant effect if it would:
a) Physically divide an established community (Refer to Section 4, Effects Found not to be Significant); or
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
3.10.6 - Project Impacts Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the proposed project and provides mitigation measures where necessary.
General Plan Consistency
Impact LU-1: The proposed project would not conflict with the applicable provisions of the City of American Canyon General Plan.
Impact Analysis
This impact assesses project consistency with the General Plan land use designation and the applicable goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan Land Use Designation
The City of American Canyon General Plan designates the project site as CR. General Plan Land Use Element Goal 1H indicates the purpose of the CR designation is to provide for the development of commercial enterprises that capitalize upon the natural environmental setting and resources of the City. Density is to be determined on a case-by-case basis to account for the specific environmental characteristics of the site and nature of the proposed project area. 900
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-7 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx The proposed project would consist of the development of a 219,834-square-foot wine warehouse on the project site with a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.496. The wine storage and distribution warehouse capitalizes on the local area’s agricultural resources related to “Winery” work in conjunction with viticulture-related activities, such as bottling, storage, logistics, fulfillment, distribution, wine-packing, and wine-related services activities, including the use of cool night air for refrigeration purposes, and, therefore, is consistent with the CR designation in this regard.
The General Plan describes typical permitted uses in the CR land use category as recreation vehicle parks, interpretative nature centers and conference facilities, and similar uses. 4 The proposed use is
consistent with the Recreation Designation in the General Plan because wine-related uses are permitted uses in this designation through the implementation of the Commercial Recreation zoning district. The wine storage and distribution warehouse would be consistent with the policies of the General Plan as indicated in Table 3.10-2. The approval of significantly similar wine distribution warehouses directly to the south and north of the project site in 2019 and 2021 (Commerce 330 and Commerce 217) within the CR land use designation, confirms the proposed project’s consistency with allowable uses in the CR Land Use designation. As indicated in the environmental documentation for the adjacent wine distribution warehouses, the City Attorney reviewed the allowed uses in the Recreation zone (which includes the proposed project type use) and determined they are consistent with the CR land use in the General Plan. 5,6 Furthermore, as discussed in Impact
LU-2, the proposed project would be consistent with the types of conditionally permitted uses set forth in the Zoning Ordinance for the Recreation zoning district. As such, the proposed project, with the issuance of a conditional use permit, would be consistent with the CR land use designation.
Goals, Objectives, and Policies
Table 3.10-2 evaluates project consistency with the relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the City of American Canyon General Plan. The conclusions expressed in Table 3.10-2 reflect the best judgment of City staff. The ultimate question of the meaning of particular General Plan policies, and thus the proposed project’s consistency with them, lies with the City Council. The ultimate question of the meaning of particular General Plan policies, and thus the proposed project’s consistency with them, lies with the City Council. The language found in general plans is sometimes susceptible to varying interpretations. Case law interpreting the Planning and Zoning Law (Government Code § 65000 et seq.) makes it clear that: (i) the ultimate meaning of such policies is to be determined by the elected City Council or a lower tier decision-making body such as a planning commission, as opposed to City staff and EIR consultants, applicants, or members of the public; and (ii) the decisionmaking body’s interpretations of such policies will prevail if they are “reasonable,” even though other reasonable interpretations are also possible (See No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 223, 245-246, 249). Courts also have recognized that, because general plans often contain numerous policies adopted to effect differing or competing legislative goals, a development project may be “consistent” with a general plan, taken as a whole, even though the project appears to be inconsistent or arguably inconsistent with some specific policies within a given general plan (Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Association v. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 719). 4 City of American Canyon, General Plan Land Use Element. 1994, as amended through September 2021. 5 City of American Canyon, 2021, Final Initial Study for the SDG Commerce 217 Distribution Center Project. February. 6 City of American Canyon, 2019, Final Initial Study for the SDG Commerce 330 Warehouse Project. January. 901
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-8 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Furthermore, courts strive to “reconcile” or “harmonize” seemingly disparate general plan policies to the extent reasonably possible (No Oil, supra, 196 Cal.App.3d at p. 244).
As shown in the table, City staff concludes that the proposed project is consistent with all applicable goals, objectives, and policies. Impacts would be less than significant. Should City decision-makers choose to approve the proposed project, they may rely on the analysis in the table as support for the conclusion that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. Certification of the Final EIR will be indicative of agreement with the conclusions in the table.
Table 3.10-2: General Plan Consistency Analysis
Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Land Use Goal 1A Provide for a diversity of land uses
that
a. serve the needs of existing and
future residents;
b. capitalize upon the tourism and
agricultural heritage of the region;
c. capitalize upon and preserves the
unique environmental resources
and character of the area;
d. offer sustained employment
opportunities for residents of the
City and the surrounding region;
e. sustain and enhance the long-term
economic viability of the City;
f. revitalize areas of physical and
economic deterioration and/or
obsolescence;
g. are developed at
densities/intensities that are
economically viable and
complementary with the natural
environmental setting and existing
development; and
h. provide a greater balance of jobs
and housing.
Consistent: The proposed project
would develop 219,834 square feet
of wine warehouse on the project
site. The project site is designated
Commercial Recreation (CR) by the
General Plan and the end uses are
consistent with the allowable uses
for this land use designation. The
proposed project would create
approximately 35 full-time and 20
part-time jobs, stimulate capital
investment, and expand the tax
base. The proposed project site
includes two existing isolated
wetlands that would be avoided
and preserved by the proposed
project. As such, the proposed
project would be consistent with
the provisions of this goal, including
serving the needs of residents,
protecting environmental
resources, creating employment
opportunities, and balancing jobs
and housing.
Objective 1.1 Accommodate the development of a
balance of land uses that (a) provide
for the housing, commercial,
employment, educational, cultural,
entertainment, and recreation needs
of residents, (b) capture visitor and
tourist activity, (c) provide
employment opportunities for
residents of the greater sub region;
and (d) provide open space and
Consistent: The proposed project
would develop a 219,834-squarefoot wine warehouse that would create approximately 35 full-time
and 20 part-time jobs, primarily for
residents of the region. The
proposed project would also
preserve on-site wetland areas,
consistent with the item that calls
for open space and aesthetic relief
from developed urban areas.
902
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-9 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
aesthetic relief from developed
urban/suburban areas.
Policy 1.1.4 Provide adequate transportation
(vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian) and
utility (sewer, water, energy, etc.)
infrastructure and public services
(police, fire, schools, etc.) to support
the needs of the residents and
businesses of American Canyon.
Consistent: This Draft EIR evaluates
the adequacy of public services,
transportation facilities, and utility
systems to serve the proposed
project and identifies mitigation
where necessary to achieve
acceptable service levels. Refer to
Section 3.12, Public Services,
Section 3.13, Transportation, and
Section 3.14, Utilities and Service
Systems, for further discussion.
Goal 1B Provide for the orderly development
of American Canyon that maintains
its distinctive character.
