1.7 Final EIR Process..............................................................................................................1-8
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION..................................................................................................................2-1
2.1 Purpose............................................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Project Location............................................................................................................... 2-1
2.3 Environmental Setting.....................................................................................................2-1
2.3.1 Existing On -site and Surrounding Uses...............................................................2-2
2.3.2 Existing Land Use Designations and Zoning........................................................2-2
2.3.3 Existing Environmental Conditions.....................................................................2-2
2.4 Project Objectives............................................................................................................2-3
2.5 Project Characteristics.....................................................................................................2-4
2.5.1 Proposed Land Uses and Operations..................................................................2-4
2.5.2 Design and Architecture.....................................................................................2-4
2.5.3 Utility Improvements..........................................................................................2-4
2.5.4 Sustainability Features........................................................................................2-5
2.6 Circulation, Access, and Parking......................................................................................2-5
2.7 Project Construction........................................................................................................2-6
2.8 Necessary Approvals........................................................................................................2-6
3.0 BASIS FOR CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS...............................................................................................3-1
3.1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 Cumulative Projects.........................................................................................................3-2 Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report i December 2023
iti_ifftw
Table of Contents
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.........................................................................................................4-1
4.1 Aesthetics......................................................................................................................4.1-1
4.1.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................4.1-1
4.1.2 Environmental Setting.....................................................................................4.1-2
4.1.3 Regulatory Framework....................................................................................4.1-3
4.1.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds................................................................4.1-5
4.1.5 Methodology and Assumptions.......................................................................4.1-6
4.1.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures...................................................................4.1-6
4.1.7 Cumulative Impacts.......................................................................................4.1-11
4.1.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts....................................................................4.1-11
4.1.9 References.....................................................................................................4.1-11
4.2 Air Quality.....................................................................................................................4.2-1
4.2.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................4.2-1
4.2.2 Environmental Setting.....................................................................................4.2-1
4.2.3 Regulatory Framework....................................................................................4.2-7
4.2.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds..............................................................4.2-12
4.2.5 Methodology and Assumptions.....................................................................4.2-13
4.2.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures.................................................................4.2-22
4.2.7 Cumulative Impacts.......................................................................................4.2-30
4.2.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts....................................................................4.2-31
4.2.9 References.....................................................................................................4.2-32
4.3 Cultural Resources........................................................................................................4.3-1
4.3.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................4.3-1
4.3.2 Environmental Setting.....................................................................................4.3-1
4.3.3 Regulatory Framework....................................................................................4.3-6
4.3.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds................................................................4.3-9
4.3.5 Methodology and Assumptions.....................................................................4.3-10
4.3.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures.................................................................4.3-10
4.3.7 Cumulative Impacts.......................................................................................4.3-13
4.3.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts....................................................................4.3-13
4.3.9 References.....................................................................................................4.3-13
4.4 Energy
...........................................................................................................................4.4-1
4.4.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................4.4-1
4.4.2 Environmental Setting.....................................................................................4.4-1
4.4.3 Regulatory Framework....................................................................................4.4-4
4.4.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds..............................................................4.4-13
4.4.5 Methodology and Assumptions.....................................................................4.4-13
4.4.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures.................................................................4.4-14
4.4.7 Cumulative Impacts.......................................................................................4.4-18
4.4.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts....................................................................4.4-18
4.4.9 References.....................................................................................................4.4-19
4.5 Geology and Soils..........................................................................................................4.5-1
4.5.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................4.5-1
4.5.2 Environmental Setting.....................................................................................4.5-1 Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report ii December 2023
Exhibit D
Table of Contents
4.5.3 Regulatory Framework....................................................................................4.5-3
4.5.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds................................................................4.5-4
4.5.5 Methodology and Assumptions.......................................................................4.5-5
4.5.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures...................................................................4.5-6
4.5.7 Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................4.5-8
4.5.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts......................................................................4.5-9
4.5.9 References.......................................................................................................4.5-9
4.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions...........................................................................................4.6-1
4.6.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................4.6-1
4.6.2 Environmental Setting.....................................................................................4.6-1
4.6.3 Regulatory Framework....................................................................................4.6-4
4.6.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds................................................................4.6-9
4.6.5 Methodology and Assumptions.....................................................................4.6-11
4.6.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures.................................................................4.6-12
4.6.7 Cumulative Impacts.......................................................................................4.6-14
4.6.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts....................................................................4.6-14
4.6.9 References.....................................................................................................4.6-14
4.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials................................................................................4.7-1
4.7.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................4.7-1
4.7.2 Environmental Setting.....................................................................................4.7-1
4.7.3 Regulatory Framework..................................................................................4.7-11
4.7.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds..............................................................4.7-18
4.7.5 Methodology and Assumptions.....................................................................4.7-18
4.7.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures.................................................................4.7-20
4.7.7 Cumulative Impacts.......................................................................................4.7-26
4.7.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts....................................................................4.7-27
4.7.9 References.....................................................................................................4.7-27
4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality.......................................................................................4.8-1
4.8.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................4.8-1
4.8.2 Environmental Setting.....................................................................................4.8-1
4.8.3 Regulatory Framework....................................................................................4.8-2
4.8.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds................................................................4.8-5
4.8.5 Methodology and Assumptions.......................................................................4.8-6
4.8.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures...................................................................4.8-6
4.8.7 Cumulative Impacts.........................................................................................4.8-8
4.8.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts......................................................................4.8-8
4.8.9 References.......................................................................................................4.8-8
4.9 Land Use and Planning..................................................................................................4.9-1
4.9.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................4.9-1
4.9.2 Environmental Setting.....................................................................................4.9-1
4.9.3 Regulatory Framework....................................................................................4.9-2
4.9.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds................................................................4.9-6
4.9.5 Methodology and Assumptions.......................................................................4.9-6
4.9.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures...................................................................4.9-7 Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report iii December 2023
Exhibit D
Table of Contents
4.9.7 Cumulative Impacts.......................................................................................4.9-11
4.9.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts....................................................................4.9-11
4.9.9 References.....................................................................................................4.9-11
4.10 Noise...........................................................................................................................4.10-1
4.10.1 Introduction...................................................................................................4.10-1
4.10.2 Environmental Setting...................................................................................4.10-1
4.10.3 Regulatory Framework..................................................................................4.10-3
4.10.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds..............................................................4.10-6
4.10.5 Methodology and Assumptions.....................................................................4.10-6
4.10.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures...............................................................4.10-10
4.10.7 Cumulative Impacts.....................................................................................4.10-19
4.10.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts..................................................................4.10-19
4.10.9 References...................................................................................................4.10-19
4.11 Transportation............................................................................................................4.11-1
4.11.1 Introduction...................................................................................................4.11-1
4.11.2 Environmental Setting...................................................................................4.11-1
4.11.3 Regulatory Framework..................................................................................4.11-4
4.11.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds..............................................................4.11-7
4.11.5 Methodology and Assumptions.....................................................................4.11-7
4.11.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures.................................................................4.11-8
4.11.7 Cumulative Impacts.....................................................................................4.11-15
4.11.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts..................................................................4.11-16
4.11.9 References...................................................................................................4.11-16
4.12 Tribal Cultural Resources............................................................................................4.12-1
4.12.1 Introduction...................................................................................................4.12-1
4.12.2 Environmental Setting...................................................................................4.12-1
4.12.3 Regulatory Framework..................................................................................4.12-1
4.12.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds..............................................................4.12-3
4.12.5 Methodology and Assumptions.....................................................................4.12-6
4.12.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures.................................................................4.12-6
4.12.7 Cumulative Impacts.....................................................................................4.12-10
4.12.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts..................................................................4.12-10
4.12.9 References...................................................................................................4.12-10
5.0 ALTERNATIVES
..............................................................................................................................5-1
5.1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.1.1 Summary of the Project......................................................................................5-2
5.1.2 Project Objectives...............................................................................................5-2
5.1.3 Summary of Proposed Project Significant and Unavoidable Impacts ................5-3
5.2 Alternatives Considered But Not Carried Forward For Further Analysis .........................5-3
5.2.1 Alternative Site Location.....................................................................................
S-4
5.2.2 Alternatives to Reduce Potential VMT Impacts..................................................5-4
5.3 Comparison
of Project Alternatives.................................................................................5-5
5.3.1 Alternative A: No Project.................................................................................... 5-6
5.3.2 Alternative B: Reuse of Existing Buildings...........................................................5-7 Prologis Stewart
and Gray Road Warehouse Project
City of Downey
Draft Environmental
Impact
Report iv
December 2023
Exhibit D
Table of Contents
5.3.3 Alternative C: Reduced Building Height..............................................................5-8
5.3.4 Alternative D: Reduced Project...........................................................................5-9
5.4 Environmentally Superior Alternative...........................................................................5-10
5.5 References.....................................................................................................................5-10
6.0 OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS...................................................................................................6-1
6.1 Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Effects........................................................6-1
6.2 Significant Irreversible Environmental Effects.................................................................6-1
6.2.1 Irreversible Commitment of Resources..............................................................6-2
6.2.2 Irreversible Environmental Changes...................................................................6-2
6.2.3 Potential Environmental Damage from Accidents.............................................6-3
6.3 Growth Inducing Impacts.................................................................................................6-3
6.4 References.......................................................................................................................6-4
7.0 Effects Found Not To Be Significant..............................................................................................7-1
7.1 Agriculture and Forestry Resources.................................................................................7-1
7.2 Biological Resources........................................................................................................7-1
7.3 Mineral Resources...........................................................................................................7-2
7.4 Population and Housing...................................................................................................7-2
7.5 Public Services..................................................................................................................7-2
7.6 Recreation........................................................................................................................7-3
7.7 Utilities and Service Systems...........................................................................................7-3
7.8 Wildfire............................................................................................................................7-4
7.9 References....................................................................................................................... 7-4
8.0 LIST OF EIR PREPARERS.................................................................................................................8-1
8.1 Lead Agency.....................................................................................................................8-1
8.2 Consultants Involved in the Preparation of the EIR.........................................................8-1 List of Appendices
Appendix A
Notice of Preparation (NOP), Initial Study, and NOP Comments Appendix B
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report Appendix C
Cultural Resources Study
Appendix D
Historic Resources Evaluation Report
Appendix E
Geotechnical Investigation
Appendix F
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Appendix G
Phase II Environmental Site Assessment
Appendix H
Asbestos, Lead -Based Paint, and Lead in Drinking Water Sampling Report Appendix I
Low Impact Development Plan
Appendix J
Land Use Plan Policy Consistency Analysis Tables
Appendix K
Noise and Vibration Report
Appendix L
Transportation Impact Study
Appendix M
Assembly Bill 52 Correspondence
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report v December 2023
Exhibit D
Table of Contents
List of Figures
No. Title
Follows Page
2-1
Regional Location..........................................................................................................................2-2 2-2
Aerial Photograph.........................................................................................................................2-2 2-3
Exiting Land Uses..........................................................................................................................2-2 2-4
Project Site Land Use Designations...............................................................................................2-2 2-5
Project Site Zoning Designations..................................................................................................2-2 2-6
Site Plan........................................................................................................................................2-4 2-7a
Project Elevations......................................................................................................................... 2-4 2-7b
Project Elevations.........................................................................................................................2-4 3-1
Related Project Locations.............................................................................................................3-2
4.1-1
Visual Simulations Locations......................................................................................................4.1-8
4.1-2a
Visual Simulation —Viewpoint 1................................................................................................4.1-8
4.1-2b
Visual Simulation —Viewpoint 2................................................................................................4.1-8
4.1-2c
Visual Simulation — Viewpoint 3................................................................................................4.1-8
4.2-1
Receptor Locations..................................................................................................................4.2-22
4.5-1
Regional Geology.......................................................................................................................4.5-2
4.5-2
Project Area Soils.......................................................................................................................4.5-2
4.5-3
Regional Fault Map....................................................................................................................4.5-2
4.10-1
Noise Receiver Locations.......................................................................................................4.10-14
4.11-1
Existing Transit Routes.............................................................................................................4.11-2
4.11-2
Existing Nearby Pedestrian and Transit Facilities
....................................................................4.11-4
4.11-3
Existing and Planned Bikeways................................................................................................4.11-4 List of Tables
No. Title
Page
ES-1
Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation.............................................................................. ES-5 1-1
Summary of Written Comments on Notice of Preparation..........................................................1-3 3-1
List of Related Projects.................................................................................................................3-3
4.2-1
Summary of Common Sources and Human Health Effects of Criteria Air Pollutants................4.2-3
4.2-2
Air Quality Monitoring Data.......................................................................................................4.2-6
4.2-3
Existing Land Use Maximum Daily Emissions............................................................................4.2-7
4.2-4
Ambient Air Quality Standards..................................................................................................4.2-8
4.2-5
South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status...................................................................................4.2-9
4.2-6
SCAQMD Thresholds of Significance........................................................................................4.2-12
4.2-7
Construction Schedule for Air Quality Modeling.....................................................................4.2-14
4.2-8
Construction Equipment Assumptions....................................................................................4.2-15
4.2-9
Maximum Daily Construction Emissions..................................................................................4.2-23
4.2-10
Maximum Daily Operational Emissions...................................................................................4.2-24
4.2-11
Maximum Localized Daily Construction Emissions..................................................................4.2-25
4.2-12
Maximum Incremental Cancer Health Risk.............................................................................4.2-27 Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report vi December 2023
Exhibit F1
Table ofContents
List ofTables hontnued\
No. Title
4L4-1
Natural Gas Consumption inSCGService Area (2O2U)........................................................... 4/4-3 4L6'1
Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes .........................................................
4.6'3
4L6'2
California Greenhouse Gas Emissions BySector ....................................................................
4.6'3
4.6-3
Existing Land Use Annual GHGEmissions ...............................................................................
4.G'4
4.6'4
Estimated Construction GHGEmissions ...............................................................................
4.6'12
4.6'5
Net Operational GHGEmissions ...........................................................................................
4.G'13
4.7-1
Listed Facilities in the Project Vicinity With Potential to Impact the Project Site ..................
4.7-3
4.7'2
Recognized Environmental Concerns .....................................................................................
4.7-5
4.10'1
Existing Transportation Noise Contours ...............................................................................
4.1U'3
4.10-2
City ofDowney Exterior Noise Limits ...................................................................................
4.20-4
4.10'3
Stationary Refrigeration Unit Fan Noise Data ......................................................................
4.1O'9
4.10'4
Condenser Noise Data ..........................................................................................................
4.1O'9
4.10'5
PMPeak Hour Traffic Volumes ...........................................................................................
4.l0'1O
4.10'6
Construction Equipment Noise Levels ................................................................................
4.1O'1Z
4.10'7
Daytime Operational Noise ................................................................................................
4.10'14
4.10'8
Nighttime Operational Noise ..............................................................................................
4.10'15
4.10'9
Existing Off -Site Traffic Noise Levels ..................................................................................
4.10'16
4.10'10
Cumulative (Year lO24)Off-Site Traffic Noise Levels .........................................................
4.10'16
4.11,1
Existing Roadways inthe Project Vicinity .............................................................................
4.11'1
4.11'2
Existing Transit Routes ..........................................................................................................
4.11'2
4.11-3
Summary ofVehicle Miles Traveled Analysis .....................................................................
4.11-12
5'1
Summary ofComparison ofAlternatives tothe Project ........................................................... 5'6
6-1
Demographics and Growth: City ofDowney ............................................................................. 6'4
pmloobStewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City ofDowney
Exhibit D
Table of Contents
This page intentionally left blank
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report viii December 2023
Exhibit D
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Downey (City) has determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required to assess the potential environmental impacts associated with the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project (Project). This EIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA (California Public Resources Code [PRC] §21000 et seq.); State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 14, §15000 et seq.); and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementation of CEQA, as adopted by the City.
This Executive Summary provides an overview of the Project and Project objectives, discloses areas of controversy and issues to be resolved, summarizes the Project alternatives, and outlines the potential impacts of the Project and recommended mitigation measures.
ESA PROJECT OVERVIEW
ES.1.1 Project Location
The Project would be located on an approximately 29.16-acre site in the southeastern portion of the City in the southern portion of Los Angeles County (County). The Project site is located approximately ten miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and nine miles northwest of the County of Orange. Regional access is provided via the following freeways: the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5 [1-5]), the San Gabriel Freeway (1-605), the Century Freeway (1-105), and the Long Beach Freeway (1-710). The Project site is bounded by Hall Road on the north, Woodruff Road on the east, Stewart and Gray Road on the south, and an industrial building on the west. The site is comprised of Assessor's Parcel Numbers 6284-019-013 through 017. Primary vehicular access to the Project site is provided by Stewart and Gray Road and Hall Road.
ES.1.2 Project Description Summary
The proposed Project would include the demolition of the existing five buildings totaling approximately 433,000 square feet (SF) and the construction of an approximately 535,685-square-foot industrial concrete tilt -up building for warehouse/logistics uses. The Project would include 683 auto parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container parking spaces and 109 dock loading doors. The new industrial building would be used for logistics and distribution purposes, and specifically as a fulfillment center and for cold storage. Approximately 95 percent of the warehouse (508,900 SF) would be high cube fulfillment and the remaining 5 percent (26,785 SF) would be for cold storage (i.e., refrigerated warehouse space). The facility would also include 20,000 SF of office area and 25,000 SF of mezzanine area within the 535,685-SF building. On -site activities would include storage, distribution, and/or consolidation of manufactured goods, and last -mile fulfillment and delivery; and general industrial/ warehouse with refrigeration and cold storage component for the purposes of receiving, storing, shipping of food and/or beverage products. The office space would be used for office uses ancillary to the warehouse operations. The proposed facility would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
ES.1.3 Project Objectives
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines §15124(b), the EIR project description must include a statement of objectives sought by the proposed project. The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the Project. The fundamental purpose and goal of the Project is to accomplish the orderly development of an appropriately zoned and designated warehouse building in the City while also contributing to increased employment opportunities within the area. The Project objectives have been refined throughout the planning and design process for the proposed Project and are listed below:
• Create a professional, well -maintained, and attractive environment for the development of a warehouse building consistent with the underlying zoning adjacent to nearby transportation infrastructure.
• Expand economic development, attract new businesses, and provide employment opportunities in the City of Downey.
• Increase the industrial base in the City of Downey by providing a Class A industrial facility that meets industry standards for operational design and can accommodate a wide variety of industrial uses.
• Facilitate a project that provides goods for the regional economy. • Design the facility for energy efficiency and sustainability. • Encourage warehouse development as attractive and productive uses while minimizing conflicts to the extent possible with the surrounding existing uses. • Encourage new warehouse distribution services that take advantage of the area's close proximity to various freeways and transportation corridors to reduce traffic congestion on surface streets and to reduce concomitant air pollution emission from vehicle sources. • Encourage new development consistent with the capacity and municipal service capabilities.
ES.2 AREAS OF CONTROVERSY AND ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
CEQA Guidelines Section 15123(b)(2) and (3) require that the EIR Summary identify areas of controversy known to the Lead Agency, issues raised by agencies and the public, and issues to be resolved, including the choice among alternatives and whether, or how to, mitigate the significant effects.
The City of Downey prepared and issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Draft EIR on March 29, 2022. However, due to mailing issues with NOP copies sent to public agencies, the City issued an updated NOP to those recipients on April 25, 2022 and accepted responses through May 25, 2022. The City of Downey hosted a scoping meeting on March 18, 2022, in the Downey City Hall Council Chambers during which time responsible and trustee agencies, as well as interested members of the public were invited to submit comments regarding the scope of the EIR. The meeting was attended by City staff, Project applicant representatives, and consultants; however, no members of the public or jurisdictional agency staff attended the meeting.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-2 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Comments received in response to the NOP were related to archaeological and tribal cultural resources, transportation and vehicle miles traveled, utilities, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, energy, hazardous materials, and urban decay. For a more detailed list of the comments received, see Table 1-1 of this EIR. For written comments on the NOP, see Appendix A of this EIR. To the extent that these issues have environmental impacts and to the extent that analysis is required under CEQA, they are addressed in Chapters 4 through 7 of this EIR.
The Project's environmental effects are addressed in Sections 4.1 through 4.12 of this EIR. Project implementation would result in potentially significant impacts in the following issue areas:
• Cultural Resources (potential to encounter previously unknown, buried cultural resources) • Hazards and Hazardous Materials (potential to encounter contaminated soils, asbestos - containing material, or lead -based paints)
• Land Use and Planning (Project consistency with land use plans, policies, or regulations) • Noise (nighttime construction activities)
• Transportation (potential to result in Vehicle Miles Traveled [VMT] impacts) • Tribal Cultural Resources (potential to encounter previously unknown, buried tribal cultural resources)
All of these potentially significant impacts would be reduced to a less than significant impact with the implementation of the mitigation measures included in Table ES-1 below, except for noise. Section 4.10, Noise, identified a significant temporary impact related to noise during nighttime construction. Even with the implementation of Mitigation Measure N01-1 to limit construction hours and notify surrounding residents of anticipated nighttime construction activities in advance, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
ES.4 SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED
CEQA states that an EIR must address "a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or the location of the project, which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives." [14 Cal. Code of Reg. 15126.6(a)]. As described in Chapter 5, Alternatives, of this EIR, four project alternatives were identified and analyzed for relative impacts as compared to the Project:
• Alternative A: No Project Alternative
• Alternative B: Reuse of Existing Buildings
• Alternative C: Reduced Building Height
• Alternative D: Reduced Project
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-3 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
ES.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Under CEQA, a significant impact on the environment is defined as a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the proposed project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic and aesthetic significance.
The proposed Project has the potential to generate significant environmental impacts in a few areas.
Table ES-1, Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation, summarizes the conclusions of the environmental analysis contained in this EIR and presents a summary of impacts and mitigation measures identified. It is organized to correspond with the environmental issues discussed in Sections
4.1 through 4.12. The table is arranged in four columns: (1) environmental impacts, (2) significance prior to mitigation, (3) mitigation measures, and (4) significance after mitigation. For a complete description of potential impacts, please refer to the specific discussions in Sections 4.1 through 4.12.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-4 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Table ES-1
SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
Aesthetics
4.1-c: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of public views of the
site and its surroundings and would not
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality.
4.1-d: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area.
Air Quality
4.2-a: The proposed Project would not
conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan.
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
4.2-b: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the Project region is non -attainment under
an applicable federal or State ambient air
quality standard.
4.2-c: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-5 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Cultural Resources
4.3-a: The proposed Project may cause a Potentially significant CUL-1: Cultural Monitoring Program. The construction Less than substantial change in the significance of a contractor shall implement an archaeological and Native significant historical resource. American monitoring program during grading and other ground -disturbing activities (i.e., trenching for utilities) which are to occur below the current layer of fill. The monitoring program shall include the retention of a qualified archaeologist and a Native American monitor. The archaeological and Native American monitors shall attend a pre -construction meeting with the construction manager and be in attendance during initial ground -disturbing activities at the Project site. The monitors shall determine the extent of their presence during soil disturbing activities.
The archaeological and Native American monitors shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading and other ground -disturbing activity if cultural resources are
encountered. If an artifact is encountered, all operations within 50 feet of where the artifact was found shall be suspended immediately, the City shall be notified, and the qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the Native American monitor, shall evaluate the significance of the find. If cultural material is determined to be significant, the qualified archaeologist shall coordinate with the consulting tribes and City staff to develop and implement appropriate treatment measures. Pursuant to California PRC §21083.2(b), avoidance is the preferred method of preservation. The archaeologist and the tribal representative shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that will be implemented to protect the newly discovered cultural resource(s), including but not limited to, avoidance in place, excavation, relocation, and further evaluation of the discoveries in accordance with CECA. No further ground disturbance shall occur in the area of the discovery until the City approves the measures to protect the significant cultural resources
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-6 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
4.3-b: The proposed Project may cause a
Potentially significant
Mitigation Measure CUL-1
Less than
substantial change in the significance of a
significant
unique archaeological resource.
4.3-c: The proposed Project may disturb
Potentially significant
CUL-2: Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. If the
Less than
human remains, including those interred
discovery of human remains occurs on the Project site, the significant
outside of formal cemeteries.
specific procedures outlined by the NAHC, in accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code, must be
followed:
1. All excavation activities within 60 feet of the remains will immediately stop, and the area will be protected with
flagging or by posting a monitor or construction worker to ensure that no additional disturbance occurs.
2. The Project owner or their authorized representative will contact the Los Angeles County Coroner.
3. The coroner will have two working days to examine the remains after being notified in accordance with HSC 7050.5.
If the coroner determines that the remains are Native
American and are not subject to the coroner's authority, the coroner will notify NAHC of the discovery within 24 hours.
4. NAHC will immediately notify the Most Likely Descendant (MLD), who will have 48 hours after being granted access to the location of the remains to inspect them and make
recommendations for their treatment. Work will be
suspended in the area of the find until the County approves the proposed treatment of human remains.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-7 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
If human remains of Native American origin are discovered or unearthed, the applicant shall contact the consulting Tribe, as detailed in Mitigation Measures TCR-1, TCR-2, and TCR-3 regarding any finds and provide information after the
archaeologist makes an initial assessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input concerning significance and treatment. Once the find has been appropriately mitigated, as determined and documented by a qualified archaeologist, work in the area may resume.
Energy
4.4-a: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
result in wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy
resources.
4.4-b: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
conflict with or obstruct a State or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency.
Geology and Soils
4.5-a.ii: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong
seismic ground shaking.
4.5-a.iii: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving
seismic -related ground failure, including
liquefaction.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-8 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
4.5-c: The proposed Project may be located
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
on a geologic unit or soils that is unstable,
or that would potentially become unstable
as a result of the Project, and potentially
result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse.
4.5-d: The proposed Project would not be
No impact
No mitigation is required.
--
located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18 1-13 of the Uniform Building Code
(1994) and would not create substantial
direct or indirect risks to life or property.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
4.6-a: Implementation of the Project would
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
not generate GHG emissions that may have
a significant impact on the environment.
4.6-b: Implementation of the proposed
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
Project would not conflict with an
applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of GHGs.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-9 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4.7-b: The proposed Project may create a Potentially significant significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment.
HAZ-1 VOC-Contaminated Soil. The following shall be
implemented during Project construction to address VOC- contaminated soil:
Soil Handling: If impacted soil is encountered, the area shall be delineated as necessary with cones, caution tape, stakes, chalk, or flagging and the area shall not be
disturbed further until an environmental professional is on site for observation and determination of whether testing and/or excavation work is required. Stockpile staging areas shall be delineated prior to the start of excavation. The specific equipment, means, and methods to be utilized for soil removal, handling, and disposition shall be selected based on the nature of the work to be conducted and its location on the site.
Areas from which contaminated or potentially
contaminated soil is being excavated, disturbed, or
handled shall be secured by temporary fencing and/or
caution tape, as appropriate. Exclusion and support zones, if any, staging areas, and decontamination pads shall also be delineated.
An environmental field coordinator shall be present full- time during soil removal and handling activities in areas in which contaminated soil has been encountered or has the potential to be encountered. This individual shall be
responsible for observations of soil conditions, air
monitoring, maintaining communications, ensuring
compliance with the MMP, and any oversight of sampling.
Less than
significant
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-10 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
If testing of suspect materials confirm that contaminated soils are present, notification and permitting with the SCAQMD shall be required along with implementation of
necessary mitigation controls and monitoring pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 1166.
If excavation is conducted during the rainy season
(November through April), provisions shall be made to
prevent off -site migration of sediment in runoff. Best management practices shall be implemented for runoff
control in accordance with the construction permit,
regulatory requirements, and the SWPPP. Measures may
include placement of sandbags, straw rolls, and/or hay
bales to control runoff and to act as filters. If precipitation accumulates within any excavation, it shall be pumped out and disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations.
• Fugitive Dust and Vapor Control: Appropriate procedures shall be implemented to control the generation of airborne dust by soil removal activities, including, but not limited to, some or all of the following:
o Generation of dust and emission of VOCs (if any)
during construction activities shall be minimized, as
necessary, by the use of water as a dust suppressant.
The water shall be available from on -site water
service, via a water truck, or through a metered
discharge from a fire hydrant located on or proximate
to the Project site. When necessary, the grading
contractor shall control dust generation by spraying
water prior to daily work activities, during
excavation/loading activities (as necessary to maintain concentrations below action levels), and at truck
staging locations. During construction activities,
watering equipment shall be continuously available to
provide proper control measures.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-11 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
o Activities that have the potential to generate fugitive dust shall cease in the event wind conditions change
creating an uncontrollable condition. If required, the
environmental field coordinator shall monitor on -site
meteorological instrumentation and/or coordinate
with off -site meteorological professionals to identify conditions that require cessation of work.
• Soil Excavation and Stockpiling: Impacted soil that is excavated and not immediately removed from the site
shall be stockpiled on and covered with plastic sheeting to control dust and minimize exposure to precipitation. The edges of the plastic sheeting shall have an overlap of at least 24 inches. Plastic sheeting shall be secured at the base of the stockpile and along seams of overlapping
plastic sheeting, if any, with sandbags or by equivalent means. If a stockpile remains on site during the rainy
season, a perimeter sediment barrier, constructed of
material such as straw bales or fiber roll, shall also be installed. The stockpiles shall remain covered until the soil is ready for final disposition.
A bi-weekly inspection of stockpiles shall be conducted, as appropriate, to verify cover integrity. Any gaps, tears, or other deficiencies shall be documented by the
environmental field coordinator and corrected
immediately. Records shall be kept of stockpile inspections and any repairs made. During stockpile removal, only the working face of the stockpile shall be uncovered.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-12 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
If the stockpiled impacted soil is to be transported off site for disposal or recycling, the soil shall be profiled for waste characteristics. Waste profiling shall consist of collecting soil samples for laboratory analysis at the frequency
required by the disposal/recycling facility to which the soil is to be transported. A minimum of four samples shall be collected from a stockpile of up to 1,000 cubic yards. For each approximately 500 cubic yards of stockpile material, an additional sample shall be collected and analyzed. Soil samples shall be analyzed for parameters required by the disposal/recycling facility. If no specific analytical program is required by the disposal/recycling facility, analysis shall include VOCs, metals, and TPH.
• Air and Soil Monitoring, Sampling, and Testing:
monitoring and sampling activities to be performed shall include:
o Air Monitoring: Air monitoring shall be conducted by
an air monitoring/health and safety professional
under the guidance of the environmental field
coordinator in areas where potential VOC-
contaminated soil is to be disturbed. Areas of the site requiring such monitoring shall include those areas
where ongoing remediation is occurring. An air
monitoring/health and safety professional shall be
present during ground -disturbing activities and shall
record monitoring data on field sheets, which will be
kept as part of Project documentation. Air monitoring
shall include the following:
■ Real-time aerosol monitors and industrial hygiene
air sampling equipment and media shall be
deployed to measure dust levels and/or
concentration of chemicals of potential concern in
dust.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-13 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
■ Vapor concentrations shall be monitored using an
organic vapor analyzer fitted with a photo
ionization detector. If readings using the photo
ionization detector reach or exceed 50 parts per
million, the provisions of SCAQMD Rule 1166 shall
be implemented, as outlined in Section (c) of Rule
1166.
o Soil Monitoring: During pre -demolition, demolition,
grading, and construction activities, visual observation of the exposed soil beneath building foundations,
floors, pavement, and subsurface features shall be
conducted by a monitoring/health and safety
professional under the guidance of the environmental
field coordinator. A field form shall be completed daily to document the areas of soil suspected of being
contaminated, if any. Any observed discoloration,
odor, or other evidence of potential hazardous
materials shall be documented and serve as the basis
for further evaluation.
o Soil Sampling and Testing: Based on field indications, soil samples may be collected to evaluate the
presence of suspected chemicals or compounds in
exposed soil. Selected soil samples shall be analyzed
by an appropriately certified, off -site laboratory, with the analytical methods selected based on the
following criteria:
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-14 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
■ Visual and Olfactory Observation: Soil that is
odorous or appears dark or oil stained shall be
analyzed for TPH by EPA Method 8015M modified
and for VOCs by EPA Method 8260B. Soil that
appears discolored in a manner typical of metals
impacts (e.g., red, yellow, green, gray, silvery)
shall be analyzed for California Code of
Regulations Title 22 metals using EPA Method
60106/7000.
■ Elevated VOC Levels: A soil sample (or samples)
shall be collected for laboratory testing if the
headspace VOC measurement exceeds 100 ppm,
as measured with a photo ionization detector
calibrated to hexane during the on -site screening.
Samples may be analyzed for VOCs using EPA
Method 8260 (VOCs) and/or TPH by EPA Method
8015M modified.
Soil samples for laboratory analysis shall be
collected using hand tools (for instance hand
auger or hand trowel) and placed in glass jars,
brass tubes, or other appropriate containers.
Samples to be analyzed for VOCs (if deemed
necessary) shall be field preserved using EPA
Method 5035. After collection, samples shall be
sealed, uniquely labeled, and placed in a chilled
cooler pending delivery to the analytical
laboratory. All soil samples shall be tracked from
point of collection through the laboratory using
chain -of -custody documentation. Re -useable soil
sampling equipment (hand auger, trowel, shovel,
etc.) shall be decontaminated prior to re -use to
reduce the potential for cross -contamination.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-15 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
Laboratory analytical data shall also be used to
characterize excavated soil to determine the
appropriate location for off -site disposal. Soil with
no visual or olfactory evidence of impacts and not
containing chemicals of potential concern may be
re -used on the Project site. Soil export manifest
records documenting the destination of all
excavated and exported soil shall be maintained.
• Import Fill Soils: Off -site soils brought to the Project site for use as backfill (import fill), if necessary, shall be tested in general conformance with the DTSC Information
Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material document (2001).
Import fill shall be tested for target compounds based on knowledge of the fill source area; however, as a minimum, the fill should be tested for the following constituents (or have been tested and documented at the source):
o TPH-cc using EPA Method 8015
o VOCs using EPA Method 8260B
o Title 22 metals using EPA Methods 601013/7471
o Pesticides using EPA Method 8081A
Other analyses may be required contingent on the source of the import fill or recommendations by the supervising professional. A minimum of one sample for laboratory
analysis is suggested per 1,000 tons of import fill per borrow site (single source). For quantities above 5,000 tons of import fill per borrow site (single source), one sample for laboratory analysis is suggested per 5,000 tons of import fill.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-16 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
HAZ-2: Asbestos -Containing Material Removal. Prior to
issuance of demolition permits, removal of asbestos -containing materials shall be conducted in the buildings at 9301 Stewart and Gray, 9400 Hall Road, 9399 Stewart and Gray Road, and 9333/9363 Stewart and Gray Road. A Licensed State of
California asbestos abatement contractor must remove all known asbestos -containing materials, consistent with
applicable Division of Occupational Safety (Title 8, Industrial Relations, Division 1. Department of Industrial Relations, Chapter 4. Division of Industrial Safety, Subchapter 4.
Construction Safety Orders, Article 4. Dust Fumes, Mists, Vapors, and Gases, Section 1529. Asbestos) and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD; Rule 1403 —Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities) guidelines.
The Licensed State of California asbestos abatement contractor shall provide documentation of removal activities to the City.
HAZ-3: Lead -Based Paint Removal. Prior to issuance of
demolition permits, removal of lead -based paint shall be conducted in the building at 9400 Hall Road. The removal of lead -containing materials shall comply with applicable regulations for demolition methods and dust suppression. Lead containing materials shall be managed in accordance with applicable regulations including, at a minimum, the hazardous waste disposal requirements (CCR Title 22, Division 4.5); and the State Lead Accreditation, Certification and Work Practice Requirements (CCR Title 17, Division 1, Chapter 8). Verification that the specified procedures were followed shall be provided to the City.
4.7-d: The proposed Project is not located
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
on a site that is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-17 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
4.7-f: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response or emergency evacuation plan.
Hydrology and Water Quality
4.8-a: The proposed Project would not
violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or
groundwater quality.
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
4.8-c: The proposed Project would not alter
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
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: result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off -site;
substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or off -site; or 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.
4.8-e: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
conflict with or obstruct implementation of
a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-18 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Land Use and Planni
4.9-b: The proposed Project may conflict Potentially significant See Impact 4.11-2 for Mitigation Measure TR-1 Less than with any land use plan, policy, or regulation significant which would result in a significant land use
and planning impact.
Noise
4.10-a: The proposed Project may result in a Potentially significant N0I-1: Construction Activity Limits. The Project applicant or Significant and temporary or permanent increase in designated contractor shall obtain permits for Project unavoidable ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the construction activities from the City. The City shall ensure all project in excess of established standards. permits contain restrictions to construction hours, and nighttime work requirements described below.
All construction activity with the exception of concrete pouring as specified below shall be prohibited between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday, and at any time on Sundays or on any City recognized public holiday.
Delivery of materials or equipment to the site and construction truck traffic coming to and from the site shall be prohibited during the same hours specified above.
If, due to weather condition (e.g., high temperatures), pouring of concrete at night or on Sundays or on any City recognized public holiday is required, the Project applicant or designated contractor shall provide written notification of nighttime concrete work to all residences located within 300 feet of the Project site. The notification shall:
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-19 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
• Be delivered a minimum of 48 hours prior to
commencement of nighttime work;
• Include the days and hours of upcoming concrete pouring nighttime work;
• Include noise complaint contact information, including phone numbers and email addresses to register noise
complaints with both the construction contractor and the City;
The City and the construction contractor shall log all received noise complaints. The construction contractor shall submit to the City a daily log of all noise complaints received, including the date and time of the complaint and address of the
complainant (if provided).
4.10-b: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
result in the generation of an excessive
ground borne vibration levels.
4.11-a: The proposed Project would not Less than significant No mitigation is required. -- conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or
policy addressing the circulation system
including transit, roadway, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-20 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
4.11-b: The proposed Project may conflict
Potentially significant
TR-1: Transportation Demand Management Plan. The Project Less than
with or be inconsistent with CEQA
Applicant shall prepare a formal Transportation Demand
significant
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b).
Management (TDM) Plan for review and approval by the City prior to the issuance of grading or building permits. The TDM Plan shall identify the TDM measures that will be implemented for the Project and shall include documentation of how both physical measures (e.g., bike lockers, designated carpool parking spaces, etc.) and programmatic measures (e.g.,
guaranteed ride home program, employee transportation
coordinator, etc.) will be provided. The TDM Plan shall be implemented for the life of the Project and shall include, at a minimum, the TDM strategies listed below (TDM Strategies T-7, T-8, and T-10) to reduce significant VMT impacts. If new TDM measures are proposed by the site owner or tenant after City approval of the TDM Plan, a new TDM plan shall be submitted for review and approval and shall include an analysis that demonstrates that the selected measures are expected to achieve the same or greater trip and VMT reductions as
demonstrated by this Project -specific analysis.
• T-7. Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing. The
Project Applicant shall implement a marketing strategy to promote the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR). Information
sharing and marketing educates employees about their
travel choices to and from the location and promotes
alternatives to driving such as carpooling, taking transit, walking, and biking, thereby reducing VMT. Effective
marketing strategies incorporate the following features or similar alternatives:
o On -site or online commuter information services.
o Employee transportation coordinators.
o On -site or online transit pass sales.
o Guaranteed ride home service.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-21 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
The Project Applicant shall provide information on
available travel options to and from the Project site in a clear and easily accessible location (e.g., a bulletin board in a common employee area), including information on
where transit passes may be purchased online or in
person. The Project Applicant shall also designate an
employee transportation coordinator who will be able to provide information and/or administer a guaranteed ride home service. Such services may consist of providing free or subsidized rides upon request via taxis or other
transportation network companies (TNQ such as Uber or
Lyft.
• T-8. Provide Ridesharing Program. The Project Applicant shall implement a ridesharing program. Ridesharing
encourages carpooled vehicle trips in place of single - occupancy vehicle trips, thereby reducing the number of trips and VMT. Ridesharing may be promoted through a
multifaceted approach, such as designating parking spaces for ridesharing/carpooling vehicles, dedicating loading and waiting zones, and coordinating rides. The Project
Applicant shall provide designated parking spaces for
carpool vehicles in a convenient/preferential location, and a designated waiting area for employees participating in ridesharing which is comfortable and convenient. The
Project Applicant should facilitate the process of arranging ridesharing or carpooling matches, either through a
website/app or via the employee transportation
coordinator (refer to TDM measure T-7 above).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-22 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
Mitigation
• T-10. Provide End -of -Trip Bicycle Facilities. The Project Applicant shall provide end -of -trip bicycle facilities such as secure bike parking, showers, and personal lockers.
Providing and maintaining securing bike parking and
related facilities encourages commuting by bicycle,
thereby reducing VMT. The Project Applicant shall provide secure bicycle parking (e.g., bicycle lockers) in an easily accessible, well -lit location. Additionally, the Project Applicant shall provide showers and changing rooms.
4.11-c: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment).
4.11-d: The proposed Project would not
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.
--
result in inadequate emergency access.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-23 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Tribal Cultural Resources
4.12-a: The proposed Project may 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 geologically
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). or 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. In applying
the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the
lead agency shall consider the significance
of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
Potentially significant TCR-1: Retain a Native American Monitor Prior to Commencement of Ground -Disturbing Activities
A) The Project applicant/lead agency shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by the Gabrieleno
Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any "ground -
disturbing activity" for the subject Project at all Project locations (i.e., both on -site and any off -site locations that are included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the Project, such as public improvement work). "Ground -disturbing activity" shall
include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement
removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal,
boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.
B) A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the earlier of the commencement of any ground -disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground - disturbing activity.
Less than
significant
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-24 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
C) The monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the relevant ground -disturbing activities, the type of construction activities performed, locations of ground -disturbing activities, soil types, cultural -related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance to the Tribe.
Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered
TCRs, including but not limited to, Native American
cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places of
significance, etc., (collectively, tribal cultural resources, or "TCR"), as well as any discovered Native American
(ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of
monitor logs will be provided to the Project applicant/lead agency upon written request to the Tribe.
D) On -site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following (1) written confirmation to the Kizh from a designated point of contact for the Project applicant/lead agency that all ground -disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground -disturbing activities on the
Project site or in connection with the Project are
complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the Kizh to the Project applicant/lead agency that no future, planned construction activity and/or
development/construction phase at the Project site
possesses the potential to impact Kizh TCRs.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-25 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
E) Upon discovery of any TCRs, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) and shall not
resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the Kizh monitor and/or Kizh archaeologist. The Kizh will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, in the Tribe's sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe deems
appropriate, including for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes.
TCR-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and
Associated Funerary Objects
A) Native American human remains are defined in PRC
5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.
B) If Native American human remains and/or grave goods
discovered or recognized on the Project site, then all
construction activities shall immediately cease. Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and all ground -disturbing activities shall immediately halt and shall remain halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a
Native American or has reason to believe they are Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission, and
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 shall be followed.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-26 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
C) Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California PRC Section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).
D) Construction activities may resume in other parts of the Project site at a minimum of 200 feet away from
discovered human remains and/or burial goods, if the Kizh determines in its sole discretion that resuming
construction activities at that distance is acceptable and provides the project manager express consent of that
determination (along with any other mitigation measures the Kizh monitor and/or archaeologist deems necessary). (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f).)
E) Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains
and/or burial goods. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin (non-TCR) shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History
Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if
such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, it shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
F) Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-27 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
TCR-3: Procedures for Burials and Funerary Remains
A) As the Most Likely Descendant ("MLD"), the Koo-nas-gna Burial Policy shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term "human remains" encompasses more than human bones.
In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the preparation of the soil for burial, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains.
B) If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the discovery location shall be treated as a
cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created.
C) The prepared soil and cremation soils are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact.
Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably
believed to have been placed with individual human
remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary
objects. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure complete recovery of all
sacred materials.
D) In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the
remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the
excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make
every effort to recommend diverting the Project and
keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the Project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-28 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
Environmental Impacts
Significance Prier to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
E) In the event preservation in place is not possible despite good faith efforts by the Project applicant/developer
and/or landowner, before ground -disturbing activities may resume on the Project site, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the Project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects.
F) Each occurrence of human remains and associated
funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and
objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be
retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the Project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the
landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials
recovered.
G) The Tribe will work closely with the Project's qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated
carefully, ethically, and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be prepared
and shall include (at a minimum) detailed descriptive
notes and sketches. All data recovery data recovery -
related forms of documentation shall be approved in
advance by the Tribe. If any data recovery is performed, once complete, a final report shall be submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does NOT authorize any
scientific study or the utilization of any invasive and/or destructive diagnostics on human remains.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-29 December 2023
Exhibit D
Executive Summary
This page intentionally left blank
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES-30 December 2023
Exhibit D
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The City of Downey (City) is the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required to assess the potential environmental impacts associated with the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project (Project). This EIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA (California Public Resources Code [PRC] §21000 et seq.); State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 14, §15000 et seq.); and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementation of CEQA, as adopted by the City. An EIR is the most comprehensive form of environmental documentation identified in CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, and provides the information needed to assess the environmental consequences of a proposed project to the extent feasible. EIRs are intended to provide an objective, factually supported, full -disclosure analysis of the environmental consequences associated with a project that may have the potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts.
1.1 PURPOSE OF THIS EIR
As explained in State CEQA Guidelines §15121, an EIR is a public informational document used in the planning and decision -making process to inform public agency decision -makers and the public generally of the significant environmental effect of a project, identify possible ways to minimize the significant effects, and describe reasonable alternatives to a project. This EIR analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with Project implementation. The City of Downey Planning Commission and City Council will consider the information in this EIR, including the public comments and staff response to those comments, during the public review and hearing process. As a legislative action, the final decision would be made by the City Council, who may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the Project.
The purpose of an EIR is to identify:
• The significant potential impacts of the Project on the environment and indicate the manner in which those significant impacts can be avoided or mitigated; • Any unavoidable adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated; and • Reasonable and feasible alternatives to the Project that would eliminate any significant adverse environmental impacts or reduce the impacts to a less than significant level.
An EIR also discloses potential growth -inducing impacts; impacts found not to be significant; and significant cumulative impacts of the Project when taken into consideration with past, present, and reasonably anticipated future projects.
CEQA requires an EIR to reflect the Lead Agency's independent judgment. A Draft EIR is circulated to responsible and trustee agencies with resources affected by a project, and to interested agencies, groups, and individuals. Draft EIR reviewers are requested to focus on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing a project's possible environmental impacts and ways in which those might be avoided or mitigated.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 1-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 1.0
Introduction
1.2 TYPE OF EIR
This EIR is being prepared as a Project -level EIR in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines §15161, which states the following:
The most common type of EIR examines the environmental impacts of a specific development project. This type of EIR should focus primarily on the changes in the environment that would result from the development project. The EIR shall examine all phases of the project including planning, construction, and operation.
While State CEQA Guidelines §§15120 to 15132 generally describe the content of an EIR, CEQA does not contain specific, detailed, quantified standards for the content of environmental documents. State CEQA Guidelines §15151 states:
An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision makers with information that enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have not looked for perfection but for adequacy, and a good faith effort at full disclosure.
1.4 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE LEAD AGENCY
The City is the Lead Agency under CEQA for purposes of Project implementation. Public agencies are required to make appropriate findings for each potentially significant environmental impact identified in an EIR if it decides to approve a project. If an EIR identifies significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level through adoption of mitigation measures or alternatives, the Lead Agency (and responsible agencies using this CEQA document for their respective permits or approvals) must decide whether a project's benefits outweigh any identified significant environmental effects that cannot be mitigated to below a threshold of significance. If the agency (Lead Agency or Responsible Agency) decides that the overriding considerations, including Project benefits, outweigh the unavoidable impacts, then the agency is required to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which states the reasons that support its actions.
The Lead Agency's actions involved in Project implementation are described in Chapter 2, Project Description, of this EIR. Other agencies that may have discretionary approval over the Project, or components thereof, including responsible and trustee agencies, are described in Section 2.8.
1.4.1 Notice of Preparation, Scoping, and Opportunities for Public Input CEQA encourages lead agencies to solicit and consider input from other interested agencies, citizen groups, and individual members of the public as early as possible in the EIR process. CEQA also requires a project to be monitored after it has been approved to ensure that mitigation measures are carried out.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 1-2 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 1.0
Introduction
CEQA requires the Lead Agency to provide the public with a full disclosure of the expected environmental consequences of a proposed project and with an opportunity to provide comments.
The City prepared and distributed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) that was available for public review between March 29, 2022 and April 27, 2022. However, due to mailing issues with NOP copies sent to public agencies, the City issued an updated NOP to those recipients on April 25, 2022 and accepted responses through May 25, 2022. Comments received on the NOP have been considered in this EIR, as described further below. The City also hosted an EIR scoping meeting on March 18, 2022, in the Downey City Hall Council Chambers, Downey, California. The scoping meeting is for jurisdictional agencies and interested persons or groups to provide comments regarding, but not limited to, the range of actions, alternatives, mitigation measures, and environmental effects to be analyzed. The meeting was attended by City staff, Project applicant representatives, and consultants; however, no members of the public or jurisdictional agency staff attended the meeting.
Table 1-1, Summary of Written Comments on Notice of Preparation, summarizes the comments received from agencies/persons during the NOP process and provides a reference, as applicable, to the EIR section(s) where the issues are addressed. The NOP and comment letters are provided in Appendix A, Initial Study/Notice of Preparation and NOP Comments, of this EIR.
Table 1-1
SUMMARY OF WRITTEN COMMENTS ON NOTICE OF PREPARATION
Federal Agencies No federal agencies provided comments on the NOP.
State Aaencies
Native American Heritage Commission
(April 14, 2022)
California Department of Transportation
(April 26, 2022)
Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts
(April 22, 2022)
Archaeological and Tribal Cultural Resources
Follow established procedures; contact all tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with geographic area; comply with Assembly Bill (AB) 52 Tribal consultation requirements.
Refer to Section 4.3, Cultural Resources, and Section 4.12, Tribal Cultural Resources
Transportation
Include the following items in transportation analysis:
• Evaluate vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per latest Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) guidance
• Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies
• Alternative transportation
• Construction truck traffic effects on Interstate 105 (1-105) and 1-605
Refer to Section 4.11,
Utilities
Estimate projected wastewater generation compared to
conveyance and treatment capacity of facilities serving the Project site
Refer to Appendix A, Initial Study/Notice of Preparation and NOP Comments
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 1-3 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 1.0
Introduction
South Coast Air Quality Management District
(April 14, 2022)
Organizations
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions
Follow latest guidance documents and utilize current modeling software to evaluate all phases of the Project including construction, operations, mobile sources, health risk, and GHG emissions/climate change. Provides suggested operational mitigation measures to address long-term impacts. Compliance with Rule 2305 — Warehouse Indirect Source Rule — Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE)
Program, and Rule 316 — Fees for Rule 2305.
Refer to Section 4.2, Air Quality, and Section 4.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
General
(SWRCC)
Public Records Act (PRA) request, mailing list request, and (April 26, 2022)
request for notification of subsequent documents and hearings regarding the Project.
Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
Air Quality, GHG Emissions, VMT
(SWRCC)
Use of local skilled labor can reduce air pollutant emissions; (April 27, 2022)
suggestions for analysis of VMT and GHGs provided in attached materials for consideration by the City in preparation of the EIR.
Refer to Section 4.2, Air Quality, Section 4.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Section 4.11, Transportation
Coalition for Responsible Equitable Economic
Hazardous Materials, Air Quality/Health Risk, GHGs, VMT Development (CREED LA)
Use, handling, and transport of hazardous materials should be (April 27, 2022)
evaluated in the EIR; operation of diesel trucks and truck refrigeration units (TRUs) result in health risks to sensitive populations; truck VMT analysis should be included in EIR; mitigation measures and alternatives to address potential impacts must be included in EIR.
Refer to Section 4.2, Air Quality, Section 4.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Section 4.11, Transportation
Coalition for Responsible Equitable Economic
General
Development (CREED LA)
PRA request and request for notification of subsequent
(April 29, 2022)
documents and hearings regarding the Project.
Teamsters Local Union No. 396
Transportation/VMT, Economic Impacts, Air Quality, Energy (April 27, 2022)
EIR should address highest potential VMT generation for potential future tenants of the Project; EIR should consider effects of economic downturn/urban decay, and potential health effects of diesel truck operations for residents near the Project site.
Refer to Section 4.2, Air Quality, Section 4.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Section 4.11, Transportation
Individuals
No individuals provided comments on the NOP.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 1-4 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 1.0
Introduction
1.4.2 Scope of Environmental Analysis
This EIR assesses the potential environmental impacts that could occur with Project implementation.
Potentially significant environmental impacts including issues raised in public comments received in response to the NOP are evaluated in this EIR. The scoping process has determined that the Project could result in significant environmental impacts concerning the following resources, which are addressed in detail in this EIR:
• Aesthetics
• Air Quality
• Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology and Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Noise
• Transportation
• Tribal Cultural Resources
Environmental resource topics that through the scoping process were determined that no further analysis is required are addressed in Chapter 7, Effects Found Not to be Significant.
1.4.3 Report Organization
Pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines §15120(c), this EIR contains the information and analysis required by State CEQA Guidelines §§15122 through 15131. Each of the required elements is covered in one of the EIR chapters and appendices, and the EIR is organized as follows:
• Executive Summary: A summary description of the proposed Project, the alternatives, potential environmental impacts, and recommended mitigation measures. • Chapter 1, Introduction: A discussion of the Project background, purpose, and need, briefly describing the proposed Project, and outlining the public agency use of the EIR. • Chapter 2, Project Description: This chapter identifies the Project location, objectives, and key characteristics and includes a list of anticipated discretionary actions. • Chapter 3, Basis of Cumulative Impacts: This chapter includes a description of the approach to cumulative impacts analysis.
• Chapter 4, Environmental Analysis: A comprehensive analysis and assessment of impacts and mitigation measures for the proposed Project. This chapter is divided into separate sections for each environmental resource area analyzed in detail that includes the environmental setting, regulatory framework, significance criteria and thresholds, methodology and assumptions, Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 1-5 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 1.0
Introduction
impacts and mitigation measures, cumulative impacts, significant unavoidable impacts, and references.
• Chapter 5, Alternatives: This chapter provides a description of the alternatives evaluation process, as well as a description of alternatives considered but eliminated from further analysis and the rationale thereof. This chapter also includes an analysis and assessment of impacts for alternatives retained, including the No Project Alternative and the Environmentally Superior Alternative.
• Chapter 6, Other CEQA Considerations: A discussion of significant unavoidable environmental effects, significant irreversible environmental effects, and growth -inducing effects. • Chapter 7, Effects Found Not to be Significant: A discussion of the issues identified as "no impact" in the Initial Study.
• Chapter 8, List of Preparers: Identifies Lead Agency staff and CEQA consultants that contributed to the preparation of this EIR.
• Appendices: The appendices include the NOP, comments received in response to the NOP and the City's scoping activities, and technical studies prepared for the Project.
1.5 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
Pertinent documents relating to this EIR have been cited in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines §15148 or have been incorporated by reference in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines §15150, which encourage incorporation by reference as a means of reducing redundancy and the length of environmental reports. The following documents are hereby incorporated by reference into this EIR and are available for review at the City of Downey Community Development Department, 11111 Brookshire Avenue, Downey, California 90241. Information contained within these documents has been used for various sections of this EIR.
City of Downey Vision 2025 General Plan. The City of Downey adopted the Vision 2025 General Plan (DGP) in 2005. The General Plan constitutes the City's overall plans, goals, and objectives for land use within the City's jurisdiction. The DGP addresses a broad range of issues relating to the community's physical, economic, and social development. It contains an evaluation of existing conditions and provides the long-term goals and policies necessary to guide growth and development in the direction that the community desires. Through the Goals, Objectives, Policies, and Programs it contains, the DGP serves as a decision -making tool to guide future growth and development decisions. The DGP has the following nine chapters:
• Land Use
• Circulation
• Housing
• Conservation
• Safety
• Noise
• Open Space
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 1-6 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 1.0
Introduction
• Design
• Economic Development
The DGP was used throughout this EIR where it provides information, policies, and regulations relevant to the proposed Project. The DGP is available at: https:JZ www.downeyca.org&ur- cit de artments communit-devek, ment tE: Ueneral- Ian -ma .
City of Downey Vision 2025 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse [SCH] No. 200431159). The DGP EIR analyzed the potential environmental impacts associated with DGP implementation. The DGP EIR was prepared as a programmatic EIR and addresses the scope of a series of actions and approvals that may be considered as one large project, and are related either geographically or as logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions. The DGP EIR estimates the forecast capacity at the City's buildout as 36,915 dwelling units and a population of 121,063 persons.
Buildout was estimated to occur over 20 years. The DGP EIR concluded significant and unavoidable impacts concerning Air Quality, Noise, and Traffic and Circulation (DGP EIR page 2-3). The DGP EIR was used in this EIR as a source of baseline data and cumulative impacts for buildout of the City. The DGP EIR is available at: htt s: www.downe ca.or our-cit de artments communit - develo ment tannin environmental -documents.
City of Downey Municipal Code. The City of Downey Municipal Code (DMC) regulates land use and activities within the City's jurisdiction including, zoning regulations (codified in DMC §9102). DMC Chapters one through eight of Article IX are referred to as The Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Downey (Zoning Ordinance) and is the primary tool for implementing the Downey General Plan's plans, goals, and objectives. The DMC is referenced throughout this EIR to establish the Project's minimum requirements according to DMC regulations. The DMC can be accessed online at:
htt s: librar . code.us lib downs ca ub munici al code.
1.6 AVAILABILITY OF THE DRAFT EIR
The City will file a Notice of Completion (NOC) with the State Clearinghouse, indicating that this Draft EIR has been completed and is available for review and comment. This Draft EIR will be available for review by the public and interested parties, agencies, and organizations for a review period of at least 45 days, as required by California law. During this period, public agencies and members of the public may provide written comments on the Draft EIR analysis and content. To elicit a written response for inclusion within the Final EIR, all comments on this Draft DEIR must be received within the public review period.
Comments should be submitted in writing during the public review period to:
City of Downey
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, CA 90241
Contact: Mr. Alfonso Hernandez
(562) 904-7154
[email protected]
Pursuant to state law (PRC §21091(d)(3)), the City will accept email comments in lieu of mailed or hand - delivered comments; however, reviewers are encouraged to follow up any email comments with letters.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 1-7 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 1.0
Introduction
In reviewing a Draft EIR, readers should focus on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing the possible impacts on the environment and on ways in which the significant effects of the Project might be avoided or mitigated. There will be a public hearing before the Planning Commission during the 45-day public review and comment period for this Draft EIR to solicit comments on the adequacy and accuracy of information presented in this Draft EIR.
The Draft EIR and the full administrative record for the Project, including all studies, is available for review during normal business hours Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., at the City of Downey Community Development Department, located at 11111 Brookshire Avenue. Additionally, copies of the Draft EIR and technical appendices are available at the reference desk of the following city offices, libraries, and on the City's website.
City Hall — 11111 Brookshire Avenue, Downey, CA 90241
Columbia Space Center —12400 Columbia Way, Downey, CA 90242 City Library — 11121 Brookshire Ave #586, Downey, CA 90241 Barbara J. Riley Center — 7810 Quill Dr, Downey, CA 90242 The Draft EIR and technical appendices can also be accessed at the City's website: b1tps.J Jwww,down_eyca,org/our-
nvironmental-documents
The City will subsequently respond to each comment on the sufficiency of the analysis contained in the Draft EIR received in writing during the public review period through a Responses to Comments document for the Final EIR. All persons who commented on the Draft EIR will also be notified of the availability of the Final EIR and the date of public hearings before the City of Downey.
1.7 FINAL EIR PROCESS
Following the close of the Draft EIR public review and comment period, a Final EIR will be prepared to respond to all substantive comments related to environmental issues surrounding the content of the Draft EIR. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines §15088.5(f)(2), the City will request that reviewers limit their comments to the content of the Draft EIR and will respond to all comments related to the disposition of environmental effects made during the Draft EIR public review period. The Final EIR will be available prior to Planning Commission and City Council public hearings to consider this Draft EIR along with the actions within the City's review and discretion to approve; see Chapter 2, Project Description, of this EIR.
The City is expected to hold public hearings on the Final EIR in early 2024. All interested parties are invited to attend the public hearings to provide either verbal or written comments on the Final EIR. The time and location of the public hearings will be noticed in accordance with applicable noticing requirements and procedures.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 1-8 December 2023
Exhibit D
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of the Project Description is to describe the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project (Project) to allow for meaningful review by reviewing agencies, decision -makers, and interested parties. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §15124 (14 California Code of Regulations §15124) requires that an environmental impact report's (EIR) project description contain (1) the precise location and boundaries of a project site; (2) a statement of objectives sought by a project including the underlying purpose of the project; (3) a general description of a project's characteristics; and (4) a statement briefly describing the intended uses of the EIR, including a list of the agencies that are expected to use the EIR in their decision making, a list of the permits and other approvals required to implement the project, and a list of related environmental review and consultation requirements required by federal, state, or local laws, regulations, or policies. An adequate project description need not be exhaustive but should supply the detail necessary for project evaluation under CEQA.
2.2 PROJECT LOCATION
The approximately 29.16-acre Project site is located in the southeastern portion of the City of Downey (City) in the southern portion of Los Angeles County (County). Figure 2-1, Regional Location, depicts the Project site in a regional context. The Project site is located approximately ten miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and nine miles northwest of the County of Orange. Regional access is provided via the following freeways: the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5 [1-5]), the San Gabriel Freeway (1-605), the Century Freeway (1-105), and the Long Beach Freeway (1-710). The Union Pacific Railroad corridor is located adjacent to the site on the north. The San Gabriel River is located approximately 0.5 mile to the west.
Figure 2-2, Aerial Photograph, depicts the Project site and surrounding uses in a local context. The Project site is bounded by Hall Road on the north, Woodruff Road on the east, Stewart and Gray Road on the south, and an industrial building on the west. The site is comprised of Assessor Parcel Numbers 6284-019-013 through 017. Primary vehicular access to the Project site is provided by Stewart and Gray Road and Hall Road.
2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15125, the existing conditions described in this section as of the date of the Notice of Preparation (March 25, 2022) constitute the baseline conditions against which environmental impacts are analyzed in this EIR. It is noted that at that particular date (March 25, 2022), the site was fully occupied and operational by industrial use tenants; however, the tenants have since vacated the buildings and ceased operations at the request of the property owner (Project applicant) in anticipation of implementing the proposed Project. If the Project is not approved, new ground leases would be executed, and industrial operations would resume.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 2-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 2.0
Project Description
2.3.1 Existing On -site and Surrounding Uses
The Project site is currently completely developed with existing industrial uses comprised of four primary structures (two large and two small), associated parking areas, storage yards, and canopy areas.
The two larger structures are each divided into two portions (A and B), creating separate but connected buildings. The existing structures were built between about 1952 and 1973. Figure 2-3, Existing Land Uses, illustrates the existing land uses currently occupying the Project site.
The Project site currently has four driveway entrances off Stewart and Gray Road and three driveway entrances off Hall Road that lead to private internal roads, which provide vehicular access around the separate buildings. These internal roads and paved areas provide parking for employees, parking for trailers and containers, recycling equipment and storage of heavy operation equipment. The Project site is surrounded by the following land uses:
• North: Hall Road and Union Pacific Railroad corridor, beyond which are commercial and industrial uses.
• South: Steward and Gray Road, beyond which are industrial and public utility uses; multi -family and single-family residential uses are located further to the southwest. • East: Adjacent commercial and industrial uses, Woodruff Avenue, additional commercial and industrial uses further east; multi -family residential uses are located further to the northeast beyond the rail corridor.
• West: Industrial uses, beyond which are single-family and multi -family residential uses.
Site elevations range from approximately 107 to 112 feet above mean sea level. Site topography is generally flat with a slight downward slope to the south.
2.3.2 Existing Land Use Designations and Zoning
The existing land use designations on the Project site and surrounding area are shown in Figure 2-4, Project Site Land Use Designations, while Figure 2-5, Project Site Zoning Designations, depicts the existing Project site and surrounding zoning. The Project site has a General Plan Land Use Designation of GM (General Manufacturing) and is currently zoned M-2 (General Manufacturing Zone). The Project site is bordered by industrial designated and zoned properties to the east, west, south, and northwest.
Properties designated Specific Plan and zoned for commercial uses occur to the north. Designated and zoned residential uses are present further to the west, northwest, southwest, and northeast but are buffered by other industrial sites bordering the Project site.
2.3.3 Existing Environmental Conditions
Due to the historic use of the Project site for manufacturing activities and associated use of hazardous materials in various manufacturing processes, the soil and groundwater beneath the site have been exposed to various constituents that are now the subject of a voluntary cleanup effort by the property owner. More specifically, extensive sampling conducted at the Project site indicated the presence of various constituents in each of these media, including volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in soil vapor; Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 2-2 December 2023
Exhibit D
HELIX
Environmental Planning
Regional Location
Figure 2-1
Exhibit D
Prologis Stewart & Gray Road Warehouse Project
0 300 Feet
HELIXEnvironmental Planning
Source: Aerial (Maxar, 2020)
Aerial Photograph
Figure 2-2
Exhibit D
s Stewart & uraV Koaa warenouse
(EXISTING) SITE PLAN
NORTH
HELIX
Environmental Planning
Source: Heger Industrial, 2022
Exhibit D
s Stewart & Grav Road Warehouse
MY1A1111_��
OEM
"
F
i f
1f t
-�
��
t { 4t
IFf b .3 {t d
1♦�
.tF �„
} 4 f
t
•
�
z
• "
3a'YM1 roM1Ck t ��
•
�
•
' n
®w..
•f•
��
®®L
®®
IBI®
®®
111/11111
11111111 1
11111 ®®
®s
®
.
1 111111E
11111 11111
1/111111 1/
®'�
®E T _
HELIX Pr *ect Site Land Use Designations
Environmental Planning 01
Figure 2-4
Exhibit D
HELIX
Environmental Planning
Source: City of Downey, 2022
1��
Exhibit D
Section 2.0
Project Description
VOCs, organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), metals in soil; and VOCs in groundwater. In order to address these conditions, the property owner is currently in the process of remediating the existing contamination in cooperation with the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) through operation of an on -site soil vapor extraction (SVE) system. The SVE system is intended to remove those constituents that exceed allowable concentration limits to allow for future redevelopment of the property. Monitoring of soil vapor and groundwater conditions on -site is ongoing with oversight by the RWQCB, and quarterly monitoring reports are submitted to the RWQCB for review to track the progress of the remediation effort. A more detailed discussion of existing hazardous materials conditions is provided in Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this EIR.
2.4 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines §15124(b), the EIR project description must include a statement of objectives sought by the proposed project. The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the project. The fundamental purpose and goal of the Project is to accomplish the orderly development of an appropriately zoned and designated warehouse building in the City while also contributing to increased employment opportunities within the area. The Project objectives have been refined throughout the planning and design process for the proposed Project and are listed below:
• Create a professional, well -maintained, and attractive environment for the development of a warehouse building consistent with the underlying zoning adjacent to nearby transportation infrastructure.
• Expand economic development, attract new businesses, and provide employment opportunities in the City of Downey.
• Increase the industrial base in the City of Downey by providing a Class A industrial facility that meets industry standards for operational design and can accommodate a wide variety of industrial uses.
• Facilitate a project that provides goods for the regional economy. • Design the facility for energy efficiency and sustainability. • Encourage warehouse development as attractive and productive uses while minimizing conflicts to the extent possible with the surrounding existing uses. • Encourage new warehouse distribution services that take advantage of the area's close proximity to various freeways and transportation corridors to reduce traffic congestion on surface streets and to reduce concomitant air pollution emission from vehicle sources. • Encourage new development consistent with the capacity and municipal service capabilities.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 2-3 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 2.0
Project Description
2.5 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
2.5.1 Proposed Land Uses and Operations
The proposed Project would include the demolition of the existing buildings totaling approximately 433,000 square feet (SF) and the construction of an approximately 535,685-SF industrial concrete tilt -up building for warehouse/logistics uses (see Figure 2-6, Project Site Pion). The Project would include 683 automobile parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container parking spaces, and 109 dock loading doors. The new industrial building would be used for logistics and distribution purposes, and specifically as a fulfillment center and for cold storage. Approximately 95 percent of the warehouse (508,900 SF) would be high cube fulfillment and the remaining 5 percent (26,785 SF) would be for cold storage (i.e., refrigerated warehouse space). The facility would also include 20,000 SF of office area and 25,000 SF of mezzanine area within the 535,685-SF building. On -site activities would include storage, distribution, and/or consolidation of manufactured goods, and last -mile fulfillment and delivery; and general industrial/warehouse with refrigeration and cold storage component for the purposes of receiving, storing, shipping of food and/or beverage products. The office space would be used for office uses ancillary to the warehouse operations. The proposed facility would operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
2.5.2 Design and Architecture
The building would include concrete tilt up panels on all sides of the building (see Figures 2-7a and 2-7b, Building Elevations). The southeast, southwest, and northwest sides of the building would be the entrance to the office component and would include glazed windows, metal and wood side paneling, metal canopies at select locations, enhanced exterior building materials and building modulation.
Exterior and interior glazing would be tempered with vision glass and spandrel glass at the main entryways and around the perimeter of the building.
The proposed building would be up to 55 feet tall with a rectilinear form. Roof lines on each side would generally be uniformly linear but each elevation would be modular such that every 50 to 60 feet of the facade would have varied design elements of material, color, and pattern to provide articulation.
Mechanical equipment (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning units) would be placed on the rooftops and screened by parapet walls incorporated into the design of the building. Proposed color schemes would be predominantly gray and white, with browns and silvers associated with wood and metal siding, and blue glazing on the windows. The proposed building height would be higher than the maximum building height of 45 feet allowed by the development regulations of the underlying M-2 zone and thus would require a variance.
In addition, the Project would include landscaping totaling 10.5 percent of the site area, and a perimeter screen wall. Ornamental landscaping would be provided along the Stewart and Gray Road and Hall Road frontages, as well as at the building entrances and within parking areas.
2.5.3 Utility Improvements
Existing wet and dry utilities are currently provided to the site via connections to facilities within Hall Road and Stewart and Gray Road. The Project would connect to the existing utility lines for domestic water, sanitary sewer, electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications service.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 2-4 December 2023
Exhibit D
s Stewart & uraV Koaci warenouse
------ OVERALL SITE PLAN!
.�A)7
-� o
HELIX
Environmental Planning
Source: HPA Architecture 2023
M73=6
Exhibit D
vrowis Stewart & urav Koaa warenouse
—CI— -1111 U� —EL —D�,V, I`ETIA"�1E1 C'
O
A, I I. I ' - -11111111111— —1 � AN I A
"AA_., IIIAN I
IAI 1IT TI 111111 T— TI 1111A�nIAIIIIE IAI AII I. IAVE A IXI.I.0 .11 A I III TI ATIII 1IIA111' -1 1111111 ll I OOVF�,IIFAD,�,�O,��,kDQKpl""�FC�'D DI 5111-111 I-VDI O
—1-1 ITAIR I —INIAII —=N1A`1�1FAT'2Z'F 11-11AA
Ion
I T�
IA
(A 1, A III, 'TA, I A . I I I IV=- �`II`T-
0 D ...... 11 1 A—W - 11 ll l-I �1 All
ID 11.R 1, "Al"I I 1111, 111 11 Ll All' , I 1111-1111 TIIII I—L 1-1111- son 101A IT coIII 011I Cl� —Al - -
HELIX
Environmental Planning
I AII 'Al I III Al —1— T—IIIII
11�1 .1AI i ITI 1=1 I, V11TI1,LL,1A
FLIVAT
I, II11QII C-111-101 G1A$�,.1,,AA1,A=I1
Al P"IP11'I
IIIIIIIAC101 I
-11 "111 All
I II-1,11L 01 IAIIII A rl IIAVL 1110
'101111L I- IIAII 11,1 1111 COIAI,�11
11 —I.—PI.—ANISEIVIIE
GLAZING LEGEND
I 1-II, —I-1 IATIA
I. IIL—SL
I _I III
Il 11 l TAI IAT -N
—CIII 11-1 1 8FI
I IPIA— —111 PA-1—
� I I IN1,111 ANI IL
-I I
I_l I— E P-TE, I.
—E AIL EXI E11— ANI 1�1 I —I III—
M/M I —LA 1I -- ll—1
IALI �l 11--
M
1--J' AM�u'.LLTA�sl
'� ', IIANIIIIIII.
ELEVATION
01111—A-11 F—T —1
1-1-1-1AL
IA�11 -1, A'.
2 �1� ... 1
Source: HPA Architecture, Inc., 2022
2 =*14 1=
wlm��
Exhibit D
vrowis Stewart & urav Koaa warenouse vroiect
6 (10L,
I- -, "
KEYNOTES - ELEVATIONS
0 CO I OIL TO IIIC 1, 111 A C1,11 111 11 — T
ALI I � I,
AE—R—ILDULA LTIO-E A1.11—
nE
II.—FIA-FLA11-11 � 11TIL11-11—AIL ".1 IF"I"11 1".1 111101"A IF FT'AA I, F " FAOLIEF "A L,L_A"" E"L'21' 11- M
.......... A,-1-11 1TA1- EOILI LA111ILO III 111 —1-0 LAA—T ALL 1111ILIAI 1�=1—F1IT1I1—FL,,A 1) IIEA � I L11 A—I'l 11TI1 I to III ILAOA OT 1-111 OVIII E-I 111L gIAFIAI -ILI,
GENERAL NOTES - ELEVATION
I A Ol ALT -I AIIIAM A.- L LTI 111I L1- 0 IET F 0
ALO' I" "IT 101' 11 IAI A I LT L�l 'LITI 'O�L ... — Ell . I.TAI-1 VAT —
"I , T1111111 —11 TIES ATAI I AU—T FLFI OFAIII—A IFIAA I. LITAI I AT "' I F-TIAOT.LL ALAIL OTTLI 'Al- — ALL —All IAIIL � SELFIT. A0LQL$ AIIAII IIC I ALI —1 $-1 1 11-011 1-11 TI I'Ll, III,G I 8AAEFTFL OF TAL—TO 10 1111 �IIOTLT. F-IL 0 K 1AII . ITIL I I.—ILELELFLA11— OF
-FAAT I. E
I I Al 10-1 T1 1-11 -0 —VI11 A-1 TO IT PAILTEI TO AAIL'�_ __
GLAZING LEGEND
—E ALL EXTALI.A — 1� IELAOF OIA11— ALI K TE.PEEED
ASILI I LA VS— A-AA1 O1L`L1Zr1`6A1—
SIA-1 ALAOI
I COMM 2:4 a SLYI-11 9 M B
ENLARGED SOUTH ELEVATION /
COLOR SCHEDULE -ELEVATIONS
FLFA—
F—] (E) --T— Ll' 'ALII P-T EAAIA
— Ll— —I
0 F—AITI III I I- PINEI I I �RATI) A -I FILLF11
0 —1AITE III I I- FINO IAII 1 —111
1171
F.A1AIII L I ILI I- I'ALAL PAEL— ILT IAO
I.L.
(D "A'A C.LOL- IFIE—
o"FIAT —A
woousor,u. coLo uEa cFnn uonao
-
Mr�A) 111TAI IA-1
uRnouNocan
Source: HPA Architecture, Inc., 2022
HELIX Pr ject Elevations
Environmental Planning 01 Figure 2-7b
Exhibit D
Section 2.0
Project Description
Proposed stormwater improvements include construction of two on -site drainage management areas (DMAs) graded for the site. Infiltration was determined to be infeasible for the Project due to contaminated soils on -site. The runoff from the DMAs would be collected via surface runoff into a series of drop inlets that would route to an underground detention vault for treatment. DMA 1 would cover roughly half (14.5 acres) of the western portion of the site and DMA 2 would encompass roughly half (14.66 acres) of the eastern portion of the site. Runoff would sheet flow into one of the drop inlets onsite and would be transported southerly into the associated DMA detention chamber and treatment unit located in the southern portion of the parking lot. The treated flow would be pumped off -site to spill to grade at the driveway, which would mimic the existing drainage pattern.
2.5.4 Sustainability Features
The Project would include a number of features designed to reduce the Project's overall environmental footprint. One such feature is the inclusion of charging capacity for electric vehicles (EVs). The parking areas onsite would have pre -installed conduit for EV charging of 50 percent of the total vehicle parking spaces. EV charging equipment would be installed and commissioned for 10 percent of the EV-capable parking spaces on the site (5 percent of total parking spaces). In addition, conduit would be installed for 15 truck stalls, allowing for future use by EV trucks.
The Project would include infrastructure for solar power to reduce energy demands. The warehouse building would include a solar -ready roof structure, with an 80 mil Thermoplastic Polyolefin Cool Roof and 5 pounds per square foot on roof structure to accommodate solar loads. Solar panels would be installed with a capability to generate a minimum of 3.13 watts per square foot of office space. In addition, advanced electrical metering would be installed to monitor customer usage and help provide feedback to the future tenant.
Drought tolerant landscaping would be installed within the Project site to reduce water demands. Cross laminated timber would be used to construct the office mezzanine structure to help the Project meet carbon reduction goals. Furthermore, the Project would be designed to meet the standards of LEED Silver Certification.
2.6 CIRCULATION, ACCESS, AND PARKING
The Project site would be accessible via five driveways: two on Stewart and Gray Road and three on Hall Road. The vehicular access driveways on Hall Road would provide full access (left- and right -turning inbound and outbound movements) for automobiles. The Stewart and Gray Road Project driveways would accommodate full access for both passenger vehicles and trucks. The access driveways would be 40 to 45 feet wide. A series of 26-foot-wide access roads would be provided throughout the Project site to allow for internal circulation and unobstructed emergency vehicle access.
While trucks approaching and leaving the Project site have numerous options for accessing regional transportation facilities (freeways) in the area, trucks would utilize the City's designated truck routes for access. The designated truck routes in the area include Stewart and Gray Road, which connects to both Woodruff Avenue and Firestone Boulevard to the east, both of which are also designated truck routes.
Firestone Boulevard provides direct access to 1-605 east of the Project site. Other designated truck routes include Bellflower Boulevard and Lakewood Boulevard to the west of the Project site.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 2-5 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 2.0
Project Description
Lakewood Boulevard provides direct access to 1-105 to the south of the Project site and to 1-5 to the north of the Project site.
The Project would include surface parking areas paved with asphalt concrete surrounding the proposed warehouse building to accommodate automobiles and trucks. A total of 683 automobile spaces would be provided, including a combination of standard automobile spaces (9 feet by 20 feet), accessible van spaces (12 feet by 20 feet), Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant spaces (9 feet by 20 feet), clean air, and electric vehicle spaces. In addition, 255 stalls for trucks with trailers (12 feet by 55 feet) would be provided. The Project would also include new sidewalks, curbs and gutters, and landscaping within the right-of-way of Hall Road and Stewart and Gray Road along the Project's roadway frontage.
2.7 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
Construction of the Project is anticipated to begin in spring 2024 and would involve demolition/site preparation and removal of all existing on -site structures, paving, and other improvements, which would occur for approximately four months. Following demolition/site preparation, grading and installation of utilities would continue for approximately two months. Building construction would then begin in early summer 2024 and continue for approximately 11 months, followed by paving, with completion of the construction activities anticipated in summer 2025.
Some nighttime construction activities are proposed, including concrete pours for the proposed buildings. Proposed nighttime construction work would occur approximately 40 nights over the course of the 11-month construction period. Building slabs would be poured over an approximately 12-day consecutive period that would begin at 12:00 a.m. with pouring completed by mid -morning and concrete finishing work continuing into the afternoon. Other concrete work for the building walls and frontage improvements would occur over an estimated 28 nights but not all consecutively. Nighttime construction would require a Temporary Use Permit from the City.
Demolition and site preparation would include the removal of the existing structures on the site totaling approximately 433,000 SF. Approximately 75,000 cubic yards (CY) of soil would be exported from the site during grading.
2.8 NECESSARY APPROVALS
The City of Downey will be responsible for Final EIR certification, as set forth in State CEQA Guidelines §15090 based on the standards of adequacy for an EIR (State CEQA Guidelines §15151). Final EIR certification would occur concurrent with consideration of the following discretionary actions by the City:
• Site Plan Review
• Conditional Use Permit
• Variance of Standards (for building height)
• Lot Merger
• Demolition Permit
• Grading Permit
• Building Permit
• Temporary Use of Land Permit (for nighttime construction) Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 2-6 December 2023
Exhibit D
3.0 BASIS FOR CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
State CEQA Guidelines §15355 provides the following definition of cumulative impacts:
Cumulative impacts refer to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. a. The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects.
b. The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time.
State CEQA Guidelines §15130(a) further addresses the discussion of cumulative impacts, as follows:
An EIR shall discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project's incremental effect is cumulatively considerable, as defined in section 15065 (a)(3). Where a lead agency is examining a project with an incremental effect that is not "cumulatively considerable," a lead agency need not consider that effect significant, but shall briefly describe its basis for concluding that the incremental effect is not cumulatively considerable.
As defined in Section 15355, a cumulative impact consists of an impact which is created as a result of the combination of the project evaluated in the EIR together with other projects causing related impacts. An EIR should not discuss impacts which do not result in part from the project evaluated in the EIR.
When the combined cumulative impact associated with the project's incremental effect and the effects of other projects is not significant, the EIR shall briefly indicate why the cumulative impact is not significant and is not discussed in further detail in the EIR. A lead agency shall identify facts and analysis supporting the lead agency's conclusion that the cumulative impact is less than significant.
An EIR may determine that a project's contribution to a significant cumulative impact will be rendered less than cumulatively considerable and thus is not significant. A project's contribution is less than cumulatively considerable if the project is required to implement or fund its fair share of a mitigation measure or measures designed to alleviate the cumulative impact. The lead agency shall identify facts and analysis supporting its conclusion that the contribution will be rendered less than cumulatively considerable.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 3-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 3.0
Basis for Cumulative Analysis
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines §15130(b), the discussion of cumulative impacts shall be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness, and should include the following elements:
A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the Agency, or A summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional, or statewide plan, or related planning document, which describes or evaluates conditions contributing to the cumulative effect. Such plans may include: a general plan, regional transportation plan, or plans for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. A summary of projections may also be contained in an adopted or certified prior environmental document for such a plan. Such projects may be supplemented with additional information such as a regional modeling program. Any such document shall be referenced and made available to the public at a location specified by the lead agency.
When utilizing a list, as suggested in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), factors to consider when determining whether to include a related project should include the nature of each environmental resource being examined, the location of the project and its type. Location may be important, for example, when water quality impacts are at issue since projects outside the watershed would probably not contribute to a cumulative effect. Project type may be important, for example, when the impact is specialized, such as a particular air pollutant or mode of traffic.
Lead agencies should define the geographic scope of the area affected by the cumulative effect and provide a reasonable explanation for the geographic limitation used.
4. A summary of the expected environmental effects to be produced by those projects with specific reference to additional information stating where that information is available.
5. A reasonable analysis of the cumulative impacts of the relevant projects, including examination of reasonable, feasible options for mitigating or avoiding the project's contribution to any significant cumulative effects.
To determine the Project's potential cumulative impacts, this EIR uses a list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts (see Section 3.2, Cumulative Projects, below). The cumulative impacts analyses are provided in Sections 4.1 through 4.12 of this EIR. These analyses describe the potential environmental changes to the existing physical conditions that may occur as a result of the proposed Project together with past, present, and probable future projects within its vicinity.
3.2 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS
The related projects and other possible development in the area determined as having the potential to interact with the proposed Project, to the extent that a significant cumulative effect may occur, are outlined in Table 3-1, List of Related Projects, and depicted in Figure 3-1, Related Project Locations.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 3-2 December 2023
Exhibit D
0 1,500 Feet Source: Aerial (Maxar, 2020)
HELIX Related Project locations
Environmental Planning
Figure 3-1
Exhibit D
Section 3.0
Basis for Cumulative Analysis
As indicated in the table, the cumulative projects involve approximately 109 dwelling units (DU) and approximately 69,464 square feet (SF) of non-residential land uses.
The cumulative projects list provided in the table and shown in the figure includes development projects that are planned or currently in various stages of development within approximately 1.5 miles of the proposed Project. The list was derived as follows:
• City of Downey (seven projects): Project data provided by the City; and • City of Norwalk (three projects): City of Norwalk environmental documents for projects in that jurisdiction, which was the most comprehensive published information available, as of this writing.
The geographic areas, and hence the cumulative projects, considered for the cumulative impact analyses vary according to environmental issue area and were determined based upon the Project's scope and the anticipated area in which the Project could contribute to an incremental increase in cumulatively considerable impacts (as discussed in Section 4.1 through Section 4.12). Implementation of each related project identified below in Table 3-1, List of Related Projects, was determined to be reasonably foreseeable by the City of Downey. In addition, the cumulative projects could result in a similar range of impacts as the proposed Project, because most represent infill development projects within urbanized areas.
Table 3-1
LIST OF RELATED PROJECTS
City of Downey
D1
Warehouse
12120 Woodruff Avenue
-
20,000 GSF
Under
Construction
D2
Senior Housing
12850 Woodruff Avenue
62 DU
-
Proposed
D3
Multifamily Housing
10361 Foster Road
47 DU
-
Proposed
D4
Manufacturing
9644 Washburn Road
-
14,000 GSF
Proposed
D5
Surface Parking
10001 Apollo Way
-
-
Proposed
D6
Shake Shack
8300 Firestone Boulevard
-
4,557 GSF
Proposed
D7
Space Center
12400 Columbia Way
20,000 GSF
Proposed
City of Norwalk
N1
Costco Fuel Facility
12450 Hoxie Avenue
-
10,907 GSF
Proposed
Remodel
N2
1-605 Corridor
1-605 Freeway between
-
-
Proposed
Improvement Project
Ramona Boulevard and
Rosecrans Avenue
N3
Norwalk Bicycle Master
Citywide
-
-
Approved
Plan
Total
109 DU
69,464 GSF
Source: City of Downey, Community Development Department, and the City of Norwalk, Economic Development Program.
GSF = gross square feet; DU = dwelling unit; Rooms = hotel rooms Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 3-3 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 3.0
Basis for Cumulative Analysis
This page intentionally left blank
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 3-4 December 2023
Exhibit D
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
This chapter analyzes the potential environmental impacts that may occur as a result of implementation of the proposed Project. The environmental resource areas analyzed in the following sections include those where potentially significant impacts could occur as a result of the proposed Project, as determined by the City based on the Initial Study and Notice Preparation (see Appendix A of this EIR).