Consistent: The proposed project
would develop 219,834 square feet
of new industrial uses on a site
designated for such use located
within the American Canyon city
limits. The project site is
surrounded by urban uses and
infrastructure on three sides. As
such, it is well suited for new
development and would advance
the goal of orderly development
that maintains American Canyon’s
distinctive character.
Objective 1.2 Promote a rate of growth that is
consistent with the ability of the City
to provide adequate infrastructure
and services and does not adversely
impact the distinctive character and
quality of life in American Canyon.
Consistent: The proposed project
would develop 219,834 square feet
of new industrial uses on a site
designated for such use located
within the American Canyon city
limits. The project site is
surrounded by urban uses and
infrastructure on three sides. The
proposed project would occur in an
area where adequate infrastructure
and services exist such that it
would not exceed the City’s ability
to serve it. Refer to Section 3.12,
Public Services, Section 3.13,
Transportation, and Section 3.14,
Utilities and Service Systems, for
further discussion.
Policy 1.2.2 Establish as a priority the development
of projects that are contiguous with
and infill the existing pattern of
development, avoiding leap-frog
development, except for large scale
Consistent: The project site is
surrounded by urban uses and
infrastructure on three sides. The
proposed project would meet the
903
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-10 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
master planned projects that are
linked to and planned to be extensions
of existing development and for which
infrastructure and services are in place
or funded.
criteria set forth in this policy for a
“priority” project.
Objective 1.3 Ensure that land use development is
coordinated with the ability to
provide adequate public
infrastructure (transportation
facilities, wastewater collection and
treatment, water supply, electrical,
natural gas, telecommunications,
solid waste disposal, and storm
drainage) and public services
(governmental administrative, capital
improvements, police, fire,
recreational, cultural, etc.).
Consistent: This Draft EIR evaluates
the adequacy of public services,
transportation facilities, and utility
systems to serve the proposed
project and identifies mitigation
where necessary to achieve
acceptable service levels. Refer to
Section 3.12, Public Services,
Section 3.13, Transportation, and
Section 3.14, Utilities and Service
Systems, for further discussion.
Policy 1.3.1 Implement public infrastructure and
service improvements necessary to
support land uses accommodated by
the Land Use Plan (as defined in the
Circulation and Public Utilities and
Services Elements.)
Consistent: Adequate
infrastructure and service levels
exist in the project vicinity such
that only minor improvements or
upgrades are necessary to serve
the proposed project. Refer to
Section 3.12, Public Services,
Section 3.13, Transportation, and
Section 3.14, Utilities and Service
Systems, for further discussion.
Policy 1.3.2 Require that type, amount, and
location of development be
correlated with the provision of
adequate supporting infrastructure
and services (as defined in the
Circulation and Public Utilities and
Services Elements.)
Consistent: This Draft EIR evaluates
the adequacy of public services,
transportation facilities, and utility
systems to serve the proposed
project and identifies mitigation
where necessary to achieve
acceptable service levels. Refer to
Section 3.12, Public Services,
Section 3.13, Transportation, and
Section 3.14, Utilities and Service
Systems, for further discussion.
Policy 1.3.3 Regulate the type, location, and/or
timing of development as necessary
in the event that there is inadequate
public infrastructure or services to
support land use development.
Consistent: Adequate
infrastructure and service levels
exist in the project vicinity such
that only minor improvements or
upgrades are necessary to serve
the proposed project. Refer to
Section 3.13, Public Services,
Section 3.13, Transportation, and
Section 3.14, Utilities and Service
Systems, for further discussion.
904
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-11 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
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.
Consistent: The project site is
designated for commercial
recreation. The proposed project
site includes two existing isolated
wetlands that would be avoided
and preserved by the proposed
project. As such, the proposed
project would promote a
development pattern that
differentiates American Canyon
from adjacent urban areas and also
respects the natural environment.
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.
Consistent: The project site would
be consistent with the surrounding
neighborhood. The proposed
project would create approximately
35 full-time and 20 part-time jobs
in proximity to nearby housing to
the south. The proposed project
site includes two existing isolated
wetlands that would be avoided
and preserved by the proposed
project. Accordingly, the proposed
project would advance the
objectives associated a cohesive
image, creation of jobs near
housing units, and promoting a
compact urban form surrounded by
open space.
Policy 1.4.1 Accommodate land use development
in accordance with the patterns and
distribution of use and density
depicted on the Land Use Plan Map
(Figure 1-1).
Consistent: The proposed project is
consistent with the CR land use
designation and is therefore
consistent with the patterns and
distribution of use and density
depicted on the Land Use Plan Map
(Figure 1-1 of the General Plan).
Policy 1.4.2 Require that development within each
land use classification adheres to
applicable requirements and
standards.
Consistent: The project site is
designated for commercial
recreation. As discussed in Impacts
LU-1 and LU-2, the proposed
project would comply with all
applicable requirements and
standards.
Objective 1.5 Maintain the character and quality of
the natural environmental resources
of the City and protect the
population and development from
Consistent: The proposed project
site includes two existing isolated
wetlands that would be avoided
and preserved by the proposed
project. Refer to Section 3.1,
905
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-12 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
the adverse impacts of
environmental hazards.
Aesthetics; Section 3.3, Biological
Resources; Section 3.8, Hazards
and Hazardous Materials; and
Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water
Quality for further discussion.
Policy 1.5.1 Require that development be
designed and sited to protect
significant environmental resources
by adherence to the policies,
standards, and programs contained
in the Natural and Historic/Cultural
Resources, Geology and Flood
Hazards, and Noise Elements of the
General Plan, as well as federal
(NEPA) and State (CEQA) regulations.
Consistent: The proposed project
site includes two existing isolated
wetlands that would be avoided
and preserved by the proposed
project. Refer to Section 3.1,
Aesthetics; Section 3.3, Biological
Resources; Section 3.6, Geology,
Soils, and Seismicity; Section 3.8,
Hazards and Hazardous Materials;
Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water
Quality; and Section 3.11, Noise for
further discussion.
Goal 1I Ensure the development of industrial
uses that provide employment for
residents of American Canyon and
the surrounding region and
contribute significant revenue for the
City.
Consistent: The proposed project
would develop a 219,834-squarefoot warehouse on a site designated for such use located
within the American Canyon city
limits. The proposed project is
estimated to create approximately
35 full-time and 20 part-time jobs
for local residents. As such, it would
advance the goal of providing
employment opportunities and
contributing significant revenue for
the City.
Objective 1.22 Provide for the continuation of
existing and development of new
industries that capitalize upon the
geographic advantages of the City
(including adjacency to Napa County
Airport and the railroad), the
agricultural production of the region,
and emerging types of businesses
(such as “thematic” and
“environmental” based industries),
offer opportunities for the clustering
of key economic sectors, and
maintain the environmental quality
of the City.
Consistent: The project site is
designated for commercial
recreation. The proposed project
would develop a 219,834-squarefoot wine warehouse. This is consistent with the objective of
promoting the development of
existing and new industries that
capitalize on the geographic
advantages of the City.
Policy 1.22.2 Allow for the inclusion of businesses
that are ancillary to and support
industrial uses such as related retail
sales facilities for manufacturers,
Consistent: The proposed project
would develop a 219,834-squarefoot wine warehouse uses.
Ancillary office space would be
906
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-13 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
financial institutions, restaurants,
photocopy shops, specialty
recreational uses (batting cages and
health clubs/spas), and similar uses.
provided within the warehouses.
The provision of these ancillary
uses is consistent with the intent of
this policy.
Policy 1.22.3 Permit development according to the
following standards:
a. Labor-intensive uses: a maximum
floor area ratio of 0.5.
b. Low labor uses (such as
warehousing): a maximum floor
area ratio of 0.7.
Consistent: The proposed project
would have a 0.496 floor area ratio
(FAR), which would be within the
General Plan’s allowable FAR of
0.50 for labor-intensive uses and
FAR of 0.70 for low labor uses.
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
c. enclosure of storage areas visible
from principal highways (including
Highway 29) and peripheral
residential and commercial
districts with decorative screening
or other elements.
Consistent: The proposed buildings
would use concrete tilt‐up panel
construction and contemporary
finishes and treatments similar to
other industrial buildings in the
project vicinity. Landscaping would
be installed within parking areas
and along the Commerce Court
frontage. The City’s design review
process would ensure consistency
with the applicable policies.
Policy 1.22.5 Require that industrial areas
developed as research and
development and office-oriented
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, an/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 welldesigned public and informational signage; and
e. installation of elements that
define the key entries to the
industrial district.
Consistent: The proposed project
would provide internal pedestrian
facilities, contemporary finishes and
treatments similar to other
industrial buildings in the project
vicinity, landscaping within parking
areas and along the Commerce
Court frontage, and signage
consistent with this policy. The
City’s design review process would
ensure consistency with the
applicable policies.
907
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-14 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Policy 1.22.7 Require that truck access be
controlled so that it is safe and
efficient and minimizes exposure to
adjacent residential neighborhoods.
Consistent: Trucks would access
the project site from Commerce
Court via Green Island Road. The
project site’s location also allows
for convenient access to State
Route (SR) 29 such that residential
areas in American Canyon would be
avoided by trucks accessing the
project site.
Goal 1N Ensure the compatibility of
development within American
Canyon with the Napa County
Airport.
Consistent: As discussed in Impact
LU-3, the proposed project is
compatible with all applicable
provisions of the Napa County
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
(ALUCP). Refer to Section 3.8,
Hazards and Hazardous Materials,
and Section 3.11, Noise, for further
discussion.
Objective 1.27 Ensure that lands in American
Canyon are developed in a manner
which protects them from the noise
and operational impacts of, and does
not adversely constrain, the Napa
County Airport.
Consistent: As discussed in Impact
LU-3, the proposed project is
compatible with all applicable
provisions of the Napa County
ALUCP including those that pertain
to noise and safety. Refer to Section
3.6, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, and Section 3.11, Noise,
for further discussion.
Policy 1.27.1 Require that development comply
with the land use and development
conditions stipulated in Tables 1-1
and 1-2 for areas depicted on Figure
1-3. [. . . ]
ZONE D Common Traffic Pattern: This
area is defined by the flight pattern
for the Napa County Airport as
illustrated on Figure 1-3. These areas
are routinely overflown by aircraft
operating to and from the airport
with frequent single-event noise
intrusion. Overflights in these areas
can range from near the traffic
pattern altitude (about 1,000 feet
above the ground) to as low as 300
above the ground. Accident risk
varies from low to moderate. Areas
where aircraft are near pattern
altitude (e.g., downwind leg) have
the lowest risk. In areas where
aircraft are at lower altitudes
Consistent: The project site is
located within Zone D of the Napa
County ALUCP. As discussed in
Impact LU-3, the proposed project
is compatible with all applicable
provisions of Zone D as set forth in
Tables 1-1 and 1-2. Refer to Section
3.8, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, and Section 3.11, Noise,
for further discussion.
908
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-15 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
(especially on circle-to-land
instrument approaches) a moderate
level of risk exists.
Policy 1.27.2 Review all applications for new
development, expansion of existing
uses, and reuse within Napa County
Airport Compatibility Zones “A”
through “E” for compliance with the
appropriate use and development
conditions.
Consistent: As discussed in Impact
LU-3, the proposed project is
compatible with all applicable
provisions of Zone D of the Napa
County ALUCP. Refer to Section 3.8,
Hazards and Hazardous Materials,
and Section 3.11, Noise, for further
discussion.
Goal 1R Ensure a high quality of the City’s
built environment, architecture,
landscape, and public open spaces.
Consistent: The proposed project
consists of a contemporary 219,834
square foot wine warehouse. This
would advance the goal of providing
a high-quality built environment and
open space. Refer to Section 3.1,
Aesthetics.
Objective 1.32 Attain residential, commercial,
industrial, and public buildings and
sites which convey a high-quality
visual image and character.
Consistent: The proposed buildings
would use concrete tilt‐up panel
construction and contemporary
finishes and treatments similar to
other industrial buildings in the
project vicinity. Landscaping would
be installed within parking areas and
along the Commerce Court frontage.
Outdoor storage areas would be
enclosed where necessary to screen
them from view from major
roadways. Overall, these
characteristics would advance the
objective of attaining high-quality
visual character. The City’s design
review process would ensure
consistency with the applicable
policies. Refer to Section 3.1,
Aesthetics, for further discussion.
Policy 1.32.1 Require adherence to the Design and
Development Principles prescribed in
this Plan and the City’s Design Review
Guidelines which shall be updated
periodically.
Consistent: The proposed project
would incorporate relevant design
concepts set forth in the latest
adopted edition of the Design
Review Guidelines. Moreover, the
City’s design review process would
ensure consistency with the
applicable policies.
Policy 1.32.2 Require that development projects
subject to discretionary review
Consistent: The proposed project is
subject to discretionary review and,
909
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-16 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
submit and implement a landscaping
plan.
therefore, the applicant has
prepared and submitted a
preliminary landscaping plan to the
City, which will be considered as
part of the approval process. A final
landscaping plan will be required as
part of the City’s design review
process, which would ensure
consistency with the applicable
policies. Refer to Chapter 2, Project
Description, for further discussion.
Policy 1.32.5 Require the use of drought tolerant
species in landscape design in
accordance with the provisions of the
Water Conservation and Landscape
Act.
Consistent: The proposed
landscaping plan incorporates
drought tolerant species in
accordance with the provisions of
the Water Conservation and
Landscape Act. Refer to Chapter 2,
Project Description, for further
discussion.
Policy 1.32.6 Require that commercial, industrial,
and multi-family residential
development incorporate adequate
drought-conscious irrigation systems
and maintain the health of the
landscape.
Consistent: The proposed
landscaping plan incorporates
adequate drought-conscious
irrigation systems in accordance
with the provisions of the Water
Conservation and Landscape Act.