There are 12 environmental issues addressed in the following sections. A brief discussion of additional impacts that were determined not to be potentially significant is included in Chapter 7, Effects Found Not to be Significant, of this EIR. The environmental topics addressed in this chapter include the following:
• 4.1: Aesthetics
• 4.2: Air Quality
• 4.3: Cultural Resources
• 4.4: Energy
• 4.5: Geology and Soils
• 4.6: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• 4.7: Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• 4.8: Hydrology and Water Quality
• 4.9: Land Use and Planning
• 4.10: Noise
• 4.11: Transportation
• 4.12: Tribal Cultural Resources
Based on the Project Initial Study (refer to Appendix A of this EIR) and existing conditions within the Project site and surrounding area, it was determined that the Project would result in less than significant or no impacts associated with the following environmental issue areas:
• Agriculture and Forestry Resources
• Biological Resources
• Mineral Resources
• Population and Housing
• Public Services and Recreation
• Utilities and Service Systems
• Wildfire
These issue areas are not evaluated in detail in this chapter but are addressed in Chapter 7, Effects Found Not to be Significant, of this EIR.
Each potentially significant environmental issue area analyzed in detail in this EIR is addressed in a separate EIR section (4.1 through 4.12) in this chapter and is organized into the following subsections:
• Introduction
• Environmental Setting
• Regulatory Framework
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
• Significance Criteria and Thresholds
• Methodology and Assumptions
• Impacts and Mitigation Measures
• Cumulative Impacts
• Significant Unavoidable Impacts
• References
Section 4.0
Environmental Analysis
Introduction discusses the section's intent and purpose, identifies the primary sources of data used in the analysis, and summarizes the issues raised during the public scoping period.
Environmental Setting describes the physical conditions that exist at the time the Notice of Preparation was released, and that may influence or affect the issue being analyzed.
Regulatory Framework lists and discusses the laws, ordinances, regulations, and standards applicable to the Project.
Significance Criteria and Thresholds provides the thresholds that are the basis of conclusions of significance, which are primarily the criteria in State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G (California Code of Regulations, §§15000—15387). The primary sources used in identifying the criteria include the State CEQA Guidelines; local, state, federal, or other standards applicable to an impact category; and officially established significance thresholds. "...An ironclad definition of significant effect is not possible because the significance of any activity may vary with the setting" (State CEQA Guidelines §15064[b]). Further, "...a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within an area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic and aesthetic significance" constitutes a significant impact (State CEQA Guidelines §15382).
Methodology and Assumptions outlines the specific analytical methods and practices utilized in evaluating potential environmental effects, as well as assumptions used in the analysis.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures describes potential environmental changes to the existing physical conditions that may occur if the Project is implemented. Evidence, based on factual and scientific data, is presented to show the cause -and -effect relationship between the Project and the potential environmental changes. The magnitude, duration, extent, frequency, range, or other parameters of a potential impact are ascertained, to the extent possible, to determine whether impacts may be significant; all of the potential direct and reasonably foreseeable indirect effects are considered.
Impacts analyzed under CEQA must be related to a physical change. Impacts are:
• Direct or primary impacts that would be caused by a proposed project and would occur at the same time and place; or
Indirect or secondary impacts that would be caused by a proposed project and would be later in time or farther removed in distance but would still be reasonably foreseeable. Indirect or secondary impacts may include growth -inducing impacts and other effects related to induced changes in the pattern of land use; population density or growth rate; and related effects on air and water and other natural systems.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4-2 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.0
Environmental Analysis
• The California Supreme Court ruled that the environment's impact on a project fall outside the scope of CEQA except to the extent that impacts from a project exacerbate such impacts. This EIR includes the environment's impacts on a project for informational purposes, and to address the exacerbation component of the Court's decision.
"Significant impact on the environment" means a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions in the area affected by a proposed project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. An economic or social change by itself is not considered a significant impact on the environment. A social or economic change related to a physical change may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significant (State CEQA Guidelines §15382).
This EIR uses terms in accordance with CEQA to describe the level of significance of environmental impacts. These terms are defined as follows:
• No Impact. The Project would not have any measurable impact on the environment. • Less than Significant Impact. An impact that is adverse but that does not exceed the defined thresholds of significance. Less than significant impacts do not require mitigation. • Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. An impact that exceeds the defined thresholds of significance and would or could cause a substantial adverse change in the environment. Mitigation measures are recommended to prevent the impact, eliminate the impact, or reduce it to a level that is considered less than significant. • Significant and Unavoidable. An impact that exceeds the defined thresholds of significance and cannot be eliminated or reduced to a less than significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures.
To approve a project with unavoidable significant impacts, the lead agency must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations. In adopting such a statement, the lead agency is required to balance the benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the project. If a project's benefits are found to outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse effects may be considered "acceptable" (State CEQA Guidelines §15093(a)).
Cumulative Impacts evaluates potential cumulative impacts associated with Project implementation. "Cumulative Impacts," as defined by State CEQA Guidelines §15355, are two or more individual impacts that, when considered together, are considerable or that compound or increase other environmental impacts. Cumulative impacts may also occur as a result of the Project together with all other reasonably foreseeable, planned, and approved future projects producing related or cumulative impacts. The following statements also apply when considering cumulative impacts:
• The individual impacts may be changes resulting from a single project or separate projects. • The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over time.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4-3 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.0
Environmental Analysis
Significant Unavoidable Impacts identifies if any of the identified Project impacts would be significant and unavoidable, as defined above.
References lists Project -specific technical reports and other sources of information used in the environmental analysis.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4-4 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.1
Aesthetics
4.1 AESTHETICS
4.1.1 Introduction
This section describes the aesthetic and other visual resources present on the Project site and its surroundings and evaluates whether the proposed Project would adversely impact such resources.
Aesthetic and other visual resources include both the natural and built environments. The information presented in this section was obtained from available public resources including the Downey General Plan (DGP) and Downey Municipal Code (DMC).
4.1.1.1 Visual Resource Terminology and Concepts
When viewing the same landscape, people may have different responses to that landscape and any proposed visual changes, based upon their values, familiarity, concern, or expectations for that landscape and its scenic quality. Since each person's attachment to and value for a particular landscape is unique, visual changes to that landscape inherently affect viewers differently. However, generalizations can be made about viewer sensitivity to scenic quality and visual changes. Recreational users (e.g., hikers, equestrians, tourists, and people driving for pleasure) are expected to have high concern for scenery and landscape character. People who are commuting daily through the same landscape generally have a moderate concern for scenery, while people working in industrial areas generally have a lower concern for scenic quality or changes to existing landscape character. The visual sensitivity of a landscape is affected by the viewing distances at which it is seen, such as close-up or far away. The visual sensitivity of a landscape also is affected by the travel speed at which a person is viewing the landscape (high speeds on a highway, low speeds on a hiking trail, or stationary at a residence).
The same feature of a project can be perceived differently by people depending on the distance between the observer and the viewed object. When a viewer is closer to a viewed object in the landscape, more detail can be seen, and there is greater potential influence of the object on visual quality because of its form or scale (relative size of the object in relation to the viewer). When the same object is viewed at background distances, details may be imperceptible but overall forms of terrain and vegetation are evident, and the horizon and skyline are dominant. In the middle -ground, some detail is evident (e.g., the foreground), and landscape elements are seen in context with landforms and vegetation patterns (e.g., the background).
The following terms and concepts are in this EIR section:
Scenic vista: An area that is designated, signed, and accessible to the public for the express purposes of viewing and sightseeing. This includes any such areas designated by a federal, state, or local agency.
• Scenic highway: Any stretch of public roadway that is designated as a scenic corridor by a federal, state, or local agency.
Visual character: Visual character typically consists of the landforms, vegetation, water features, and cultural modifications that impart an overall visual impression of an area's landscape. Scenic areas typically include open space, landscaped corridors, and viewsheds. Visual character is influenced by many different landscape attributes including color contrasts, landform Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.1-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.1
Aesthetics
prominence, repetition of geometric forms, and uniqueness of textures among other characteristics.
Light and Glare. Lighting effects are associated with the use of artificial light during the evening and nighttime hours. There are two primary sources of light: light emanating from building interiors passing through windows and light from exterior sources (i.e., street lighting, building illumination, security lighting, parking lot lighting, landscape lighting, and signage). Light introduction can be a nuisance. Uses such as residences and hotels are considered light- sensitive, since occupants have expectations of privacy during evening hours and may be subject to disturbance by bright light sources. Light spill is typically defined as the presence of unwanted light on properties adjacent to the property being illuminated. With respect to lighting, the degree of illumination may vary widely depending on the amount of light generated, height of the light source, presence of barriers or obstructions, type of light source, and weather conditions. Glare is primarily a daytime occurrence caused by the reflection of sunlight or artificial light on highly polished surfaces such as window glass or reflective materials and, to a lesser degree, from broad expanses of light-colored surfaces. Perceived glare is the unwanted and potentially objectionable sensation as observed by a person as they look directly into the light source of a luminaire. Daytime glare generation is common in urban areas and is typically associated with buildings with exterior facades largely or entirely comprised of highly reflective glass. Glare can also be produced during evening and nighttime hours by the reflection of artificial light sources such as automobile headlights. Glare generation is typically related to either moving vehicles or sun angles, although glare resulting from reflected sunlight can occur regularly at certain times of the year. Glare -sensitive uses include residences, hotels, transportation corridors, and aircraft landing corridors.
4.1.2 Environmental Setting
4.1.2.1 Citywide Visual Resources
The City is located in a relatively flat area of the greater southeast Los Angeles area, and is bordered by existing development in the cities of South Gate, Commerce, Pico Rivera, Santa Fe Springs, Norwalk, Bellflower, Paramount, and Bell Gardens. The San Gabriel Mountains are located approximately 20 miles to the north and the City of Long Beach and the Pacific Ocean are approximately 12 miles to the south.
Because the City and the surrounding communities are dense urban environments with very little topographic variation, there are very limited opportunities for elevated or expansive views. With no distinguishable topography, there are no identifiable scenic vistas in the City, except those that may be afforded by two golf courses on the west side of the City. In addition, there are no state designated scenic highways in the City.
Other features that contribute to the visual and aesthetic character of the City include public parks and open space, the density and distribution of existing development, architecture, its history of orange orchards, and resources associated with the City's role within the aerospace industry.
4.1.2.2 Project Site Visual Setting
The Project site is located in a completely developed area that includes industrial, commercial, and residential uses. Visual elements are predominantly comprised of built environment features. The Project site and its immediate surroundings primarily consists of industrial warehouses and commercial Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.1-2 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.1
Aesthetics
buildings. Additional uses near the Project site include surface parking and roadways, and the Union Pacific Railroad corridor. Residential buildings are present in the vicinity, beyond adjacent industrial and public utility uses to the south of the Project and to the northeast beyond the adjacent UPRR rail corridor to the north of the Project. Interspersed among the residential and commercial buildings are some landscaped areas and numerous street trees. Within the industrial land uses, there is limited landscaping and a few trees along the roadway. No open space, notable landforms, or natural features occur in the vicinity. Although the San Gabriel River is located approximately 0.5 mile to the east, the portion closest to the Project site is channelized further reinforcing the urbanized visual character of the visual environment.
Based on the surrounding development and flat topography, there is limited visibility from the Project site of locations beyond the immediately adjacent structures. Similarly, limited views of the Project site and existing structures are provided from nearby public thoroughfares or open spaces, except when directly adjacent to the site. The aesthetic value of existing structures is limited by wear and tear due to their age, their inconsistent design themes, open storage yards, and extensive surface parking area and fencing surrounding them. No designated scenic resources, vistas, view corridors, or scenic highways are located on the Project site or vicinity.
4.1.2.3 Light and Glare
Light and glare surrounding the Project site reflects that typically found in urban environments with active businesses. Sources of light and glare include adjacent industrial, commercial, and residential land uses. Stationary source lighting in the area is generated from building interiors and exterior sources (i.e., building illumination, security lighting, parking lot lighting, and landscape lighting) associated with existing land uses, including within the Project site. The area is also influenced by light and glare from vehicle headlights, streetlights, and signage at existing structures.
4.1.3 Regulatory Framework
4.1.3.1 State
California State Scenic Highway Program
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) manages the California Scenic Highway Program, which is intended to preserve and protect scenic highway corridors from changes that would diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to highways. State laws governing the Scenic Highway Program are found in Streets and Highways Code §§260 to 263. A highway may be designated as scenic based on certain criteria, including how much of the natural landscape can be seen by travelers, the landscape's scenic quality, and the extent to which development intrudes on the traveler's scenic view enjoyment.
The Program's Scenic Highway System List identifies scenic highways that are either eligible for designation or have already been designated as such. There are no eligible or designated state scenic highways in the City or surrounding cities (Caltrans 2022).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.1-3 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.1
Aesthetics
4.1.3.2 Local
City of Downey Vision 2025 General Plan
The DGP Vision 2025 was adopted on January 25, 2005 and provides a long-range policy guide to address changes to the City. The following goals, policies, and programs from the Design Element of the DGP are applicable to the aesthetics of the proposed Project:
Design Element
Goal 8.1: Promote quality design for new, expanded, and remodeled construction. o Policy 8.1.1: Promote architectural design of the highest quality. ■ Program 8.1.1.1: Discourage construction with architectural design of poor quality.
■ Program 8.1.1.5: Encourage applicants to use licensed professionals to prepare architectural and landscaping plans.
■ Program 8.1.1.6: Encourage developments to be "internally compatible" in architectural design.
■ Program 8.1.1.8: Promote good quality sign design.
Goal 8.2: Maintain and enhance the appearance of properties. o Policy 8.2.1: Promote compliance with code regulations. o Policy 8.2.2: Promote the upgrading of properties.
■ Program 8.2.2.4: Encourage the upgrade of property appearance during the development review process.
• Goal 8.3: Promote the enhancement of the streetscape. o Policy 8.3.1: Enhance the views of property from public streets to exhibit a positive image.
■ Program 8.3.1.1: Promote prevailing street yard setbacks for buildings consistent with adjacent properties.
■ Program 8.3.1.2: Maximize the landscaped setback on street yard setbacks. ■ Program 8.3.1.3: Minimize the amount of pavement and other non -plant material along the street yard setbacks.
o Policy 8.3.3: Promote the installation of new trees.
■ Program 8.3.3.1: Promote the installation of new trees throughout the City, but especially where visible from the street.
City of Downey Municipal Code
Section 9318, Manufacturing Zones
DMC §9318 establishes regulations and development standards for properties within the manufacturing zone. Within the M-2 zone, building height is limited to 45 feet or 3 stories, whichever is less. Setbacks of at least 10 feet in the front, 20 feet in the rear, and 10 feet along the street must be maintained.
Other regulations related to aesthetic elements of development in the M-2 zone are noted in DMC §9318.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.1-4 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.1
Aesthetics
Section 9520, Landscaping, Lighting, and Walls
DMC §9520 establishes regulations related to landscaping, lighting, and walls that are intended to create an atmosphere of orderly development and uniformly pleasant and attractive surroundings in the City to enhance, conserve, and stabilize property values. Further, the section aims to reduce the amount of heat, noise, and glare generated by development; minimize the impact of all forms of physical and visual pollution; screen incompatible uses; preserve and enhance the visual appearance of the City; and enhance pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular traffic safety.
Landscaping is required in compliance with §9520.04, which includes requirements such as 75 percent drought -resistant plant materials, parking lot landscaping, and consistent maintenance. Lighting is generally required to be shielded away from other properties or public rights -of -way and must be placed twenty feet from the public right-of-way if it is over five feet in height. Landscaping and lighting plans are subject to approval by the City Planner. Walls or planters within the manufacturing zone may not exceed three feet at front and street side yards or ten feet at interior side and rear yards.
Article IX, Chapter 6, Signs
DMC Article IX, Chapter 6 establishes regulations related to signage that are intended to establish standards for signage to maintain safety and minimize adverse visual effects related to signs. DMC §9618.02 outlines sign type and area allowed for each zone. In the M-2 zone the allowable sign area is dependent on the length of the building frontage. DMC §9624 outlines lighting and design standards for signage to prevent glare onto abutting properties or the public rights -of -way.
4.1.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds
The following significance criteria are from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Project implementation would result in a significant impact related to aesthetics if it would:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista; b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway;
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the Project is in an urbanized area, impacts may be significant if the Project conflicts with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality; and/or d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
Through the analysis in the IS/NOP (see Appendix A of this EIR), it was determined that the proposed Project would result in no impacts associated with scenic vistas (Threshold a) or scenic resources within a State scenic highway (Threshold b). Accordingly, these issues are not analyzed further in this EIR.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.1-5 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.1
Aesthetics
4.1.5 Methodology and Assumptions
The proposed Project was evaluated against significance criteria/thresholds c and d above as the basis for determining the level of significance concerning aesthetic impacts. In addition to the design characteristics of the proposed development, this analysis considers the existing regulatory framework (i.e., laws, ordinances, regulations, and standards) that avoid or reduce the potentially significant environmental impact.
This analysis of impacts on aesthetic resources examines the Project's temporary (i.e., construction) and permanent (i.e., operational) effects -based significance criteria/threshold's application. For each criterion, the analyses address both construction and operational impacts, as applicable. The impact conclusions consider the potential for changes in environmental conditions, as well as compliance with the regulatory framework enacted to protect the environment.
The determination that the Project would or would not result in "substantial" adverse or beneficial effects on scenic resources or visual character considers the site's aesthetic resource value and the Project's individual component's visual impact (e.g., the nature and duration of the impact). For example, a Project component resulting in a substantial change on a site with a low aesthetic resource value could result in a less than significant impact concerning scenic or visual character. In other words, new structures or visual changes in areas with a low aesthetic resource value will not necessarily result in substantial adverse effects on visual resources and could result in a beneficial effect.
4.1.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 4.1-c: Would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the Project is in an urbanized area, impacts may be significant if the Project conflicts with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed Project would construct a single warehouse in place of five existing structures of similar uses. The single warehouse that would be developed would provide a more cohesive visual character compared to existing conditions. The warehouse would be constructed of concrete tilt -up panels painted with neutral whites and grays. Sections of enhanced building materials would consist of wood or metal paneling (refer to building elevations shown in Figure 2-7 (a-b)). Each building elevation would have minor variations in finished height to provide visual interest; however, maximum building height is up to 55 feet above grade, which is in excess of the City's maximum height restrictions of 45 feet or 3 stories (whichever is less) for buildings in the General Manufacturing Zone (refer to Section 4.9, Land Use and Planning, for additional details regarding building height requirements of the zone).
As shown in Figure 2-7 (a-b), the north, east, and west elevations of the building would largely consist of truck docks along the lower half of the building elevations, with concrete staircases and metal louver doors approximately every eight docks. The portion of the concrete tilt -up panel surrounding the truck docks and associated doors and staircases would be grey in color. The proposed building would include 28 dock doors along the north elevation, 42 dock doors along the east elevation, and 39 dock doors Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.1-6 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.1
Aesthetics
along the west elevation. The upper portions of the tilt -up panels along the north, east, and west elevations contain a variety of alternating treatments to visually break up the large expanse of building.
Treatments along the upper portion of the tilt -up panels include facades painted white, with inset windows; sections of metal siding with larger windows; wood siding; and panels containing varying paint schemes that alternate multiple shades of gray and white. The west and east ends of the north elevation feature building entrances consisting of a large expanse of glazed windows, surrounded by a metal canopy, with wood siding on the remainder of the fagade. The south elevation, which would face Stewart and Gray Road continues the pattern of the concrete tilt -up treatments on the other elevations, with tilt -up panels containing various treatments to visually break up the large building fagade. Fagade treatments along the southern elevation mirror the other elevations of the building, with white concrete panels containing windows, sections of metal siding with larger windows, wood siding, and panels containing varying paint schemes in grey and white colors. The corner locations (westernmost and easternmost portions) of the south fagade contain a large expanse of windows, surrounded by wood siding. An aluminum metal canopy would surround the windows, creating storefront framing with tempered glazing at all doors.
The proposed layout of the Project would include the construction of the building in the central portion of the Project site, with parking areas provided in the northern portion of the site, adjacent to Hall Road; along the western Project perimeter; on the eastern portion of the site, between the proposed building and the adjacent land uses; and along the southern boundary of the Project site. A 26-foot-wide fire lane would traverse throughout the site, surrounding the building, and connecting to both Project driveways on Stewart and Gray Road and to two of the three driveways on Hall Road. The proposed building would be situated approximately 89 feet from the southern property boundary, with 15 feet of landscaped area, 20 feet of parking, 26 feet of driveway area, another 20 feet of parking, and an 8-foot walkway adjacent to the building between the property boundary and the proposed structure. The northern most portion of the site adjacent to Hall Road is proposed for parking. The proposed building would be setback approximately 404 feet for the northern Project boundary at the western most portion of the northern Project boundary. Due to the irregular shape of the Project site, and the southeastern alignment of Hall Road adjacent to the site, the building setback from Hall Road is much smaller in the central portion of the site, with the building setback as close as approximately 50 feet from Hall Road.
Implementation of the Project would include landscaping within the northern and southern portions of the site. Shrubs and ground cover would be placed adjacent to parking areas and the building along Stewart and Gray Road, around the northern building entrance, the northern parking area, and the Project site frontage along Hall Road. Six mature trees would be retained in the northwestern portion of the Project site, along the Hall Road frontage. An additional 15 trees that are currently present along the Hall Road, which are scattered at uneven intervals along the Project site frontage, would be removed during Project implementation. These would be replaced with 23 camphor trees which would provide a more consistent and uniform landscape along the northern Project boundary and would provide additional visual screening of the Project site and the proposed building for public views along Hall Road.
Further, the Project landscape plan includes new trees lining the southern Project boundary, and throughout the Project parking areas fronting Stewart and Gray Road. The Project would include removal of approximately 21 trees; retaining 6 existing trees; and planting 18 48-inch box trees, 18 36-inch box trees, 119 24-inch box trees, and 21 15-gallon trees. Wooden walls would be installed around the exterior of the parking area to provide additional visual screening and would not exceed three feet in height. The wood walls would be broken up into short lengths of wall. Ground -mounted Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.1-7 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.1
Aesthetics
equipment at the Project site would be screened by shrub hedges to obscure the equipment. Trash enclosures would be constructed of concrete tilt -up panels and would be painted to match the proposed building.
Visual simulations have been prepared for the Project to provide a representation of the visual appearance associated with the development of the Project. Figure 4.1-1, Visual Simulations Locations, provides the viewpoint locations for each of the three simulations. Figure 4.1-2 (a-c), Visual Simulation — Viewpoint 1, Viewpoint 2, and Viewpoint 3, provides simulations representing views of the Project site from three locations along Stewart and Gray Road, south of the Project site. Stewart and Gray Road provides the most prominent unobstructed views of the Project site and as such, represent the best viewpoints for presenting visual changes at the Project site. Although the proposed Project would be partially visible from adjacent uses to the west and east, these locations are not public viewpoints. The remaining public views into the Project site occur along from Hall Road and Woodruff Avenue, although views from Woodruff Avenue would be partially obstructed by the intervening land use and associated buildings east of the Project site.
Viewpoint 1 (Figure 4.1-2a) provides views northeast into the Project site, Viewpoint 2 provides views northwest into the Project site (Figure 4.1-2b), and Viewpoint 3 provides views looking north into the Project site (Figure 4.1-2c). As shown in Figure 4.1-2a, views into the Project site from near the southwestern corner of the site provide direct views of the proposed structure, at the western driveway along Stewart and Gray Road. The building entry, visible near the driveway entrance, consists of a large expanse of glazed windows surrounded by an aluminum canopy, with wood siding composing the remainder of the building facade. Signage for the Project would be present on the metal canopy, as indicated in Figure 4.1-2a. Landscaping treatments would be provided around the building and along the Stewart and Gray Road frontage. Small wood walls would be incorporated into the landscaping to provide additional screening of parking areas, as shown from this viewpoint. Figure 4.1-2b illustrates the proposed appearance of the building from the eastern Project driveway along Stewart and Gray Road.
The southeast corner of the building would be similar in appearance to the southwest corner, consisting of a large expanse of glazed windows, an aluminum canopy containing Project signage, surrounded by wood siding. From both locations, the entire south elevation of the building is visible, with the upper portion of the alternating facade treatments visible above the street frontage and Project site landscaping. The tree canopies associated with landscaping and small wood walls at the edge of parking areas obscure large portions of the lower half of the south building elevation facade from each of the viewpoints. As shown in Figure 4.1-2c, Viewpoint 3, which is directly south of the Project site, between Viewpoints 1 and 2, provide more direct views of the south building facade, although views of the lower portion of the facade would be partially obstructed by street frontage, small wood walls, and Project site landscaping.
As the Project site is surrounded by other industrial and commercial development, there is no clear neighborhood character for the area and public views of the site are limited by surrounding development. Implementation of the Project would not degrade the existing visual quality of the site or its surroundings. Rather, redevelopment of the Project site would improve visual quality from public viewpoints by removing security fencing, providing a single building with a consistent and modernized architectural design, and installing landscaping within and at the borders of the Project site.
Construction equipment and activities that may change the Project site's scenic value would be temporary. Equipment would not be visually inconsistent with the existing conditions of the Project site Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.1-8 December 2023
Exhibit D
0 300 Feet Source: Aerial (Maxar, 2020)
HELIX Visual Simulations locations
Environmental Planning
Figure 4.1-1
Exhibit D
HELIX
Environmental Planning
Source: HPA Architecture, Inc., ZUZZ
M.-MMUMM
Exhibit D
HELIX
Environmental Planning
N =* I M • rol
Source: HPA Architecture, Inc., ZUZZ
Z .1-MMUM;
Exhibit D
HELIX
Environmental Planning
Source: HPA Architecture, Inc., ZUZZ
FRMM��
Exhibit D
Section 4.1
Aesthetics
or its surroundings, which include sites with large trucks, machinery, and assorted materials storage.
Impacts to visual character and visual quality during construction would be less than significant.
Public Resources Code §21071 defines the term "urbanized area" for the purpose of CEQA to mean an incorporated city that has a population of at least 100,000 persons or has a population of less than 100,000 persons if the population of that city and not more than two contiguous incorporated cities combined equals at least 100,000 persons. U.S. Census Bureau data from 2020 indicates that the City has a population of 114,355 and is therefore an urbanized area that should be evaluated relative to applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality (U.S. Census Bureau 2020).
The Project site parcels are zoned as M-2 (General Manufacturing Zone) and subject to the zoning regulations outlined in the DMC. As required by DMC §9318, setbacks of at least 10 feet in the front, 20 feet in the rear, and 10 feet along the street would be maintained at the site. Drought tolerant landscaping would be installed around the building and at the site's perimeter, which would enhance the visual quality of the site from surrounding public rights -of -way. Landscaped areas would total
10.5 percent of the site area, meeting the landscaping requirements of the DMC of 10 percent. Trees surrounding the Project site would provide an element of screening of the warehouse building. Wooden walls installed around the exterior of the parking area would not exceed three feet in height and would be broken up into short lengths of wall.
Lighting at the Project site would include black painted metal fixtures to be wall -mounted around the building's exterior and pole -mounted throughout the parking areas surrounding the warehouse building.
Lighting is required to be shielded away from other properties and public rights -of -way. The final lighting plan would be subject to approval by the City Planner. Consistent with DMC §§9618.02 and 9624, the Project's signage would be integrated into the design theme, sit below the roof line, and not generate glare that would affect surrounding properties or roadways.
DMC §9318 limits building height within the M-2 zone to 45 feet or 3 stories, whichever is less. The Project as currently proposed would have a maximum height of 55 feet and would conflict with this zoning regulation. The excess height of the proposed Project would not be substantially greater than the surrounding structures that include commercial and industrial uses such that the proposed building would be a visually dominant or highly contrasting element in the visual landscape. Further, the building at 55 feet would not obstruct views of designated scenic resources as there are none in the Project area.
The inconsistency with the DMC regulations related to height would not substantially degrade the visual character or quality of the Project site and its surroundings. The Project would improve the visual quality of the Project site overall and would conform with other applicable zoning regulations. Although the Project would result in the construction of one large building that is bulkier than the existing condition, the Project, with the exception of the maximum building height, would comply with the requirements of the General Manufacturing land use designation and the General Manufacturing (M-2) Zone pertaining to aesthetics, including building setbacks, landscaping, lighting, and maximum floor -to -area ratio. As shown in the visual simulations, the Project design would not degrade the visual character or quality of public views. The architectural treatments provided along the large building walls would break up the expanse by including a variety of materials and treatments to create visual interest and eliminate the appearance of large uniform monochromatic walls. Landscaping and visual screening of the building and parking areas would further serve to reduce the bulk and building massing by partially obstructing portions of the building.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.1-9 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.1
Aesthetics
Further, the Project is consistent with existing development patterns and building forms within the Project area. The proposed building would consist of replacing existing warehouse structures with a new warehouse in an area designated for industrial uses and already contains warehouse buildings. Impacts associated with the visual character and visual quality of the Project site would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Threshold 4.1-d: Would the Project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation would introduce new sources of light to the Project site, while removing existing light sources. As noted above, lighting at the Project site would include wall -mounted fixtures around the building's exterior and pole -mounted fixtures throughout the parking areas. Light fixtures associated with the parking areas would be the sources of lighting closest to adjacent properties, including fixtures along the eastern and western Project perimeters. The fixtures proposed along the western perimeter of the site would be at the property line. A photometric study prepared for the Project (HPA Architecture 2020) demonstrates that lighting levels along the western perimeter would range from 1.0 to 2.1 foot candles.' Along the eastern Project boundary, lighting levels would range from 1.0 to 1.6 foot candles. These lighting levels would not create substantial light spill onto surrounding properties. In accordance with DMC §9520, lighting would be shielded away from surrounding properties and roadways. As the Project would be replacing a similar land use that includes comparable lighting and would be located among other urban land uses, implementation of the Project would not represent a new source or substantial light such that views in the area would be affected.
Further, compliance with DMC regulations and lighting plan approval by the City Planner would ensure that new lighting would not result in adverse impacts to vehicle travel or nearby properties. Impacts related to lighting would be less than significant.
Glare is caused by the reflection of sunlight or artificial light on highly polished surfaces such as window glass or reflective materials and, to a lesser degree, from broad expanses of light-colored surfaces. Glare generation associated with buildings is typically attributed to exterior facades largely or entirely comprised of highly reflective glass. The proposed Project would be constructed of concrete panels with smaller portions of wood and metal paneling, none of which would generate substantial glare. A potentially reflective component of the Project would be windows, which would be spaced across the building fagade with the largest area of glass occurring at the building's entrances. The Project would not have glass facades or extensive glass areas. The installation of windows and glass at the Project entrances would be consistent with the typical urban uses that surround the site. The Project would not represent a new source of substantial glare and would not adversely affect views in the area. Impacts related to glare would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
z Foot candle is a unit of illumination equal to that given by a source of one candela at a distance of one foot.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.1-10 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.1
Aesthetics
4.1.7 Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative study area for aesthetic impacts is the viewshed that includes the Project site and its surrounding areas. The combination of the proposed Project together with related present and reasonably foreseeable future projects, as provided in Table 3-1, Cumulative Projects List, could involve actions with the potential to result in adverse aesthetic impacts.
The proposed Project would not have a significant impact related to aesthetics at the project level.
Based on the site's location surrounded by urban development, there are limited opportunities for new development that would inhibit scenic views or visual quality of the area, especially because there are no designated scenic resources in the Project area. The site and its surroundings are nearly entirely developed. Redevelopment in the area may improve scenic quality based on improved architectural design and would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to scenic vistas or scenic quality.
Redevelopment in the area is also not likely to introduce substantial sources of light or glare based on the existing urban setting. Future projects in the area would also be required to comply with City policies related to light and glare. Therefore, the Project's contributions toward cumulative aesthetic impacts are not considered to be cumulatively considerable.
4.1.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
No significant unavoidable aesthetic impacts have been identified.
4.1.9 References
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2022. California State Scenic Highway System Map.
Available at: htt s: caltrans,ma s.arc is.com a s webs viewer index. html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa. Accessed January 27.
Downey, City of (City). 2005. Vision 2025 General Plan. January.
HPA Architecture. 2020. Site Photometric Study, Stewart & Gray Road. December 8, 2020.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2020. Quick Facts United States. Available at:
htt s: www.census . ov uickfacts US. Accessed January 27, 2022.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.1-11 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.1
Aesthetics
This page intentionally left blank
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.1-12 December 2023
Exhibit D
4.2.1 Introduction
Section 4.2
Air Quality
This section of the EIR evaluates potential air quality impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed Project. This analysis is based on the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report (HELIX 2023) prepared for the Project, which is included as Appendix B of this EIR.
4.2.2 Environmental Setting
4.2.2.1 Climate and Meteorology
The Project site is in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which consists of all or part of four counties: Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange. The distinctive climate of the SCAB is determined by its terrain and geographic location. The SCAB is a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills.
It is bound by the Pacific Ocean to the southwest and high mountains around the rest of its perimeter.
The general region lies in the semi -permanent high-pressure zone of the eastern Pacific, resulting in a mild climate tempered by cool sea breezes with light, average wind speeds.
The usually mild climatological pattern is interrupted occasionally by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds. Winds in the Project area are usually driven by the dominant land/ sea breeze circulation system. Regional wind patterns are dominated by daytime onshore sea breezes.
At night, the wind generally slows and reverses direction traveling toward the sea. Local canyons can also alter wind direction, with wind tending to flow parallel to the canyons. The vertical dispersion of air pollutants in the SCAB is hampered by the presence of persistent temperature inversions. High pressure systems, such as the semi -permanent high-pressure zone in which the SCAB is located, are characterized by an upper layer of dry air that warms as it descends, restricting the mobility of cooler marine - influenced air near the ground surface, and resulting in the formation of subsidence inversions. Such inversions restrict the vertical dispersion of air pollutants released into the marine layer and, together with strong sunlight, can produce worst -case conditions for the formation of photochemical smog. The basin -wide occurrence of inversions at 3,500 feet above mean sea level or less averages 191 days per year (SCAQMD 1993).
The predominant wind direction in the vicinity of the Project site is from the southwest and the average wind speed is approximately 4.7 miles per hour (mph), as measured at the Fullerton Municipal Airport, approximately 9 miles southeast of the Project site (Iowa Environmental Mesonet [IEM] 2022). The annual average maximum temperature in the Project area, as measured at the Montebello climatic station, approximately 6 miles north of the Project site, is approximately 79.1 degrees Fahrenheit (7), and the annual average minimum temperature is approximately 55.7°F. Total precipitation in the Project area averages approximately 14.8 inches annually. Precipitation occurs mostly during the winter and relatively infrequently during the summer (Western Regional Climate Center [WRCC] 2022).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
4.2.2.2 Air Pollutants of Concern
Criteria Pollutants
Section 4.2
Air Quality
Criteria pollutants are defined by state and federal law as a risk to the health and welfare of the public.
In general, criteria air pollutants include the following compounds:
• Ozone (03)
• Carbon monoxide (CO)
• Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
• Particulate matter (PM), which is further subdivided:
o Coarse PM, 10 microns or less in diameter (PM1o)
o Fine PM, 2.5 microns or less in diameter (PM2.5)
• Sulfur dioxide (S02)
• Lead (Pb)
Criteria pollutants can be emitted directly from sources (primary pollutants; e.g., CO, S02, PMlo, PM2.5, and lead), or they may be formed through chemical and photochemical reactions of precursor pollutants in the atmosphere (secondary pollutants; e.g., ozone, NO2, PMlo, and PM2.5). PMlo and PM2.5 can be both primary and secondary pollutants. The principal precursor pollutants of concern are reactive organic gases ([ROGs] also known as volatile organic compounds [VOCs])1 and nitrogen oxides (NOx)• The descriptions of sources and general health effects for each of the criteria air pollutants are shown in Table 4.2-1, Summary of Common Sources and Human Health Effects of Criteria Air Pollutants. Specific adverse health effects on individuals or population groups induced by criteria pollutant emissions are highly dependent on a multitude of interconnected variables such as cumulative concentrations, local meteorology and atmospheric conditions, and the number and characteristics of exposed individuals (e.g., age, gender). Criteria pollutant precursors (ROG and NOx) affect air quality on a regional scale, typically after significant delay and distance from the pollutant source emissions. Health effects related to ozone and NO2 are, therefore, the product of emissions generated by numerous sources throughout a region. Emissions of criteria pollutants from vehicles traveling to or from the Project site (mobile emissions) are distributed nonuniformly in location and time throughout the region, wherever the vehicles may travel. As such, specific health effects from these criteria pollutant emissions cannot be meaningfully correlated to the incremental contribution from the Project. 1 CARB defines and uses the term ROGs while the USEPA defines and uses the term VOCs. The compounds included in the lists of ROGs and VOCs and the methods of calculation are slightly different. However, for the purposes of estimating criteria pollutant precursor emissions, the two terms are often used interchangeably.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-2 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
Table 4.2-1
SUMMARY OF COMMON SOURCES AND HUMAN HEALTH EFFECTS OF CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANTS Carbon Monoxide An odorless, colorless gas formed when
(CO) carbon in fuel is not burned completely; a
Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2)
Ozone (03)
Particulate Matter
(PM10 and PM2.5)
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2)
Lead
component of motor vehicle exhaust.
A reddish -brown gas formed during fuel
combustion for motor vehicles and
industrial sources. Sources include motor
vehicles, electric utilities, and other sources
that burn fuel.
Formed by a chemical reaction between
reactive organic gases (ROGs) and nitrogen
oxides (NOx) in the presence of sunlight.
Common sources of these precursor
pollutants include motor vehicle exhaust,
industrial emissions, gasoline storage and
transport, solvents, paints, and landfills.
Produced by power plants, steel mills,
chemical plants, unpaved roads and parking
lots, wood -burning stoves and fireplaces,
automobiles, and other sources.
A colorless, nonflammable gas formed
when fuel containing sulfur is burned, when
gasoline is extracted from oil, or when
metal is extracted from ore. Examples are
petroleum refineries, cement
manufacturing, metal processing facilities,
locomotives, and ships.
Metallic element emitted from metal
refineries, smelters, battery manufacturers,
iron and steel producers, use of leaded
fuels by racine and aircraft industries.
Source: CARB 2023a; USEPA 2023a
Toxic Air Contaminants
Reduces the ability of blood to deliver
oxygen to vital tissues, affecting the
cardiovascular and nervous system.
Impairs vision, causes dizziness, and can
lead to unconsciousness or death.
Respiratory irritant; aggravates lung and
heart problems. Precursor to ozone and
acid rain. Contributes to climate change
and nutrient overloading, which
deteriorates water quality. Causes brown
discoloration of the atmosphere.
Irritates and causes inflammation of the
mucous membranes and lung airways;
causes wheezing, coughing, and pain when
inhaling deeply; decreases lung capacity;
aggravates lung and heart problems.
Damages plants; reduces crop yield.
Damages rubber, some textiles, and dyes.
Increased respiratory symptoms, such as
irritation of the airways, coughing, or
difficulty breathing; aggravated asthma;
development of chronic bronchitis;
irregular heartbeat; nonfatal heart attacks;
and premature death in people with heart
or lung disease. Impairs visibility (haze).
Respiratory irritant. Aggravates lung and
heart problems. In the presence of
moisture and oxygen, sulfur dioxide
converts to sulfuric acid, which can
damage marble, iron, and steel. Damages
crops and natural vegetation. Impairs
visibility. Precursor to acid rain.
Anemia, high blood pressure, brain and
kidney damage, neurological disorders,
cancer, lowered IQ. Affects animals, plants,
and aauatic ecosystems.
The Health and Safety Code (§39655, subd. (a).) defines a toxic air contaminant (TAC) as "an air pollutant which may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health." A substance that is listed as a hazardous air pollutant pursuant to subsection (b) of Section 112 of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) (42 United States Code Section 7412[b]) is a TAC. Under State law, the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), acting through the California Air Resources Board (CARE), is authorized to identify a substance as a TAC if it determines the substance is an air pollutant that may cause or contribute to an increase Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-3 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
in mortality or an increase in serious illness, or that may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.
Diesel Particulate Matter
Diesel engines emit a complex mixture of air pollutants, including both gaseous and solid material. The solid material in diesel exhaust is referred to as diesel particulate matter (DPM). Almost all DPM is 10 microns or less in diameter, and 90 percent of DPM is 2.5 microns or less in diameter (CARB 2023b).
Because of their extremely small size, these particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar regions of the lung. In 1998, CARB identified DPM as a TAC based on published evidence of a relationship between diesel exhaust exposure and lung cancer and other adverse health effects. DPM has a notable effect on California's population —it is estimated that about 70 percent of total known cancer risk related to air toxics in California is attributable to DPM (CARB 2023b).
Asbestos Containing Material
Asbestos is a mineral fiber that naturally occurs in some rock and soil. Long-term exposure to airborne asbestos fibers has been linked to major health effects including lung cancer; mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer that is found in the thin lining of the lung, chest and the abdomen and heart; and asbestosis, a serious progressive, long-term, non -cancer disease of the lungs (USEPA 2023b). Because of its fiber strength and heat resistance, asbestos has been used in a variety of building construction materials for insulation and as a fire retardant, primarily in buildings constructed before 1979. Asbestos fibers may be released into the air by the disturbance of asbestos containing material during demolition activities.
Asbestos containing material may be present in building materials such as walls, ceilings, insulation, or fireproofing in older (pre-1979) buildings.
MOT1:• -• mom
Lead is a naturally occurring metallic element that is found in small amounts in the earth's crust. In addition to its status as a criteria pollutant, lead is listed as a TAC because, depending on the level and duration of exposure, lead can adversely affect the nervous system, kidney function, immune system, reproductive and developmental systems and the cardiovascular system. There is also a probable link between lead exposure and kidney cancer, brain cancer (gliomas), and lung cancer (USEPA 2023c). Lead particulate matter can be emitted during demolition activities that disturb material that contains lead - based paint (LBP), most typically found in structures built before 1978.
Toxics Best Available Control Technology
Diesel powered on -road (highway) trucks are a potential source of DPM. In addition, some transport refrigeration units (TRUs) are powered by a small diesel engine and are a potential source of DPM. TRUs provide cooling for trucks and/or trailers which transport goods requiring refrigeration. The Toxics Best Available Control Technology (T-BACT) for operation of diesel internal combustion engines is compliance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and CARB emissions standards. All heavy-duty diesel powered on -road vehicles manufactured since 2010 are required to meet USEPA emissions standards, including reductions of emissions of DPM by approximately 90 percent compared to unregulated engines (USEPA 2023c). Diesel powered TRUs are considered nonroad equipment. The USEPA has promulgated multiple tiers of emissions standard (with Tier 4 being the most stringent) for nonroad diesel engines manufactured, depending on engine horsepower and application. CARB regulations Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-4 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
require diesel engines used in TRUs, with 25 or more horsepower, sold in California since 2012 to be USEPA Tier 4 Interim certified (CARB 2011).
4.2.2.3 Sensitive Receptors
CARB and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) have identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: adults over 65, children under 14, infants (including in utero in the third trimester of pregnancy), and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis (CARB 2005; OEHHA 2015).
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to the types of population groups or activities involved and are referred to as sensitive receptor locations. Examples of these sensitive receptor locations are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. Following OEHHA guidance for health risk assessments, the health impacts are analyzed for individual residents assumed to be standing in their primary outdoor spaces closest to the source of TACs from 17 to 21 hours per day (depending on the age group) every day for 30 years, and for individual off -site workers assumed to be working with moderate intensity outside of a commercial or industrial building for 8 hours per day, 260 days per year. Because of these and other assumptions, health risk assessment are, by design, conservative (health protective).
The closest existing sensitive receptor location to the Project site is a single-family home located approximately 240 feet east of the Project site, across Hall Road, Woodruff Avenue, and the Union Pacific Railroad corridor. In addition, multi -family residences are located approximately 250 feet southwest of the Project site, across Stewart and Gray Road; single-family residences are located approximately 300 feet west of the Project site beyond a row of industrial businesses; and multi -family residences are located approximately 320 feet east of the Project site, across Woodruff Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad corridor. The closest school to the Project site is Gauldin Elementary School, approximately 2,600 feet (0.5 mile) south of the Project site.