Refer to Chapter 2, Project
Description, for further discussion.
Policy 1.32.7 Require that all commercial,
industrial, multi-family, and common
area landscape be adequately
irrigated with automatic irrigation
systems.
Consistent: The proposed
landscaping plan incorporates
automatic irrigation systems. Refer
to Chapter 2, Project Description,
for further discussion.
Policy 1.32.8 Promote the use of reclaimed water
for the irrigation of public and private
landscape, as available.
Consistent: The proposed project
would be served with reclaimed
water provided by the City of
American Canyon for landscape
irrigation purposes. Refer to
Chapter 2, Project Description, for
further discussion.
Objective 1.33 Ensure that structures and sites are
designed and constructed to
maintain their long-term quality and
provide for the needs of their
occupants.
Consistent: All proposed structures
would be designed to suit the
needs of the end user, consistent
with this objective. The City’s
design review process would
ensure consistency with the
applicable policies. Refer to
Chapter 2, Project Description, for
further discussion.
910
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-17 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Policy 1.33.1 Require that all structures be
constructed in accordance with the
requirements of the City’s building
and other pertinent codes and
regulations; including new,
adaptively reused, and renovated
buildings.
Consistent: All proposed structures
would be required to adhere to the
latest adopted edition of the
California Building Standards Code
(CBC) at the time building permits
are sought.
Policy 1.33.3 Require that all development be
designed to provide adequate space
for access, parking, supporting
functions, open space, and other
pertinent elements.
Consistent: The proposed project
would provide 134 car and 23 truck
parking spaces. Five would be
designated handicap access and
one would be compact. 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. The proposed
project would meet these
requirements. Additionally, the
proposed project would preserve
the existing on-site wetlands. Refer
to Chapter 2, Project Description,
for further discussion.
Policy 1.33.4 Require that all commercial,
industrial, and public development
incorporate appropriate design
elements to facilitate access for and
use by the physically challenged.
Consistent: All proposed structures
would be required to incorporate
all applicable disability access
requirements set forth by the
Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA). The proposed project would
provide 134 car and 23 truck
parking spaces. Five would be
designated handicap access and
one would be compact. Refer to
Chapter 2, Project Description, for
further discussion.
Economic
Development
Element
Goal 3 Provide for the economic needs of
American Canyon residents by
capitalizing on the marketability of
the City’s industrial land and
promoting a mix of uses which create
quality jobs and foster fiscal stability.
Consistent: The proposed project
would develop a 219,834-squarefoot wine warehouse. The proposed project would create approximately
35 full-time jobs and 20 part-time
jobs, stimulate capital investment,
911
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-18 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
and expand the tax base. These
characteristics are consistent with
the goal of providing for the
economic needs of American
Canyon residents.
Objective 3.1 Maximize the City’s market potential
in terms of industrial/ business park
and community-serving commercial
activity. Increased industrial activity
can be a catalyst for broadening the
City’s economic base by providing
quality jobs and tax revenues, as well
as, stimulating infrastructure
improvements.
Consistent: The proposed project
would develop a 219,834-squarefoot wine warehouse. The proposed project would create approximately
35 full-time jobs and 20 part-time
jobs, stimulate capital investment,
and expand the tax base. These
characteristics are consistent with
the objective of maximizing the
City’s market potential in terms of
industrial/ business park activity.
Policy 3.1.1 Adopt a Land Use Map which
designates acreage for heavy
industrial, light industrial/ business
park, commercial, and recreational
commercial activities.
Consistent: The project site is
currently designated CR by the City
of American Canyon General Plan
and the proposed project’s uses are
consistent with the allowable uses
of this land use designation. Refer
to Impact LU-1 for further
discussion.
Goal 3A Generate new industrial growth
through diversification of the
industrial base and maintenance of
current activity to provide
employment opportunities for
residents and generate fiscal
revenues for the City.
Consistent: The proposed project
would develop a 219,834-squarefoot wine warehouse. This is consistent with the goal of
generating new industrial growth
through diversification of the
industrial base.
Objective 3.4 Increase the number of firms within
the industries now represented in
the City and capture new, clean,
nonpolluting industries that are
stable and compatible with City
needs in terms of traffic, air quality,
and employment.
Consistent: The proposed project
would develop a 219,834-squarefoot wine warehouse and is consistent with other adjacent
warehousing firms. The proposed
project is estimated to create
approximately 35 full-time jobs and
20 part-time jobs. The proposed
project would implement traffic
improvements as necessary and
feasible to mitigate impacts on
traffic operations. Refer to Section
3.2, Air Quality, and Section 3.13,
Transportation, for further details.
912
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-19 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Policy 3.4.2 Establish design and FAR standards
for industrial buildings which will
create and maintain an attractive
image for American Canyon’s
industrial areas without imposing
overly restrictive regulations.
Consistent: The proposed project
would have a FAR of 0.496 that
would be within the allowable FAR
of the project site.
Policy 3.4.3 In partnership with landowners and
tenants, improve the infrastructure
(particularly access across the North
Slough drainage channel and the
railroad) in the Green Island
Industrial Park and Annexes and
expand infrastructure services to the
undeveloped sites on the north side
of Green Island Road to link the two
industrial areas and provide land use
and design continuity to both sides of
Green Island Road.
Consistent: The proposed project
would take vehicular access from
Commerce Court via Green Island
Road. The proposed project would
be located among existing
warehouse land uses.
Objective 3.5 Make available sufficient acreage in
order to capture the City’s fair-share
of regional industrial growth through
the year 2010.
Consistent: The project site is
designated CR by the General Plan
and is served with existing
infrastructure. Thus, the project
site is well suited to advance the
objective of facilitating industrial
development within American
Canyon.
Policy 3.5.1 Designate a sufficient amount of land
to accommodate the projected
growth in demand for industrial
space by 2010.
Consistent: The project site is
designated CR by the General Plan
and is served with existing
infrastructure. Thus, the project
site is well suited to advance the
policy of accommodating new
industrial development within
American Canyon.
Circulation
Element
Guiding Policy
1.1 Community Priorities. Safe and
convenient access to activities in the
community is provided by a welldesigned local roadway system. That system serves the community’s
primary need for mobility and
includes a planned hierarchy of
roadways to meet that need. The
following Community Priorities relate
most directly to this Element:
• Encourage and foster a strong
sense of community and safety, as
well as the “hometown” feeling by
Consistent: Vehicular access to the
project site would be provided
from Commerce Court, which
provides a connection to SR-29. The
project site’s location also allows
for convenient access to SR-12 such
that safe and convenient access can
be provided for trucks and
residential areas would be avoided.
Refer to Section 3.13,
Transportation for further
discussion.
913
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-20 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
creation of a town center through
land use and circulation planning.
• Improve a hierarchy of roadway
networks to achieve and maintain
acceptable traffic Level of Service
(LOS) and provide a Citywide
system of bicycle lanes and
recreational trails that improve
accessibility without the use of an
automobile.
• Improve SR-29 so that it serves as
a visually attractive gateway into
the City while providing access to
commercial businesses and serving
intra and inter-regional traffic and
goods movement.
Guiding Policy
1.2 Implement planned roadway
improvements. Use Figure 3: General
Plan Circulation System, and Table 3:
Major Circulation Improvements, to
identify, schedule, and implement
roadway and complementary
intersection improvements to
support General Plan buildout
conditions. Planned improvements
may be phased as development
occurs and need for increased
capacity is identified.
Consistent: This Draft EIR evaluates
project-related transportation
impacts. Refer to Section 3.13,
Transportation, for further
discussion.
Guiding Policy
1.3 Design circulation system to focus
regional travel on SR-29. SR-29 is
important for both Citywide and
north–south regional travel. As both
City and regional travel grow, design
the City circulation system to
discourage regional traffic from
bypassing SR-29 and impacting City
streets. Also, cooperatively work with
regional partners, including Caltrans,
NCTPA and others explore a
complete streets approach that will
expand the travel capacity of SR-29.
Consistent: Vehicular access to the
project site would be provided
from Commerce Court which
provides a connection to SR-29 and
SR-12 via Green Island Road, which
are all truck routes. Refer to
Section 3.13, Transportation, for
further discussion.
914
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-21 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Guiding Policy
1.6 Achieve and maintain a Multimodal
LOS D or better for roadways and
intersections during peak hours
where possible and as long as
possible. However, recognizing that
LOS D may not be achievable or
cannot be maintained upon full
buildout of the General Plan, due to
traffic generated from sources
beyond the control of the City, the
City Council shall have the discretion
to only require feasible mitigation
measures that may not achieve LOS
D, but will reduce the impact of any
development use or density planned
for in the Land Use Element of the
General Plan.
The following locations that may not
achieve or maintain LOS D are as
follows and therefore will be exempt
from the LOS D policy:
• State Route 29 through the City
• American Canyon Road from SR-29
to Flosden Road–Newell Drive
• Flosden Road south of American
Canyon Road.
Consistent: This Draft EIR evaluates
project-related transportation
impacts. Refer to Section 3.13,
Transportation, for further
discussion.
Guiding Policy
1.9 Use of existing facilities. Make
efficient use of existing
transportation facilities, and improve
these facilities as necessary in
accordance with the Circulation Map.
Consistent: The proposed project
would rely on the existing Commerce
Court for vehicular access.
Guiding Policy
1.11 Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled.
Through layout of land uses,
improved alternate modes, and
provision of more direct routes,
strive to reduce the total vehicle
miles traveled by City residents.
Consistent: The project site has
convenient access to SR-12 and SR29. The development of the proposed project’s a 219,834-
square-foot wine warehouse is
within the North Bay Region and
would contribute to reducing trip
length by locating these facilities
closer to customers within this
region. Finally, the development of
approximately 35 full-time jobs and
20 part-time jobs in a housing-rich
part of the Bay Area region would
allow employees to work closer to
where they live, thereby reducing
vehicle miles traveled. Refer to
915
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-22 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Section 3.13, Transportation, for
further discussion.
Guiding Policy
1.12 Circulation System Enhancements.
Achieve, maintain and/or improve
mobility in the City by considering
circulation system enhancements
beyond improvements identified on
the Circulation Map, where feasible
and appropriate. Improve the
circulation system, in accordance
with the Circulation Map, at
minimum, to support multimodal
travel of all users and goods and
where feasible, apply creative
circulation system enhancements
that increase system capacity and
that are acceptable to the City and its
residents and where applicable,
Caltrans.
Consistent: This Draft EIR evaluates
project-related transportation
impacts. Refer to Section 3.13,
Transportation, for further
discussion.
Implementing
Policy 1.13
Financing Program. Develop a
transportation financing program
that will fully fund the planned
expansion of the existing
transportation network consistent
with the General Plan. The financing
program will include an update to the
existing Transportation Impact Fee
(TIF) program consistent with AB
1600.
Consistent: The proposed project
would pay fees in accordance with
the City’s latest adopted traffic
impact fee schedule, as applicable.
This is consistent with the policy of
implementing a transportation
financing program that will fully
fund the planned expansion of the
existing transportation network.
Implementing
Policy 1.14
Work with Caltrans on highway
improvements. Continue to work
with the Caltrans to achieve timely
context sensitive design solutions,
funding and construction of
programmed highway improvements.
Consistent: The proposed project
would not result in impacts to
Caltrans facilities. Refer to Section
3.13, Transportation, for further
discussion.
Implementing
Policy 1.16
Use of Congestion Management
Process. Utilize the NCTPA
Congestion Management Program
(CMP) to determine the timing and
degree of regional roadway facility
improvements in accordance with
region wide plans. Actively
participate in the Community-Based
SR-29 Gateway Corridor
Improvement Plan process to identify
a funded SR-29 travel capacity
enhancement through the City.
Consistent: The proposed project
would not result in impacts to
regional roadway facilities. Refer to
Section 3.13, Transportation, for
further discussion.
916
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-23 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Implementing
Policy 1.17
Regional fair-share fee program.
Work with Caltrans, NCTPA, Napa
County, and other jurisdictions to
establish a fair-share fee program for
improvements to routes of regional
significance and State highways. This
fee should reflect traffic generated
by individual municipalities/
unincorporated communities as well
as pass-through traffic.
Consistent: The proposed project
would pay fees in accordance with
the City’s latest adopted traffic
impact fee schedule, as applicable.
This includes improvements under
the jurisdiction of Caltrans, Napa
County Transportation and
Planning Agency (NCTPA), and the
County of Napa.
Implementing
Policy 1.19
Complete Streets. When constructing
or modifying transportation facilities,
consistent with Resolution 2012-72,
“Complete Streets Policy of the City
of American Canyon,” strive to
provide for the movement of
vehicles, commercial trucks,
alternative and low energy vehicles,
transit, bicyclists and pedestrians
appropriate for the road classification
and adjacent land use.
Consistent: The proposed project
does not include the construction
or modification of transportation
facilities. It would be accessed from
the existing Commerce Court. Refer
to Section 3.13, Transportation, for
further discussion.
Implementing
Policy 1.23
Access Restriction. Minimize, where
possible, the number of access points
along arterial roadways, including by
consolidating or relocating driveways
to provide for more efficient traffic
movement.
Consistent: The proposed project
would have one access point on
Commerce Court and connect to
the warehouses to the south and
north. This is consistent with the
policy of providing for more
efficient traffic movement.
Implementing
Policy 1.24
Impacts of new development. Based
upon the findings of a traffic impact
study, consistent with Guiding Policy
1.26, new development will be
responsible for mitigation of
transportation related impacts.
Consistent: A traffic impact study
was prepared as part of this Draft
EIR. Refer to Section 3.13,
Transportation, for further
discussion.
Implementing
Policy 1.26
Update and adopt Transportation
Impact Analysis (TIA) guidelines.