4.2.2.4 Existing Air Quality
Criteria Pollutants
Attainment Designations
Attainment designations are discussed in Section 4.2.3.1 and Table 4.2-5. The SCAB is a federal and state nonattainment area for 8-hour ozone and PM2.5. The SCAB is also a state nonattainment area for 1-hour ozone, 8-hour ozone, PM2.5, and PM1o.
Monitored Air Quality
The SCAQMD maintains monitoring stations to measure ambient concentrations of pollutants in the SCAB. The nearest monitoring station, approximately 5.2 miles southwest of the Project site, is the Compton-700 North Bulls Road monitoring station. The closest monitoring station with data for PM10 is the South Long Beach monitoring station, approximately 9.9 miles southwest of the Project site.
Table 4.2-2, Air Quality Monitoring Data, presents a summary of the ambient pollutant concentrations monitored at the two air quality monitoring stations during the most recent three years (2020 through 2022) for which the SCAQMD has reported data.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-5 December 2023
Exhibit D
Table 4.2-2
AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA
Ozone (03) — Compton Station
Section 4.2
Air Quality
Maximum concentration 1-hour period (ppm)
0.152
0.085
0.111
Maximum concentration 8-hour period (ppm)
0.115
0.76 0.085
Days above 1-hour state standard (>0.09 ppm)
3 0
1 Days above 8-hour state/federal standard (>0.070 ppm) 4 1
1 Coarse Particulate Matter (PMio) — South Long Beach Station Maximum 24-hour concentration (µg/m3)
68.7 49.7
50.3 Measured Days above 24-hr state standard (>50 µg/m3) 3 0
0 Measured Days above 24-hr federal standard (>150 µg/m3) 0 0
0 Annual average (µg/m3)
*
23.6 Exceed state annual standard (20 µg/m3)
*
Yes
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) — Compton Station
Maximum 24-hour concentration (µg/m3)
67.5 102.1
52.8 Measured Days above 24-hour federal standard (>35 µg/m3) 19 12
6 Annual average (µg/m3)
14.7 14.4
14.0 Exceed state and federal annual standard (12 µg/m3) Yes
Yes
Yes
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) — Compton Station
Maximum 1-hour concentration (ppm)
0.072
0.068
0.065
Days above state 1-hour standard (0.18 ppm)
0 0
0 Days above federal 1-hour standard (0.100 ppm)
0 0
0 Annual average (ppm)
0.014
0.014
0.014
Exceed annual federal standard (0.053 ppm)
No
No
No
Exceed annual state standard (0.030 ppm)
No
No
No
Source: CARB 2023c
ppb = parts per billion; ppm = parts per million; µg/m3= micrograms per cubic meter; * = insufficient data available.
As shown in Table 4.2-2, the 1- and 8-hour ozone, PMlo, and PM2.5 standards were exceeded numerous times in each of the sample years. Data for NO2 showed no exceedances.
Existing Land Use Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Emissions resulting from operation of the industrial businesses on the Project site (at the time of the NOP) were analyzed using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), as described in the methodology discussion in Section 4.2.5.1, below. The calculated existing land use operational criteria pollutant and precursor emissions are shown in Table 4.2-3, Existing Land Use Maximum Daily Emissions.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-6 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
Table 4.2-3
EXISTING LAND USE MAXIMUM DAILY EMISSIONS
Category
Pollutant
Emissions (pounds per
day)
VOC
NOx
CO
Sox
PM10
PM2 s
Area
12.9 <0.1
18.9 <0.1
<0.1
<0.1
Energy
0.2 3.0
2.5 <0.1
0.2 0.2
Mobile
5.1 31.6
52.7 0.3
15.9 4.4
Total Existing Use Daily Emissions1,2
1 18.2
34.5 1 74.0
0.3 16.1
4.6 Source: HELIX 2023 (CaIEEMod output data is provided in Appendix A of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report, Appendix B to this EIR)
1 Totals may not sum due to rounding.
z Maximum daily emissions of VOC and CO and Sox occur during summer, maximum daily emissions of NOx occur during winter, emissions of PM are not seasonally dependent.
VOC = volatile organic compounds; NOx = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; Sox = sulfur oxides; PMlo = particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter Community Health Risks
The SCAQMD has conducted studies on carcinogenic risk from exposure to air toxics in the SCAB. The most recent is the Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study V (MATES V). According to the MATES Data Visualization interactive tool, the area around the Project site has a cumulative cancer risk from toxic air contaminants of 569 in 1 million. 68 percent of the existing cumulative cancer risk from toxic air contaminants is from DPM (SCAQMD 2023a).
4.2.3 Regulatory Framework
The Project site is located within the SCAB. Air quality in the SCAB is regulated by the USEPA at the federal level, by the CARB at the state level, and by the SCAQMD at the regional level.
4.2.3.1 Federal Air Quality Regulations
Federal Clean Air Act
Air quality is defined by ambient air concentrations of specific pollutants identified by the USEPA to be of concern with respect to health and welfare of the general public. The USEPA is responsible for enforcing the CAA of 1970 and its 1977 and 1990 Amendments. The CAA required the USEPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), which identify concentrations of pollutants in the ambient air below which no adverse effects on the public health and welfare are anticipated. In response, the USEPA established both primary and secondary standards for several criteria pollutants.
Table 4.2-4, Ambient Air Quality Standards, shows the federal and state ambient air quality standards for these pollutants.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-7 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
Table 4.2-4
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Pollutant
Averaging
Time
California
Standards
Federal Standards
Primary'
Federal Standards
Secondaryz
03 1 Hour
0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3)
—
—
8 Hour
0.070 ppm
(137 µg/m3)
0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3)
Same as Primary
PM10
24 Hour
50 µg/m3
150 µg/m3
Same as Primary
AAM
20 µg/m3
—
Same as Primary
PM2.5
24 Hour
—
35 µg/m3
Same as Primary
AAM
12 µg/m3
12.0 µg/m3
15.0 µg/m3
CO
1 Hour
20 ppm (23 mg/m3)
35 ppm (40 mg/m3)
—
8 Hour
9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3)
9 ppm (10 mg/m3)
—
8 Hour
(Lake Tahoe)
6 ppm (7 mg/m3)
—
—
NO2
1 Hour
0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3)
0.100 ppm (188 µg/m3)
—
AAM
0.030 ppm (57 µg/m3)
0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3)
Same as Primary
S02
1 Hour
0.25 ppm (655 µg/m3)
0.075 ppm (196 µg/m3)
—
3 Hour
—
—
0.5 ppm
(1,300 µg/m3)
24 Hour
0.04 ppm (105 µg/m3)
—
—
Lead
30-day Avg.
1.5 µg/m3
—
—
Calendar
Quarter
—
1.5 µg/m3
Same as Primary
Rolling
3-month Avg.
—
0.15 µg/m3
Same as Primary
Visibility
Reducing
Particles
8 Hour
Extinction coefficient
of 0.23 per km —
visibility >_ 10 miles
(0.07 per km —>>30
miles for Lake Tahoe)
No Federal
Standards
No Federal
Standards
Sulfates
24 Hour
25 µg/m3
No Federal
Standards
No Federal
Standards
Hydrogen
Sulfide
1 Hour
0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3)
No Federal
Standards
No Federal
Standards
Vinyl Chloride
24 Hour
0.01 ppm (26 µg/m3)
No Federal
Standards
No Federal
Standards
Source: CARB 2016
z National Primary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary, within an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health.
2 National Secondary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant.
03 = ozone; ppm: parts per million; µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; PMzo = particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; AAM = Annual Arithmetic Mean; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; CO = carbon monoxide; mg/m3 = milligrams per cubic meter; NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; S02 = sulfur dioxide; km = kilometer; — = No Standard The USEPA has classified air basins (or portions thereof) as being in "attainment," "nonattainment," "maintenance," or "unclassified" for each criteria air pollutant, based on whether or not the NAAQS have been achieved. Upon attainment of a standard for which an area was previously designated nonattainment, the area will be classified as a maintenance area. If an area is designated unclassified, it Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-8 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
is because inadequate air quality data were available as a basis for a nonattainment or attainment designation. The Project site is located within the Los Angeles County portion of the SCAB and, as such, is in an area designated as a nonattainment area for certain pollutants that are regulated under the CAA.
Table 4.2-5, South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status, lists the federal and state attainment status of the SCAB for the criteria pollutants. With respect to federal air quality standards, the USEPA classifies the SCAB as in attainment for PM1o, CO, NO2, 502, and lead, and in nonattainment for 8-hour ozone and PM2.5.
Table 4.2-5
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN ATTAINMENT STATUS
Criteria Pollutant
Federal Designation
State Designation
Ozone (03) (1-hour)
(No federal standard)
Nonattainment
Ozone (03) (8-hour)
Extreme Nonattainment
Nonattainment
CO (Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Attainment (Maintenance)
Attainment
Respirable Particulate Matter (PMio)
Attainment (Maintenance)
Nonattainment
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
Serious Nonattainment
Nonattainment
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
Attainment (Maintenance)
Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide (S02)
Unclassifiable/Attainment
Unclassifiable/Attainment
Lead
Attainment
Attainment
Sulfates
(No federal standard)
Attainment
Hydrogen Sulfide
(No federal standard)
Attainment
Visibility
(No federal standard)
Attainment
Source: SCAQMD 2016a
4.2.3.2 California Air Quality Regulations
California Clean Air Act
The federal CAA allows states to adopt ambient air quality standards and other regulations provided that they are at least as stringent as federal standards. CARB, a part of the CaIEPA, is responsible for the coordination and administration of both federal and state air pollution control programs within California, including setting the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). CARB also conducts research, compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures, and provides oversight of local programs. CARB establishes emissions standards for motor vehicles sold in California, consumer products (such as hairspray, aerosol paints, and barbecue lighter fluid), and various types of commercial equipment. It also sets fuel specifications to further reduce vehicular emissions.
In addition to primary and secondary AAQS, the state has established a set of episode criteria for ozone, CO, NO2, 502, and PM. These criteria refer to episode levels representing periods of short-term exposure to air pollutants that actually threaten public health. Table 4.2-5, above, lists the state attainment status of the SCAB for the criteria pollutants. Under state designation, the SCAB is currently in attainment for CO, NO2, S02, and lead; and in nonattainment for ozone, PM1o, and PM2.5.
State Implementation Plan
The CAA requires areas with unhealthy levels of ozone, inhalable particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur dioxide to develop plans, known as State Implementation Plans (SIPS).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-9 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
SIPS are comprehensive plans that describe how an area will attain the NAAQS. The 1990 amendments to the CAA set deadlines for attainment based on the severity of an area's air pollution problem.
SIPS are not single documents —they are a compilation of new and previously submitted plans, programs (e.g., monitoring, modeling, permitting), district rules, state regulations and federal controls. Many of California's SIPs rely on a core set of control strategies, including emission standards for cars and heavy trucks, fuel regulations and limits on emissions from consumer products. State law makes CARB the lead agency for all purposes related to the SIP. Local air districts and other agencies prepare SIP elements and submit them to CARB for review and approval. CARB forwards the SIP revisions to the USEPA for approval and publication in the Federal Register. The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40, Chapter I, Part 52, Subpart F, Section 52.220 lists all of the items that are included in the California SIP (CARB 2023d). At any one time, several California submittals are pending USEPA approval.
California Energy Code
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 Part 6, California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, were first established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. Energy -efficient buildings require less electricity, natural gas, and other fuels. Electricity production from fossil fuels and on -site fuel combustion (typically for space and water heating) results primarily in GHG emissions.
4.2.3.3 Local Regulations
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Air quality in the SCAB portion of Los Angeles County is regulated by the SCAQMD. As a regional agency, the SCAQMD works directly with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), County transportation commissions, and local governments and cooperates actively with all federal and state government agencies. The SCAQMD develops rules and regulations; establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources; inspects emissions sources; and enforces such measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary.
Air Quality Management Plan
The SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary (area and point), mobile, and indirect sources. It has responded to this requirement by preparing a sequence of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMP). On December 2, 2022, the SCAQMD adopted the 2022 AQMP, which is a regional and multi -agency effort (SCAQMD, CARB, SCAG, and USEPA). The 2022 AQMP represents a comprehensive analysis of emissions, meteorology, atmospheric chemistry, regional growth projections, and the impact of existing control measures. The plan seeks to achieve multiple goals in partnership with other entities promoting reductions in criteria pollutant, GHGs, and toxic risk, as well as efficiencies in energy use, transportation, and goods movement. Included in the 2022 AQMP are updated strategies and control measures to address the designation of the SCAB as an "extreme" nonattainment area for the 2015 NAAQS 8-hour ozone standard. To meet the 2015 NAAQS ozone standard, an additional 67 percent reduction of NOx will be required compared to the reductions forecast to occur by 2037 (as required by current adopted rules and regulations). Achieving the NOx reductions will require extensive use of zero emission technologies across all stationary and mobile sources. The overwhelming majority of NOx emissions are from heavy-duty trucks, ships and other State and federally regulated mobile Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-10 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
sources that are mostly beyond the SCAQMD's control. The region will not meet the NAAQS ozone standard absent significant federal action. In addition to federal action, the 2022 AQMP requires substantial reliance on future deployment of advanced technologies to meet the NAAQS ozone standard (SCAQMD 2022).
The AQMP, in combination with those from all other California nonattainment areas with serious (or worse) air quality problems, is submitted to CARB, which develops the California SIP. The SIP relies on the same information from SCAG to develop emission inventories and emission reduction strategies that are included in the attainment demonstration for the air basin. The current federal and state attainment status for the SCAB is presented above, in Table 4.2-5.
Rules and Regulations
The following rules promulgated by the SCAQMD would be applicable to construction and/or operation of the Project.
Rule 401— Visible Emissions: Limits the allowable opacity of air contaminant emissions from any single source (SCAQMD 2001a).
Rule 402 — Nuisance: Prohibits the discharge of air contaminants, including odors, which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons (SCAQMD 1976).
Rule 403 — Fugitive Dust: Requires actions to prevent, reduce or mitigate anthropogenic fugitive dust emissions, including emissions from construction activities. Project construction would be required to implement all applicable fugitive dust best available control measures specified in Table 1 in the rule (SCAQMD 2005).
Rule 1113 — Architectural Coating: Establishes VOC limits for architectural coatings (e.g., paints, stains, preservatives). Effective January 1, 2019, building interior and exterior paint is limited to a maximum VOC content of 50 grams per liter (SCAQMD 2016b).
Rule 1166 — Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Decontamination of Soil: Sets requirements to control the emission of VOCs from excavating, grading, handling, and treating VOC-contaminated soil as a result of leakage from storage or transfer operations, accidental spillage, or other deposition (SCAQMD 2001b).
Rule 1403 — Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities: Specifies work practice requirements to limit asbestos emissions from building demolition and renovation activities, including the removal and associated disturbance of ACM. The requirements for demolition and renovation activities include asbestos surveying, notification, ACM removal procedures and time schedules, ACM handling and clean-up procedures, and storage, disposal, and landfilling requirements for asbestos - containing waste materials (SCAQMD 2007).
Rule 2305 — Warehouse Indirect Source Rule: Requires owners and operators of warehouses with 100,000 SF or more of indoor floor space in a single building to directly reduce NOx and PM emissions, or to otherwise facilitate emission and exposure reductions of these pollutants in nearby communities (SCAQMD 2021).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-11 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
4.2.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant air quality impact would occur if implementation of the Project would:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard; c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; and/or d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.
Through the analysis in the IS/NOP (see Appendix A of this EIR), it was determined that the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with other emissions, such as those leading to odors (Threshold d). Accordingly, this issue is not analyzed further in the EIR.
Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines states that the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the above determinations. The SCAQMD has established significance thresholds to assess the regional and localized impacts of project -related air pollutant emissions. The significance thresholds are updated, as needed, to appropriately represent the most current technical information and attainment status in the SCAB. Table 4.2-6, SCAQMD Thresholds of Significance, presents the most current significance thresholds, including regional daily thresholds for short-term construction and long-term operational emissions; maximum incremental cancer risk and hazard indices for TACs; and maximum ambient concentrations for exposure of sensitive receptors to localized pollutants. A project with daily emission rates, risk values, or concentrations below these thresholds is generally considered to have a less than significant effect on air quality.
Table 4.2-6
SCAQMD THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Mass Daily Thresholds (pounds per day)
VOC
75 55
NOx
100
55 CO
550
550
P M 10
150
150
PM2.5
55 55
Sox
150
150
Lead
3 3
Toxic Air Contaminants
Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk >_ 10 in 1 million
TACs Cancer Burden > 0.5 excess cancer cases
(in areas >_ 1 in 1 million)
Chronic & Acute Hazard Index >_ 1.0 (project increment
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-12 December 2023
Exhibit D
Ambient Air Quality for Criteria Pollutants
Section 4.2
Air Quality
NO2
1-hour average >_ 0.18 ppm
Annual average >_ 0.03 ppm
CO
1-hour average >_ 20.0 ppm (state)
8-hour average >_ 9.0 ppm (state/federal)
24-hour average >_ 10.4 µg/m3 (construction)
PM10
24-hour average >_ 2.5 µg/m3 (operation)
Annual average > 1.0 µg/m3
24-hour average >_ 10.4 µg/m3 (construction)
PM2.5
24-hour average >_ 2.5 µg/m3 (operation)
S02
1-hour average >_ 0.075 ppm
24-hour average >_ 0.04 ppm
Source: SCAQMD 2019
VOC = volatile organic compound; NOx = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; PMzo = respirable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less; SOx = sulfur oxides; TACs = toxic air contaminants; GHG = greenhouse gas emissions; MT/yr = metric tons per year; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent; NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; ppm = parts per million; µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter
Part of the control process of the SCAQMD's duty to improve the air quality in the SCAB is the uniform CEQA review procedures required by SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993 CEQA Handbook).
The single threshold of significance used to assess Project direct and cumulative impacts has "worked" as evidenced by the track record of the air quality in the SCAB improving over the course of the past decades. According to SCAQMD, the SCAQMD's thresholds of significance are based on factual and scientific data and are therefore appropriate thresholds of significance to use for air quality analysis.
4.2.5 Methodology and Assumptions
4.2.5.1 Emissions Modeling
Criteria pollutant emissions for both the Project and the existing industrial land use were calculated using CalEEMod, version 2022.1.1.18 CalEEMod is a computer model used to estimate air emissions resulting from land development projects throughout the state of California. CalEEMod was developed by the California Air Pollution Control Officer's Association (CAPCOA) in collaboration with the California air quality management and pollution control districts, primarily the SCAQMD. CalEEMod estimates criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions from mobile (i.e., vehicular) sources, area sources (fireplaces, woodstoves, and landscape maintenance equipment), energy use (electricity and natural gas used in space heating, ventilation, and cooling; lighting; and plug-in appliances), water use and wastewater generation, solid waste disposal, and refrigerants. Emissions are estimated based on land use information input to the model by the user. Detailed methodology and assumptions are included in the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report (Appendix B of this EIR) and are summarized below.
4.2.5.2 Construction Emissions
CalEEMod has the capability to calculate reductions in construction emissions from the effects of dust control, diesel -engine classifications, and other selected emissions reduction measures. In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, fugitive dust emissions calculations assume application of water on exposed Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-13 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
surface a minimum of two times per day and a speed limit of 25 mph enforced for vehicles traveling on unpaved surfaces.
Construction Activities
Construction emissions were estimated based on the timeline provided by the Project applicant, which assumed for modeling purposes that construction would commence with demolition/site preparation in February 2024, and CalEEMod defaults. Demolition/site preparation activities are anticipated to overlap with grading and excavation activities. Off -site improvements, paving, and architectural coatings (e.g., painting) occur concurrently with building construction. The quantity, duration, and intensity of construction activity influence the amount of construction emissions and related pollutant concentrations that occur at any one time. As such, the emission forecasts provided herein reflect a specific set of conservative assumptions based on the expected construction scenario wherein a relatively large amount of construction activity is occurring in a relatively intensive manner. Because of this conservative assumption, actual emissions could be less than those forecasted. If construction is delayed or occurs over a longer time period, emissions could be reduced because of: (1) a more modern and cleaner -burning construction equipment fleet mix than assumed in CalEEMod; and/or (2) a less intensive buildout schedule (i.e., fewer daily emissions occurring over a longer time interval).
Construction is assumed to occur five days per week with equipment operating up to eight hours per day. The construction schedule assumed in the modeling is shown in Table 4.2-7, Construction Schedule for Air Quality Modeling.
Table 4.2-7
CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE FOR AIR QUALITY MODELING
Construction Activity
Construction Period
Start
Construction Period
End
Number of
Working Days
Demolition/Site Preparation
2/9/2024
5/23/2024
75 Grading/ Underground Utilities
5/24/2024
7/18/2024
40 Off -Site Underground Utilities
6/3/2024
10/18/2024
100
Building Construction
7/19/2024
3/31/2024
182
Off -Site Driveways and Sidewalks
10/24/2024
12/12/2024
37 Architectural Coatings
1/28/2025
3/31/2025
45 Paving
2/7/2025
1 3/6/2025
20 Source: HELIX 2023 (complete data is provided in Appendix A of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report, Appendix B to this EIR)
Construction Off -Road Equipment
Construction would require the use of heavy off -road equipment. Construction equipment estimates for other activities estimates are based on default values in CalEEMod, with additional equipment added for excavation for underground utilities (based on assumptions used for similar projects). Table 4.2-8, Construction Equipment Assumptions, presents a summary of the assumed equipment that would be involved in each stage of construction.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-14 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
Table 4.2-8
CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS
Demolition/Site Preparation
Concrete/Industrial Saws
33 1
8 Excavators
36 3
8 Rubber Tired Dozers
367
2 8
Water Trucks
376
1 4
Grading/Underground Utilities
Excavators
36 2
8 Graders
148
1 8
Rubber Tired Dozers
367
1 8
Scrapers
423
2 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
84 2
8 Water Trucks
376
1 4
Off -Site Underground Utilities
Excavators 36 2 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 84 2 8
Off -Site Driveways and Sidewalks
Excavators
36 2
8 Rubber Tired Dozers
367
1 8
Tactors/Loaders/Backhoes
84 2
8 Building Construction
Cranes
367
1 7
Forklifts
82 3
8 Generator Sets
14 1
8 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
84 3
7 Welders
46 1
8 Water Trucks
376
1 4
Architectural Coating
Air Compressors 37 1 6
Paving
Pavers
81 2
8 Paving Equipment
89 2
8 Rollers
39 2
8 Source: HELIX 2023 (complete data is provided in Appendix A of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report, Appendix B to this EIR) Construction On -Road Trips
Worker commute trips and vendor delivery trips were modeled based on CalEEMod defaults. Worker trips are anticipated to vary between 10 and 228 trips per day, depending on construction activity.
Vendor delivery trips would be 90 per day during building construction. Based on model defaults and an estimated 433,000 SF of exiting building area, approximately 2,490 loads (4,980 trips) of debris would be exported during demolition. Based on estimates from the Project off -site improvement plan, approximately 31 loads (62 trips) of soil and debris would be exported and approximately 31 loads (62 trips) of aggregate and concrete would be imported during oof-site street improvements. Based on the model default of 16 CY per load, exporting 75,000 CY of soil during grading would require 4,688 Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-15 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
loads (9,376 trips). Based on the paved areas shown on the site plan, approximately 1,053 loads (2,106 trips) of aggregate/asphalt would be imported to the Project site during paving. The CaIEEMod default worker, vendor and haul trip distances were used in the model. Due to the size of the Project site, 1,000 feet of every haul truck trip (1 percent of each trip) was assumed to be on an unpaved on -site access road.
4.2.5.3 Operation Emissions
Operational impacts were estimated using CaIEEMod. Operational sources of emissions include area, energy, transportation, water use, solid waste, and refrigerants. Operational emissions are calculated for the earliest anticipated full year of operation-2026. Methodology and assumptions regarding operational emissions are included in the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report (Appendix B of this EIR) and described below.
Area Source Emissions
Area sources include emissions from landscaping equipment, the use of consumer products, the reapplication of architectural coatings for maintenance, and hearths. Emissions associated with area sources were estimated using the CalEEMod default values and SCAQMD Rule 1113 architectural coatings VOC of 50 g/L for building envelope coatings and interior flat coatings and 100 g/L for pavement marking.
Energy Emissions
Development within the Project would use electricity for lighting, heating, and cooling. Direct emissions from the burning of natural gas may result from furnaces, hot water heaters, and appliances. Electricity generation typically entails the combustion of fossil fuels, including natural gas and coal, which is then transmitted to end users. A building's electricity use is thus associated with the off -site or indirect emission of GHGs at the source of electricity generation (power plant). The 2022 Title 24 standards include the requirement for on -site solar electricity generation which would be applicable to the Project.
The minimum amount of solar electricity generated to meet the 2022 Tile 24 standards is based on climate zone and the building's conditioned floor area (the floor space that would include heating or air conditioning). Because the amount of Project warehouse space that would be conditioned was uncertain at the time of this analysis, to be conservative, no energy use reductions resulting from Project solar panels were included in the modeling. The Project's and the existing land use's energy use was modeled using CaIEEMod defaults.
Mobile Sources
Operational emissions from mobile source emissions are associated with Project -related vehicle trip generation and trip length. Based on the trip generation rate from the Transportation Impact Study (TIS) prepared for the Project, the Project fulfillment center warehouse (including the office and mezzanine space) would generate 3,277 average daily trips (ADT; 3,179 passenger car trips and 98 truck trips) and the Project cold storage warehouse space would generate 57 ADT (Linscott Law & Greenspan [LLG] 2023). Passenger car trip purposes and distances were modeled using CaIEEMod defaults. The TIS reported that Project high -cube fulfillment center truck ADT would consist of 16 two -axle trucks, 20 three -axle trucks, and 62 four or more axle trucks. Two -axle trucks were assumed to be light -heavy duty (LHDT2; 10,000 to 14,000 pounds gross vehicle weight [GVW]). Three -axle trucks were assumed to be Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-16 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
medium -heavy duty (MHDT; 14,000 to 33,000 GVW). Four or more axle trucks were assumed to be heavy -heavy duty (HHDT; greater than 33,000 GVW). The TIS did not analyze truck percentages for the cold storage warehouse trips. The cold storage warehouse truck trips were determined from data in the study High -Cube Warehouse Vehicle Trip Generation Analysis, prepared for SCAQMD, which reports that the cold -storage warehouse average vehicle mix is approximately 39.5 percent trucks (Institute of Transport Engineers 2016). The fleet mix for Project truck trips was set in CaIEEMod to match the TIS and SCAQMD analysis truck mix. All truck trips were assumed to be primary (no diverted or pass -by trip reductions). Truck trip distances were modeled using the SCAQMD recommended distance of 40 miles for warehouse projects, assuming that only the local portion of each trip (local delivery or highway access) would result in new VMT to the region (SCAQMD 2021b).
Trip generation for the existing industrial land use was modeled using the trip generation presented in the TIS which concluded that the existing land use generates 2,109 ADT. The existing land use trips consist of 1,291 passenger car trips and 818 truck trips (90 2-axle truck trips, 294 3-axle truck trips, and 434 4- or more axle truck trips; LLG 2023). The CaIEEMod default trip distances were used for the exiting land use trips.
Solid Waste Sources
The disposal of solid waste produces GHG emissions from anaerobic decomposition in landfills, incineration, and transportation of waste. CaIEEMod determines the GHG emissions associated with disposal of solid waste into landfills. Portions of these emissions are biogenic. CaIEEMod methods for quantifying GHG emissions from solid waste are based on the IPCC method using the degradable organic content of waste.
Water Sources
Water -related GHG emissions are from the conveyance and treatment of water. CaIEEMod uses the CEC's 2006 Refining Estimates of Water -Related Energy Use in California to establish default water -related emission factors.
Refrigerants
Refrigerants are substances used in equipment for air conditioning and refrigeration. Most of the refrigerants used today are HFCs or blends of gases containing HFCs. CaIEEMod quantifies refrigerant emissions from leaks during regular operation and routine servicing over the equipment lifetime.
4.2.5.4 Localized Significance Threshold Methodology
SCAQMD has developed a localized significance threshold (LST) methodology and mass rate look -up tables by source receptor area (SRA) that can be used by public agencies to determine whether a project may generate significant adverse localized air quality impacts. LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard; they are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each SRA (SCAQMD 2009). The LST methodology translates the concentration standards into emissions thresholds that are a function of project site area, source to receptor distance, and the location within the SCAB. The LST methodology is recommended to be limited to projects of 5 acres or less and to avoid the need for complex dispersion modeling. For projects that exceed 5 acres, Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-17 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
such as the proposed Project, the 5-acre LST look -up values can be used as a screening tool to determine which pollutants require detailed analysis. This approach is conservative as it assumes that all on -site emissions would occur within a 5-acre area and over -predicts potential localized impacts (i.e., more pollutant emissions occurring within a smaller area and within closer proximity to potential sensitive receptors). If a project exceeds the LST look up values, then the SCAQMD recommends that project -specific localized air quality modeling be performed.
The proposed Project is within SRA 5, Southeast Los Angeles County. The closest sensitive receptor is a single-family residence 240 feet west of the Project site. Therefore, the LSTs in SRA 5 for project sites of 5 acres with receptors located between 50 and 100 meters (164 to 328 feet) are used in LST analysis for the Project.
4.2.5.5 Health Risk Assessment
A health risk assessment (HRA) was prepared to analyze potential health risks to nearby sensitive receptors and off -site workers from the emission of DPM during construction and operation of the proposed warehouse in accordance with applicable portions of the OEHHA Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments (OEHHA 2015), and applicable portions of the SCAQMD's Modeling Guidance for AERMOD (SCAQMD 2023b). HRA modeling inputs and outputs are included in Appendix B, HRA Modeling, of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report (Appendix B of this EIR). Detailed methodology and assumptions regarding the HRA, including methodology and assumptions for calculating TAC emissions and dispersion modeling are included in the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report (Appendix B of this EIR).
TAC Emissions
Available air quality models and complications of emissions factors do not include DPM emissions.
However, because nearly all DPM consists of particles 10 microns in diameter or less, DPM emissions are approximately equal to PM10 exhaust emissions from diesel engines. All DPM emissions calculations used in the Project HRA were based on PM10 exhaust emissions.
Calculations of off -road construction DPM emissions were based on CaIEEMod reported PM10 exhaust emissions reported for each construction activity. Emissions of DPM from trucks traveling to and from the Project warehouse were calculated using emission factors from CARB's EMFAC2021 version 1.0.2 online database (CARB 2023e) and the haul tuck trips described in Section 4.2.5.2, above. All haul trucks were assumed to be heavy -heavy duty (HHDT; greater than 33,000 pounds gross vehicle weight [GVW]).
Trucks on public road surrounding the Project site were assumed to be traveling at the posted speed limit (35 mph for Hall Road and 40 mph for Stewart and Gray Road). In addition, each haul truck entering the Project site was assumed to idle for the maximum allowable 5 minutes (per California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 13, Section 2485). Haul truck idling emissions were assumed to be approximately equivalent to truck emissions at 5 mph.
Calculations of operational DPM emissions were based on the Project truck trip generation estimate and the Project truck trip distribution described in the Project TIS (LLG 2023). All trucks were assumed be traveling at the average posted speed limit for each modeled roadway segment. Trucks entering and exiting the Project driveways and circulating within the Project site were assumed to be traveling at 15 mph. All trucks were assumed to idle at the loading docks for the maximum allowable 5 minutes after Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-18 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
arriving and again before leaving the Project site, plus two additional minutes corresponding to low - speed maneuvering in the loading dock areas. Truck idling emissions were assumed to be approximately equivalent to truck emissions at 5 mph.
Emissions of DPM from trucks traveling to and from the Project warehouse were calculated using emission factors from CARB's EMFAC2021 version 1.0.2 online database (CARB 2023e). The truck fleet mix was estimated from the Project TIS which reported that the Project high -cube fulfillment center truck ADT would consist of 16 two -axle trucks, 20 three -axle trucks, and 62 four or more axle trucks (LLG 2023). Two -axle trucks were assumed to be light -heavy duty (10,000 to 14,000 pounds GVW). Three -axle trucks were assumed to be medium -heavy duty (MHDT; 14,000 to 33,000 pounds GVW). Four or more axle trucks were assumed to be HHDT. The TIS did not analyze truck percentages for the cold storage warehouse trips. The cold storage warehouse truck trips were determined from data in the study High - Cube Warehouse Vehicle Trip Generation Analysis, prepared for SCAQMD, which reports that the cold - storage warehouse average vehicle mix is approximately 39.5 percent trucks (Institute of Transport Engineers 2016), or 23 ADT (20 trucks would be HHDT and the remaining were assumed to be MHDT).
All trucks associated with the Project's cold -storage warehouse space (23 ADT) were assumed to be equipped with a TRU. Although a small percentage of TRUs currently in service are capable of running off of batteries, to be conservative (health protective), all TRUs were assumed to be directly powered by a diesel engine or be electrically powered and supplied by a diesel -powered generator mounted on the truck or trailer.
Emissions of DPM for TRUs were calculated using emission factors from CARB's OFFROAD2021 version
1.0.5 online database (CARB 2023e). OFFROAD 2021 contains population and emission data for TRUs directly powered by a diesel engine, and for TRUs supplied by a diesel -powered generator. TRUs were assumed to operate for an average total of 4 hours at the loading dock before and/or after unloading/loading.
Dispersion Modeling
Localized concentrations of DPM were modeled using Lakes AERMOD View version 10.2.1. The Lakes program utilizes the USEPA's AERMOD gaussian air dispersion model version 2111. Plot files from AERMOD using unitized emissions (one gram per second) for each DPM source were imported into CARB's Hotspots Analysis and Reporting Program (HARP), Air Dispersion Modeling and Risk Tool (ADMRT) version 22118. The ADMRT calculated ground -level concentrations of DPM utilizing the imported plot files and the annual and hourly emissions inventory.
Source Parameters
Because most of the off -road diesel equipment anticipated to be used for Project emissions are mobile and exact location of use on the Project site cannot be reasonably determined, off -road equipment emissions and haul truck idling emissions were modeled as an area source corresponding to the Project site minus a 2-meter (6.5 feet) setback from the property line (to account for a portion of the equipment width). Off -road equipment emissions were assumed to be emitted at an average height of 3 meters (9.8 feet) corresponding to the typical exhaust stack height for heavy off -road construction equipment.
Construction haul trucks and operational warehouse trucks traveling streets around the Project site, on Project driveways, and within the Project site were modeled as line volume sources following Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-19 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
methodology/calculations recommended in the USEPA Haul Road Workgroup Final Report, using an average truck height of 4 meters (13.1 feet), the average road width for on -street travel, and an average truck width of 2.6 meters (8.5 feet) for driveways and on-stie circulation (USEPA 2011). Two construction haul routes were modeled assuming haul trucks would access 1-605 from Firestone Avenue:
50 percent of truck entering/leaving the Project site east on Hall Road, turning north on Woodruff Avenue, then turning southeast on Firestone Boulevard; and 50 percent of trucks entering/leaving the Project site east on Stewart and Gray Road, then turning southeast on Firestone Boulevard. Operational warehouse trucks were modeled traveling on the routes extending up to 500 meters from the Project site (0.3 mile), as identified in the TIS: Hall road from the northwest Project driveway to Woodruff Avenue; Woodruff Avenue from Hall road to Firestone Boulevard; Firestone Boulevard from Woodruff Avenue to southeast approximately 300 meters (0.2 mile); Stewart and Gray Road from the west Project driveway to approximately 300 meters (0.2) mile west of the Project site; Stweart and Gray Road along the Project frontage; Stewart and Gray Road from the Project east driveway to approximately 300 meters (0.2 mile) east of Woodruff Avenue; and Woodruff Avenue to approximately 300 meters (0.2 mile) south of Stewart and Gray Road.
Trucks parked in the loading dock area and parking area were modeled as volume sources with a 25-meter (82 feet) wide base and a height of 4 meters (13.1 feet). Five identical volume sources were placed in the Project building loading dock areas: two on the east side, two on the west side, and one on the north side.
Emissions of DPM would not be constant throughout the day. For construction emissions, variable emissions were used assuming construction would occur from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday.
For operational emissions, the volume of trucks entering and exiting the site would vary by hour of the day and day of the week. However, since the Project is assumed to operate 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, the truck volume was assumed to be steady throughout all hours of the day and week. This modeling assumption is generally conservative (health protective).
Meteorological Data
SCAQMD provides pre-processed meteorological data suitable for use with AERMOD (SCAQMD 2017).
The available data set recommended by SCAQMD for the Project area was from the Pico Rivera station, approximately 4 miles northeast of the Project site. A wind rose for the Pico Rivera station shows an average wind speed of 4.5 miles per hour from the southwest (SCAQMD 2017). The wind rose graphics are included in Appendix B to this report. The Pico Rivera station set includes 5 years of data collected between 2010 and 2016. Urban dispersion coefficients with a Los Angeles County population of 9,818,605 were selected in the model in accordance with SCAQMD modeling recommendations (SCAQMD 2023b).
Terrain Data
United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Elevation Dataset (NED) files with a 10-meter resolution covering an area approximately one kilometer by one kilometer around the Project site were used in the model to cover the analysis area. Terrain data was imported to the model using AERMAP, a terrain preprocessing program for AERMOD.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-20 December 2023
Exhibit D
Receptor Modeling
Section 4.2
Air Quality
To develop risk isopleths (linear contours showing equal level of risk), receptors were placed in a cartesian grid 1,300 meters by 1,300 meters (approximately 0.8 mile by 0.8), centered on the Project site with a grid spacing of 50 meters (164 feet), in accordance with the SCAQMD guide recommendations (SCAQMD 2023b). To ensure the area of maximum off -site impact was captured, receptors were placed along the Project boundary at 20-meter (66 feet) intervals. Additional discrete receptors were placed at the closest primary outdoor spaces for the 8 closest residences around the Project site (including residences near the Project ruck routes on Hall Road and Woodruff Avenue) and 7 closest worker locations (commercial or industrial buildings). Figure 4.2-1, Receptor Locations, shows the modeled receptor locations.
Risk Determination
Health risks resulting from localized concentration of DPM were estimated using the ADMRT. The latest cancer slope factors and chronic Reference Exposure Limits (RELs), and exposure paths for all TACs designated by CARB are included in ADMRT. For the residential cancer risk, an exposure duration of 30 years was selected in accordance with the OEHHA (2015) guidelines.
The model conservatively assumes that residents would be standing and breathing outdoors at the location of the property line closest to the Project every day between 17 and 21 hours per day (depending on the age group, starting with infants in utero in the third trimester of pregnancy) for 30 years. The Risk Management Policy (RMP) using the derived method for the intake rate percentile was selected in accordance with the SCAQMD guide recommendations (SCAQMD 2023b). For off -site worker cancer risk, an exposure duration of 25 years was selected with an assumption of 8 hours per day, 5 days per week of exposure while standing outside with moderate intensity breathing rates, in accordance with the OEHHA guidelines. Because DPM only has an inhalation cancer slope factor and an inhalation chronic REL, only the cancer risk and chronic risk from exposure to DPM was evaluated (acute risk and 8-hour chronic risk would be zero), and only the inhalations pathway was evaluated. The risk modeling input and output is included in Appendix B to this report.
Because the most intensive use of heavy construction equipment would occur during demolition/site preparation and grading activities, potential health risks for construction were modeled in two periods:
construction period 1(demolition/site preparation and grading) is anticipated to last 5.3 months and was modeled using the minimum exposure duration of 6 months (0.5 years) available in the ADMRT, starting with infants in utero in the third trimester of pregnancy for residential risks and age 16 for worker risks; and construction period 2 (off -site improvements, building construction, architectural coatings, and paving) ) is anticipated to last 8.3 months and was modeled using an exposure duration of
0.7 year starting at age 0 for residential risks and age 16 for worker risks. The remaining exposure period was modeled using operational emissions starting in 2026 and lasting 29 years for residential risks starting at age 1, and 24 years for worker risks starting at age 17. Total health risks were calculated by summing the construction period 1, construction period 2, and operational risks for each receptor.
Cancer burden evaluates an overall population's increased cancer risk and is defined as the increases in cancer cases in the population due exposure to TACs from a project. Cancer burden is calculated differently from individual risk. Per OEHHA, cancer burden uses a 70-year exposure to evaluate population -wide cancer risk, and the cancer burden only evaluates residential exposure (not worksites).
Cancer burden is calculated by multiplying the number of residents exposed to an incremental excess Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-21 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
cancer risk of 1 in 1 million or greater by the estimated incremental excess cancer risk of the maximally exposed individual resident.
4.2.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 4.2-a: Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Less than Significant Impact. SCAG is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial Counties, and addresses regional issues relating to transportation, economy, community development, and environment. With regard to air quality planning, SCAG has prepared the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), a long-range transportation plan that uses growth forecasts to project trends out over a 20-year period to identify regional transportation strategies to address mobility needs. These growth forecasts form the basis for the land use and transportation control portions of the AQMP. These documents are utilized in the preparation of the air quality forecasts and consistency analysis included in the AQMP. Both the RTP/SCS and AQMP are based, in part, on regional population and employment growth projections originating with County and City General Plans.
Projects that are consistent with the land use designation for their project site are generally consistent with the population and growth assumptions used in the AQMP. The Project does not have a residential component and would not result in regional population growth. The Project site is designated General Manufacturing (GM) in the Downey General Plan Vision 2025. The Project's proposed warehouse uses (fulfillment center and cold storage) are consistent with the GM land use designation. As such, employment growth in the City as a result of the Project, and the related changes in regional emissions, are accounted for in the AQMP, which is crafted to bring the basin into attainment for all criteria pollutants. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the AQMP. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Threshold 4.2-b: Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would generate criteria pollutants and precursors in the short- term during construction and during long-term operation. To determine whether a project would result in cumulatively considerable emissions that would violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, a project's emissions are evaluated based on the quantitative emission thresholds established by the SCAQMD.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-22 December 2023
Exhibit D
0 600 Feet Source: Aerial (Maxar, 2021)
HELIX Receptor Locations
Environmental Planning
Figure 4.2-1
Exhibit D
Construction
Section 4.2
Air Quality
The Project's construction emissions were estimated using the CaIEEMod model as described in Section 4.2.5.1. The results of the calculations for Project construction are shown in Table 4.2-9, Maximum Daily Construction Emissions. The table identifies the maximum anticipated daily emissions for comparison with the SCAQMD daily emissions thresholds.
Table 4.2-9
MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Activity
Pollutant
Emissions (pounds per
day)
VOC
NOx
Co
Sox
PM10
PM2.5
Demolition/Site Preparation
3.0 32.6
26.8 <0.1
27.8 4.0
Grading/ Underground Utilities
4.2 56.6
41.3 0.2
78.9 11.2
Concurrent Grading and Off -Site
Improvements
4.7 60.8
48.0 0.2
79.2 11.3
Concurrent Off -Site Improvements
and Building Construction
3.0 21.4
40.1 <0.1
4.3 1.6
Building Construction
2.5 17.6
30.9 <0.1
7.5 2.5
Concurrent Building Construction,
Architectural Coating, and Paving
65.2 34.2
47.8 0.1
7.5 2.5
Maximum Daily Emissions
65.2 60.8
48.0 0.2
79.2 11.3
SCAQMD Threshold
75 100
550
150
150
55 Significant Impact?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Source: HELIX 2023 (CaIEEMod output data is provided in Appendix A of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report, Appendix B to this EIR)
VOC = volatile organic compound; NOX = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; SOX = sulfur oxides; PM10 = particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter As shown in Table 4.2-9, construction period emissions of criteria pollutants and precursors would not exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds.