Update and adopt Transportation
Impact Analysis guidelines and a
Multimodal LOS assessment
methodology for the evaluation of
potential transportation impacts
resulting from new development that
is specific to the City and that will
supersede existing LOS standards and
guidelines.
Consistent: A traffic impact study
was prepared as part of this Draft
EIR in accordance with the City of
American Canyon’s latest guidance
for such studies. Refer to Section
3.13, Transportation, for further
discussion.
917
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-24 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Implementing
Policy 1.35
General transit and pedestrian
access. In reviewing designs of
proposed developments, ensure that
provision is made for access to
current and future public transit
services. In particular, pedestrian
access to arterial and collector
streets from subdivisions should not
be impeded by continuous segments
of sound walls.
Consistent: There is an existing
sidewalk along the project frontage
with Commerce Court. In addition,
Commerce Court is suitable for
bicycle travel. Furthermore, the
project site is located near the
Commerce Court Emergency
Vehicle Access that connects to
Eucalyptus Drive, which also
functions as a Class I
bicycle/pedestrian facility.
Guiding Policy
2.1 Promote walking and bicycling.
Promote walking and bike riding for
transportation, recreation, and
improvement of public and
environmental health.
Consistent: There is an existing
sidewalk along the project frontage
with Commerce Court. In addition,
Commerce Court is suitable for
bicycle travel. Furthermore, the
project site is located near the
Commerce Court Emergency
Vehicle Access that connects to
Eucalyptus Drive, which also
functions as a Class I
bicycle/pedestrian facility.
Guiding Policy
2.3 Develop a safe and efficient nonmotorized circulation system.
Provide safe and direct pedestrian
routes and bikeways between places.
Consistent: There is an existing
sidewalk along the project frontage
with Commerce Court. In addition,
Commerce Court is suitable for
bicycle travel. Furthermore, the
project site is located near the
Commerce Court Emergency
Vehicle Access that connects to
Eucalyptus Drive, which also
functions as a Class I
bicycle/pedestrian facility.
Collectively, these characteristics
would promote a safe and efficient
non-motorized circulation system.
Implementing
Policy 2.7
Universal design. Provide pedestrian
facilities that are accessible to
persons with disabilities and ensure
that roadway improvement projects
address accessibility by using
universal design concepts.
Consistent: There is an existing
sidewalk along the project frontage
with Commerce Court. In addition,
Commerce Court is suitable for
bicycle travel. Furthermore, the
project site is located near the
Commerce Court Emergency
Vehicle Access that connects to
Eucalyptus Drive, which also
functions as a Class I
bicycle/pedestrian facility. The
proposed project’s internal
pedestrian facilities would also
comply with the ADA.
918
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-25 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Implementing
Policy 2.18
Pedestrian connections to
employment destinations. Encourage
the development of a network of
continuous walkways within new
commercial, town center, public, and
industrial uses to improve workers’
ability to walk safely around, to, and
from their workplaces. Where
possible, route pedestrians to gradeseparated crossings over State Route
29. Consistent: The proposed project’s
internal pedestrian facilities would
connect to the Commerce Court
sidewalk and, thus, advance the
policy of providing pedestrian
connections to employment
destinations. The City’s design
review process would ensure
consistency with this policy.
Guiding Policy
4.1 Promote safe and efficient goods
movement. Promote the safe and
efficient movement of goods via
truck and rail with minimum
disruptions to residential areas.
Consistent: The project site has
convenient access to SR-12 and SR29. This is consistent with the policy of promoting safe and
efficient goods movement. Refer to
Section 3.13, Transportation for
further discussion.
Guiding Policy
4.2 Promote railroad safety. Minimize
the safety problems associated with
the railroad, including the
construction and maintenance of atgrade crossings and the physical barrier effect of the track alignment
on the City.
Consistent: Both existing railroad
grade crossings on Green Island
Road would receive safety
improvements as part of a Citysponsored project. Although these improvements are independent of
the proposed project, they would
promote railroad safety on a route
used by project-related trips.
Guiding Policy
4.4 New truck route designation. All
highways, arterials, and industrial
streets shall be designated truck
routes.
Consistent: The project site would
be accessed via Commerce Court
which is a designated truck route.
Guiding Policy
4.6 Location of industrial development.
Continue industrial expansion in the
north industrial area to minimize the
neighborhood impacts of truck
movements.
Consistent: The project site‘s land
use would be consistent with other
adjacent land uses. There are no
residential adjacent to this area, nor
would project-related truck routes
travel through such areas.
Guiding Policy
4.7 Secure truck parking. Encourage
high-security off-street parking for
tractor-trailer rigs in industrial
designated areas.
Consistent: The proposed project
would provide 134 car and 23 truck
parking spaces. Five would be
designated handicap access and
one would be compact. The project
site would include nighttime
lighting. As such, the proposed
project would provide secure truck
parking.
919
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-26 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Utilities Goal 5 It shall be the goal of American Canyon to establish and maintain a secure
water supply and treatment,
distribution and storage system to
serve the land uses proposed under
the General Plan.
Consistent: This Draft EIR evaluates
project impacts on water supply
and distribution and concludes that
adequate supplies and
infrastructure are available to serve
the proposed project. Refer to
Section 3.14, Utilities and Service
Systems, for further discussion.
Objective 5.2 Obtain additional water supply
sources as necessary to supplement
the [North Bay Aqueduct] supply and
serve anticipated growth under the
proposed land use plan.
Consistent: The City of American
Canyon had adequate water
supplies available to serve the
proposed project. Refer to Section
3.14, Utilities and Service Systems,
for further discussion.
Policy 5.2.4 Promote water conservation and
wastewater reclamation as additional
water supply sources.
Consistent: The proposed project
would employ drought tolerant
landscaping and be served with
recycled water for nonpotable
irrigation purposes. This is
consistent with the policy of
promoting water conservation and
wastewater reclamation. Refer to
Section 3.14, Utilities and Service
Systems, for further discussion.
Policy 5.2.5 In the event that sufficient capacity is
not available to serve a proposed
project, the City shall not approve
the project until additional capacity
or adequate mitigation is provided.
Consistent: The City of American
Canyon has adequate water
supplies available to serve the
project. In addition, the proposed
project would comply with the
City’s Zero Water Footprint Policy,
which requires new development
projects to secure offsets to ensure
that existing customers do not
experience a loss in reliability or an
increase in rates.
Objective 5.4 Establish a water management
program to promote water
conservation and wastewater reuse.
Consistent: The proposed project
would employ drought tolerant
landscaping and be served with
recycled water for nonpotable
irrigation purposes. This is
consistent with the objective of
promoting water conservation and
wastewater reuse. Refer to Section
3.14, Utilities and Service Systems,
for further discussion.
920
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-27 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Policy 5.4.1 Promote the use of water-saving
plumbing fixtures and water-saving
landscaping.
Consistent: The proposed project
would employ drought tolerant
landscaping. The proposed
project’s plumbing fixtures would
comply with the water
conservation standards set forth in
the latest adopted edition of the
California Plumbing Code. Refer to
Section 3.14, Utilities and Service
Systems, for further discussion.
Goal 5B It shall be the goal of American
Canyon to develop and maintain a
water treatment and distribution
system that meets generally
accepted operational criteria for
service to provide daily and peak
demands, including fire flow
requirements, to meet present and
future needs in a timely and cost
effective manner.
Consistent: This Draft EIR evaluates
project impacts on water supply
and distribution and concludes that
adequate supplies and
infrastructure are available to serve
the proposed project. Refer to
Section 3.14, Utilities and Service
Systems, for further discussion.
Objective 5.7 Expand water treatment, storage and
distribution facilities as necessary to
meet increasing water demands.
Consistent: The existing water
distribution lines in Commerce
Court have adequate capacity to
serve the proposed project. The
City of American Canyon also has
adequate water supplies available
to serve the proposed project.
Refer to Section 3.14, Utilities and
Service Systems, for further
discussion.
Policy 5.7.3 Require adequate water supply,
distribution, storage, and treatment
facilities to be operational prior to
the issuance of certificates of
occupancy.
Consistent: The existing water
distribution lines in Commerce
Court have adequate capacity to
serve the proposed project. The
City of American Canyon has
adequate water supplies available
to serve the proposed project.
Refer to Section 3.14, Utilities and
Service Systems, for further
discussion.
Policy 5.7.4 Require all new development to be
served from an approved domestic
water supply.
Consistent: The proposed project
would be served with potable
water provided by the City of
American Canyon, which is an
approved domestic water supply.
Policy 5.7.5 Monitor the demands on the water
system and, as necessary, manage
Consistent: This Draft EIR evaluates
project impacts on water supply
921
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-28 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
development to mitigate impacts
and/or facilitate improvements.
and distribution and concludes that
adequate supplies and
infrastructure are available to serve
the proposed project. Refer to
Section 3.14, Utilities and Service
Systems, for further discussion.
Objective 5.8 Ensure that the costs of
improvements to the water supply,
distribution, storage, and treatment
system are borne by those who
benefit.
Consistent: The project applicant
would construct or provide the full
cost of on-site water infrastructure
and off-site improvements
necessary to serve the proposed
project.
Policy 5.8.1 Require improvements to the existing
water supply, distribution, storage,
and treatment facilities necessitated
by a new development proposal be
borne by the project proponent (in
proportion to benefit); either
through the payment of fees, or by
the actual construction of the
improvements.
Consistent: The project applicant
would construct or provide the full
cost of on-site water infrastructure
and off-site improvements
necessary to serve the proposed
project.
Goal 5C Establish and maintain adequate
planning, construction, maintenance,
and funding for storm drain and flood
control facilities to support permitted
land uses and preserve the public
safety; upgrading existing deficient
systems and expanding, where
necessary, to accommodate new
permitted development and to
protect existing development in the
City. Pursue public funding sources
(i.e., grants) to reduce fiscal impacts
of implementation to the City.
Consistent: The proposed project
would install an on-site stormwater
drainage system that would include
storm drain pipes and a bioretention
pond. The system would be
designed to accommodate peak
storm event runoff in accordance
with the City’s latest adopted
standards. This is consistent with
the goal of providing adequate
storm drain and flood control
facilities to support permitted land
uses and preserve the public safety.
Refer to Section 3.9, Hydrology and
Water Quality, for further
discussion.
Objective 5.10 Ensure that adequate storm drain
and flood control facilities are
provided and properly maintained to
protect life and property from flood
hazards.
Consistent: The proposed project
would install an on-site stormwater
drainage system that would be
designed to accommodate peak
storm event runoff in accordance
with the City’s latest adopted
standards. Refer to Section 3.9,
Hydrology and Water Quality, for
further discussion.
922
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-29 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Policy 5.10.1 Provide for the maintenance of
existing public storm drains and flood
control facilities and for the
construction of upgraded and
expanded storm drain and flood
control facilities, where necessary, to
protect existing and accommodate
new permitted development.
Consistent: The project applicant
would install on-site storm
drainage infrastructure and be
responsible for its maintenance and
upkeep. Refer to Section 3.9,
Hydrology and Water Quality, for
further discussion.
Policy 5.10.3 Require that adequate storm drain
and flood control facilities be
constructed coincident with new
development.
Consistent: The project applicant
would be required to install on-site
storm drainage infrastructure prior
to issuance of the certificate of
occupancy. Refer to Section 3.9,
Hydrology and Water Quality, for
further discussion.
Policy 5.10.4 Limit new development, when
necessary, until adequate flood control
facilities are constructed to protect
existing development and
accommodate the new development
runoff, or until mitigation is provided.
Consistent: The project applicant
would be required to install on-site
storm drainage infrastructure prior
to issuance of the certificate of
occupancy. This is consistent with
the policy of requiring adequate
flood control facilities to be
constructed in conjunction with
new development. Refer to
Chapter 2, Project Description, for
further discussion.
Objective 5.11 Ensure that the costs of
improvements to the storm drain and
flood control system are borne by
those who benefit.
Consistent: The project applicant
would construct or provide the full
cost of on-site storm drainage
infrastructure and off-site
improvements necessary to serve
the proposed project.
Policy 5.11.1 Require improvements to existing
storm drain and flood control
facilities necessitated by a new
development proposal be borne by
the project proponent; either
through the payment of fees, or by
the actual construction of the
improvements in accordance with
State Nexus Legislation.
Consistent: The project applicant
would construct or provide the full
cost of on-site storm drainage
infrastructure and off-site
improvements necessary to serve
the proposed project.
Policy 5.11.3 Collect adequate amounts of fees
and charges to fund the
operation/maintenance of existing
facilities and to construct new
facilities.
Consistent: The project applicant
would provide all required storm
drainage fees to the City of
American Canyon.
Goal 5D Maintain the quality of surface and
subsurface water resources within
Consistent: As required by
applicable laws and regulations, the
923
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-30 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
the City of American Canyon and its
Planning Area.
proposed project would implement
stormwater quality measures and
practices to maintain the quality of
surface and subsurface water
resources.
Objective 5.12 Enhance runoff water quality
upstream of points of discharge to
channelized drainage courses.
Consistent: As required by
applicable laws and regulations, the
proposed project would implement
stormwater quality measures and
practices that would enhance
runoff water quality prior to
discharge in downstream
waterways. Refer to Section 3.9,
Hydrology and Water Quality for
further discussion.
Policy 5.12.1 Capitalize on opportunities to reduce
pollutant loading through passive
treatment systems such as vegetated
filter strips, grass swales, and
infiltration/ sedimentation areas in
suitable open space areas, and
incorporated into landscaping
adjacent to parking lots and streets.
Consistent: Passive treatment
systems would be incorporated
into the proposed project’s storm
drainage system where
appropriate. Refer to Section 3.9,
Hydrology and Water Quality for
further discussion.
Policy 5.12.2 Incorporate features in new drainage
detention facilities which enhance
the water quality of discharges from
the facility.