Operation
The Project's operational emissions and emissions resulting from operation of the industrial businesses on the Project site at the time of the NOP were estimated using the CaIEEMod model as summarized in Section 4.2.5.1 and provided in more detail in the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report (Appendix B to this EIR). Model outputs are provided in Appendix A of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report (Appendix B to this EIR). Table 4.2-10, Maximum Daily Operational Emissions, compares the Project's net maximum daily operational emissions (Project emissions minus existing land use emissions) with the SCAQMD thresholds. Detailed modeled existing land use emissions are shown in Table 4.2-3.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-23 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
Table 4.2-10
MAXIMUM DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Category
Pollutant
Emissions (pounds per
day)
VOC
NOx
CO i
Sox
PM10
PMzs
Area
16.2 <0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
Energy
0.2 2.9
2.4 <0.1
0.2 0.2
Mobile
11.0 24.6
95.6 0.3
26.5 7.0
Project Total Daily Emissions'
27.4 27.5
98 0.4
26.7 7.3
Existing Use Daily Emissions
(18.2)
(34.5)
(74.0)
(0.3)
(16.1)
(4.6)
Project Net Daily Emissions
9.2 -7.0
24.0 0.1
10.6 2.7
SCAQMD Threshold
55 55
550
150
150
55 Significant Impact?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Source: HELIX 2023 (CaIEEMod output data is provided in Appendix A of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report, Appendix B to this EIR)
1 Totals may not sum due to rounding.
z Maximum daily emissions of VOC, SOX, PM10, and PM2.5 occur during summer, maximum daily emissions of NOx and CO occur during winter.
VOC = volatile organic compounds; NOx = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; Sox = sulfur oxides; PM10 = particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.S = particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter As shown in Table 4.2-10, both the Project actual daily emissions and the Project net emissions (Project emissions minus existing use emissions) during operation of the Project would not exceed the daily thresholds set by the SCAQMD. Short-term construction and long-term operation of the Project would not result in criteria pollutant and precursor pollutant emissions that would exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds, and impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Threshold 4.2-c: Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less than Significant Impact. As discussed above, the Project would generate pollutants during construction and operation. Exposure of sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations is discussed below for construction and operational activities.
Construction Activities
Criteria Pollutants
The localized effects from the on -site portion of daily construction emissions were evaluated at sensitive receptor locations potentially impacted by the Project according to the SCAQMD's LST method, described in Section 4.2.7.1. The proposed Project is within SRA 5, Southeast Los Angeles County.
Consistent with the LST guidelines, when quantifying mass emissions for localized analysis, only emissions that occur on site are considered. Emissions related to off -site delivery/haul truck activity and construction worker trips are not considered in the evaluation of construction -related localized impacts, as these mobile emissions are spread along area roadways and are not localized. The closest sensitive receptor is the single-family residence approximately 240 feet west of the Project site. Therefore, the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-24 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
LSTs in SRA 5 for project sites of 5 acres with receptors located between 50 and 100 meters (164 to 328 feet) are used in this analysis. Table 4.2-11, Maximum Localized Daily Construction Emissions, shows the localized construction emissions.
Table 4.2-11
MAXIMUM LOCALIZED DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Activity
Pollutant
Emissions
(pounds per
day);
NOx
CO
PM10
PMIS
Demolition/Site Preparation
26.4 23.2
1.1 1.6
Grading/ Underground Utilities
35.8 31.7
5.1 2.8
Building Construction
12.8 14.6
0.6 0.5
Architectural Coatings
0.9 1.1
0.0 0.0
Paving
7.5 10.0
0.4 0.3
Concurrent Building Construction and
Architectural Coating
20.1 25.6
0.9 0.8
Maximum Daily Emissions
35.8 31.7
5.1 2.8
SCAQMD LST Thresholds (100 meters)
176
Z437
60 15
Exceed LST (100 meters)?
No
No
No
No
Source: HELIX 2023 (CaIEEMod output data is provided in Appendix A of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report, Appendix B to this EIR)
NOX = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; PM10 = particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter As shown in Table 4.2-11, localized emissions for all criteria pollutants would remain below their respective SCAQMD LSTs. Therefore, construction of the Project would not result in exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial localized concentrations of criteria pollutants and precursors.
Asbestos Containing Material and Lead Based Paint
As described in Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, ACM and LBP have been identified in existing buildings on the Project site. Mitigation measures HAZ-2, Asbestos -Containing Material Removal, and HAZ-3, Lead -Based Paint Removal, would ensure the removal, handling, transport, and disposal of ACM and LBP during Project demolition activities comply with federal, state, and SCAQMD regulations to prevent airborne asbestos and lead emissions which may affect sensitive receptors or workers in the area. The mitigation measures require removal of ACM by a licensed State of California asbestos abatement contractor, compliance with state asbestos handling regulations (CCR Tile 8, Section 1529), state hazardous waste disposal requirements (CCR Title 22, Division 4.5), and the State Lead Accreditation, Certification and Work Practice Requirements (CCR Title 17, Division 1, Chapter 8), and SCAQMD Rule 1403.
VOC Contaminated Soil
As described in Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, soil vapor testing on the Project site has identified VOCs exceeding DTSC screening levels. The DEIR identified mitigation measures HAZ-1, VOC-Contaminated Soil, would monitor for signs of contaminated soil during Project demolition and construction activities, identify and test potentially and isolate contaminated, and ensure adequate dust suppressions is employed and ensure the safe removal, handling, transport, and disposal of contaminated soil. Mitigation measure HAZ-1 and compliance with applicable federal and state Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-25 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
regulations would ensure VOC emissions from contaminated soil would not adversely affect sensitive receptors and workers in the area.
Construction DPM Emissions
Implementation of the Project would result in the use of heavy-duty construction equipment, haul trucks, on -site generators, and construction worker vehicles. These vehicles and equipment could generate the TAC DPM. Generation of DPM from construction projects typically occurs in a localized area (e.g., at the Project site) for a short period of time. Because construction activities and subsequent emissions vary depending on the phase of construction (e.g., grading, building construction), the construction -related emissions to which nearby receptors are exposed to would also vary throughout the construction period. During some equipment -intensive phases such as grading, construction -related emissions would be higher than other less equipment -intensive phases such as building construction. An HRA was completed to evaluate potential community health risks from exposure to Project DPM emissions.
The dose (of TAC) to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk.
Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance in the environment and the extent of exposure a person has with the substance; a longer exposure period to a fixed quantity of emissions would result in higher health risks. Current models and methodologies for conducting cancer health risk assessments are associated with longer -term exposure periods (typically 30 years for individual residents based on guidance from OEHHA) and are best suited for evaluation of long duration TAC emissions with predictable schedules and locations. These assessment models and methodologies do not correlate well with the temporary and highly variable nature of construction activities. Cancer potency factors are based on animal lifetime studies or worker studies where there is consistent long-term exposure to the carcinogenic agent. There is considerable uncertainty in trying to evaluate the cancer risk from activities such as short-term construction, that will only last a small fraction of a lifetime (OEHHA 2015).
The incremental increased cancer risk is an estimate of the chance a person exposed to a specific source of a TAC may have of developing cancer from that exposure beyond the individual's risk of developing cancer from existing background levels of TACs in the ambient air. For context, the average cancer risk from TACs in the ambient air for an individual living in an urban area of California is 830 in 1 million (CARB 2015). Cancer risk estimates do not mean, and should not be interpreted to mean, that a person will develop cancer from estimated exposures to toxic air pollutants. The results of the construction period HRA incremental excess cancer risks are compared to the SCAQMD threshold in Table 4.2-12, Construction Incremental Increased Cancer Risk.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-26 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
Table 4.2-12
CONSTRUCTION INCREMENTAL INCREASED CANCER RISK
Receptor'
Construction
Period 1(chances
per million)'
Construction
Period 2 (chances
per million)'
Total Construction
Risk (chances per
million)
SCAQMDThreshold
(chances per
million)
Exceed
Threshold?
R1
1.4 1.1
2.4 10
No
R2
2.4 0.6
3.0 10
No
R3
2.3 1.2
3.5 10
No
R4
3.5 1.7
5.1 10
No
R5
0.8 0.6
1.4 10
No
R6
1.4 1.1
2.5 10
No
R7
1.5 1.2
2.7 10
No
R8
1.4 1.1
2.5 10
No
W1
<0.1
<0.1
0.1 10
No
W2
0.1 <0.1
0.1 10
No
W3
0.1 0.1
0.1 10
No
W4
0.1 0.1
0.2 10
No
W5
0.1 <0.1
0.1 10
No
W6
0.1 0.1
0.1 10
No
W7
0.1 0.1
0.1 10
No
Source: HELIX 2023.
z Refer to Figure 4.2-1 for receptor locations.
z Construction Period 1 = demolition/site preparation and grading (0.5 year). 3 Construction Period 2 = off -site improvements, building construction, architectural coatings, and paving (0.7 year).
R = residential receptor; W = worker receptor
As shown in Table 4.2-12, the incremental excess cancer risk for off -site modeled residents and workers from exposure to Project DPM emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD threshold. The total combined Project construction and operational health risks are discussed in the Operational Activities section, below.
Health risks associated with non -cancer chronic effects from TAC exposure are quantified using the maximum hazard index. A hazard index is the potential exposure to a substance divided by the REL (the level at which no adverse effects are expected). A hazard index of less than one indicates no adverse health effects are expected from the potential exposure to the substance. The maximum hazard index is the sum of hazard indices for pollutants with non -cancer health effects that target the same body organ or system. The results of the HRA show that the maximum residential non -cancer chronic maximum hazard index would be 0.01, far below the SCAQMD hazard index threshold of 1.
Operational Activities
Criteria Pollutants
As discussed in Section 4.2.7.1, SCAQMD has developed a localized significance threshold (LST) methodology that can be used by public agencies to determine whether a project may generate significant adverse health and localized air quality impacts from on -site emissions of NOx, CO, PMlo and PM2.5. For Project operational activities, emissions of NOx and CO are associated with truck and passenger vehicle emissions which primarily occur off -site. The portion of truck and passenger vehicle emissions which occur on -site are limited to low -speed circulation and idling and would be a small Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-27 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
portion of the Project operational emissions of 28 pounds per day of NOx and 98 pounds per day of CO, far below the applicable LST thresholds of 176 pounds per day NOx and 2,437 pounds per day CO.
Operational PM10 and PM2.5 emissions from areas sources (primarily landscape equipment exhaust) and energy sources (natural gas combustion exhaust) would be negligible —less than 0.3 pound per day. The only remaining on -site operational source of PM emissions would be low -speed circulation and idling exhaust emissions from trucks. The total exhaust PM emissions produced on or near the Project site by Project -related truck trips would be approximately 1.2 pounds per year (less than 0.001 pounds per day) of PM10 and PM2.5, far below the LST threshold of 15 pounds per day for PM10 and 4 pounds per day for PM2.5. Therefore, operation of the Project would not result in exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial localized concentrations of NOx or CO. Impacts related to exposure of sensitive receptors to Project operational emissions of PM (primarily DPM) are discussed and evaluated below.
CO Hotspots
Vehicle exhaust is the primary source of CO. In an urban setting, the highest CO concentrations are generally found in close proximity to congested intersections. Under typical meteorological conditions, CO concentrations tend to decrease as distance from the emissions source (e.g., congested intersection) increase. Project -generated traffic has the potential of contributing to localized "hotspots" of CO off site.
Because CO is a byproduct of incomplete combustion, exhaust emissions are worse when fossil fueled vehicles are operated inefficiently, such as in stop -and -go traffic or through heavily congested intersections. Because CO disperses rapidly, hotpots are most likely to occur in areas with limited vertical mixing such as tunnels, long underpasses, or below -grade roadways.
The analysis prepared for CO attainment in the SCAB by SCAQMD can be used as a screening tool in evaluating the potential for CO exceedances in the SCAB, and any potential need for further modeling.
CO attainment was thoroughly analyzed as part of SCAQMD's 2003 AQMP where the results of a CO hotspot analysis was conducted for the four worst -case scenario intersections in the Los Angeles metropolitan area at the peak morning and afternoon time periods. The intersections evaluated included: (1) Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway (Lynwood); (2) Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue (Westwood); (3) Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue (Hollywood); and (4) La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard (Inglewood). These analyses did not predict a violation of CO standards. The peak modeled CO concentrations due to vehicle emissions occurred at the intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, which has a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day. The 2003 AQMP estimated the 1-hour concentration for this intersection at 4.6 ppm, which indicates the most stringent 1-hour CO standard (20.0 ppm) would not likely be exceeded until the daily traffic at the intersection exceeded more than 400,000 vehicles per day (SCAQMD 2003).2 Therefore, if a project intersection does not exceed 400,000 vehicles per day, then the project does not need to prepare a detailed CO hot spot analysis.
According to the intersection analysis contained in the Project Traffic Impact Study (LLG 2023), the highest volume Project -affected intersection would be the intersection of Firestone Boulevard and the 1-605 northbound ramps. Based on the peak hour conditions of the intersection under the "Future with Project Conditions," as provided in the Project Traffic Impact Study, the intersection would carry a PM peak hour volume of 4,288 and a daily volume of approximately 45,000 vehicles (LLG 2023), significantly below the daily traffic volumes of 400,000 vehicles per day that would be expected to generate CO concentration exceedances. Based on the studies undertaken for the 2003 AQMP, there is no reason 2 Based on the ratio of the CO standard (20.0 ppm) and the modeled value (4.6 ppm).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-28 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
unique to the SCAB meteorology or unique to any Project -affected intersection to conclude that the CO concentrations any Project -affected intersection would exceed the 1-hour CO standard. Therefore, the Project does not trigger the need for a detailed CO hotspots model and the Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of CO.
Operational DPM Emissions
Implementation of the Project would result in emissions of DPM from operation of a warehouse facility.
To evaluate potential impacts to sensitive receptors from the operational DPM emissions, an HRA was completed. According to the trip generation analysis presented in the Traffic Impact Study, the Project would result in fewer daily truck trips than the existing industrial land uses on the Project site (LLG 2023). However, to be conservative (health protective), the HRA does not consider the DPM emissions from the existing land use, or the community health benefits, which would result from removing the existing industrial land use on the Project site.
The maximum estimated community incremental excess cancer risks due to exposure to Project combined 30 year construction and operational DPM TAC emissions from long term operation of the warehouse facility are presented in Table 4.2-13, Maximum Incremental Cancer Health Risk. These estimates are conservative (health protective) and assume that the student, resident, or worker is outdoors for the entire exposure period (17 to 21 hours per day, every day for 30 years for residents, and 8 hours per day, 260 days per year for 25 years for workers).
Table 4.2-13
MAXIMUM INCREMENTAL CANCER HEALTH RISK
Receptor'
Construction Risk
(chances per
million)2
Operational Risk
(chances per
million)'',
Total 30-Year Risk
(chances per
million)"'
SCAQMD Threshold
(chances per
million)
Exceed
Threshold?
R1
2.4 0.1
2.5 10
No
R2
3.0 0.2
3.2 10
No
R3
3.5 0.1
3.7 10
No
R4
5.1 0.2
5.3 10
No
R5
1.4 0.1
1.4 10
No
R6
2.5 0.1
2.6 10
No
R7
2.7 0.1
2.8 10
No
R8
2.5 0.1
2.5 10
No
W 1
0.1 <0.1
0.1 10
No
W2
0.1 <0.1
0.1 10
No
W3
0.1 <0.1
0.2 10
No
W4
0.2 <0.1
0.3 10
No
W5
0.1 <0.1
0.1 10
No
W6
0.1 0.1
0.2 10
No
W7
1 0.1
<0.1
0.1 10
No
Source: HELIX 2023.
1 Refer to Figure 4.2-1 for receptor locations.
z Construction exposure duration 1.2 years.
3 Operation exposure duration 29.
4 Totals may not sum due to rounding.
R = residential receptor; W = worker receptor
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-29 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
As shown in Table 4.2-13, the Project's incremental increased cancer risk would not exceed the SCAQMD's threshold of 10 in 1 million. The maximum chronic health risk hazard index for all modeled receptors would be 0.02 and would not exceed the SCAQMD's threshold of 1.
The maximally exposed individual resident would be receptor R4, located along Woodruff Avenue across the railroad tracks from Hall Road, and would have an incremental increased cancer risk of 5.3 in 1 million. The maximally exposed individual worker would be receptor W4, located outside the commercial building on the northeast side of the Project site, and would have an incremental increased cancer risk of 0.3 in 1 million. The point of maximum impact (PMI) would be located at Universal Transverse Mercator coordinates zone 11, 396614 meters east, 3755019 meters north, midway along the Project's northeastern property line on the shoulder of Hall Road. No residents or workers are anticipated to be located at the PMI for extended periods. If a receptor were to be located at the PMI for 30 years, the residential cancer risk would be 20.8 in 1 million.
Cancer burden evaluates an overall population's increased cancer risk and is defined as the increases in cancer cases in the population due exposure to TACs from a project. Cancer burden is calculated differently from individual risk. Per OEHHA, cancer burden uses a 70-year exposure to evaluate population -wide cancer risk, and the cancer burden only evaluates residential exposure (not worksites).
Cancer burden is calculated by multiplying the number of residents exposed to an incremental excess cancer risk of 1 in 1 million or greater by the estimated incremental excess cancer risk of the maximum exposed individual resident (MEIR). The population exposed to the 1 in 1 million or greater cancer risk was estimated by overlaying the 1 in million 70-year risk isopleth on an aerial images and counting the number of single and multi -family residential building within or touching the isopleth. 92 single family residences and 80 multi -family buildings were identified within or touching the isopleth. The multi- family building ranges in size from duplexes to 40-unit apartment buildings. To be conservative (not underestimating the population), all single-family residences were assumed to house 10 residents, and all multifamily buildings were assumed to have 40 units with 5 residents per unit (200 residents per building), for a total estimated population of 16,920. The 70-year residential cancer risk for the MEIR would be 5.5 in 1 million (5.5 x 10-6). Therefore, the estimated cancer burden from a 1.2 year exposure to Project construction emissions plus a 70 year exposure to Project operational DPM emissions would be 0.09, below the SCAQMD threshold of 0.5.
In summary, construction of the Project would not result in significant localized concentrations of criteria pollutants or TACs. Long-term operation of the Project would not result in significant localized concentrations of CO. Long-term combined P construction and operational DPM emissions would not result in cancer risk, chronic health risk, and cancer burden exceeding the respective SCAQMD thresholds. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and the impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
4.2.7 Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope for the analysis of cumulative air quality impacts is the SCAB. It is appropriate to consider the entire air basin as air emissions can travel substantial distances and are not confined by jurisdictional boundaries; rather, they are influenced by large-scale climatic and topographical features.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-30 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.2
Air Quality
While some air quality emissions can be localized, such as a CO hotspot or odor, the overall consideration of cumulative air quality is typically more regional. By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact.
The SCAB is a federal and state nonattainment area for 8-hour ozone and PM2.5. The SCAB is also a state nonattainment area for 1-hour ozone and PMlo. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development within the SCAB, and this regional impact is cumulative rather than attributable to any one source. Cumulative projects throughout the air basin generate construction and operational air pollutant emissions that contribute to air quality impacts. The thresholds of significance are relevant to whether a project's individual emissions would result in a cumulatively considerable incremental contribution to the existing cumulative air quality conditions. These thresholds are designed to identify those projects that would result in significant levels of air pollution and to assist the region in attaining the applicable state and federal ambient air quality standards. If a project's emissions would be less than those threshold levels, the project would not be expected to result in a considerable incremental contribution to the significant cumulative impact. Additionally, the SCAQMD AQMP, in combination with those from all other California nonattainment areas with serious (or worse) air quality problems as part of the State Implementation Plan, is intended to address cumulative impacts in the SCAB based on future growth predicted by growth projections from the local jurisdictions' adopted general plans; therefore, development consistent with the applicable general plan would be generally consistent with the growth projections in the air quality plans and would not result in a cumulative impact.
The Project and the other projects in the SCAB would contribute particulates and the ozone precursors VOC and NOx to the area during short-term construction. As described in the impact analysis above, emissions during Project construction would not exceed SCAQMD's daily construction threshold for identified pollutants. As such, the Project would not violate air quality standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. As discussed above, growth that is consistent with local jurisdictions' adopted general plans has been considered in the development of the SCAQMD AQMP and State Implementation Plan and would not result in a cumulative impact. As the Project is consistent with the City's General Plan, and would not result in exceedances of significance thresholds during construction or operation, it would not contribute to a cumulative air quality impact.
Therefore, the Project's construction and operational emissions would not be cumulatively considerable, and impacts would be less than significant. Since the Project would be below regional thresholds and, therefore, not cumulatively considerable, its emissions would be consistent with assumptions in the State Implementation Plan (which is based on population estimates of jurisdictions' General Plans; as the Project is consistent with the General Plan, it is included in the assumptions utilized in development of the AQMP and State Implementation Plan), and long-term emissions would not produce a cumulatively significant impact to air quality or human health. As discussed in the impact analysis above, no exceedances of LSTs, the CO standard, or substantial generation of TACs would occur as a result of the Project. These impacts would be less than significant and not cumulatively considerable.
4.2.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
No significant unavoidable air quality impacts have been identified.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.2-31 December 2023
Exhibit F1
4'2'9 References
Section 4.2
Air Quality
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2023a. California Ambient Air Quality Standards. Available at:
Accessed
September15.
2O23b.Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health. Available at:
Accessed
September15.
2023c.ADAMAir Quality Data Statistics: Top 4Summary. Available at:
2O22d.State Implementation Plan Background. Available at:
about. Accessed September 15.
2023e. Emissions inventory from on -road and off -road mobile sources in California. Available at:
yl. Accessed September 15.
2016. Ambient Air Quality Standards. May 4. Available at:
2015. Risk Management Guidance for Stationary Sources of Air Toxics. Available at:
Z011.California Code ofRegulations, Title 1IDivision 3,Chapter 9,Article 8Section Z477 Airborne Toxic Control Measure for In -Use Diesel -Fueled Transport Refrigeration Units (TRU) and TRU Generator Sets, and Facilities Where TRUs Operate. Available at:
2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April. Available at:
HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. (HEUX).2O23.Pro|ogbStewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report. September.
Institute of Transport Engineers. 2016. High -Cube Warehouse Vehicle Trip Generation Analysis. October.
Available at: httD://Iibrarv.ite.orLY/Dub/a3e6679a-e3a8-bf38-7f29-2961becdd498.
Iowa Environmental Mesonet (IEM). 2022. Fullerton Municipal Airport Windrose Plot. Available at:
Linscott Law & Greenspan (LLG). 2023. Transportation Impact Study Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project. September.
pmloobStewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City ofDowney
Exhibit F1
Section 4.2
Air Quality
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. February. Available at:
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCA{}MD).2023a. MATES VMultiple Air ToxicsExposure Study. Available at:
studLies
Accessed September 1l
Z0Z3b.Modeling Guidance for AERMOD.Available at:
gualitylmeteorological-data/Lmodeiriing-guidance. Accessed September 15. 2022. 2022 Air Quality Management Plan. Adopted December 2. Available at:
2021a. Rule 2305 — Warehouse Indirect Source Rule. May. Available at:
2021b. Second Draft Staff Report Proposed Rule 2305 — Warehouse Indirect Source Rule.
Available at:
2305 sr 2nd-draft 4-7-21 dean.odf?sfvmn=8.
2019. South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. April. Available at:
2016a. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) Attainment Status for South Coast Air Basin. February. Available at:
nt-
2016b. Rule 1113, Architectural Coatings. Amended February 5. Available at:
2009. Mass Rate Localized Significance Thresholds Look -up Tables. October. Available at:
2007. Rule 1403, Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities. Available at:
2005. Rule 403, Fugitive Dust. Amended June 3. Available at:
4. 2003. 2003 Air Quality Management Plan. Available at: https:Z,/ www.agmd.gov/home r- 2001a. Rule 401, Visible emissions. Amended November 9. Available at:
4. pmloobStewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City ofDowney
Exhibit F1
Section 4.2
Air Quality
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCA{lMD)(continued) 20O1b.Rule 1166 Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Decontamination ofSoil.
Available at:
1993.CEQAAir Quality Handbook.
1976. Rule 402, Nuisance. Adopted May 7. Available at: http:Z,/ www.agmd.govZdocszdefault- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2023a. Criteria Air Pollutants. Last updated July 20. 2023b.Learn about Asbestos. Available at:Gidi:3!31); learn-about- asJbestos.Accessed September 15.
2023c. Learn about Lead. Available at: Accessed
September15.
Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC). 2022. Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary, Montebello, California (045790).Available at:
Accessed November 2O32.
pmloobStewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City ofDowney
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.3.1 Introduction
This section of the EIR is based on two reports prepared by HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc., including a Cultural Resources Study (HELIX 2023a) and a Historical Resources Evaluation Report (HRER; HELIX 2023b). The Cultural Resources Study including a records search, Sacred Lands File search, Native American outreach, and a review of historic aerial photographs and maps, was conducted for the Project area. The report details the methods and results of the cultural resources study and has been prepared to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It is included in its entirety in Appendix C. The HRER includes the evaluation of the existing buildings on the site and is included in its entirety in Appendix D.
4.3.2 Environmental Setting
The Project is located in the City of Downey (City), in Los Angeles County, at the northwest corner of the intersection of Stewart and Gray Road and Woodruff Ave (see Figure 2-1, Regional Location, and Figure 2-2, Aerial Photograph). The 29.16-acre Project site consists of five parcels (APN's: 6284-019-013, 6284-019-014, 6284-019-015, 6284-019-016, and 6284-019-017), located at 9300, 9350, and 9400 Hall Road and 9301, 9333, and 9399 Stewart and Gray Road. It is bordered by Hall Road to the north, commercial buildings to the east, Stewart and Gray Road to the south, and industrial buildings to the west.
4.3.2.1 Natural Setting
The Project area is situated within the Los Angeles Basin, a broad, level plain bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west, the Santa Monica Mountains and Puente Hills to the north, and the Santa Ana Mountains and San Joaquin Hills to the south. It is drained by several major watercourses, including the Los Angeles, Rio Hondo, San Gabriel, and Santa Ana Rivers. The Project is located at an elevation ranging approximately 33 meters (108 feet) above mean sea level (amsl).
The Los Angeles Basin developed as a result of tectonic forces and the San Andreas fault zone, with subsidence occurring 18 to 3 million years ago (Critelli et al. 1995). While sediments dating back to the Cretaceous (66 million years ago) are preserved in the Basin, continuous sedimentation began in the middle Miocene (around 13 million years ago) (Yerkes et al., 1965). Since that time, sediments have been eroded into the basin from the surrounding highlands, resulting in thousands of feet of accumulation (Yerkes et al., 1965). Most of these sediments are marine, until sea level dropped in the Pleistocene and deposition of the alluvial sediments that compose the uppermost units in the Los Angeles Basin began.
The surficial geology of the Project site is comprised of younger alluvium, which consists of unconsolidated silt, sand, and gravel eroded from the mountains surrounding the Los Angeles Basin and deposited beginning in the Holocene (Yerkes 1960; Yerks and Cambell 2005). Soils in the vicinity consist primarily of Hueneme, San Emigdio, and Pico; Hueneme series sediments are comprised of grayish brown loamy fine sand and sandy loam with few rock fragments; San Emigdio series sediments consist of light brownish grey fines sandy loam; Pico series sediments are comprised of greyish brown sandy loam (NRCS 1997, 1999, and 2003). All three soil series support grasslands and cultivated agriculture.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
4.3.2.2 Ethnographic Setting
The Project site is located within the region that has traditionally been occupied by the Gabrieleno people (also spelled as Gabrieleno or Gabrielino; Bean and Smith 1978:538; Kroeber 1925: Plate 57).
Other Indigenous groups in the surrounding areas include the Chumash to the north and northwest, the Tataviam/Alliklik to the north, the Serrano to the east, and the Luiseno and Juaneno to the south.
Interactions between these groups are well -documented, comprised primarily of trade and intermarriage.
The name Gabrieleno identifies the Indigenous people who were administered by the Spanish missionaries settled at Mission San Gabriel. This group is now considered to have a regional dialect of the Gabrielino language, along with the Santa Catalina Island and San Nicolas Island dialects (Bean and Smith 1978:538). In the post -European contact period, Mission San Gabriel included natives of the greater Los Angeles area, while also including members of surrounding Indigenous groups from other areas such as Kitanemuk, Serrano, and Cahuilla. There is little evidence that the people we call Gabrieleno had a broad term for their group (Dakin 1978:222); rather, they identified themselves as an inhabitant of a specific community with locational suffixes (e.g., a resident of Yaanga was called a Yabit, much the same way that a resident of New York is called a New Yorker; Johnston 1962:10).
Several native words have been suggested as labels for the broader group of Indigenous people from the Los Angeles region. These include Tongva (or Tong-v; Merriam 1955:7-86) and Kizh (Kij or Kichereno; Heizer 1968:105), though evidence indicated that these terms referred to local places or smaller groups of people within the larger group that we now call Gabrieleno. Nevertheless, many present-day descendants of these people have taken on Tongva as a preferred group name because it has a native rather than Spanish origin (King 1994:12). Thus, the term Gabrieleno /Tongva is used in the remainder of this report when discussing the Indigenous people of the Los Angeles Basin and their descendants.
The Gabrieleno/Tongva subsistence economy was centered on hunting and gathering. Due to the rich and varied nature of their environment, the Indigenous population exploited mountains, foothills, valleys, deserts, riparian, estuarine, and open and rocky coastal eco-niches. Acorns served as the staple food, supplemented by the roots, leaves, seeds, and fruits of a variety of flora (e.g., islay, cactus, yucca, sages, and agave). Freshwater and saltwater fish, shellfish, birds, reptiles, and insects, as well as both large and small mammals, were also hunted or collected and served as a large part of their diet (Bean and Smith 1978:546; Kroeber 1925:631-632; McCawley 1996:119-123, 128-131).
A wide variety of tools and implements were used by the Gabrieleno/Tongva to gather and collect food resources. These included the bow and arrow, traps, nets, blinds, throwing sticks and slings, spears, harpoons, and hooks for hunting and fishing. Those groups located near the ocean used oceangoing plank canoes, or Vat, and tule balsa canoes for fishing, travel, and trade between the mainland and the Channel Islands (McCawley 1996:7). Gabrieleno/Tongva people processed their resources with a variety of tools, including hammerstones and anvils, mortars and pestles, manos and metates, strainers, leaching baskets and bowls, knives, bone saws, and wooden drying racks. Food was likewise consumed from a variety of vessels, with Catalina Island steatite used to make ollas and cooking vessels (Blackburn 1963; Kroeber 1925:629; McCawley 1996:129-138).
At the time of Spanish contact, the basis of Gabrieleno/Tongva religious life was the Chinigchinich cult, centered on the last of a series of heroic mythological figures. Chinigchinich gave instruction on laws and institutions, and also taught the people how to dance, the primary religious act for this society. He later Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-2 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
withdrew into heaven, where he rewarded the faithful and punished those who disobeyed his laws (Kroeber 1925:637-638). The Chinigchinich religion seems to have been relatively new when the Spanish arrived. It was spreading south into the southern Takic groups even as Christian missions were being built and may represent a mixture of native and Christian beliefs and practices (McCawley 1996:143-144).
The burial practices of the Gabrieleno/Tongva included both burials and cremations, with inhumation the more common practice on the Channel Islands and the adjacent mainland coastal areas, while cremation was the primary practice on the remainder of the coast and through the inland areas (Harrington 1942; McCawley 1996:157). Remains were buried in distinct burial areas, sometimes associated with villages and sometimes with no clear village association (Altschul et al. 2007). Cremation ashes have been found in archaeological contexts buried within stone bowls and in shell dishes (Ashby and Winterbourne 1966:27), as well as scattered among broken ground stone implements (Cleland et al. 2007). Archaeological data corresponds with ethnographic descriptions of an elaborate mourning ceremony that occurred over several days and included a variety of offerings, such as seeds, stone grinding tools, animal skins, baskets, wood tools, shell beads, bone and shell ornaments, and projectile points and knives. Offerings varied, both with the sex of the deceased individual as well as their status (Dakin 1978:234-365; Johnston 1962:52-54; McCawley 1996:155-165). More information can be found in the attached Cultural Report (Appendix Q.
Historical Setting
The post -contact history of California has been generally divided into three distinct periods, defined primarily by political and socioeconomic control of the region; the Spanish period (1769-1822), the Mexican period (1822-1848), and the American period (1848—present). While explorers from Spain, Russia, and Britain visited California for brief periods of times between 1529 and 1769 it was the establishment of the mission system, beginning with Mission San Diego de Alcala, that serves as the starting point of the Spanish Period. Independence from Spain, marked by the signing of the Treaty of C6rdoba 1822 and recognition by Isabella II in 1836, is the beginning of the Mexican period, while the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848 and the end to Mexican -American War, signals the beginning of the American period, with California becoming a United States Territory.
Spanish Period
Spanish explorers made sailing expeditions along the coast of Southern California between the mid- 1500s and mid-1700s. Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo was the first, stopping in 1542 at present-day San Diego Bay. Cabrillo and his crew explored the shorelines of present Catalina Island as well as San Pedro and Santa Monica bays. After Cabrillo, the Spanish naval officer Sebasti6n Vizcaino recorded most of the present California and Oregon coastline in following half -century. Vizcaino's crew also landed on Santa Catalina Island and at San Pedro and Santa Monica Bays, and is the origin of each of their names. It was based on these explorations by Cabrillo and Vizcaino that the Spanish crown laid claim to California (Bancroft 1886:96-99; Gumprecht 2001:35).
It took more than 200 years before Spain began the colonization and inland exploration of Alta California. This was marked by the 1769 overland expedition of Captain Gaspar de Portola, marking the beginning of California's Historic period, which occurred immediately after the King of Spain installed the Franciscan Order to direct religious and colonization matters in assigned territories of the Americas.
With a band of 64 soldiers, missionaries, Baja (lower) California Native Americans, and Mexican civilians, Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-3 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
Portola established the Presidio of San Diego, a fortified military outpost, as the first Spanish settlement in Alta California. In July 1769, while Portola was exploring Southern California, Franciscan Fr. Junipero Serra founded Mission San Diego de Alcala at Presidio Hill, the first of the 21 missions that would be established in Alta California by the Spanish and the Franciscan Order between 1769 and 1823.
The Portola expedition reached the present-day boundaries of Los Angeles in August of 1769, marking the first entrance of Europeans to the area. Father Juan Crespi, a member of the expedition, named "the campsite by the river Nuestra Senora la Reina de los Angeles de la Porci6ncula or "Our Lady the Queen of the Angeles of the Porciuncula." Two years later, Fr. Junipero Serra established another Catholic mission, Mission San Gabriel Arcangel, on September 8, 1771 (Engelhardt 1927). Only a decade later, a group of Mexican families traveled from Mission San Gabriel Arcangel to establish a new pueblo called El Pueblo de la Reyna de Los Angeles ("the Pueblo of the Queen of the Angels"). ►i- � '- W.
The primary emphasis of the Spanish period in California was the construction of missions and their associated presidios in the attempt to integrate the Native American population into Catholicism and communal enterprise. While the crown provided incentives to bring settlers to pueblos or towns, only three pueblos were established during the Spanish period, of which only two were successful and remain as California cities (San Josh and Los Angeles). Growth within Alta California was kept to a minimum due to several factors, such as the threat of invasion, political dissatisfaction, and unrest among the Indigenous population. After more than a decade of intermittent rebellion, New Spain (Mexico and the California territory) won independence from Spain in 1821. The following year the Mexican legislative body in California ended the isolationist policies established by the crown in order to keep Spain's monopoly on trade, and opened California ports to foreign merchants.
Extensive land grants were established in the interior during the Mexican period, in part to increase the population inland from the more settled coastal areas where the Spanish had first concentrated their colonization efforts. Rancho Los Nietos was granted to Pedro Fages in 1784. Originally containing 43,119 acres, Rancho Los Nietos was the first and largest grants deeded by the King of Spain during this period containing present day Anaheim, Artesia, Bellflower, Buena Park, Cerritos, Cypress, Downey, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Lakewood, Long Beach, Los Alamitos, Naples, Norwalk, Santa Fe Springs, Seal Beach, Sunset Beach, and Whittier (Clay and Troesken 2005). The secularization of the missions following Mexico's independence from Spain resulted in the subdivision of former mission lands and establishment of many additional ranchos.
During the primacy of the ranchos (1834-1848), landowners focused almost exclusively on the cattle industry, devoting large tracts to grazing. Cattle hides became a primary southern California export, providing a commodity to trade for goods from the east and other areas in the United States and Mexico. The number of nonnative inhabitants increased during this period because of the influx of explorers, trappers, and ranchers associated with the land grants. The rising California population contributed to the introduction and rise of diseases foreign to the Native American population, who had no immunities to these diseases.
American Period
With the Battle of Chino in 1846, war between Mexico and the United States began, starting as a clash between resident Californios and Americans in the San Bernardino area. This battle, was a defeat for the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-4 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
Americans, bolstering the Californios resolve against American rule and emboldening them to continue the offensive in later battles at Dominguez Field and in San Gabriel (Beattie 1942). Americans, however, were ultimately the victors of this two-year war. The Mexican American War officially ended with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, which resulted in the annexation of California, bringing California into its American period.
California officially became a state with the Compromise of 1850, which also designated Utah and New Mexico (with present-day Arizona) as U.S. Territories (Waugh 2003). Horticulture and livestock would continue to dominate the California economy, due to the ranchos supremacy and dependence on cattle through the 1850s. The Gold Rush began in 1848, and with the influx of people seeking gold, cattle were no longer desired mainly for their hides but also as a source of meat and other goods. During the 1850s cattle boom, rancho vaqueros drove large herds from southern to northern California to feed that region's burgeoning mining and commercial boom. Cattle were at first driven along major trails or roads such as the Gila Trail or Southern Overland Trail, but were then transported by trains as the railroads began to expand through the state. The cattle boom ended for southern California as neighbor states and territories drove herds to northern California at reduced prices. Operation of the huge ranchos became increasingly difficult, and droughts severely reduced their productivity (Cleland 2005:102-103).
The settlement called El Pueblo de la Reyna de Los Angeles (the Pueblo of the Queen of the Angels), was established in 1781 by 11 Mexican families traveling from Mission San Gabriel. It consisted of a small group of adobe -brick houses and streets and would eventually be known as the Ciudad de Los Angeles (City of Angels), which became incorporated on April 4, 1850, only two years after the Mexican — American War and five months prior to California's achieving statehood. The County of Los Angeles had been previously established on February 18, 1850, as one of the 27 counties established in the months prior to California's acquiring official statehood in the United States. After the United States took possession of California, many of the Mexican ranchos in Los Angeles county stayed intact, as stipulated by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hildago; however, a severe drought in the 1860s, as well as expensive fees in proving ownership, resulted in many of the ranchos' being sold or otherwise acquired by Americans. The majority of these were then subdivided into agricultural parcels or towns (Dumke 1944). By 1876, Los Angeles County reportedly had a population of 30,000 (Dumke 1944).
Project Vicinity
The Project site is located with the large boundaries of what was originally Rancho Los Nietos, however the ranch was split into six ranchos in 1834, per the petition of Nieto's heirs to Mexican governor Jose Figueroa; Ranch Los Alamitos, Rancho Las Bolsas, Ranch Los Cerritos, Rancho Los Coyotes, Ranch Palo Alto, and Rancho Santa Gertrudes. The Project site is within what became Rancho Santa Gertrudes, granted to Josefa Cota and sold to Lemuel Carpenter in 1843 (Hoffman 1862). A patent was filled by Lemuel Carpenter in 1852, as required by the Land Act of 1851, but died in 1859. Due to Carpenter's debt at his death, the rancho was sold to John Downey and James McFarland at a sheriff's auction, and the grant was patented to McFarland and Downey in 1870 (Willey 1886). A smaller portion of the rancho was previously filed by Thomas Sanchez Colima in 1852 and was patented to him in 1877 (Willey 1886).
Two settlements were established in the mid-19th century along the Rio Honda River, College Settlement and Gallatin, with Gallatin located where Paramount Boulevard and Florence Avenue cross.
In 1873, Downey subdivided 96 acres of the Rancho Santa Gertrudes land he purchased with McFarland and established the city of Downey. In 1883 businessmen of those three settlements were able to convince the Southern Pacific Railroad to route through Downey. The arrival of the Southern Pacific Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-5 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
Railroad sparked a boom in development, though it stayed primarily agricultural in nature into the 20th century. This eventually united the three settlements into a larger settlement of Downey, with the rail depot serving as the center of town. The agricultural focus was citrus, harkening back to John Downey's importation of several orange varieties, but grain, corn, and castor beans were also grown. After World War II, Downey began to shift from its rural origins to a suburban city of industry with a focus on aviation. Factories from Vultee Aircraft had been constructed in the city during World War II and manufacturing continued after its purchase by North American Aviation, then Rockwell International, and finally Boeing. Before being purchased by Boeing, Rockwell International was a subcontractor of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and its Downey factory was involved with the development of the Apollo Space and Space Shuttle programs. The City was incorporated in 1956, which was followed by the institution of a charter government in 1964.
4.3.3 Regulatory Framework
4.3.3.1 Federal Regulations
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
Federal regulations that would be applicable to the Project if there is a federal nexus (e.g., permitting or funding from a federal agency) consist of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and its implementing regulations (16 United States Code 470 et seq., 36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 800). Section 106 of the NHPA requires Federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on "historic properties", that is, properties (either historic or archaeological) that are eligible for the NRHP. To be eligible for the NRHP, a historic property must be significant at the local, state, or national level under one or more of the following four criteria:
A. associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history;
B. associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; C. embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; and/or D. has yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
4.3.3.2 State Regulations
California State Office of Historic Preservation
The California State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) is responsible for administering federally and state mandated historic preservation programs to further the identification, evaluation, registration, and protection of California's irreplaceable archaeological and historical resources under the direction of the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), a gubernatorial appointee, and the State Historical Resources Commission.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-6 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
OHP's responsibilities include:
• Identifying, evaluating, and registering historic properties; • Ensuring compliance with federal and state regulatory obligations; • Encouraging the adoption of economic incentives programs designed to benefit property owners; and
• Encouraging economic revitalization by promoting a historic preservation ethic through preservation education and public awareness and, most significantly, by demonstrating leadership and stewardship for historic preservation in California.
California Environmental Quality Act
Section 15064.5(b)(1) of the State CEQA Guidelines specifies that projects that cause "...physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historic resource would be materially impaired" shall be found to have a significant impact on the environment. Pursuant to CEQA, a historical resource is a resource listed in, or eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) (Section 2.2). In addition, resources included in a local register of historic resources, or identified as significant in a local survey conducted in accordance with state guidelines, are also considered historic resources under CEQA, unless a preponderance of the facts demonstrates otherwise. According to CEQA, the fact that a resource is not listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the CRHR, or is not included in a local register or survey, shall not preclude a Lead Agency, as defined by CEQA, from determining that the resource may be a historic resource as defined in California PRC Section 5024.1.7.
CEQA applies to archaeological resources when (1) the archaeological resource satisfies the definition of an historical resource, or (2) the archaeological resource satisfies the definition of a "unique archaeological resource." A unique archaeological resource is an archaeological artifact, object, or site that has a high probability of meeting any of the following criteria (PRC §21083.2(g)):
1. The archaeological resource contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions, and there is a demonstrable public interest in that information.
2. The archaeological resource has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type.
3. The archaeological resource is directly associated with a scientifically -recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.
California Register of Historic Resources
Created in 1992 and implemented in 1998, the CRHR is "an authoritative guide in California to be used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the state's historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change" (PRC §5024.1(a)). Certain properties, including those listed in or formally determined eligible for listing in the NRHP and California Historical Landmarks (CHLs) numbered 770 and higher, are automatically included in the CRHR. Other properties recognized under the California Points of Historical Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-7 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
Interest program, identified as significant in historic resources surveys, or designated by local landmarks programs may be nominated for inclusion in the CRHR.
For listing in the CRHR, a historical resource must be significant at the local, state, or national level under one or more of the following four criteria:
A. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; B. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; C. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; D. It has yielded or has the potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.
Under 14 CCR Section 15064.5(a)(4), a resource may also be considered a "historical resource" for the purposes of CEQA at the discretion of the lead agency.
All resources that are eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR must have integrity, which is the authenticity of a historical resource's physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance. Resources, therefore, must retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. In an archaeological deposit, integrity is assessed with reference to the preservation of material constituents and their culturally and historically meaningful spatial relationships. A resource must also be judged with reference to the particular criteria under which it is proposed for nomination.
Native American Heritage Commission
Section 5097.91 of the PRC established the Native American Heritage Commission (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 5097.9 of the PRC, 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 PRC specifies a protocol to be followed when the NAHC receives notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a county coroner.
Government Code Sections 625(R) and 6254.10
These sections of the California Public Records Act were enacted to protect archaeological sites from unauthorized excavation, looting, or vandalism. Section 6254(r) explicitly authorizes public agencies to withhold information from the public relating to "Native American graves, cemeteries, and sacred places maintained by the NAHC." Section 6254.10 specifically exempts from disclosure requests for "records that relate to archaeological site information and reports, maintained by, or in the possession of the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-8 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR), the State Historical Resources Commission, the State Lands Commission, the NAHC, another state agency, or a local agency, including the records that the agency obtains through a consultation process between a Native American tribe and a state or local agency." Health and Safety Code, Sections 7050 and 7052
Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5 declares that, in the event of the discovery of human remains outside of a dedicated cemetery, all ground disturbance must cease and the county coroner must be notified. Section 7052 establishes a felony penalty for mutilating, disinterring, or otherwise disturbing human remains, except by relatives.
Assembly Bill 52
California State Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) revised PRC Section 21074 to include Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) as an area of CEQA environmental impact analysis. As a general concept, a TCR is similar to the federally defined termed Traditional Cultural Properties (TCP); however, it incorporates consideration of local and state significance and required mitigation under CEQA. According to Patricia L. Parker and Thomas F. King (1998), "Traditional" in this context refers to those beliefs, customs, and practices of a living community of people that have been passed down through the generations, usually orally or through practice. The traditional cultural significance of a historic property, then, is derived from the role the property plays in a community's historically rooted beliefs, customs, and practices.
A TCR may be considered significant if it is (i) included in a local or state register of historical resources; (ii) determined by the lead agency to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in PRC Section 5024.1; (iii) a geographically defined cultural landscape that meets one or more of these criteria; (iv) a historical resource described in PRC Section 21084.1 or a unique archaeological resource described in PRC Section 21083.2; or (v) a non -unique archaeological resource if it conforms with the above criteria.
Consultation with local tribes pursuant to AB 52 requirements is discussed in Section 4.12, Tribal Cultural Resources.
4.3.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds
The significance criteria used to evaluate the Project impacts related to cultural resources are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to cultural resources would occur if the Project would:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5;
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries; Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-9 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
4.3.5 Methodology and Assumptions
The proposed Project was evaluated against the above significance criteria/thresholds as the basis for determining the level of significance concerning impacts to cultural resources. Information regarding potential impacts to cultural resources has been reviewed and summarized from a variety of sources, including records searches, Sacred Lands File search, Native American outreach, a review of historic aerial photographs and maps, and the Project -specific Cultural Resources Study (Appendix C), and Project -specific HRER (Appendix D). This EIR acknowledges that issues that would be addressed by the codes and regulations would be subject to the regulations in place at the time of permitting.
4.3.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 4.3-a: Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The cultural resources records search and study did not identify any known historical resources within the Project area. The entire Project area has been disturbed by nineteenth and twentieth-century agricultural activities, irrigation systems, road construction, transportation (railway) and utility (transmission and gas line) installation, and manufacturing uses. The entire Project site is currently developed and has been since the 1950s. Two buildings were identified in the archival research as being present in the Project area between 1896 and 1951, both likely associated with the previous agricultural uses. These were demolished and replaced with the existing on -site buildings beginning in the early 1950s, with the first structures constructed in 1951 and the latest circa 1967. Considering the extended presence of parking lots and limited change to the Project area since 1952, it is possible that there are cultural resources associated with the small structure identified in the archival research as having been present in the northwest corner of the site under the asphalt. There is also the possibility of similar resources present in the northeast corner, but development in that portion of the Project area has likely destroyed or heavily impacted possible resources there.
In addition, the HIRER was prepared to evaluate the buildings on the Project site. None of the buildings were found to be of significant historic value. Historical background research demonstrates that the existing on -site buildings are not associated with any significant historic events or person(s). The buildings were not designed by master architects nor are they exemplary embodiments of an architectural style. The evaluated existing on -site buildings were found not historically significant and determined not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR. Therefore, the buildings do not qualify as historical resources for the purposes of CEQA.
While no historical resources were identified during the cultural and historic resources studies, the possibility exists that unknown, buried historical resources may be present within the Project site and the proposed Project could cause a significant impact to unknown historical resources within the Project area. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would address unanticipated discoveries of historical resources, and the proposed Project's potential impacts to unknown historical resources would be reduced to below the level of significance.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-10 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measures
CUL-1: Cultural Monitoring Program. The construction contractor shall implement an archaeological and Native American monitoring program during grading and other ground -disturbing activities (i.e., trenching for utilities) which are to occur below the current layer of fill. The monitoring program shall include the retention of a qualified archaeologist and a Native American monitor. The archaeological and Native American monitors shall attend a pre -construction meeting with the construction manager and be in attendance during initial ground -disturbing activities at the Project site. The monitors shall determine the extent of their presence during soil disturbing activities.
The archaeological and Native American monitors shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading and other ground -disturbing activity if cultural resources are encountered. If an artifact is encountered, all operations within 50 feet of where the artifact was found shall be suspended immediately, the City shall be notified, and the qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the Native American monitor, shall evaluate the significance of the find. If cultural material is determined to be significant, the qualified archaeologist shall coordinate with the consulting tribes and City staff to develop and implement appropriate treatment measures. Pursuant to California PRC § 21083.2(b), avoidance is the preferred method of preservation. The archaeologist and the tribal representative shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that will be implemented to protect the newly discovered cultural resource(s), including but not limited to, avoidance in place, excavation, relocation, and further evaluation of the discoveries in accordance with CEQA. No further ground disturbance shall occur in the area of the discovery until the City approves the measures to protect the significant cultural resource(s).
Threshold 4.3-b: Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The cultural resources records search and study did not identify any known archaeological resources within the Project area. Due to the presently developed nature of the site, the Project area did not undergo an intensive pedestrian survey and so the ground surface was not investigated. The Project site is located in alluvial soils, where there is the potential for buried cultural resources. As discussed above under Threshold 4.3-a, it is possible that there are buried cultural resources in the northwest and northeast corners of the site under the asphalt.
While no archaeological resources were identified during the cultural resources study, the possibility exists that unknown, buried archaeological resources may be present within the Project site and the proposed Project could cause a significant impact to unknown archaeological resources within the Project area. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would address unanticipated discoveries of archaeological resources, and the proposed Project's potential impacts to unknown archaeological resources would be reduced to below the level of significance.
Mitigation Measures
See Mitigation Measure CUL-1 above.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-11 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
Threshold 4.3-c: Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The archaeological records search did not reveal any resources known to contain human remains within or near the Project site. While no human remains are known to be present onsite, implementation of the proposed Project has the potential to result in unanticipated discovery of human remains through discovery of unknown burial sites. If human remains are found, those remains would require proper treatment in accordance with applicable laws, including Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. If human remains are found during excavation, excavation would be halted in the vicinity of the find until the County Coroner has investigated and appropriate recommendations have been made for the treatment and disposition of the remains. Substantial adverse changes to the significance of human remains resulting from implementation of the proposed Project would be reduced to below the level of significance through the implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2, which is in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e).
Mitigation Measures
CUL-2: Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. If the discovery of human remains occurs on the Project site, the specific procedures outlined by the NAHC, in accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code, must be followed:
1. All excavation activities within 60 feet of the remains will immediately stop, and the area will be protected with flagging or by posting a monitor or construction worker to ensure that no additional disturbance occurs.
2. The Project owner or their authorized representative will contact the Los Angeles County Coroner.
The coroner will have two working days to examine the remains after being notified in accordance with HSC 7050.5. If the coroner determines that the remains are Native American and are not subject to the coroner's authority, the coroner will notify NAHC of the discovery within 24 hours.
4. NAHC will immediately notify the Most Likely Descendant (MILD), who will have 48 hours after being granted access to the location of the remains to inspect them and make recommendations for their treatment. Work will be suspended in the area of the find until the County approves the proposed treatment of human remains.
If human remains of Native American origin are discovered or unearthed, the applicant shall contact the consulting Tribe, as detailed in Mitigation Measures TCR-1, TCR-2, and TCR-3 regarding any finds and provide information after the archaeologist makes an initial assessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input concerning significance and treatment. Once the find has been appropriately mitigated, as determined and documented by a qualified archaeologist, work in the area may resume.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-12 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
4.3.7 Cumulative Impacts
This section presents an analysis of the cumulative effects of the proposed Project in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects that could cause cumulatively considerable impacts. The geographic context for the analysis of cumulative impacts related to cultural resources is the City of Downey and immediately surrounding lands, including cumulative projects occurring in the City of Norwalk.
Cumulative impacts to cultural resources could occur if any of these projects, in conjunction with the proposed Project, would have impacts on resources that, when considered together, would be significant; however, the proposed Project would not affect known cultural resources. Further, while there is the potential for impacts to unknown cultural resources, such as those that might be discovered during ground -disturbing activities like construction and demolition associated with the proposed Project, Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 would provide procedures for inadvertent discovery of cultural resources or human remains and require a cultural resources monitoring program to ensure that impacts are reduced to a less -than -significant level. Taken together, implementation of these mitigation measures would ensure that the Project would not have an impact on cultural resources.
Therefore, the Project's contribution to cumulative effects related to cultural resources would be less than significant and not cumulatively considerable.
4.3.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
No significant unavoidable impacts have been identified.
4.3.9 References
Altschul, Jeffrey H., John G. Douglass, Richard Ciolek-Torrello, Sarah Van Galder, Benjamin R. Vargas, Kathleen L. Hull, Donn R. Grenda, Jeffrey Homburg, Manuel Palacios-Fest, Steven Shelley, Angela Keller, and David Maxwell. 2007. Life at the Nexus of the Wetlands and Coastal Prairie, West Los Angeles. Proceedings of the Society for California Archaeology 20:34-42.
Ashby, G.E., and J.W. Winterbourne. 1966. A Study of Primitive Man in Orange County and Some of Its Coastal Areas. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 2(1):5-52.
Bancroft, Hubert. 1886. History of California, Volume Ill: 1825-1840. A.L. Bancroft & Co., San Francisco Bean, Lowell J., and Charles R. Smith. 1978. Gabrielino. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 538- 549. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.
Beattie, George. 1942 The Battle of Chino. Historical Society of Southern California. 24(4): 143-160.
Blackburn, Thomas. 1963. Ethnohistoric Descriptions of Gabrielino Material Culture. Annual Report, Archaeological Survey. University of California, Los Angeles.
Clay, Karen and Wener Troesken. 2005. Ranchos and the Politics of Land Claims. In Land of Sunshine: An Environmental History of Metropolitan Los Angeles, ed. William Deverell and Greg Hise.
University of Pittsburgh Press. Pittsburgh, PA.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-13 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
Cleland, Robert Glass. 2005. The Cattle on a Thousand Hills: Southern California, 1850-80. The Huntington Library, San Marino, California.
Cleland, James H., Andrew L. York, and Lorraine M. Willey. 2007. Piecing Together the Prehistory of Landing Hill: A Place Remembered. EDAW Cultural Publications No. 3. EDAW, Inc., San Diego, California.
Dakin, Susanna Bryant. 1978. A Scotch Paisano in Old Los Angeles: Hugo Reid's Life in California, 1832- 1852 Derived from His Correspondence. Originally published 1939. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London, United Kingdom.
Dumke, Glenn. 1944. The Boom of the Eighties in Southern California. Huntington Library Publications, San Marino, California.
Engelhardt, Zephyrin. 1927. San Gabriel Mission and the Beginning of Los Angeles. Mission San Gabriel, San Gabriel, California.
Harrington, John P. 1942. Culture Element Distributions: XIX Central California Coast. University of California Anthropological Records 7(1):1-46.
Heizer, Robert F. 1968. Village Names in Twelve California Mission Records. Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey 74.
HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. (HELIX). 2023a. Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project Cultural Resources Study. March.
2023b Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project Historic Resources Evaluation Report. February.
Hoffman, Ogden. 1862. Reports of Land Cases Determined in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Numa Hubert, San Francisco.
Johnston, Bernice E. 1962. California's Gabrielino Indians. Frederick Webb Hodge Anniversary Publication Fund 8, Southwest Museum, Los Angeles, California.
King, Chester D. 1994. Native American Placenames in the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, Agoura Hills. Topanga Anthropological Consultants, California.
Kroeber, A.L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bulletin 78, Bureau of American Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Reprinted 1976 by Dover Publications, Inc., New York.
McCawley, William. 1996. The FirstAngelinos: The Gabrielino Indians of Los Angeles. Malki-Ballena Press, Banning, California.
Merriam, Clinton Hart. 1955. Studies of California Indians. University of California Press. Berkeley, California.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-14 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1997. Palmview Series. United States Department of Agriculture. Electronic document available at:
htt s: soilseries,sc.e oveusda, ov C;SD Docs P HUENEME.html, accessed April 7, 2022. 1999. Tujunga Series. United States Department of Agriculture. Electronic document available at: htt s: soilseriesoscae ov.usdao ov C;SD Docs T SAN EMIGDIO.html, accessed April 7, 2022. 2003. Tujunga Series. United States Department of Agriculture. Electronic document available at: https:ZZsoilseries,sc,e ov.usda, ov ®SD Docs T PiCO.html, accessed April 7, 2022.
Waugh, John. 2003. On the Brink of Civil War: The Compromise of 1850 and How it Changed the Course of American History. The American Crisis Series. Books on the Civil War Era No. 13. Scholarly Resources Inc, Delaware.'
Yerkes, Robert. 1960. Geologic map of the Whittier and La Habra quadrangles, the western Puente Hills, Los Angeles basin, California. U.S. Geological Survey
Yerkes, Robert and Russel Campbell. 2005. Preliminary Geological Map of the Los Angeles 30' x 60' Quadrangle, Southern California. U.S. Geological Survey Yerkes, Robert, T.H. McCulloh, J.E. Schoellhamer, and J.G. Vedder. 1965. Geology of the Los Angeles Basin — an introduction. Geological Survey Professional Paper 420-A.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-15 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.3
Cultural Resources
This page intentionally left blank
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.3-16 December 2023
Exhibit D
4.4 ENERGY
4.4.1 Introduction
Section 4.4
Energy
This section provides an evaluation of existing energy conditions, describes the regulatory framework for energy, and provides an evaluation of potential energy use and related impacts for the Project. The following discussion is related to the potential for the proposed Project to have impacts due to inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy resources during construction or operation, or a conflict with a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
4.4.2 Environmental Setting
Energy sources are classified as non-renewable if they cannot be replenished in a short period of time, such as fossil fuels. Fossil fuels, which consist of oil, coal, natural gas, and associated byproducts, provide the energy required for most motorized vehicles and generation of electricity at most power plants.
Thus, the discussion of energy conservation most relevant to the Project is focused on Project -generated electricity demand, natural gas demand, and fuel consumption.
4.4.2.1 Electricity
Southern California Edison (SCE) provides electricity to the City of Downey. SCE provides electric power to more than 15 million persons in 15 counties and in 180 incorporated cities, within a service area encompassing approximately 50,000 square miles. Based on SCE's 2020 Power Content Label Mix, SCE derives electricity from varied energy resources including: fossil fuels, hydroelectric generators, nuclear power plants, geothermal power plants, solar power generation, and wind farms. SCE also purchases from independent power producers and utilities, including out-of-state suppliers (CEC 2020).
California's electricity industry consists of traditional utilities, private generating companies, and state agencies, each with a variety of roles and responsibilities to ensure that electrical power is provided to consumers. The California Independent Service Operator (ISO) is a nonprofit public benefit corporation and is the impartial operator of the state's wholesale power grid and is charged with maintaining grid reliability, as well as directing uninterrupted electrical energy supplies to California's homes and communities. While utilities still own transmission assets, the ISO routes electrical power along these assets, maximizing the use of the transmission system and its power generation resources. The ISO matches buyers and sellers of electricity to ensure that enough power is available to meet demand. To these ends, every five minutes the ISO forecasts electrical demands, accounts for operating reserves, and assigns the lowest cost power plant unit to meet demands while ensuring adequate system transmission capacities and capabilities (California ISO 2022).
Part of the ISO's responsibility is to plan and coordinate grid enhancements to ensure that electrical power is provided to California consumers. As a result, utilities file annual transmission expansion/ modification plans to accommodate the state's growing electrical needs. The ISO reviews and either approves or denies the proposed additions. Additionally, the ISO works with other areas in the western United States electrical grid to ensure that adequate power supplies are available to the state. In this manner, continuing reliable and affordable electrical power is assured to existing and new consumers throughout the state.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
The Southern California region's electricity reliability has been of concern for the past several years due to the planned retirement of aging facilities that depend upon once -through cooling technologies, as well as the June 2013 retirement of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (San Onofre). While the once -through cooling phase -out has been ongoing since the May 2010 adoption of the State Water Resources Control Board's once -through cooling policy, the retirement of San Onofre has complicated the situation. California ISO studies revealed the extent to which the South California Air Basin (SCAB) and the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB) region were vulnerable to low -voltage and post -transient voltage instability concerns. A preliminary plan to address these issues was detailed in the 2013 Integrative Energy Policy Report (IEPR) after a collaborative process with other energy agencies, utilities, and air districts. Similarly, the subsequent 2021 IEPR's provides information and policy recommendations on advancing a clean, reliable, and affordable energy system (CEC 2022b).
4.4.2.2 Natural Gas
SoCalGas (SCG) is the principal distributor of natural gas in Southern California, providing retail and wholesale customers with transportation, exchange, storage services, and procurement services to most retail core customers. SCG is a gas -only utility and, in addition to serving the residential, commercial, and industrial markets, provides gas for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and electric generation (EG) customers in Southern California (CGEU 2020). California's existing gas supply portfolio is regionally diverse and includes supplies from on- and off -shore California sources, southwestern United States supply sources, the Rocky Mountains, and Canada (CGEU 2020). The CPUC regulates natural gas utility service for approximately 10.8 million customers that receive natural gas from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), SCG, San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E), Southwest Gas, and several smaller natural gas utilities (CPUC 2022a).
Natural gas demand statewide, including volumes not served by utility systems, is expected to decrease at an annual average rate of 1.0 percent through 2035. The decline in throughput demand is due to modest economic growth, CPUC-mandated energy efficiency standards and programs, and SB 350 goals.
Other factors that contribute to the downward trend are tighter standards created by revised Title 24 Codes and Standards, renewable electricity goals, a decline in core commercial and industrial demand, and conservation savings linked to Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) (CGEU 2020). From 2020 to 2035, residential demand is expected to decline approximately one percent per year, on average due to declining use per meter. The core, non-residential markets (comprising core commercial, core industrial and Natural Gas Vehicles [NGV]) are also expected to decline at an average annual rate of 1.0 percent by 2035. However, the NGV market is expected to grow 1.45 percent over the forecast horizon. The NGV market is expected to grow due to government (federal, state, and local) incentives and regulations encouraging the purchase and operation of alternate fuel vehicles as well as the increased use of renewable natural gas that provides significant GHG emission reduction benefits. The noncore, non-EG markets are expected to decline 0.3 percent by 2035. That decline is being driven by very aggressive energy efficiency goals and associated programs. Total EG load, including large cogeneration and non - cogeneration EG for a normal hydro year, is expected to decrease 2.0 percent per year by 2035 (CGEU 2020).
SCG also implements energy efficiency programs. Programs administered by SCG include services that help customers evaluate their energy efficiency options and adopt recommended solutions, as well as simple equipment -retrofit improvements, such as rebates for new hot water heaters (CGEU 2020). The overall annual energy efficiency cumulative savings goal is forecast to increase from approximately 4 billion cubic feet (Bcf) in 2020 to 53 Bcf by 2035 (CGEU 2020).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-2 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
Natural gas service must be provided in accordance with SCG's policies and extension rules on file with CPUC at the time contractual agreements are made. The viability of natural gas is based on present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. Table 4.4-1, Natural Gas Consumption in SCG Service Area (2020), shows the natural gas consumption by SCE service area with the latest data available from California Energy Commission (CEC).
Table 4.4-1
NATURAL GAS CONSUMPTION IN SCG SERVICE AREA (2020)1,2
Agriculture &
Commercial
Commercial
'
Mining
Industry
Residential
Total Usage
Water Pump
Building
Other
Construction
74.4 801.6
87.9 1,615.6
226.2
2,425.8
5231.4
z California Energy Commission, Energy Consumption Data Management System, California Energy Consumption Database, interactive web tool (CEC 2022a)
z All units are million therms.
SCG = SoCalGas
As shown in the table above, SCG produced approximately 5.2 billion therms in 2020, of which approximately 1.6 billion therms were consumed by industry and 802 million therms were consumed by the commercial building sector.
4.4.2.3 Transportation Fuel
The Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) identified 36.2 million registered vehicles in California (DMV 2021), and those vehicles consume an estimated 17.2 billion gallons of fuel each year'. Gasoline (and other vehicle fuels) are commercially provided commodities and would be available to the Project patrons and employees via commercial outlets.
Fossil fuels are known to create almost all the United States' transportation fuels. As stated above, energy sources include oil, coal, and natural gas, which are non-renewable resources that formed when prehistoric plants and animals died and were gradually buried by layers of rock. Fossil fuel industries drill or mine for these energy sources, burn them to produce electricity, or refine them for use as fuel for heating or transportation (USDOE 2022).
The 2021 IEPR provides the results of the California Energy Commission's assessments of a variety of energy related issues facing California. The IEPR includes a transportation energy and demand forecast that considers vehicles and associated fuels, incorporates consumer preference, regulatory impacts, economic and demographic projects, projected improvements in technology, and other market factors (CEC 2022c). The most recent forecast estimated that between 2021 and 2035, gasoline fuel demand for transportation in California will decline primarily due to increases in electrification and the use of zero emission vehicles (ZEV) (CEDC 2022d). Petroleum -based fuels will continue to represent the largest shares of transportation energy demand. Under the high -demand case for Light Duty Vehicle, gasoline consumption will drop from approximately 13.8 billion gross gasoline equivalents (GGE) in 2020 to approximately 11 billion GGE in 2035. Electricity consumption would increase from less than 1 billion GGE in 2020 to approximately 4 billion GGE which includes raw energy used by the plug in -vehicles z Fuel consumptions estimated utilizing information from EMFAC2021.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-3 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
(PEV), but also the gasoline energy avoided by using more PEVs. Diesel energy forecast is less than 1 GGE in 2020 and will remain roughly the same in 2035 (CEC 2022c).
Use of biomethane or renewable gas fuel in California's transportation sector has grown significantly to displace an increasing portion of fossil pipeline gas, and the state is poised for significant development of new California -based production plants in several sectors. The CEC expects a continual growth trend because of state and local government incentives, vehicle and engine technology advances, and an existing network of fueling stations located in key areas of the state (CEC 2022c).
Vehicles in California consumed 179 million diesel gallons equivalent (DGE) of fossil gas and renewable gas. Renewable gas has been directed primarily at vehicle fuels because of the low -carbon fuel standard, comprising 77 percent of the pipeline gas supply for vehicles in 2019. Renewable gas displaced 5 percent of the diesel fuel consumption in trucks (CEC 2022c).
4.4.3 Regulatory Framework
4.4.3.1 Federal
At the federal level, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) are three agencies with substantial influence over energy policies and programs. Generally, federal agencies influence and regulate transportation energy consumption through establishment and enforcement of fuel economy standards for automobiles and light trucks, through funding of energy -related research and development projects, and through funding for transportation infrastructure improvements. Major federal energy -related laws and plans are discussed below.
Federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act
The Federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) of 2018 grants specific authority to the President of the U.S. to fulfill obligations of the U.S. under the international energy program; provide for the creation of a Strategic Petroleum Reserve capable of reducing the impact of severe energy supply interruptions; conserve energy supplies through energy conservation programs; provide for improved energy efficiency of motor vehicles, major appliances and other consumer products; provide a means for verification of energy data to assure the reliability of energy data; and to conserve water by improving the water efficiency of certain plumbing products and appliances. Furthermore, the EPCA establishes fuel economy standards for on -road motor vehicles in the U.S. (GPO 2018).
The National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA), which is part of USDOT, is responsible for establishing additional vehicle standards and revising existing standards under the EPCA. The NHTSA has set new fuel economy standards that are estimated to require a combined passenger car and light truck average fuel economy level of 54.5 mpg by 2025 (NHTSA 2012). It should be noted that heavy-duty vehicles (i.e., vehicles and trucks over 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight) are not currently subject to fuel economy standards. Compliance with federal fuel economy standards is not determined for each individual vehicle model; instead, compliance is determined on the basis of each manufacturer's average fuel economy for the portion of their vehicles produced for sale in the United States. For corporate manufacturers' compliance with the fuel economy standards, the USEPA calculates a value for each manufacturer, based on city and highway fuel economy test results and vehicles sales. On the basis of the information generated under the program, USDOT is authorized to assess penalties for Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-4 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
noncompliance. In the course of over a 30-year history, this regulatory program has resulted in vastly improved fuel economy throughout the United States' vehicle fleet, and also has protected against inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary use of energy.
In 2012, NHTSA established passenger and light truck Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for model years (MY) 2017 through 2021 which required, on an average industry fleet -wide basis, a range from 40.3 to 41.0 miles per gallon in MY 2021. In 2019, the NHTSA and USEPA amended certain existing CAFE and greenhouse gas emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks and establish new standards, covering MY 2021 through 2026. However, in March 2022, the NHTSA and USEPA revised the standards covering MY 2024 through 2026 to require an industry fleet -wide average of roughly 49 mpg in MY 2026 (NHTSA 2022).
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) promoted the development of inter -modal transportation systems to maximize mobility, as well as to address national and local interests in air quality and energy. The ISTEA contained factors that metropolitan planning organizations were required to address in developing transportation plans and programs, including some energy - related factors. To meet the new ISTEA requirements, metropolitan planning organizations adopted explicit policies defining the social, economic, energy, and environmental values that were to guide transportation decisions in that metropolitan area. The planning process for specific projects would then address these policies. Another requirement was to consider the consistency of transportation planning with federal, state, and local energy goals. Through this requirement, energy consumption was expected to become a decision criterion, along with cost and other values that determine the best transportation solution (USDOT 2020).
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) builds upon the initiatives established in the ISTEA legislation discussed previously. TEA-21 authorizes highway, highway safety, transit, and other efficient surface transportation programs. TEA-21 continues the program structure established for highways and transit under ISTEA, such as flexibility in the use of funds, emphasis on measures to improve the environment, and focus on a strong planning process as the foundation of good transportation decisions. TEA-21 also provides for investment in research and its application to maximize the performance of the transportation system through, for example, deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems, to help improve operations and management of transportation systems and vehicle safety (USDOT 2020).
4.4.3.2 State
At the state level, the CEC and CPUC are two agencies with authority over different aspects of energy.
CPUC regulates privately -owned utilities in the energy, rail, telecommunications, and water sectors. CEC collects and analyzes energy -related data, prepares statewide energy policy recommendations and plans, promotes, and funds energy efficiency programs, and adopts and enforces appliance and building energy efficiency standards. California is exempt under federal law from setting state fuel economy standards for new on -road motor vehicles. The California Air Resources Board (CARE) has responsibility for mobile source emissions in the state. Major state energy -related laws and plans are discussed below.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-5 December 2023
Exhibit D
California Air Resources Board
Section 4.4
Energy
CARB, which has the responsibility for control of emissions from mobile sources (CARB 2000), took the lead on addressing diesel emissions in the State of California. The first step to significantly reduce diesel emissions occurred in 2000 when CARB approved the "Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel -Fueled Engines and Vehicles" or Diesel Risk Reduction Plan.
Most recently, the CARB approved the 2020 Mobile Source Strategy, which will deliver broad environmental and public health benefits, as well as support much needed efforts to modernize and upgrade transportation infrastructure, enhance system -wide efficiency and mobility options, and promote clean economic growth in the mobile sector (CARB 2021a). The 2020 Mobile Source Strategy includes concepts to move the state towards the goal that 100 percent of sales will be ZEVs by 2035 for on -road light -duty vehicles, 100 percent of California -registered trucks will be ZEVs by 2045, where feasible for on -road medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, and 100 percent of off -road vehicles and equipment will be zero -emission by 2035, where technologically feasible (CARB 2021a).
Advanced Clean Cars and Trucks
In January 2012, CARB approved the Advanced Clean Cars Program, a new emissions -control program for MY 2017 through 2025. The program combines the control of smog -causing pollutants and GHGs with requirements for greater numbers of zero -emission vehicles (ZEVs). By 2025, when the rules will be fully implemented, the new automobiles will emit 40 percent fewer GHG emissions and 75 percent fewer smog -forming emissions (CARB 2022a). The program also requires car manufacturers to offer for sale an increasing number of ZEVs each year, including battery electric, fuel cell, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (EV) (CARB 2022a).
In December 2012, CARB adopted regulations allowing car manufacturers to comply with California's GHG emissions requirements for model years 2017-2025 through compliance with the USEPA GHG requirements for those same model years (CARB 2012). CARB's Clean Cars 11 program, which updates the state's passenger vehicle emission standards and ZEV requirements, was adopted in 2022.
Additionally, CARB adopted the Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) Regulation in 2021. The ACT Regulation is part of a holistic approach to accelerate a large-scale transition of zero -emission medium -and heavy- duty vehicles from Class 2b to Class 8 and includes a manufacturers ZEV sales requirement and a one- time reporting requirement for large entities and fleets (CARB 2021b). CARB is also developing a medium and heavy-duty zero -emission fleet regulation with the goal of achieving a zero -emission truck and bus California fleet by 2045 everywhere feasible and significantly earlier for certain market segments such as last mile delivery and drayage applications.
Heavy-duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Regulation
In December 2008, CARB adopted the Heavy-duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Regulation to reduce GHG emissions by improving the fuel efficiency of heavy-duty tractors that pull 53-foot or longer box -type trailers. Fuel efficiency is improved through improvements in tractor and trailer aerodynamics and the use of low rolling resistance tires. The tractors and trailers subject to this regulation must use USEPA SmartWay certified tractors and trailers or retrofit their existing fleet with SmartWay verified technologies. Trucks serving the Project that are not drayage trucks would be regulated under this statute and required to comply with SmartWay standards to reduce GHG emissions. As part of the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-6 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
regulatory package for the Heavy-duty Vehicle GHG Regulation, CARB also reviewed and implemented the Drayage Truck Regulation and Truck and Bus Regulation. These three regulations were collectively adopted to address emissions from trucks (CARB 2010).
Low Carbon Fuel Standard
Executive Order S-01-07 (January 18, 2007) requires a 10 percent or greater reduction in the average fuel carbon intensity for transportation fuels in California regulated by CARB. CARB identified the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) as a Discrete Early Action item under AB 32 and the final resolution (09-31) was issued on April 23, 2009. In 2009, CARB approved for adoption the LCFS regulation which became fully effective in April 2010 and is codified at Title 17, CCR, Sections 95480-95490. The LCFS will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the carbon intensity of transportation fuels used in California by at least 10 percent by 2020. Carbon intensity is a measure of the GHG emissions associated with the various production, distribution, and use steps in the "lifecycle" of a transportation fuel. On December 29, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California issued several rulings in the federal lawsuits challenging the LCFS. Opponents argued that the LCFS violates the Supremacy Clause (US Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2) and Commerce Clause (US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3) of the U.S. Constitution by discriminating against fuel produced out-of-state. One of the district court's rulings preliminarily prevented CARB from enforcing the regulation. In January 2012, CARB appealed that decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. On September 18, 2013, the Ninth Circuit issued its decision affirming the District Court's conclusion that LCFS ethanol and initial crude -oil provisions are not facially discriminatory but remanded to the District Court to determine whether the LCFS ethanol provisions are discriminatory in purpose and effect. Additionally, the Ninth Circuit remanded to the District Court with instructions to vacate the preliminary injunction against CARB's enforcement of the regulation (Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Corey [2013] U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit No. 12-15131.).
Scoping Plan
The Scoping Plan is a strategy CARB develops and updates at least one every five years, as required by AB 32. It lays out the transformations needed across our society and economy to reduce emissions and reach our climate targets. The current 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan) is the third update to the original plan that was adopted in 2008. The initial 2008 Scoping Plan laid out a path to achieve the AB 32 mandate of returning to 1990 levels of GHG emissions by 2020, a reduction of approximately 15 percent below business as usual. The 2008 Scoping Plan included a mix of incentives, regulations, and carbon pricing, laying out the portfolio approach to addressing climate change and clearly making the case for using multiple tools to meet California's GHG targets. The 2013 Scoping Plan assessed progress toward achieving the 2020 mandate and made the case for addressing short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs). The 2017 Scoping Plan also assessed the progress toward achieving the 2020 limit and provided a technologically feasible and cost-effective path to achieving the SB 32 mandate of reducing GHGs by at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. On December 15, 2022, CARB approved the 2022 Scoping Plan. The 2022 Scoping Plan lays out a path to achieve targets for carbon neutrality and reduce anthropogenic GHG emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels no later than 2045, as directed by Assembly Bill 1279. Additionally, the Scoping Plan seeks to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The actions and outcomes in the plan will achieve significant reductions in fossil fuel combustion by deploying clean technologies and fuels; further reductions in SLCPs; support for sustainable development; increased action on natural and working lands to reduce emissions and sequester carbon; and the capture and storage of carbon (CARB 2022b).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-7 December 2023
Exhibit D
California Energy Commission
Section 4.4
Energy
The CEC was formed by Assembly Bill (AB) 1575 and is the state's primary energy policy and planning agency. AB 1575, which was adopted in 1975 in response to the oil crisis of the 1970s, also requires EIRs to consider wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy and was the driving force behind the creation of state CEQA Guidelines Appendix F. The CEC was established to address the state's energy challenges and is responsible for the creation of the State Energy Plan. The State Energy Plan identifies the emerging trends related to energy supply, demand, conservation, public health and safety, and the maintenance of a healthy economy. The State Energy Plan recommends that the state assist in the transformation of the transportation system to improve air quality, reduce congestion, and increase the efficient use of fuel supplies with the fewest environmental and energy costs. The State Energy Plan also identifies a number of strategies, including providing assistance to public agencies and fleet operators, encouraging urban designs that reduce vehicles miles traveled, and accommodating pedestrian and bicycle access.
California Public Utilities Commission
CPUC regulates investor -owned electric and natural gas utilities operating in the state, including SCG.
The CPUC regulates the natural gas rates and natural gas services, including in -state transportation over the utilities' transmission and distribution pipeline systems, storage, procurement, metering, and billing.
CPUC policy on natural gas infrastructure and capacity is to: 1) allow gas utilities to gain better access to new sources of supply, develop a diverse supply portfolio, and have adequate storage capacity for core procurement requirements; 2) ensure adequate, diverse utility natural gas pipeline and storage infrastructure for utilities and consumers; 3) assure delivery of supplies with a high degree of certainty, especially for core customers; 4) minimize transmission constraints; 5) provide access to a diverse portfolio of supplies; 6) reduce the likelihood of price spikes; 7) allow more gas to be stored when prices are low; 8) allow customers to match supplies with requirements; and 9) obtain fair access to utility transmission systems for suppliers and pipelines.
California Energy Code
The California Energy Code (Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]) was established in 1978 to reduce California's energy consumption. Energy use standards in the code are updated periodically to reduce per -capita energy use and to include new programs, such as the California Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards and the California Solar Initiative. In 2008, the CPUC adopted the state's first "Long -Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan" for achieving energy savings in various sectors throughout California. In 2011, the Strategic Plan was updated to include a chapter related to lighting.
Title 20 of the California Code of Regulations
California's Appliance Efficiency Regulations (CCR Title 20, Parts 1600-1608) contain energy performance, energy design, water performance, and water design standards for appliances (including refrigerators, ice makers, vending machines, freezers, water heaters, fans, boilers, washing machines, dryers, air conditioners, pool equipment, and plumbing fittings) that are sold or offered for sale in California (CEC 2022d).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-8 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations
The California Energy Code (CCR Title 24, Part 6) was established in 1978 to reduce California's energy consumption. Energy use standards in the code, referred to as Building Energy Efficiency Standards, are updated on an approximately three-year cycle (CEC Standards). Energy consumption by new buildings in the state is regulated by The California Energy Code via the Building Energy Efficiency Standards. These efficiency standards (commonly referred to as Title 24 standards) apply to newly constructed buildings and additions and alterations to existing buildings. (CEC 2022e). They are designed to reduce wasteful, uneconomic, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy, and enhance outdoor and indoor environmental quality. The current 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Energy Code), which went into effect January 1, 2023, focus on four key areas in new construction of homes and business by encouraging (1) electric heat pump technology and use; (2) establishing electric -ready requirements when natural gas is installed; (3) expanding solar photovoltaic (PV) system and battery storage standards; and (4) strengthening ventilation standards to improve indoor air quality. Specifically, the 2022 updates require all new homes to be electric -ready. That means buildings with gas stoves have electrical panels and wiring to support a switch to electric stoves. Further advancements and cost reductions will continue to expand electric options for heating, cooking, laundering, and EV charging to meet all Californians' needs (CEC 2022e). The Project will be subject to the Title 24 Standards in effect at the time of building permits. It is projected that the current building efficiency standards will reduce 10 million metric tons of GHGs over 30 years. On a statewide basis throughout 2023, all measures for newly constructed buildings and altered components of existing buildings collectively would save approximately 27 million therms of fossil fuel natural gas and 1.4 billion kWh of electricity (CEC 2021).
Green Building Standards
The purpose of Title 24, specifically Part 11, known as the California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code, is to encourage sustainable construction practices that reduce negative impacts on the environment through planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, material conservation and resource efficiency, and environmental quality (CBSC 2022). The CALGreen Code is applicable to the planning, design, operation, construction, use, and occupancy of every newly constructed building or structure throughout the state. The California Green Building Standards applicable to this Project are detailed below.
Non -Residential Mandatory Measures
• Short-term bicycle parking. If the new project or an additional alteration is anticipated to generate visitor traffic, provide permanently anchored bicycle racks within 200 feet of the visitors' entrance, readily visible to passers-by, for 5% of new visitor motorized vehicle parking spaces being added, with a minimum of one two -bike capacity rack (5.106.4.1.1). • Long-term bicycle parking. For new buildings with tenant spaces that have 10 or more tenant - occupants, provide secure bicycle parking for 5% of the tenant -occupant vehicular parking spaces with a minimum of one bicycle parking facility (5.106.4.1.2). • Designated parking for clean air vehicles. In new projects or additions to alterations that add 10 or more vehicular parking spaces, provide designated parking for any combination of low - emitting, fuel -efficient and carpool/van pool vehicles as shown in Table 5.106.5.2 (5.106.5.2).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-9 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
• Electric vehicle (EV) charging stations. New construction shall facilitate the future installation of EV supply equipment. The compliance requires empty raceways for future conduit and documentation that the electrical system has adequate capacity for the future load. The number of spaces to be provided for is contained in Table 5.106. 5.3.3 (5.106.5.3). Additionally, Table
5.106.5.4.1 specifies requirements for the installation of raceway conduit and panel power requirements for medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicle supply equipment for warehouses, grocery stores, and retail stores.
• Outdoor light pollution reduction. Outdoor lighting systems shall be designed to meet the backlight, uplight, and glare ratings per Table 5.106.8 (5.106.8). • Construction waste management. Recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65% of the nonhazardous construction and demolition waste in accordance with Section 5.408.1.1.
5.405.1.2, or 5.408.1.3; or meet a local construction and demolition waste management ordinance, whichever is more stringent (5.408.1).
• Excavated soil and land clearing debris. 100% of trees, stumps, rocks and associated vegetation and soils resulting primarily from land clearing shall be reuse or recycled. For a phased project, such material may be stockpiled on site until the storage site is developed (5.408.3). • Recycling by Occupants. Provide readily accessible areas that serve the entire building and are identified for the depositing, storage, and collection of non -hazardous materials for recycling, including (at a minimum) paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, plastics, organic waste, and metals or meet a lawfully enacted local recycling ordinance, if more restrictive (5.410.1). • Water conserving plumbing fixtures and fittings. Plumbing fixtures (water closets and urinals) and fittings (faucets and showerheads) shall comply with the following:
o Water Closets. The effective flush volume of all water closets shall not exceed
1.28 gallons per flush (5.303.3.1)
o Urinals. The effective flush volume of wall -mounted urinals shall not exceed 0.125 gallon per flush (5.303.3.2.1). The effective flush volume of floor- mounted or other urinals shall not exceed 0.5 gallons per flush (5.303.3.2.2).
o Showerheads. Single showerheads shall have a minimum flow rate of not more than
1.8 gallons per minute and 80 psi (5.303.3.3.1). When a shower is served by more than one showerhead, the combine flow rate of all showerheads and/or other shower outlets controlled by a single valve shall not exceed 1.8 gallons per minute at 80 psi (5.303.3.3.2).
o Faucets and fountains. Nonresidential lavatory faucets shall have a maximum flow rate of not more than 0.5 gallons per minute at 60 psi (5.303.3.4.1). Kitchen faucets shall have a maximum flow rate of not more than 1.8 gallons per minute of 60 psi (5.303.3.4.2). Wash fountains shall have a maximum flow rate of not more than
1.8 gallons per minute (5.303.3.4.3). Metering faucets shall not deliver more than
0.20 gallon per cycle (5.303.3.4.4). Metering faucets for wash fountains shall have a maximum flow rate not more than 0.20 gallons per cycle (5.303.3.4.5).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-10 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
• Outdoor potable water uses in landscaped areas. Nonresidential developments shall comply with a local water efficient landscape ordinance or the current California Department of Water Resources' Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), whichever is more stringent (5.304.1).
• Water meters. Separate submeters or metering devices shall be installed for new buildings or additions in excess of 50,000 SF or for excess consumption where any tenant within a new building or within an addition that is project to consume more than 1,000 gallons per day (GPD) (5.303.1.1 and 5.303.1.2).
• Outdoor water uses in rehabilitated landscape projects equal or greater than 2,500 SF.
Rehabilitated landscape projects with an aggregate landscape area equal to or greater than 2,500 SF requiring a building or landscape permit (5.304.3). • Commissioning. For new buildings 10,000 SF and over, building commissioning shall be included in the design and construction processes of the building project to verify that the building systems and components meet the owner's or owner representative's project requirements (5.410.2).
State of California Energy Plan
The CEC is responsible for preparing the State Energy Plan, which identifies emerging trends related to energy supply, demand, conservation, public health and safety, and the maintenance of a healthy economy. The Plan calls for the state to assist in the transformation of the transportation system to improve air quality, reduce congestion, and increase the efficient use of fuel supplies with the least environmental and energy costs. To further this policy, the plan identifies several strategies, including assistance to public agencies and fleet operators and encouragement of urban designs that reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and accommodate pedestrian and bicycle access.