Consistent: The proposed project’s
storm drainage system would
include storm drain pipes and a
bioretention pond, which would
serve to enhance the water quality
of discharges from the facility
through percolation of pollutants
into the soil. Refer to Section 3.9,
Hydrology and Water Quality, for
further discussion.
Policy 5.12.3 Minimize impervious area that is
directly connected to piped or
channelized drainage systems in new
development.
Consistent: The two, on-site
isolated wetlands would be
preserved. This would be
consistent with the policy of
minimizing impervious area that is
directly connected to piped or
channelized drainage systems in
new development. Refer to Section
3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality,
for further discussion.
Objective 5.13 Prevent degradation of surface water
quality due to construction activities
and industrial operations.
Consistent: As required by applicable
laws and regulations, the proposed
project would implement
construction and operation
924
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-31 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
stormwater pollution prevention
measures to prevent degradation of
surface water quality. Refer to
Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water
Quality, for further discussion.
Policy 5.13.1 Require that development activities
comply with the State General Storm
Water Permit For Construction
Activities with measures that protect
surface water quality to the maximum
extent practicable.
Consistent: The proposed project’s
construction and operation
stormwater pollution prevention
measures would comply with the
applicable stormwater permits.
Refer to Section 3.9, Hydrology and
Water Quality, for further discussion.
Goal 5E It shall be the goal of the City of
American Canyon to establish and
maintain adequate planning,
construction, maintenance, and
funding for wastewater collection
and treatment facilities to support
land uses; upgrading existing
deficient systems, and expanding,
where necessary, in the City’s service
area.
Consistent: This Draft EIR evaluates
project impacts on wastewater
collection and treatment and
concludes that adequate capacity is
available to serve the proposed
project. Refer to Section 3.14,
Utilities and Service Systems, for
further discussion.
See also Section 3.6, Geology, Soils,
and Seismicity for discussion on
septic tanks and alternative
wastewater disposal facilities.
Objective 5.14 Provide a system of wastewater
collection and treatment facilities
which will adequately convey and
treat wastewater generated by
existing and future development in
the City’s service area.
Consistent: Aside from laterals to
serve proposed buildings, all
wastewater infrastructure necessary
to serve the proposed project is
currently in place. The laterals would
be required to be in place prior to
the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy. See also Section 3.6,
Geology, Soils, and Seismicity for
discussion on septic tanks and
alternative wastewater disposal
facilities.
Policy 5.14.2 Provide for the construction of
upgraded and expanded wastewater
collection and treatment
improvements to support existing
and new development.
Consistent: The proposed project
would connect to an existing sewer
line located within Commerce
Court. Aside from laterals to serve
proposed buildings, no other
wastewater upgrades would be
required. See also Section 3.6,
Geology, Soils, and Seismicity for
discussion on septic tanks and
alternative wastewater disposal
facilities.
925
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Land Use Draft EIR
3.10-32 FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
Policy 5.14.4 Require new development to connect
to a master planned sanitary sewer
system. Where construction of
master planned facilities is not
feasible, and where the future
construction of master planned
faculties will not be jeopardized, the
City Council may permit the
construction of interim faculties
sufficient to serve the present and
short-term future needs.
Consistent: The proposed project
would be served with sanitary
sewer service provided by the City
of American Canyon. The proposed
project would connect to an
existing sewer line located within
Commerce Court; no interim
facilities would be necessary. See
also Section 3.6, Geology, Soils, and
Seismicity for discussion on septic
tanks and alternative wastewater
disposal facilities.
Policy 5.14.5 Require all new development to
secure sewer capacity rights prior to
or at the time building permits are
issued.
Consistent: The City of American
Canyon has indicated that the
proposed project would be served
with adequate sewer capacity. See
also Section 3.6, Geology, Soils, and
Seismicity for discussion on septic
tanks and alternative wastewater
disposal facilities.
Objective 5.15 Ensure that wastewater collection
and treatment facilities are upgraded
and installed in a timely manner to
meet usage requirements and
maximize cost efficiency.
Consistent: Aside from laterals to
serve the proposed building, all
wastewater infrastructure necessary
to serve the proposed project is
currently in place. The laterals would
be required to be in place prior to
the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy. Refer to Section 3.6,
Geology, Soils, and Seismicity for
discussion on septic tanks and
alternative wastewater disposal
facilities.
Policy 5.15.1 Require that wastewater collection
and treatment facilities be installed
and available for use prior to the
issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
Consistent: Aside from laterals to
serve the proposed building, all
wastewater infrastructure
necessary to serve the proposed
project is currently in place. The
laterals would be required to be in
place prior to the issuance of a
certificate of occupancy. Refer to
Section 3.6, Geology, Soils, and
Seismicity for discussion on septic
tanks and alternative wastewater
disposal facilities.
Objective 5.16 Ensure that the costs of
infrastructure improvements are
borne by those who benefit.
Consistent: The project applicant
would construct or provide the full
cost of on-site sewer infrastructure
and off-site improvements
926
City of American Canyon—SDG Commerce 220 Distribution Center Project Draft EIR Land Use
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.10-33 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5639/56390001/EIR/2 - Screencheck EIR/edit/56390001 Sec03-10 Land Use.docx Element
Goal/Objective/Policy
No. Text Consistency Determination
necessary to serve the proposed
project and would be subject to
City fee programs.
Policy 5.16.1 Require that the cost for
improvements to the existing
wastewater collection and treatment
facilities necessitated by a new
development proposal be borne by
the project proponent in proportion
to benefit; either through the
payment of fees, or by the actual
construction of the improvements.
Consistent: The project applicant
would construct or provide the full
cost of on-site sewer infrastructure
and off-site improvements
necessary to serve the proposed
project and would be subject to
City fee programs.
Public Services
and Facilities
Goal 6A Maintain a high level of fire
protection and emergency services to
City/District businesses and
residences.
Consistent: This Draft EIR evaluates
project impacts on the American
Canyon Fire Protection District and
concludes that adequate levels of
service can be provided. Refer to
Section 3.12, Public Services, for
further discussion.
Objective 6.3 Ensure that the Fire District’s facility, manpower and equipment needs
keep pace with the City’s growth.
Consistent: This Draft EIR evaluates
project impacts on the American
Canyon Fire Protection District and
concludes that adequate levels of
service can be provided. Refer to
Section 3.12, Public Services, for
further discussion.
Policy 6.3.1 Require that City planning staff work
closely with Fire District officials to
ensure that fire facilities and
personnel are expanded
commensurably to serve the needs of
the City’s growing population and
development base.
Consistent: The American Canyon
Fire Protection District was
consulted during the preparation of
this Draft EIR to determine whether
the proposed project would
impede its ability to provide fire
protection. Refer to Section 3.12,
Public Services, for further
discussion.
Policy 6.4.3 Require, through the development
review process, that all structures
and facilities subject to the District’s
jurisdiction adhere to City, State and
federal regulatory standards such as
the Uniform Building and Fire Codes
and other applicable safety
guidelines.