AB 1493 Pavley Regulations and Fuel Efficiency Standards California AB 1493, enacted on July 22, 2002, required CARB to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. Under this legislation, CARB adopted regulations to reduce GHG emissions from non-commercial passenger vehicles (cars and light -duty trucks). Although aimed at reducing GHG emissions, specifically, a co -benefit of the Pavley standards is an improvement in fuel efficiency and consequently a reduction in fuel consumption.
California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989
The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) requires each jurisdiction in California to submit detailed solid waste planning documents for the California Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery's (CalRecycle) approval, set diversion requirements of 25 percent in 1995 and 50 percent in 2000, established a comprehensive statewide system of permitting, inspections, enforcement, and maintenance for solid waste facilities, and authorized local jurisdictions to impose fees based on the types or amounts of solid waste generated (CalRecycle 2018a). As of 2007, jurisdictional diversion rates are no longer calculated; with the passage of the Per Capita Disposal Measurement System (SB1016), only per capita disposal rates are measured. CalRecycle compares each jurisdiction's reported disposal tons to population to calculate per capita disposal in pounds per person Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-11 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
per day (CalRecycle 2018b). The City achieved an annual per capita disposal rate of 6.2 pounds per day per resident, and 23.1 pounds per day per employee in 2020, the most recent data available (CalRecycle 2020a).
AB 341 (2011) amended AB 939 to include a provision declaring that it is the policy goal of the state that not less than 75 percent of solid waste generated be source reduced, recycled, or composted by the year 2020, and annually thereafter (Public Resources Code Section 41780.01). The state did not meet its 75 percent by 2020 recycling goal set out in AB 341. However, CalRecycle identified five strategies and three additional focus areas that can be pursued by the state to reach the 75 percent goal (CalRecycle 2020b).
The City contracts with CR&R for waste management. Regarding construction and demolition material, CR&R offers a variety of ways to recycle and reduce waste on construction sites. Landfill is further reduced through construction waste re -planning, source separation, mixed recycling, and the reuse or donation of used or excess construction materials (City 2016).
Renewable Portfolio Standard
Established in 2002 under SB 1078, accelerated in 2006 under SB 107, in 2011 under SBX1-2, in 2015 under SB 350, and again in 2018 under SB 100, California's Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) required retail sellers of electric services to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020 (SB 1078, SB 1368). The 33 percent standard was consistent with the RPS goal established in the Scoping Plan (CARB 2008). Initially, the RPS provisions applied to investor - owned utilities, community choice aggregators, and electric service providers. SBX1-2 added, for the first time, publicly owned utilities to the entities subject to RPS.
Senate Bill 350 (SB 350), signed in 2015, increased the RPS from 33 percent in 2020 to 50 percent by 2030 and will double the energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas final end uses of retail customers through energy efficiency and conservation by 2030 (CARB 2017).
Senate Bill 100 (SB 100) was subsequently signed in 2018 and directs CPUC, CEC, and CARB to plan for 100 percent of total retail sales of electricity in California to come from eligible renewable energy resources and zero -carbon resources by December 31, 2045. SB 100 also accelerates the RPS target to 50 percent by 2026 and to 60 percent by 2030.
4.4.3.3 Local
Connect SoCal: Southern California Association of Governments 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020 RTP/SCS) On September 3, 2020, SCAG's Regional Council unanimously voted to approve and fully adopt the Connect SoCal (2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy). This long- range vision plan balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental, and public health goals. The 2020 RTP/SCS aims at reducing GHG emissions per capita by 19 percent by 2035.
Additionally, daily per capita vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the SCAG region is projected to decrease in 2045 from 21.8 miles under the Baseline to 20.7 miles with Connect SoCal RTP/SCS.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-12 December 2023
Exhibit D
City of Downey Energy Action Plan
Section 4.4
Energy
One of the discretionary measures the City has undertaken is the development of Downey's Energy Action Plan (EAP). The EAP was adopted in 2015 to reduce the energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of the City and meet the goals of AB 32. The EAP identifies current energy measures that are being considered as well as future opportunities that will contribute to the energy reduction goal. The EAP analyzes current energy usage, defines energy reduction goals, and provides action steps to achieve those goals (City of Downey 2015).
City of Downey General Plan, Vision 2025
Downey Vision 2025, the General Plan update to the City's 1992 General Plan, was adopted on January 25, 2005. Downey Vision 2025 provides a long-range policy guide (Goal 4.6. Conserve energy resources) to address changes to the City. The City of Downey outlines building design considerations within the Conservation Chapter of Downey Vision 2025 that are applicable to the proposed Project as follows:
• Policy 4.6.1. Promote the conservation of energy by residents and businesses to conserve energy.
o Program 4.6.1.1. Provide incentives for people to use energy sources such as solar energy.
o Program 4.6.1.2. Implement program to mitigate potential negative impacts on residents and businesses during energy "black outs."
4.4.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant energy impact would occur if implementation of the Project would:
a) Result in potentially significance environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction or operation; and/or b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
4.4.5 Methodology and Assumptions
The evaluation of potential impacts related to energy usage that may result from the construction and long-term operations of the Project has been conducted as described below. This analysis of impacts on energy resources qualitatively discusses the proposed Project's temporary (i.e., construction) and permanent (i.e., operational) effects -based significance criteria/threshold's application, outlined above.
The impact conclusions consider the potential for changes in environmental conditions, as well as compliance with the regulatory framework enacted to protect the environment.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-13 December 2023
Exhibit D
4.4.5.1 Construction
Section 4.4
Energy
Construction energy consumption would result primarily from transportation fuels (e.g., diesel and gasoline) used for haul trucks, heavy-duty construction equipment, and construction workers traveling to and from the Project site. Construction activities can vary substantially from day to day, depending on the specific type of construction activity and the number of workers and vendors traveling to the Project site. This analysis considers these factors and provides the estimated maximum construction energy consumption for the purposes of evaluating the associated impacts on energy resources.
4.4.5.2 Operations
Project operational activities would require energy in the form of electricity and natural gas for building heating, cooling, lighting, water demand and wastewater treatment, consumer electronics, and other energy needs, as well as transportation fuels (primarily gasoline) for trucks and worker vehicles traveling to and from the Project site.
The energy usage required for Project operations and routine and incidental maintenance activities is estimated based on the increase in energy demand from the new buildings. The energy usage would be required to comply with building energy standards pursuant to Title 24 Building Standards Code and CALGreen Code.
4.4.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 4.4-a: Would the Project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction or operation?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would result in the demand for energy resources during both construction and long-term operation, as described below. Long-term operations effects would include fossil fuels related to transportation as well as electricity and natural gas usage during building operations.
Construction Energy Use
Project -related construction activities would consume energy, primarily in the form of diesel fuel (e.g., mobile construction equipment) and electricity (e.g., power tools). There are no known conditions within the Project site that would require non-standard equipment or construction practices that would be less energy -efficient than at comparable construction sites in the region or the state. Energy use would also occur through the burning of fuel by vehicles used by workers commuting to and from the construction site.
The proposed Project would be required to comply with applicable state regulations. Construction equipment would be required to comply with the latest USEPA and CARB engine emissions standards, which require the use of highly efficient combustion engines designed to minimize unnecessary fuel consumption. Per CALGreen regulations, the proposed Project is required to divert 65 percent of waste generated during construction from landfills. Recycling construction and demolition waste not only keeps it from being transported to the landfill, but also reduces the "upstream" energy consumption from the manufacturing of virgin material. Some incidental energy conservation would also occur Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-14 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
through compliance with CCR Title 13, Motor Vehicles, section 2449(d)(3) Idling, which limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than 5 minutes, thereby avoiding unnecessary and wasteful consumption of fuel. Best Available Control Measures (BACMs) inform construction equipment operators of this requirement. Enforcement of idling limitations is realized through periodic site inspections conducted by City building officials, and/or in response to citizen complaints.
Construction activities for the proposed Project would also be required to monitor air quality emissions using applicable regulatory guidance such as the South Coast AQMD CEQA Guidelines, which are discussed in greater detail in Section 4.2.3.3 of this EIR. This requirement indirectly relates to construction energy conservation because air pollutant emissions are reduced through the efficient use of equipment and materials, which results in reduced energy consumption. There are no aspects of the Project that would foreseeably result in the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy during construction activities.
As discussed above, there are no unusual characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment that would be less energy efficient than at comparable construction sites in the region or state. Therefore, it is expected that construction fuel consumption associated with the Project would not be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than other similar projects of this nature.
Therefore, impacts to energy resources associated with the proposed Project's construction activities would be less than significant.
Transportation Energy Use
Trips by individuals traveling to and from the proposed Project site are anticipated to occur through the use of passenger vehicles or by walking, biking, or public transit. Passenger vehicles would be mostly powered by gasoline, with some fueled by diesel or electricity. Public transit would be powered by diesel or natural gas and could potentially be fueled by electricity. This analysis is centered on the overall VMT associated with the proposed Project, which would be subject to the City's development review process and would be required to demonstrate consistency with DGP and DMC requirements.
The proposed Project would be required to comply with state and regional fuel efficiency requirements, including SB 32's Scoping Plan that includes a 50 percent reduction in petroleum use in vehicles and the 2020 Connect SoCal RTP/SCS provides strategies to reduce energy use and GHG emissions. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in a substantial increase in transportation - related energy uses, such that it would result in a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Impacts would be less than significant.
As discussed in Section 2.5.4, Sustainability Features, the Project would include features to support the usage of electrical vehicles. Pre -installed conduit for electrical charging would be installed to 50 percent of the total vehicle parking spaces onsite. Ten percent of those parking spaces would have fully commissioned electric vehicles charging stations at the start of Project operations (5 percent of total parking spaces). Conduit would also be installed for 15 truck stalls, allowing for future use by EV trucks.
Electricity and Natural Gas Usage
Operational -related energy consumption associated with the proposed Project would include building electricity, water, and natural gas usage. Operation of the warehouse and office space would use electricity and potentially natural gas to run various appliances and equipment, including refrigeration Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-15 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
systems for warehoused products, air conditioning and heating systems for office and warehouse space, ventilation equipment, water heaters, lights, and numerous other devices. Generally, electricity use is higher in the warmer months due to increased air conditioning needs, and natural gas use is highest when the weather is colder because of high heating demand.
California's Building Energy Efficiency Standards create uniform building codes to reduce the state's energy consumption and provide energy efficiency standards for all buildings. These standards are incorporated within the California Building Code and would be expected to substantially reduce the growth in electricity and natural gas use. For example, requirements for energy -efficient lighting, heating and cooling systems and green building materials are expected to save additional electricity and natural gas. These savings are cumulative, doubling as years go by. The City of Downey Municipal Code 8990 has adopted by reference Title 24 Part 6 of the California Energy Code, which sets building energy efficiency standards. The proposed Project would be required to comply with these standards.
The California Public Utilities Commission adopted California's first Long -Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan, which reiterated the following four specific programmatic goals known as the "Big Bold Energy Efficiency Strategies" that were established by the CPUC in Decisions D.07-10-032 and D.07-12-051:
• All new residential construction will be ZNE by 2020
• All new commercial construction will be ZNE by 2030
• 50 percent of commercial buildings will be retrofit to ZNE by 2030 • 50 percent of new major renovations of state buildings will be ZNE by 2025 Development of the proposed Project would be required to meet or exceed the provisions included in the California Energy Code Building Energy Efficiency Standards (CCR Title 24 Part 6) and the CALGreen Code (CCR Title 24, Part 11).
The California Energy Commission's 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards contains energy efficiency requirements for newly constructed buildings which include the generation of energy via solar power.
For a project of this size with a total of 46,785 square feet (20,000 SF of office space and 26,785 SF of refrigerated warehouse space), a minimum of 20.6 kWdc of photovoltaic energy would be required in order to meet the California Energy Commission's 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. The required 20.6 kWdc would generate an estimated 36066 kWh annually to offset the energy demand of the proposed Project. As discussed in Section 2.5.4, Sustainability Features, the warehouse building boult be outfitted with a solar -ready roof and solar panels with a capacity to generate up to 3.13 watts per square foot of office space. Electrical metering would be installed to allow for easy monitoring of electricity usage.
For the reasons discussed above, the proposed Project would not result in a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during construction or operations. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-16 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
Threshold 4.4-b: Would the Project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Less than Significant Impact. The following section analyzes the proposed Project's consistency with the applicable state and local regulations previously discussed in Section 4.4.3 Regulatory Framework.
The Project would be consistent with the California Energy Plan. This plan identifies several strategies and encourages urban designs that reduce VMT and accommodate pedestrian and bicycle access. The Project site is located along major transportation corridors with proximate access to the regional freeway system, including 1-605, 1-5, 1-105, and 1-710, that would limit travel along local roadways and provide more efficient regional mobility in terms of travel and fuel. In addition, Project VMT impacts would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of Project design features and transportation demand measures, as discussed in Section 4.11, Transportation, of this EIR). The Project would also include roadway frontage improvements to include new sidewalks to accommodate pedestrians.
The Project would be consistent with CARB's 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality in that it would provide a new, modern industrial use at the Project site, which is designated and zoned for industrial uses. The proposed Project would be designed to meet current building energy efficiency standards and include photovoltaic energy generation to help meet state requirements. Additionally, it would achieve a LEED Silver certification. These sustainability features would be consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan.
The Project would be consistent with applicable goals of the Connect SoCal 2020 RTP/SCS (refer to Appendix I of this EIR). With regards to energy efficiency, the Project would be designed to include sustainability features consistent with energy demand and consumption reduction strategies of the RTP/SCS. The Project site is located near freeways with convenient access to reduce travel of local roadways and foster goods movement. Incorporation of solar and EV charging infrastructure would provide renewable energy facilities. Additionally, the Project would be designed to achieve 2022 Title 24 energy standards, at a minimum, through implementation of energy -reduction measures, such as energy -efficient lighting and appliances, water -efficient appliances and plumbing fixtures, and water - efficient landscaping and irrigation. Connect SoCal 2020 RT/SCS also aims to reduce per capita GHG emissions in the region by 19 percent by 2035, as well as decrease daily per capita VMT in the region.
Project VMT impacts (evaluated on a per employee metric given the proposed use) would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of Project design features and transportation demand measures, as discussed in Section 4.11, Transportation, of this EIR).
In addition to state and regional energy efficiency standards, the City of Downey has several local plans that focus on energy efficiency. The City of Downey's EAP was adopted in 2015 with the goal of reducing energy consumption and GHG emissions to meet the goals of AB 52. The proposed Project would be designed to meet current building energy efficiency standards and include photovoltaic energy generation to help meet state requirements (refer to Section 2.5.4 in this EIR).
The City's General Plan contains a long-range plan to conserve energy resources which includes building design guidelines encouraging the use of solar energy. As discussed in Section 2.5.4, Sustainability Features, the proposed Project includes rooftop solar energy generation as part of building design. The City's EAP also includes strategies to reduce energy use and increase building efficiency. The proposed Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-17 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
Project would be designed to meet state and local energy efficiency standards for new construction and would not conflict with the energy objectives of the General Plan nor the strategies in its EAP.
Furthermore, the proposed Project would be designed to meet the energy efficiency and sustainability standards of the SEED Silver Certification. The proposed Project would comply with California Building Code requirements for new development, including the 2022 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards and the 2022 California Green Building Standards requirements. Title 24 of the California Energy Code includes energy reduction strategies and regulations that apply to the Project, including implementation of energy -reduction measures, such as energy efficient lighting and appliances, water efficient appliances and plumbing fixtures, and water efficient landscaping and irrigation.
For these reasons, the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
4.4.7 Cumulative Impacts
Potential cumulative impacts on energy would result if the proposed Project, in combination with past, present, and future projects, would result in the wasteful or inefficient use of energy. This could result from development that would not incorporate sufficient building energy efficiency measures, not achieve building energy efficiency standards, or would result in the unnecessary consumption of energy during construction and/or operation. Projects that include development of large buildings or other structures that would have the potential to consume energy in an inefficient manner would have the potential to contribute to a cumulative impact.
Construction and operations associated with the proposed Project would result in the use of energy in an efficient manner that would comply with applicable state and local regulations. The use of energy would not be substantial in comparison to statewide electricity, natural gas, gasoline, and diesel demand. New capacity or supplies of energy resources would not be required. The proposed Project and new development projects located within the cumulative study area would also be required to comply with all the same applicable federal, state, and local measures aimed at reducing fossil fuel consumption and conserving energy. The anticipated impacts of the proposed Project, in conjunction with cumulative development in the vicinity, would result in increased energy use. Potential land use impacts are site - specific and require evaluation on a case -by -case basis. As noted above, the proposed Project would not result in the wasteful or inefficient use of energy or result in significant impacts to state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Therefore, cumulative energy impacts resulting from the Project would be less than significant and not cumulatively considerable.
4.4.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
No significant unavoidable energy impacts have been identified.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-18 December 2023
Exhibit D
4.4.9 References
Section 4.4
Energy
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2022a. Advanced Clean Cars Program - About. Available at:
htt s: WW2.arb.ca. ov our -Work ro rams advanced -clean -cars- ro ram about. Accessed December 9.
2022b. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. Available at:
htt s: WW2.arb,ca. ov our -Work ro rams ab-32-climate-chan e-sco in - Ian 2022-sco in - plan -documents.
2021a. 2020 Mobile Source Strategy. Available at:
https:�/WW2.arb.ca,Gov/sites�default�files/2021-12/2020 Mobile Source Strate m,pdf.
Accessed October 21, 2021.
2021b. Advanced Clean Trucks Fact Sheet. Available at:
htt s: WW2.arb.ca. ov sites default files 2021-08 200625factsheet ADA. df. August 20, 2021. 2017. California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Available at:
https:/AWW3.arb.ca.govlcc/scopingp_lan/scopin _plan 2017.pdf 2012. LEV /I/ and ZEV Regulation Amendments for Federal Compliance Option. Available at:
http:l�WWW.arb.ca.a�re�ac�2012/leviiidtcl2�eviiidtcl2.htm. 2010. Truck and Bus Regulation Amendments, Final Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking, December 16-17, 2010. Available at:
http:ZZWWW.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010Atruckbuslo tbfsor.pdf. 2008. California Air Resources Board, Climate Change Scoping Plan. December 2008. Available at: http://WWW.arb.ca.I ov/cc�scopinplan�document/adopted scoJainlansdf. 2000. Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel -Fueled Engines and Vehicles. October 2000. Available at: htt s: WW2.arb.ca. ov our -Work ro rams diesel- risk-reduction-olan
California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). 2022.2022 California Green Building Standards Code, Part 11. Available at: h1tpsJkcodes.iccsafe.or content CAGBC2022P1 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2020a. Jurisdiction Diversion/Disposal Rate Summary (2007-Current), Jurisdiction Perris. Available at:
tt s: WWW2,calrec cle.ca. ov LGCentral DiversionPro ram JurisdictionDiversion Post2006. 2020b. California's 75 Percent Initiative Defining the Future. Last Updated January 21, 2020.
Available at: httpsJ- -admin.s3-us-West-
2.amazonaWs.comf2019 0000 CalReccle 75Percentlnitiative.Ddf. 2018a. Glossary of Terms, Integrated Waste Management Act. Last Updated September S, 2018.
Available at: https://WWW.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentraiLGiossary/##IV1lMA .
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-19 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
Government Publishing Office (GPO). 2018. Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Public Law 94-163, As Amended Through 115-270, Enacted October 23, 2018, November 5, 2018. Available at:
htt s: www. ovinfo. ov content k COMPS-845 df COMPS-845, df.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). 2022. Corporate Average Fuel Economy - Finalizes CAFE Standards for MYs 2024-2026. May 2, 2022. Available at:
https:Z/ www.govinfo.govlcontentZpkgZFR-2022-05-02� pdff 2022-07200�adf. 2012. Federal Register, Vol. 77, No. 199, Rules & Regulations. 2017 and Later Model Year Light - Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards, effective December 14, 2012. Available at: https:/Avvvv 0 . 0v-10- ypdfL2012-21972, pdf.
U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT). 2020. Federal Highway Administration, Legislation, Regulations, and Guidance, Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 Information, February 24, 2020. Available at:
https://www.fhwa.dot.govb anning public involvement/archiveZIegislation/istea.cfm.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-21 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.4
Energy
This page intentionally left blank
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.4-22 December 2023
Exhibit D
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
4.5.1 Introduction
Section 4.5
Geology and Soils
This section of the EIR evaluates potential impacts associated with geology and soils resulting from implementation of the proposed Project. The following discussion is based on a Project Geotechnical Investigation (Southern California Geotechnical 2021), as well as geological and fault mapping from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the California Department of Conservation (DOC), soil mapping by the National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and the Downey General Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report. The geotechnical report is contained in Appendix E of this EIR.
4.5.2 Environmental Setting
4.5.2.1 Geologic Setting
The City of Downey (City) is located in the Los Angeles Basin, between the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers. Alluvial materials associated with the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers likely underlie the City (City of Downey 2004a). Much of the City, including the Project site, is underlain by Quaternary alluvium and marine deposits (Figure 4.5-1, Regional Geology). Other geologic units in the vicinity include older Quaternary alluvium and marine deposits, Pliocene marine rocks, and Miocene marine rocks.
4.5.2.2 Project Site Geology
The Project site is underlain by artificial fill and alluvium. Artificial fill extends to depths of approximately
2.5 to 5.4 feet below the ground surface. The fill soils generally consist of loose to medium dense silty fine sands and fine sands. Alluvium occurs in areas below the pavement and underneath the fill soils extending to depths of greater than 50 feet below the ground surface. The alluvial soils encountered in the upper 8 to 17 feet generally consist of loose silty fine sands with occasional soft to stiff fine sandy clay layers and stiff to very stiff clayey silt layers. At greater depths, the alluvial soils predominately consist of loose to medium dense silty sands with interbedded layers of medium dense fine sands and sandy silts. Medium stiff to very stiff silty clay and clayey silt layers were also encountered between depths of 37 to 47 feet below the surface.
Soils in the Project area consists of urban land -Hueneme, drained San Emigdio complex, zero to two percent slopes (Figure 4.5-2, Project Area Soils). These soils are completely surrounding the Project site, with urban land, frequently flooded, zero to five percent slopes, and xeropsamments, frequently flooded, zero to two percent slopes present in the San Gabriel River channel located approximately
0.5 mile east of the Project site.
Groundwater was not encountered during the geotechnical investigation at the site. Based on the lack of any water within borings during the geotechnical investigation and the moisture content of soil samples recovered during the investigation, the static groundwater table is considered to have existed at a depth in excess of 50 feet (which was the depth of soil borings during the investigation) at the time of subsurface exploration. Based on a review of available groundwater data, the historic high groundwater level for the Project site is approximately seven feet below ground surface. Recent water level data from on -site monitoring wells indicate a high groundwater level reading of approximately 81 feet below ground surface.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.5-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
4.5.2.3 Geologic Hazards
Faulting and Seismicity
Section 4.5
Geology and Soils
The City is located within seismically -active Southern California. There are no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones within the City; however, there are a number of major active faults located southwest and northeast of the City, including active and potentially active faults (City of Downey 2004a). These major faults include the Newport -Inglewood Fault, the Compton -Los Alamitos Fault, the Whittier -Elsinore Fault, the Elysian Park Seismic Zone, the Palos Verdes Hills Fault, and the San Andreas Fault. The two faults with the greatest potential to impact the City are the Newport -Inglewood Fault and the Compton - Los Alamitos Fault, located approximately six and ten miles southwest of the City, respectively. The Project site is not located directly on any active, potentially active, or inactive fault traces as defined by the California Geological Survey (CGS). Figure 4.5-3, Regional Fault Map, depicts faults occurring within the Project vicinity. The Whitter section of the Elsinore fault zone is located approximately 6 miles northeast of the Project site and the East Montebello fault is located approximately 7.8 miles north of the Project site. To the south of the Project site, the Los Alamitos fault is at a distance of approximately
5.9 miles while the Newport -Inglewood -Rose Canyon fault zone, Los Angeles basin section is located at a distance of approximately 8.1 miles.
Liquefaction
Liquefaction and seismically induced settlement are most commonly caused by seismic ground shaking.
The primary factors which influence the potential for liquefaction include groundwater table elevation, soil type and plasticity characteristics, relative density of the soil, initial confining pressure, and intensity and duration of ground shaking. Liquefaction typically occurs in areas with cohesionless and granular (low clay/silt content) soils (or silt/clay soils with low plasticity), relative densities of less than approximately 70 percent, and groundwater within 50 feet of the surface. The occurrence of liquefaction under the described conditions results in a rapid pore -water pressure increase and a corresponding loss of shear strength, with affected soils behaving as a viscous liquid. Surface manifestations from these events can include effects such as a loss of bearing capacity for structures/foundations, ground subsidence (settling or shrinking), differential settlement (different degrees of settlement over relatively short distances), and lateral spreading (horizontal displacement on sloped surfaces as a result of underlying liquefaction).
Soil types within the City consist of a combination of silts and sands. These soil types, coupled with a relatively high-water table are conducive to liquefaction to occur during intense ground shaking (City of Downey 2005). All areas of the City are within a liquefaction hazard zone, including the Project site (City of Downey 2005, CGS 1999b).
Landslides
Slope failures in the form of landslides are common during strong seismic shaking in areas of steep slopes. The Project site and surrounding area are generally flat with no steep slopes. The site slopes gently to the south at a gradient of less than one percent. No known landslides have occurred at the site.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.5-2 December 2023
Exhibit D
0 2 Miles Source: Aerial (Maxar, 2020)
HELIX Regional Geology
Environmental Planning
Figure 4.5-1
Exhibit D
Prologis Stewart & Gray Road Warehouse Project
0 1,000 Feet
rrx�r►.�
Source: Aerial (Maxar, 2020)
Project Area Soils
Figure 4.5-2
Exhibit D
0 2 Miles Source: Aerial (Maxar, 2020)
HELIX Regional Fault Map
Figure 4.5-3
Exhibit D
Expansive Soils
Section 4.5
Geology and Soils
Expansive (or shrink -swell) behavior is attributable to the water -holding capacity of clay minerals, and can adversely affect the integrity of facilities such as pavement or structure foundations. Expansion of soils may result in unacceptable settlement or heave of structures or concrete slabs supported on grade.
Changes in soil moisture content can result from precipitation, landscape irrigation, utility leakage, roof drainage, perched groundwater, drought, or other factors. Soils with a relatively high fine soils content (clays dominantly) are generally considered expansive or potentially expansive. All of the soil types in Downey can be compacted to a degree that expansive soils would not hinder site development (City of Downey 2004b).
4.5.3 Regulatory Framework
4.5.3.1 State
California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972 (PRC Section 2621 et seq.) is intended to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults.
The law requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones known as Earthquake Fault Zones (previously called Special Studies Zones and Fault -Rupture Hazard Zones) around the surface traces of active faults, and to distribute maps of these zones to all affected cities, counties, and state agencies.
The Act also requires completion of a geologic investigation prior to project approval, to demonstrate that applicable structures will not be constructed across active faults and/or that appropriate setbacks from such faults (generally 50 feet) are included in the project design. The location and width of structural setback zones are determined based on the geologic structure and type of active faulting encountered during the detailed fault evaluation and the proposed improvements.
California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 (PRC Division 2, Chapter 7.8, Section 2690 et seq.) provides a statewide seismic hazard mapping and technical advisory program to assist local governments in protecting public health and safety relative to seismic hazards other than surface fault rupture, which is covered by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (described above). This Act is intended to protect the public from the effects of strong ground shaking, ground failure, liquefaction, earthquake -induced landslides, and other hazards caused by earthquakes. The Act provides direction and funding for the State Geologist to compile seismic hazard maps and to make those maps available to local governments. The Act, along with related standards in the Seismic Hazards Mapping Regulations (CCR Title 14, Division 2, Chapter 8, Article 10, Section 3270 et seq.), also directs local governments to require the completion and review of appropriate geotechnical studies prior to approving development projects. These requirements are implemented on a local level through means such as general plan directives and regulatory ordinances (with applicable City standards outlined below). Special Publication 117A, Guidelines for Evaluation and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California (California Geological Survey 2008), contains guidance for the evaluation and mitigation of earthquake hazards for projects within designated zones of required investigations.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.5-3 December 2023
Exhibit D
California Building Code
Section 4.5
Geology and Soils
The California Building Code (CBC; CCR Title 24, Part 2) encompasses a number of requirements related to geologic issues. Specifically, these include general provisions (Chapter 1); structural design, including soil and seismic loading (Chapters 16/16A); structural tests and special inspections, including seismic resistance (Chapters 17/17A); soils and foundations (Chapters 18/18A); concrete (Chapters 19/19A); masonry (Chapters 21/21A); wood, including consideration of seismic design categories (Chapter 23); construction safeguards (Chapter 33); and grading, including excavation, fill, drainage, and erosion control criteria (Appendix J). The CBC encompasses standards from other applicable sources, including the International Building Code (IBC), and ASTM International, with appropriate amendments and modifications to reflect site -specific conditions and requirements in California.
4.5.3.2 Local
City of Downey General Plan
The City of Downey General Plan, Downey Vision 2025, is a long-range policy document that serves as a guide to address changes in the community. With regards to geology and soils, applicable goals and policies of the General Plan are included in the Safety Element. The General Plan contains the following goal and supporting policies applicable to the Project in relation to geology and soils:
• Goal 5.5. Address the potential hazards associated with seismic activity. o Policy 5.5.1. Minimize damage in the event of a major earthquake. ■ Program 5.5.1.1. Promote public information about earthquake safety. ■ Program 5.5.1.2. Monitor seismic activity to identify new potential for fault rupture, liquefaction, and other seismic -related hazards. ■ Program 5.5.1.3. Monitor groundwater table levels as they relate to liquefaction hazards.
■ Program 5.5.1.4. Ensure the preparation of geotechnical reports for developments to address soil liquefaction hazards.
■ Program 5.5.1.6. Ensure the placement of utility lines Underground.
City of Downey Municipal Code
Article VIII, Building Regulation, Chapter 1 of the Downey Municipal Code (DMC) contains the Downey Building Code. Article VIII, Chapter 1, Section 8000 of the DMC adopts by reference, with modifications, the 2019 edition of the California Building Code (CBC; California Code of Regulations, title 24, Part 2), based upon the 2018 IBC.
4.5.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds
The significance criteria used to evaluate the Project impacts related to geology and soils are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to geology and soils would occur if the Project would:
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.5-4 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.5
Geology and Soils
a) Directly or indirectly cause 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;
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking;
iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction; or 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.
Through the analysis in the IS/NOP (see Appendix A of this EIR), it was determined that the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with surface fault rupture (Threshold a.i) and soil erosion/loss of topsoil (Threshold b), and no impacts associated with landslides (Threshold a.iv), alternative wastewater disposal systems (Threshold e), and paleontological resources (Threshold f).
Accordingly, these issues are not further analyzed in this EIR.
4.5.5 Methodology and Assumptions
The Geotechnical Investigation is based upon a field investigation consisting of subsurface testing conducted during multiple site visits. The subsurface exploration consisted of eight borings advanced to depths of 10 to 50 feet below the ground surface. In addition to the borings, four cone penetration test soundings were advanced to depths of 50 feet at the site as part of the liquefaction evaluation. The borings were advanced with hollow -stem augers, by a conventional truck -mounted drilling rig. Sampling methods were conducted in accordance with ASTM Test Method D-3550. Samples were also taken using a 1.4-inch inside diameter split spoon sampler in general accordance with ASTM D-1586.
The liquefaction analysis was conducted in accordance with the requirements of Special Publication 117A (CDMG, 2008), and currently accepted practice (SCEC, 1997). The liquefaction potential of the subject site was evaluated using the empirical method developed by Boulanger and ldriss (Boulanger Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.5-5 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.5
Geology and Soils
and Idriss, 2008, 2014). This method predicts the earthquake -induced liquefaction potential of the site based on a given design earthquake magnitude and peak ground acceleration at the subject site.
Additionally, relevant information from the California Department of Conservation and the California Geological Survey, as well as relevant maps and geologic documentation, were reviewed.
4.5.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 4.5-a.ii: Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site could potentially be subject to relatively high levels of ground shaking and site acceleration in the event of an earthquake on any of the major active faults in the region. The intensity of ground shaking at any specific site and relative potential for damage from this hazard depends on the earthquake magnitude, distance from the source (epicenter), and the site response characteristics (ground acceleration, predominant period, and duration of shaking). Ground shaking can affect the integrity of surface and subsurface facilities such as structures, foundations, and utilities, either directly from vibration -related damage to rigid structures, or indirectly through associated hazards (such as liquefaction, landslides, and other seismic -related ground failure). The nearby major active faults that could produce secondary seismic effects at the Project site, including ground shaking, include the Newport -Inglewood Fault, Compton -Los Alamitos Fault, Whitter-Elsinore Fault Zone, and San Andreas Fault, among others.
In the event of a major earthquake, the Project site and proposed building could be subject to strong ground shaking, which has the potential to damage or destroy buildings and other structures, thereby exposing people to hazardous conditions. However, pursuant to DMC Article VIII, Chapter 1, Section 8000, the Project would be designed and constructed in compliance with the Downey Building Code and CBC, which contains specific structural requirements for seismic safety. Compliance with applicable regulations and building codes would minimize the risk to life and property from potential ground motion at the Project site. Therefore, the Project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving ground shaking. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Threshold 4.5-a.iii: Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less than Significant Impact. A liquefaction analysis was conducted at the Project site as part of the Project -specific geotechnical investigation. The results of the liquefaction analysis have identified potentially liquefiable soils at all four locations on the Project site that were tested during the analysis.
Total dynamic settlement associated with liquefaction ranges from approximately 2.14 to 2.59 inches at the four tested locations. Based on the total dynamic settlement, differential settlements of up to Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.5-6 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.5
Geology and Soils
approximately 1.3 inches are expected to occur due to liquefaction during a design -level seismic event.
The estimated differential settlement could be assumed to occur across a distance of 50 feet. The Project -specific geotechnical investigation includes recommendations for site preparation and Project construction design to reduce anticipated impacts that could occur due to liquefaction during a seismic event. These recommendations include remedial grading, which would remove the existing undocumented fill soils and a portion of the near surface alluvium at the Project site. These materials would be replaced as compacted structural fill. The presence of the recommended layer of newly placed compacted structural fill above these liquefiable soils would help to reduce any surface manifestations that could occur as a result of liquefaction. A shallow foundation system for the proposed structure can be designed to resist the effects of the anticipated differential settlements due to liquefaction to the extent that the structure would not catastrophically fail. The use of a shallow foundation system is typical for the type of building planned for the Project site, where they are underlain by the extent of liquefiable soils encountered at the Project site.
The post -liquefaction damage that could occur within the building proposed for the Project would also be typical of similar buildings in the vicinity of this Project. Thus, while the Project site is subject to liquefaction, the Project would be designed and constructed in compliance with the Downey Building Code and CBC, and would incorporate the Project -specific geotechnical recommendations as Project conditions of approval. Compliance with applicable regulations and building codes, in conjunction with the implementation of site -specific geotechnical recommendations, would minimize the risk to life and property from potential ground failure at the Project site due to liquefaction. Therefore, the Project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving liquefaction. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Threshold 4.5-c: Would the Project 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? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site and surrounding areas are relatively flat and there are no hillsides or steep topographic features at the Project site or in surrounding areas that could contribute to landslides. According to the DOC's Earthquake Hazards Map the Project site is not located in a landslide zone (DOC 2021). As such, the Project would not potentially result in on- or off -site landslides.
Based on the presence of undocumented fills at the Project site, there is potential for settlement to occur as a result of the Project. Due to the presence of undocumented fill soils and loose, low strength native alluvium within the foundation influence zones of the proposed building, the near -surface soils, in their present state, are not considered suitable to support the foundations and floor slabs of the proposed building. The Project -specific geotechnical investigation includes recommendations for remedial grading, which would remove the existing undocumented fill soils and a portion of the near surface alluvium. These materials would be replaced as compacted structural fill. The native soils that would remain in place below the recommended depth of over excavation would not be subject to significant load increases from the foundations of the proposed building, and the post -construction static settlement of the proposed building is expected to be within tolerable limits.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.5-7 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.5
Geology and Soils
Removal and recompaction of the near surface fill soils and alluvium is estimated to result in an average shrinkage of 7 to 17 percent. Minor ground subsidence is expected to occur in the soils below the zone of removal, due to settlement and machinery working. The subsidence is estimated to be approximately
0.1 foot. The actual amount of subsidence would be variable and would be dependent on the type of machinery used, repetitions of use, and dynamic effects. The remedial grading proposed for the Project site would ensure that any settlement associated with the Project would be within tolerable limits.
As discussed for Threshold (b) above, potentially liquefiable soils are present at the Project site and would be addressed through compliance with the Downey Building Code, CBC, and Project -specific geotechnical recommendations as Project conditions of approval. While the Project site is subject to unstable soil associated with settlement, minor subsidence, and liquefaction, the Project would be designed and constructed in compliance with the Downey Building Code and CBC, and would incorporate the Project -specific geotechnical recommendations as Project conditions of approval.
Compliance with applicable regulations and building codes, in conjunction with the implementation of site -specific geotechnical recommendations, would minimize impacts associated with unstable geologic units or soil. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Threshold 4.5-d: Would the Project 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?
No Impact. The near surface soils at the Project site generally consist of silty sands and occasional sandy silts. Testing of on -site soils indicate that the soils at the Project site possess a very low expansion potential. As such, no design considerations related to expansive soils would be required for the Project.
No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
4.5.7 Cumulative Impacts
The geographic context for the analysis of cumulative impacts related to geology and soils is the City of Downey and immediately surrounding lands, including cumulative projects occurring in the City of Norwalk. Geology and soil features can be very specific to certain locations and sites, but can also have broad reaching elements, such as faults and underlying bedrock formations. However, potential geologic or soil hazards resulting from development are generally localized to the site and immediate surrounding lands rather than a broad reaching area. In this way, potential cumulative impacts resulting from seismic and geologic hazards would be minimized on a site -by -site basis to the extent that standard construction methods and code requirements provide. Cumulative projects would also be susceptible to similar geologic hazards. The specific geologic condition of each individual project site, soil type, and project excavation requirements would dictate the severity of the potential geologic risks.
Overall, cumulative projects would be subject to the same regulations and engineering practices as the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.5-8 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.5
Geology and Soils
Project, such as the local jurisdiction's building code, CBC requirements, and any site -specific requirements identified in each project's geotechnical investigation. Compliance with these requirements would ensure that potential cumulative impacts related to geology and soils would be less than significant and not cumulatively considerable.
4.5.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
No significant unavoidable impacts have been identified.
4.5.9 References
California Department of Conservation. 2021. California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application. Available at: htt s: www.conservation.ca . zardsZeg-zapp. Accessed January 25, 2022.
California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey. 1999a. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Maps. May 1, 1999.
1999b. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, Whittier Quadrangle. March 25, 1999.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology. 1998a. Seismic Hazard evaluation of the Whittier 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles and Orange Counties, California. 1998.
1998b. Seismic Hazard evaluation of the South Gate 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles and Orange Counties, California. 1998.
City of Downey. 2005. Vision 2025 General Plan. January. 2004a. Downey Vision 2025 Comprehensive General Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report SCH #2004031159. July 28.
2004b. CEQA Initial Study, Downey Vision 2025. March 26.
Southern California Geotechnical. 2021. Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Warehouse, North Side of Stewart and Gray Road, West of Woodruff Avenue, Downey, California for ProLogis. May 19.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.5-9 December 2023
Exhibit F1
Section 4.s
Geology and Soils
This page intentionally left blank
pmloobStewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City ofDowney
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
4.6.1 Introduction
This section of the EIR evaluates potential greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed Project. This analysis is based on the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report (HELIX 2023) prepared for the Project, which is included as Appendix B of this EIR.
4.6.2 Environmental Setting
4.6.2.1 Climate Change Overview
Global climate change refers to changes in average climatic conditions on Earth including temperature, wind patterns, precipitation, and storms. Global temperatures are moderated by atmospheric gases.
These gases are commonly referred to as GHGs because they function like a greenhouse by letting sunlight in but preventing heat from escaping, thus warming the Earth's atmosphere.
GHGs are emitted by natural processes and human (anthropogenic) activities. Anthropogenic GHG emissions are primarily associated with: (1) the burning of fossil fuels during motorized transport, electricity generation, natural gas consumption, industrial activity, manufacturing, and other activities; (2) deforestation; (3) agricultural activity; and (4) solid waste decomposition.
The temperature record shows a decades -long trend of warming, with 2016 and 2020 global surface temperatures tied for the warmest year on record since 1880 (National Aeronautics and Space Administration [NASA] 2023a). The newest release in long-term warming trends announced 2022 ranked as tied with 2015 for the sixth warmest year on record with an increase of 1.6 degrees Fahrenheit compared to the 1951-1980 average (NASA 2023b). GHG emissions from human activities are the most significant driver of observed climate change since the mid-20th century (United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2013). The IPCC constructed several emission trajectories of GHGs needed to stabilize global temperatures and climate change impacts. The statistical models show a "high confidence" that temperature increase caused by anthropogenic GHG emissions could be kept to less than two degrees Celsius relative to pre -industrial levels if atmospheric concentrations are stabilized at about 450 parts per million (ppm) carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) by the year 2100 (IPCC 2014).
4.6.2.2 Types of Greenhouse Gases
The GHGs defined under California's Assembly Bill (AB) 32 include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N20), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).
Carbon Dioxide. CO2 is the most important and common anthropogenic GHG. CO2 is an odorless, colorless GHG. Natural sources include the decomposition of dead organic matter; respiration of bacteria, plants, animals, and fungi; evaporation from oceans; and volcanic outgassing. Anthropogenic sources of CO2 include burning fuels, such as coal, oil, natural gas, and wood. Data from ice cores indicate that CO2 concentrations remained steady prior to the current period for approximately 10,000 years. The atmospheric CO2 concentration in 2010 was 390 ppm, 39 percent above the concentration at the start of the Industrial Revolution (approximately 280 ppm in 1750). As of Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
August 2023, the CO2 concentration exceeded 419 ppm, a 51 percent increase since 1750 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] 2023).
Methane. CH4 is the main component of natural gas used in homes. A natural source of methane is from the decay of organic matter. Geological deposits known as natural gas fields contain methane, which is extracted for fuel. Other sources are from decay of organic material in landfills, fermentation of manure, and cattle digestion.
Nitrous Oxide. N20 is produced by both natural and human -related sources. N20 is emitted during agricultural and industrial activities, as well as during the combustion of fossil fuels and solid waste.
Primary human -related sources of N20 are agricultural soil management, animal manure management, sewage treatment, mobile and stationary combustion of fossil fuel, adipic (fatty) acid production, and nitric acid production.
Hydrofluorocarbons. Fluorocarbons are gases formed synthetically by replacing all hydrogen atoms in methane or ethane with chlorine and/or fluorine atoms. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are nontoxic, nonflammable, insoluble, and chemically nonreactive in the troposphere (the level of air at Earth's surface). CFCs were first synthesized in 1928 for use as refrigerants, aerosol propellants, and cleaning solvents. They destroy stratospheric ozone; therefore, their production was stopped as required by the 1989 Montreal Protocol.
Sulfur Hexafluoride. SF6 is an inorganic, odorless, colorless, nontoxic, nonflammable gas. SF6 is used for insulation in electric power transmission and distribution equipment, in the magnesium industry, in semi -conductor manufacturing, and as a tracer gas for leak detection.
GHGs have long atmospheric lifetimes that range from one year to several thousand years. Long atmospheric lifetimes allow for GHG emissions to disperse around the globe. Because GHG emissions vary widely in the power of their climatic effects, climate scientists have established a unit called global warming potential (GWP). The GWP of a gas is a measure of both potency and lifespan in the atmosphere as compared to CO2. For example, a gas with a GWP of 10 is 10 times more potent than CO2 over 100 years. CO2e is a quantity that enables all GHG emissions to be considered as a group despite their varying GWP. The GWP of each GHG is multiplied by the prevalence of that gas to produce CO2e.
Historically, GHG emission inventories have been calculated using the GWPs from the IPCC's Second Assessment Report (SAR). In 2007, IPCC updated the GWP values based on the latest science at the time in its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4). The updated GWPs in the IPCC AR4 have begun to be used in recent GHG emissions inventories. In 2013, IPCC again updated the GWP values based on the latest science in its Fifth Assessment Report (AIRS) (IPCC 2013). However, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) reporting guidelines for national inventories require the use of GWP values from the AR4. To comply with international reporting standards under the UNFCCC, official emission estimates for California and the U.S. are reported using AR4 GWP values, and statewide and national GHG inventories have not yet updated their GWP values to the AIRS values. Project GHG emissions in this analysis are reported using the AR4 GWP values.
By applying the GWP ratios, Project related CO2e emissions can be tabulated in metric tons per year.
Typically, the GWP ratio corresponding to the warming potential of CO2 over a 100-year period is used as a baseline. The atmospheric lifetime and GWP of selected GHGs are summarized in Table 4.6-1, Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-2 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Table 4.6-1
GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIALS AND ATMOSPHERIC LIFETIMES
Greenhouse Gas
Atmospheric Lifetime
(Years)
IPCC
SAR GWP
IPCC
AR4 GWP
IPCC
AR5 GWP
Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
50-200
1 1
1 Methane (CH4)
12 21
25 28
Nitrous Oxide (N20)
114
310
298
265
H FC-134a
14 1,300
1,430
1,300
PFC: Tetraflouromethane (CF4)
50,000
6,500
7,390
6,630
PFC: Hexafluoroethane (C2F6)
10,000
9,200
12,200
11,100
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
3,200
23,900
22,800
23,500
Source: IPCC 2007
IPCC = Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; SAR = Second Assessment Report; GWP = global warming potential; AR4 = Fourth Assessment Report; HFC = hydrofluorocarbon; PFC = perfluorocarbon
4.6.2.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories
In 2020, total GHG emissions worldwide were estimated at 50,510 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2e emissions (Climate Watch 2023). By country, the U.S. contributed the second largest portion (10.5 percent) of global GHG emissions, behind China with 24.4 percent of global emissions. The total U.S. GHG emissions was 5,290 MMT CO2e in 2020 (Climate Watch 2023). On a national level, approximately 90 percent of GHG emissions were associated with energy, including transportation energy (Climate Watch 2023).
California Air Resources Board (CARB) performed statewide inventories for the years 1990 to 2020, as shown in Table 4.6-2, California Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector. The inventory is divided into five broad sectors of economic activity: agriculture, commercial and residential, electricity generation, industrial, and transportation. Emissions are quantified in MMT CO2e.
Table 4.6-2
CALIFORNIA GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BY SECTOR
Sector
Emissions
(MMT CO2e)
190
Emissions
(MMT CO2e)
2000
Emissions
(MMT CO2e)
2010
Emissions
(MMT CO2e)
2020
Agriculture and Forestry
18.9 (4%)
30.8 (8%)
33.6 (8%)
31.6 (8%)
Commercial and Residential
44.1 (10%)
44.2 (10%)
46.0 (10%)
38.7 (11%)
Electricity Generation
110.5 (26%)
104.7 (20%)
90.3 (20%)
59.5 (16%)
Industrial
105.3 (24%)
93.0 (20%)
87.8 (20%)
73.3 (20%)
Transportation
150.E (35%)
175.7 (37%)
162.9 (37%)
135.8 (37%)
Unspecified Remaining
1.3 (<1%)
13.4 (5%)
21.6 (5%)
30.2 (8%)
Total
430.7
461.8
442.2
369.1
Source: CARB 2007 and CARB 2023a
MMT = million metric tons; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent As shown in Table 4.6-2, statewide GHG source emissions totaled 431 MMT CO2e in 1990, 462 MMT CO2e in 2000, 442 MMT CO2e in 2010, and 369 MMT CO2e in 2020. Transportation -related emissions consistently contribute the most GHG emissions, followed by industrial emissions and electricity generation (CARB 2007 and CARB 2023a).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-3 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
4.6.2.4 Existing Land Use Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions resulting from operation of the industrial businesses on the Project site at the time of the NOP were analyzed using CalEEMOd. The calculated existing land use operational criteria pollutant and precursor emissions are shown in Table 4.6-3, Existing Land Use Annual GHG Emissions.
Table 4.6-3
EXISTING LAND USE ANNUAL GHG EMISSIONS
Emission Sources
2024 Emissions
(MT COze)
Area
9 Energy
1,803
Vehicular (Mobile)
5,552
Solid Waste
166
Water
242
Refrigerant
18 Existing Land Use Total'
7,790
Source: HELIX 2023 (CaIEEMod output data is provided in Appendix A of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report, Appendix B to this EIR) 1 Totals may not sum due to rounding.
GHG = greenhouse gas; MT = metric tons; COZe = carbon dioxide equivalent
4.6.3 Regulatory Framework
4.6.3.1 Federal GHG Regulations
Federal Clean Air Act
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on April 2, 2007, in Massachusetts v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that CO2 is an air pollutant, as defined under the Clean Air Act (CAA), and that the USEPA has the authority to regulate emissions of GHGs. The USEPA announced that GHGs (including CO2, CH4, N20, HFC, PFC, and SF6) threaten the public health and welfare of the American people (USEPA 2023). This action was a prerequisite to finalizing the USEPA's GHG emissions standards for light -duty vehicles, which were jointly proposed by the USEPA and the United States Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
On June 30, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decision published in West Virginia v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency overturned the USEPA's Clean Power Plan rule which cited Section 111(d) of the CAA for authority to set limits on CO2 emissions from existing coal- and natural -gas -fired power plants. The June 30, 2022 decision does not overturn the April 2, 2007 decision; however, it may limit the USEPA's authority to develop rules limiting GHG emissions without clear congressional authorization.
Light -Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards
The USEPA and the NHTSA worked together on developing a national program of regulations to reduce GHG emissions and to improve fuel economy of light -duty vehicles. The USEPA established the first -ever national GHG emissions standards under the CAA, and the NHTSA established Corporate Average Fuel Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-4 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Economy standards under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. On April 1, 2010, the USEPA and NHTSA announced a joint Final Rulemaking that established standards for 2012 through 2016 model year vehicles. This was followed up on October 15, 2012, when the agencies issued a Final Rulemaking with standards for model years 2017 through 2025. In March 2022, the agencies finalized standards for model years 2024 through 2026 and established an industry -wide fleet average of approximately 49 miles per gallon for passenger cars and light trucks in model year 2026.
4.6.3.2 California GHG Regulations
California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 Part 6: California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings were first established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. Energy -efficient buildings require less electricity, natural gas, and other fuels. Electricity production from fossil fuels and on -site fuel combustion (typically for space or water heating) results in GHG emissions.
The Title 24 standards are updated approximately every three years to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. The 2019 Title 24 standards became effective on January 1, 2020, and the 2022 Title 24 standards will go into effect on January 1, 2023. The 2022 update to the Building Energy Efficiency Standards focuses on several key areas to improve the energy efficiency of newly constructed buildings and additions and alterations to existing buildings (California Energy Commission [CEC] 2022).
The standards are divided into three basic sets. First, there is a basic set of mandatory requirements that apply to all buildings. Second, there is a set of performance standards —the energy budgets —that vary by climate zone (of which there are 16 in California) and building type; thus, the standards are tailored to local conditions. Finally, the third set constitutes an alternative to the performance standards, which is a set of prescriptive packages that are basically a recipe or a checklist compliance approach.
California Green Building Standards Code
The California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen; CCR Title 24, Part 11) is a code with mandatory requirements for all nonresidential buildings (including industrial buildings) and residential buildings for which no other state agency has authority to adopt green building standards. The 2019 Standards for new construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and nonresidential buildings became effective on January 1, 2020, and the 2022 Standards are effective on January 1, 2023 (California Building Standards Commission [CBSC] 2022).
The development of CALGreen is intended to (1) cause a reduction in GHG emissions from buildings; (2) promote environmentally responsible, cost-effective, healthier places to live and work; (3) reduce energy and water consumption; and (4) respond to the directives by the Governor. In short, the code is established to reduce construction waste; make buildings more efficient in the use of materials and energy; and reduce environmental impact during and after construction.
CALGreen contains requirements for storm water control during construction; construction waste reduction; indoor water use reduction; material selection; natural resource conservation; site irrigation conservation; and more. The code provides for design options allowing the designer to determine how Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-5 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
best to achieve compliance for a given site or building condition. The code also requires building commissioning, which is a process for the verification that all building systems, like heating and cooling equipment and lighting systems, are functioning at their maximum efficiency. CALGreen also contains two levels of voluntary measures (Tier 1 and Tier 2) which go beyond minimum State code requirements. Categories of Tier 1 and Tier 2 measures include: Electric vehicle (EV) designated parking; EV charging infrastructure; cool roofs; efficient outdoor lighting; dock door seals; potable water use reductions; recycled building material content; and resilient flooring.
Executive Order S-3-05
On June 1, 2005, Executive Order (EO) 5-3-05 proclaimed that California is vulnerable to climate change impacts. It declared that increased temperatures could reduce snowpack in the Sierra Nevada, further exacerbate California's air quality problems, and potentially cause a rise in sea levels. To avoid or reduce climate change impacts, EO S-3-05 calls for a reduction in GHG emissions to the year 2000 level by 2010, to year 1990 levels by 2020, and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
Assembly Bill 32 — Global Warming Solution Act of 2006
The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, widely known as AB 32, requires that CARB develop and enforce regulations for the reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions. CARB is directed by AB 32 to set a GHG emission limit, based on 1990 levels, to be achieved by 2020. The bill requires CARB to adopt rules and regulations in an open public process to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emission reductions.
Executive Order B-30-15
On April 29, 2015, EO B-30-15 established a California GHG emission reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The EO aligns California's GHG emission reduction targets with those of leading international governments, including the 28 nation European Union. California is on track to meet or exceed the target of reducing GHGs emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, as established in AB 32.
California's new emission reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 will make it possible to reach the goal established by EO S-3-05 of reducing emissions 80 percent under 1990 levels by 2050.
Senate Bill 32
Senate Bill (SB) 32 (Amendments to the California Global Warming Solutions Action of 2006) extends California's GHG reduction programs beyond 2020. SB 32 amended the Health and Safety Code to include Section 38566, which contains language to authorize CARB to achieve a statewide GHG emission reduction of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by no later than December 31, 2030. SB 32 codified the targets established by EO 8-30-15 for 2030, which set the next interim step in the State's continuing efforts to pursue the long-term target expressed in EO 8-30-15 of 80 percent below 1990 emissions levels by 2050.
Assembly Bill 197
A condition of approval for SB 32 was the passage of AB 197. AB 197 requires that CARB consider the social costs of GHG emissions and prioritize direct reductions in GHG emissions at mobile sources and large stationary sources. AB 197 also gives the California legislature more oversight over CARB through Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-6 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
the addition of two legislatively appointed members to the CARB Board and the establishment a legislative committee to make recommendations about CARB programs to the legislature.
Assembly Bill 1493 — Vehicular Emissions of Greenhouse Gases AB 1493 (Pavley) requires that CARB develop and adopt regulations that achieve "the maximum feasible reduction of GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light -duty truck and other vehicles determined by CARB to be vehicles whose primary use is noncommercial personal transportation in the State." On September 24, 2009, CARB adopted amendments to the Pavley regulations that intend to reduce GHG emissions in new passenger vehicles from 2009 through 2016. The amendments bind California's enforcement of AB 1493 (starting in 2009), while providing vehicle manufacturers with new compliance flexibility. In January 2012, CARB approved a new emissions -control program for model years 2017 through 2025. The program combines the control of smog, soot, and global warming gases and requirements for greater numbers of zero -emission vehicles into a single packet of standards called Advanced Clean Cars (CARB 2023b).
Assembly Bill 341
The state legislature enacted AB 341 (California Public Resource Code Section 42649.2), increasing the diversion target to 75 percent statewide. AB 341 requires all businesses and public entities that generate 4 cubic yards or more of waste per week to have a recycling program in place. The final regulation was approved by the Office of Administrative Law on May 7, 2012 and went into effect on July 1, 2012.
Executive Order S-01-07
This EO, signed by Governor Schwarzenegger on January 18, 2007, directs that a statewide goal be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California's transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by the year 2020. It orders that a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) for transportation fuels be established for California and directs CARB to determine whether a LCFS can be adopted as a discrete early action measure pursuant to AB 32. CARB approved the LCFS as a discrete early action item with a regulation adopted and implemented in April 2010. Although challenged in 2011, the Ninth Circuit reversed the District Court's opinion and rejected arguments that implementing LCFS violates the interstate commerce clause in September 2013. CARB is therefore continuing to implement the LCFS statewide.
Senate Bill 350
Approved by Governor Brown on October 7, 2015, SB 350 increases California's renewable electricity procurement goal from 33 percent by 2020 to 50 percent by 2030. This will increase the use of Renewables Portfolio Standard eligible resources, including solar, wind, biomass, and geothermal. In addition, large utilities are required to develop and submit Integrated Resource Plans to detail how each entity will meet their customers resource needs, reduce GHG emissions, and increase the use of clean energy.
Senate Bill 375
SB 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, supports the State's climate action goals to reduce GHG emissions through coordinated transportation and land use planning with the goal of more sustainable communities.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-7 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Under the Sustainable Communities Act, CARB sets regional targets for GHG emissions reductions from passenger vehicle use. In 2010, CARB established these targets for 2020 and 2035 for each region covered by one of the State's metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). CARB periodically reviews and updates the targets, as needed.
Each of California's MPOs must prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as an integral part of its regional transportation plan (RTP). The SCS contains land use, housing, and transportation strategies that, if implemented, would allow the region to meet its GHG emission reduction targets. Once adopted by the MPO, the RTP/SCS guides the transportation policies and investments for the region. CARB must review the adopted SCS to confirm and accept the MPO's determination that the SCS, if implemented, would meet the regional GHG targets. If the combination of measures in the SCS would not meet the regional targets, the MPO must prepare a separate alternative planning strategy (APS) to meet the targets. The APS is not a part of the RTP. Qualified projects consistent with an approved SCS or Alternative Planning Strategy categorized as "transit priority projects" would receive incentives to streamline CEQA processing.
Senate Bill 100
Approved by Governor Brown on September 10, 2018, SB 100 extends the renewable electricity procurement goals and requirements of SB 350. SB 100 requires that all retail sale of electricity to California end -use customers be procured from 100 percent eligible renewable energy resources and zero -carbon resources by the end of 2045.
California Air Resources Board: Scoping Plan
On December 11, 2008, the CARB adopted the Scoping Plan (CARB 2008) as directed by AB 32. The Scoping Plan proposes a set of actions designed to reduce overall GHG emissions in California to the levels required by AB 32. Measures applicable to development projects include those related to energy -efficiency building and appliance standards, the use of renewable sources for electricity generation, regional transportation targets, and green building strategy. Relative to transportation, the Scoping Plan includes nine measures or recommended actions related to reducing VMT and vehicle GHGs through fuel and efficiency measures. These measures would be implemented statewide rather than on a project -by -project basis.
In response to EO B-30-15 and SB 32, all state agencies with jurisdiction over sources of GHG emissions were directed to implement measures to achieve reductions of GHG emissions to meet the 2030 and 2050 targets. CARB was directed to update the Scoping Plan to reflect the 2030 target and, therefore, is moving forward with the update process (CARB 2014). The mid-term target is critical to help frame the suite of policy measures, regulations, planning efforts, and investments in clean technologies and infrastructure needed to continue driving down emissions. CARB is moving forward with a second update to the Scoping Plan to reflect the 2030 target set by EO B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update, Proposed Strategy for Achieving California's 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target, was adopted in December 2017. The Scoping Plan Update establishes a proposed framework for California to meet a 40 percent reduction in GHGs by 2030 compared to 1990 levels (CARB 2017).
On December 15, 2022, CARB approved the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan). The 2022 Scoping Plan lays out a path to achieve targets for carbon neutrality and reduce anthropogenic GHG emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels no later than 2045, as directed by Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-8 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Assembly Bill 1279. The actions and outcomes in the plan will achieve significant reductions in fossil fuel combustion by deploying clean technologies and fuels; further reductions in short-lived climate pollutants; support for sustainable development; increased action on natural and working lands to reduce emissions and sequester carbon; and the capture and storage of carbon (CARE 2022).
4.6.3.3 Regional GHG Policies and Plans
Southern California Association of Governments
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial Counties, and addresses regional issues relating to transportation, the economy, community development and the environment. SCAG coordinates with various air quality and transportation stakeholders in Southern California to ensure compliance with the federal and state air quality requirements. Pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 40460, SCAG has the responsibility of preparing and approving the portions of the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) relating to the regional demographic projections and integrated regional land use, housing, employment, and transportation programs, measures, and strategies. SCAG is required by law to ensure that transportation activities "conform" to, and are supportive of, the goals of regional and state air quality plans to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) includes transportation programs, measures, and strategies generally designed to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT), which are contained in the AQMP. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) combines its portion of the AQMP with those prepared by SCAG. The RTP/SCS and Transportation Control Measures, included as Appendix IV-C of the 2016 AQMP for the Air Basin, are based on SCAG's 2016-2040 RTP/SCS.
On September 3, 2020, SCAG's Regional Council adopted the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. On October 30, 2020, CARB accepted SCAG's determination that the SCS meets the applicable state GHG emissions targets.
The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS has been incorporated into the forthcoming 2022 AQMP.
4.6.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds
Given the relatively small levels of emissions generated by a typical development in relationship to the total amount of GHG emissions generated on a national or global basis, individual development projects are not expected to result in significant, direct impacts with respect to climate change. However, given the magnitude of the impact of GHG emissions on the global climate, GHG emissions from new development could result in significant, cumulative impacts with respect to climate change. Therefore, the potential for a significant GHG impact is limited to cumulative impacts.
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant GHG emissions impact would occur if implementation of the Project would:
a) Generate GHGs, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-9 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The determination of significance is governed by CEQA Guidelines §15064.4, entitled "Determining the Significance of Impacts from Greenhouse Gas Emissions." CEQA Guidelines §15064.4(a) states, "[t]he determination of the significance of greenhouse gas emissions calls for a careful judgment by the lead agency consistent with the provisions in Section 15064. A lead agency should make a good -faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project. A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to ... [use a quantitative model or qualitative model]" (emphasis added). In turn, CEQA Guidelines §15064.4(b) clarifies that a lead agency should consider "Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project." Therefore, consistent with CEQA Guidelines §15064.4, the GHG analysis for the Project appropriately relies upon a threshold based on the exercise of careful judgement and believed to be appropriate in the context of this particular project.
On December 5, 2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted their Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans for projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency.
The SCAQMD's interim GHG significance threshold uses a tiered approach to determining significance.
Tier 1 consists of evaluating whether or not the project qualifies for any applicable exemption under CEQA. Tier 2 consists of determining whether or not the project is consistent with a GHG reduction plan that may be part of a local general plan, for example. Tier 3 establishes a screening significance threshold level to determine significance using a 90 percent emission capture rate approach, which corresponds to 10,000 MT CO2e emissions per year for stationary sources at industrial facilities. Tier 4, to be based on performance standards, is yet to be developed. Under Tier 5 the project proponent would allow offsets to reduce GHG emission impacts to less than the proposed screening level.
For industrial projects with emissions primarily from stationary sources, the SCAQMD has adopted a threshold of 10,000 MT CO2e per year. The SCAQMD has continued to consider adoption of significance thresholds for residential and general development projects. The most recent proposal issued in September 2010 uses the following tiered approach to evaluate potential GHG impacts from various uses. Under option 1, separate screening thresholds are proposed for residential projects (3,500 MT CO2e/year), commercial projects (1,400 MT CO2e/year), and mixed -use projects (3,000 MT CO2e/year).
Under option 2 a single numerical screening threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e/year would be used for all non- industrial projects. These thresholds have not been adopted by the SCAQMD or distributed for widespread public review and comment, and the working group tasked with developing the thresholds has not met since September 2010. The future schedule and likelihood of threshold adoption is uncertain.
If the CARB adopts statewide significance thresholds, SCAQMD staff plans to report back to the SCAQMD Governing Board regarding any recommended changes or additions to the SCAQMD's interim threshold.
As the City does not currently have any approved quantitative thresholds related to GHG emissions, the quantitative analysis provided herein relies upon the 3,000-MT CO2e non -industrial threshold cited by SCAQMD (SCAQMD 2008). Even though a warehouse land use is considered an industrial use, the emissions are primarily from mobile sources (cars and trucks), not stationary sources. Therefore, to be conservative, Project emissions are compared to the much lower non -industrial screening threshold.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-10 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
4.6.5 Methodology and Assumptions
4.6.5.1 Emissions Modeling
GHG emissions for both the proposed Project and the existing industrial land use (at the time of the NOP) were calculated using CaIEEIVIod, version 2022.1.1.18. CaIEEMod is a computer model used to estimate air emissions resulting from land development projects throughout the state of California.
CaIEEMod was developed by CAPCOA in collaboration with the California air quality management and pollution control districts, primarily the SCAQMD. The calculation methodology, source of emission factors used, and default data is described in the CalEEMod User's Guide, and Appendices C, D, and G (CAPCOA 2022). CaIEEMod estimates criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions from mobile (i.e., vehicular) sources, area sources (fireplaces, woodstoves, and landscape maintenance equipment), energy use (electricity and natural gas used in space heating, ventilation, and cooling; lighting; and plug- in appliances), water use and wastewater generation, solid waste disposal, and refrigerants. Emissions are estimated based on land use information input to the model by the user.
4.6.5.2 Construction Emissions
CaIEEMod estimates construction emissions for each year of construction activity based on the annual construction equipment profile and other factors determined as needed to complete all phases of construction by the target completion year. As such, each year of construction activity has varying quantities of GHG emissions. Per SCAQMD guidance, total construction GHG emissions resulting from the Project are amortized over 30 years (the anticipated period before the Project building would require replacement or significant renovation) and added to operational GHG emissions.
The methodology and assumptions utilized in the construction emissions modeling of GHG emissions is the same as used for criteria air pollutants, as described in detail in Section 4.2.5.2 of this EIR.
4.6.5.3 Operation Emissions
Operational impacts were estimated using CaIEEMod. Operational sources of emissions include area, energy, transportation, water use, solid waste, and refrigerants. Operational emissions are calculated for the earliest anticipated full year of operation-2026.
The Project would include electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure. Including EV infrastructure in a development project is generally accepted as a GHG reduction measure. Adding EV charging infrastructure to a development project would not result in increased GHG emissions in the region.
Without the Project including EV infrastructure, EV owners would either charge their vehicles somewhere else, resulting in similar electricity use, or they would choose to use conventional vehicles, resulting in higher GHG emissions. Therefore, Project electricity use for EV charging is not included in the GHG analysis.
The methodology and assumptions utilized in the operations emissions modeling of GHG emissions is the same as used for criteria air pollutants, as described in detail in Section 4.2.5.3 of this EIR.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-11 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
4.6.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 4.6-a: Would the Project generate GHGs, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. Project construction and operational GHG emissions were estimated using the CalEEMod model as described in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Technical Report (Appendix B to this EIR). Project -specific input was based on general information provided in the Project description (refer to Section 2, Project Description, of this EIR) and default model settings to estimate reasonably conservative conditions. Additional details of phasing, selection of construction equipment, and other input parameters, including CalEEMod data, are included in Appendix A of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report (Appendix B of this EIR).
Construction
Emissions of GHGs related to the construction of the Project would be temporary. As shown in Table 4.6-4, Estimated Construction GHG Emissions, total GHG emissions associated with construction of the Project are estimated at 1,721 MT CO2e. For construction emissions, SCAQMD guidance recommends that the emissions be amortized (i.e., averaged) over 30 years and added to operational emissions. Averaged over 30 years, the proposed construction activities would generate approximately 57 MT CO2e emissions per year.
Table 4.6-4
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION GHG EMISSIONS
Year
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2024
1,355
2025
366
Total'
1,721
Amortized Construction Emissions'
57 Source: HELIX 2023 (complete data is provided in Appendix A of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report, Appendix B to this EIR) 1 Totals may not sum due to rounding.
z Construction emissions are amortized over 30 years in accordance with SCAQMD guidance.
GHG = greenhouse gas; MT = metric tons; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent Operation
The Project's net annual GHG emissions, including amortized annual construction emissions and subtracting the existing land use GHG emissions, are shown in Table 4.6-5, Net Operational GHG Emissions. Detailed GHG emissions for the existing land use are shown in Section 4.6.2.4, above.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-12 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Table 4.6-5
NET OPERATIONAL GHG EMISSIONS
Emission Sources
2024 Emissions
(MT GOze)
Area
11 Energy
1,158
Vehicular (Mobile)
6,436
Solid Waste
157
Water
300
Subtotal'
8,180
Construction (Annualized over 30 years)
57 Project Total'
8,237
Existing Land Use Total
(7,790)
Net Project Total'
447
SCAQMD Screening Threshold
3,000
Exceed Threshold?
No
Source: HELIX 2023 (complete data is provided in Appendix A of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report, Appendix B to this EIR) z Totals may not sum due to rounding.
GHG = greenhouse gas; MT = metric tons; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent As shown in Table 4.6-5, the Project emissions, including amortized construction emissions, would be approximately 447 MT CO2e per year and would not exceed the non -industrial facility SCAQMD GHG screening threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e per year.
Project GHG emissions, including amortized construction emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD industrial screening threshold, and impacts associated with the generation of GHGs would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Threshold 4.6-b: Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs?
Less than Significant Impact. There are numerous State plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The principal overall State plan and policy is AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. The quantitative goal of AB 32 is to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. AB 1279 establishes a state goal of net zero GHG emissions by 2045. Statewide plans and regulations such as GHG emissions standards for vehicles (AB 1493), the LCFS, and regulations requiring an increasing fraction of electricity to be generated from renewable sources are being implemented at the statewide level; as such, compliance at the project level is not addressed. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with those plans and regulations.
The Project does not have a residential component and would not result in regional population growth and (as discussed for threshold 4.6-a, above) Project GHG emissions would decrease compared to the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-13 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.6
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
existing land use emissions. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of an applicable GHG emissions reduction plan. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
4.6.7 Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope of consideration for GHG emissions is global, as such emissions contribute, on a cumulative basis, to global climate change. By nature, GHG impacts are cumulative as they are the result of combined worldwide emissions over many years, and additional development would incrementally contribute to this cumulative impact. The discussion presented for thresholds 4.6-a and 4.6-b above also serves as the Project's cumulative impact analysis.
As detailed above, a number of plans, policies, and regulations have been adopted for the purpose of reducing cumulative GHG emissions. The Project would be constructed consistent with the energy - efficiency standards, water reduction goals, and other standards contained in the 2022 Title 24 Part 6 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and Part 11 (CALGreen) Building Standards, or the code in place at the time building permit applications are submitted. Through mandatory compliance with state GHG reduction measures, the Project would be consistent with applicable GHG plans and regulations. As a result, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to impacts related to GHG emissions.
4.6.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
No significant unavoidable GHG impacts have been identified.
4.6.9 References
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2022. User's Guide for CalEEMod Version 2022.1. Available at: htt : www.caleemod.com .
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2023a. Current California GHG Emission Inventory Data. Available at: htt s: ww2,arb.ca. ov h-inventar -data. Accessed Se tember 2023. 2023b. Clean Car Standards — Pavley, Assembly Bill 1493. Accessed December. Available at:
htt : www.arb.ca . ov cc ccros ccros.htm. Accessed September 15. 2022. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. November 16. Available at:
htt s: wwr-work 2.arb.ca. ov ouro rams ab-32-climate-than e-sco in -Ian 2022-sco in - oian-documents.
2017. California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Available at:
htt s: www.arb.ca . ov cc sco in Ian sco i Plan 2017. df.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.6-14 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4.7.1 Introduction
The purpose of this section is to describe the existing environmental setting and regulatory setting concerning potential impacts from hazards and hazardous materials (other than geological and flood hazards) associated with the Project and Project vicinity. The analysis in this section is based on a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA; SCS Engineers 2017a; Appendix F) and a Phase 11 ESA (SCS Engineers 2017b; Appendix G) for the project site. In addition, sampling was conducted at the project site to determine the presence or absence of asbestos, lead -based paint, and lead in the drinking water (SCS Engineers 2017c; Appendix H).
4.7.2 Environmental Setting
4.7.2.1 On -Site Uses
Current Use
As noted in Section 2.3 of this EIR, as of the date of the Notice of Preparation (March 25, 2022) which constitutes the environmental baseline, the site was fully occupied and operational by industrial use tenants; however, the tenants have since vacated the buildings and ceased operations in December 2022 at the request of the property owner (Project applicant) in anticipation of implementing the proposed Project. As such, as of the date of this EIR (November 2023), the Project site is completely developed with vacant industrial warehouse buildings, associated parking areas, storage yards, and canopy areas.
Historical Use
Based on a review of historical aerial photographs, city directories, and topographic maps as part of the Phase I ESA, the first structure at the Project site was located in the northeast corner of the property as early as 1896. By 1928, the majority of the Project site, with the exception of the northeast corner, appeared to be agricultural or fallow land, with a dwelling or farm located in the northeast corner.
Orchard uses were present on a portion of the Project site from 1942 through 1951. By 1952, some of the current development had been initiated on the Project site, with additional construction of current on -site facilities by 1963. An aboveground water storage tank was present at the Project site from at least 1952 through at least 1983. By 1972, all of the currently existing structures were present on the Project site. Numerous tenants have occupied the Project site, including various manufacturing facilities for aerospace, carpets, furniture, cabinetry, printing, pulp and paper recycling. The Project site was most recently occupied by multiple industrial tenants until December 2022.
4.7.2.2 Adjacent Uses
Current Use
The Project site is located in a developed area comprised of a mixture of industrial, commercial and residential uses. Hall Road is adjacent to the Project site to the north, with a railroad corridor located to the north of Hall Road, beyond which are commercial and industrial uses. To the east are adjacent commercial and industrial uses, with Pacific Elite Collision Centers (11899 Woodruff Avenue) and Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Onstage Dance Center (11711 Woodruff Avenue) in the adjacent buildings to the east. Woodruff Avenue, additional commercial and industrial uses further east, and multi -family residential uses are located further to the northeast beyond the rail corridor. Stewart and Gray Road is to the immediate south of the Project site, with industrial uses with S&G Leadway Plastics Corporation (9368 Stewart and Gray Road) and CPL Express Inc (9340 Stewart and Gray Road) located further south, beyond Stewart and Gray Road. Multi -family and single-family residential uses are located further to the southwest. A multi -tenant commercial office park is located adjacent to the west of the Project site, beyond which are single-family and multi -family residential uses.
Historical Use
A railroad, Hall Road, and Woodruff Road were observed adjacent to the Project site as early as 1896. In 1928, the area surrounding the Project site appeared to be fallow or agricultural land, with a railroad track and an orchard to the north/northeast of the Project site. By 1962, a large structure was present to the west of the Project site, which was occupied by Aerojet (9236 Hall Road) through at least 2003.
General Dynamics also operated adjacent to the west of the Project site.
4.7.2.3 Hazardous Materials Sites
Hazardous materials are substances with certain physical or chemical properties that could pose a substantial present or future hazard to human health or the environment when improperly handled, disposed, or otherwise managed. Hazardous materials are used for a variety of purposes, including service industries, various small businesses, medical uses, schools, and households. Many chemicals used in household cleaning, construction, dry cleaning, film processing, landscaping, and automotive maintenance and repair are considered hazardous. Small -quantity hazardous waste generators include facilities such as automotive repair, dry cleaners, and medical offices.
A search of federal, tribal, state, and local environmental regulatory agency databases was conducted to identify listed hazardous materials sites on and within the appropriate minimum search distances for each database. The properties identified in the database searches included the Project site and off -site listed facilities. The sites identified during the database search that are located within 0.25 mile of the Project site and have potential to affect the Project site are included in Table 4.7-1, Listed Facilities in the Project Vicinity with Potential to Impact the Project Site. Other sites within 0.25 mile of the Project site include sites that are downgradient from the Project site or based on case status have been determined to not impact the Project site. These sites are not included in Table 4.7-1. Additional sites that are located at distances of greater than 0.25 mile were identified during the database search and are included in Appendix F of Phase I ESA (SCS Engineers 2017a; Appendix F to this EIR); however, sites beyond 0.25 mile are not anticipated to impact the Project site significantly (SCS Engineers 2017a) and are therefore not included in Table 4-7.1.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-2 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Table 4.7-1
LISTED FACILITIES IN THE PROJECT VICINITY WITH POTENTIAL TO IMPACT THE PROJECT SITE Distance/
Facilities
Location
Direction from
Database
Potential Concern
Project Site
OmniTeam Inc., Intersection
9300 Hall Road
Project site
RCRA-NonGen/NLR,
Facilities at this address reportedly disposed of waste and Develop, and Aerojet
FINDS, HAZNET,
mixed oil; alkaline solution; ignitable and reactive waste; Ordnance Co.
ECHO, Los Angeles
detergent waste chemicals; hydrocarbon solvents
County HMS, SWEEPS
(benzene, hexane, Stoddard, etc.); off -specification, aged, UST
or surplus organics; other organic waste; and unspecified solvent mixture. UST site.
Western Pacific Pulp and
9350 Hall Road
Project site
FINDS, LUST, SWEEPS
This facility reportedly disposed of other organic solids and Paper
UST, HAZNET, HIST
waste/mixed oil. Release of gasoline from a UST into soil.
Cortese, RGA, SSTS,
Los Angeles County
HMS
Maersk Downey, Anderson
9400 Hall Road
Project site
HAZNET, ICIS, FINDS,
Facilities at this address reportedly disposed of oxygenated Trucking Company, Heger
Los Angeles County
solvents (acetone, butanol, ethyl acetate, etc.), other Reality, Western Pacific Pulp
HMS
organic solid waste, unspecified soil -containing waste, and Paper, Hudd Distribution
unspecified organic liquid mixture, and liquids with
halogenated organic compounds greater than 1,000
milligrams per liter. Disposal of tank bottom wastes related to the removal of USTs at 9350 Hall Road.
Duray Inc., Duray/JF Duncan
9301 Stewart
Project site
FINDS, EMI, HAZNET,
Duray is listed as having had air permits for emissions and Industries, Omni Temp
and Gray Road
Los Angeles County
disposal of unspecified aqueous solution.
Refrigerant
HMS
Access Ingredients
9333 Stewart
Project site
HAZNET
This facility reportedly disposed of off -specification, aged, and Gray Road
or surplus organics.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-3 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Facilities
Location
Distance/
Direction from
Project Site
Database
Potential Concern
Primex Technologies, Olin
9236 Hall Road
Adjacent to the
SLIC, UST, Envirostor,
This facility reportedly has (or had) nine USTs, including a Ordnance, General Dynamics
west
RCRA-SQG, FINDS,
10,000-gallon gasoline tank and various sumps. This facility
WDS, SWEEPS UST,
reportedly generated and disposed of hazards wastes
HIST UST, CA FID UST,
including ignitable, corrosive, and reactive wastes;
EMI, Los Angeles
halogenated solvents used in degreasing; spent
County HMS
halogenated and non -halogenated solvents; and
wastewater treatment sludge. A release of volatile organic compounds was reported, with the case completed and
closed in 1999.
Source: SCS 2017a
Notes: RCRA-NonGen = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Not Generating Hazardous Waste; FINDS = Facility Index System; HAZNET = California Environmental Protection Agency Hazardous Waste Facility and Manifest Data; ECHO = United States Environmental Protection Agency Enforcement and Compliance History Online; Los Angeles County HMS = Los Angeles County Hazardous Materials System; SWEEPS UST = Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System Underground Storage Tanks; LUST = Leaking Underground Storage Tanks; HIST Cortese = Hazardous Waste and Substance List; RGA = Recovered Government Archive; SSTS = Section Seven Tracking System; ICIS = United States Environmental Protection Agency Integrated Compliance Information System; EMI = Emissions Inventory Data; RCRA-SQG = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Small Quantity Generator; UST= Underground Storage Tank; SLIC = Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup database; Envirostor = DTSC Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Database; WDS = California State Water Resources Control Board Waste Discharge System Database; CA FID UST = California Facility Inventory Database; CLEANERS = Drycleaner Database; HIST UST = Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-4 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4.7.2.4 Recognized Environmental Conditions
Based on interviews with past and present owners, operators, and/or occupants on the Project site; reviews of regulatory databases; visual inspections of the Project site and adjoining properties; a review of historical Project site use information; commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the Project site; and information collected during preparation of the Phase I ESA, a number of Recognized Environmental Concerns (RECs) were identified for the Project site. Table 4.7-2, Recognized Environmental Concerns, summarizes the RECs identified for the Project site.
Table 4.7-2
RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
On -Site Uses
Throughout the
N/A
Subsurface features associated with numerous patch areas and Project site
steel plated vault/trenches observed in the larger warehouse buildings and a well observed at the south end of 9300 Hall Road.
Throughout the
N/A
The presence of various manufacturing facilities at the site within Project site
unknown chemical use.
9300 Hall Road
Aerojet1
Use of degreasers containing chlorinated solvents; operation of 1,1,1-trichloroethane degreaser, a perchloroethylene degreaser, a Freon degreaser, scrubbers, wastewater treating equipment, a spray booth (paint and solvent), and other equipment related to aerospace manufacturing activities.
9300 Hall Road
Aerojetl
A number of subsurface features, including a 10,000-gallon diesel underground storage tank and various concrete sumps and/or clarifiers were located at the Project site. Some of these subsurface features were removed, but some are anticipated to have remained and were abandoned in place. Samples collected in 1985 from the contents of these subsurface features revealed elevated concentrations of metals, total petroleum hydrocarbons, and oil and grease.
9350 Hall Road
Western Pacific
Two underground storage tanks (a 1,000-gallon gasoline tank and Paper and Pulp
a 15,000-gallon diesel tank) were formerly located on site, with a reported release of TPH. No record of remediation was located. 9400 Hall Road
Heger Reality
Disposal of tank bottom wastes and halogenated solvents. 9301 Stewart and
N/A
Information was provided by tenants at the Project site that an Gray Road and
underground storage area or bunker may exist in the northwest 9300 Hall Road
corner of the Project site. Comments by the building tenants at these addresses suggested the bunker was used during World War II and housed chemicals. No evidence regarding the presence of this feature was observed during site investigations, and its current or past existence has not been confirmed.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-5 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Uses
9236 Hall Road Aerojet' and Use of degreasers containing chlorinated solvents; operation of General 1,1,1-trichloroethane degreaser, a perchloroethylene degreaser, a Dynamics Freon degreaser, scrubbers, wastewater treating equipment, a spray booth (paint and solvent), and other equipment related to aerospace manufacturing activities.
Source: SCS Engineers 2017a
z The database search indicated that Aerojet used degreasers containing chlorinated solvents on the parcel adjacent to the Project site (at 9236 Hall Road); however, Aerojet also occupied a portion of the Project site at 9300 Hall Road and may have conducted operations at the Project site. As such, this Recognized Environmental Condition is listed as both occurring on -site and at adjacent uses.
4.7.2.5 Asbestos, Lead -Based Paint, and Drinking Water Sampling Sampling for asbestos, lead -based paint, and lead in drinking water was conducted at the Project site in 2017 (SCS Engineers 2017c). The results of the sampling are summarized below.
Asbestos
Asbestos sampling was conducted at all of the Project site buildings, and included 342 bulk samples consisting of 557 sample layers from structures at the Project site. Samples collected in each building varied, but generally included samples from ceiling tiles, drywall compound, cove bases, mastics, floor tile, floor tile grout, ceiling plaster, window putty, carpet mastic, roofing cap sheets, roof penetration mastic, plaster and button board, tar paper, wall tile grout, exterior stucco, and vinyl flooring. Of the collected samples, thirteen samples contained asbestos concentrations over 1 percent, which is the definition of asbestos -containing materials as defined by the USEPA. Within California, the Division of Occupational Safety and Health defines asbestos -containing material as any manufactured material which contains greater than one -tenth of a percent (0.1 percent) asbestos by weight. Additionally, two of the collected samples contained trace concentrations of asbestos (less than one percent). Seventeen samples were not analyzed due to positive results of samples containing the same materials. The remaining 525 samples layers did not contain asbestos above concentrations of one percent.
None of samples collected in the building at 9300 Hall Road, 9350 Hall Road, and 9402 Hall Road contained asbestos. Samples that contained asbestos were collected in 9301 Stewart and Gray, 9400 Hall Road, 9399 Stewart and Gray Road, and 9333/9363 Stewart and Gray Road. Asbestos was contained in samples collected in window putty, floor tile, floor tile mastic, vinyl flooring, carpet mastic, and joint compound associated with drywall. Additionally, at the building at 9301 Stewart and Gray Road, a gray clay pipe was observed during the site inspection. Samples were not collected from the pipe; however, the pipe is presumed to contain asbestos. All asbestos -containing materials were observed to be in good condition at the time of sampling.
Lead -Based Paint
Paint samples were collected at the Project site to determine the presence or absence of lead -based paint. Major paint systems and/or those paint systems that were observed to be in poor condition (i.e., loose and flaky) at the time of inspection were targeted for sampling. Eighteen composite bulk samples were collected for analysis. Samples were collected in all buildings present on the Project site.
Out of the eighteen samples collected, two paint samples were found to contain concentrations of lead Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-6 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
greater than 0.06 percent lead by weight (lead -based paint is typically defined as paint containing lead at concentrations equal to or exceeding 0.06 percent by lead weight or 600 milligrams per kilogram).
One paint sample was found to contain a concentration of lead greater than 0.01 percent, but less than the 0.06 percent lead by weight. The remaining fifteen samples did not contain concentrations of lead greater than 0.01 percent.
None of samples collected in the building at 9300 Hall Road, 9399 Stewart and Gray Road, 9333/9363 Stewart and Gray Road, 9350 Hall Road, or 9402 Hall Road were found to contain concentrations of lead greater than 0.01 percent. One sample collected at 9301 Stewart and Gray Road contained lead in a concentration of 0.015 percent, which is below the guideline of 0.06 percent. Two samples from the building at 9400 Hall Road contained concentrations of lead greater than 0.06 percent lead by weight.
Lead in Drinking Water
Drinking water sampling was conducted at the Project site to determine the presence or absence of lead in the drinking water. Samples were collected from each of the four major buildings at the Project site (9300 and 9350 Hall Road, 9399 and 9399-9363 Stewart and Gray Road) to obtain representative coverage of the Project site. Samples were collected from the most probable drinking water sources in each building (i.e., breakroom sinks). Lead was not detected in the sample from 9399 Stewart and Gray Road, and was detected in concentrations ranging from 0.946 micrograms (µg) per liter (L) to 2.06 µg/L in the remaining three samples. None of the drinking water samples were found to contain concentrations of lead that exceeded the USEPA action level for drinking water (15 µg/L).
4.7.2.6 Soil Vapor, Soil, and Groundwater Sampling
Based on the RECs identified during the Phase I ESA, a Phase II ESA was conducted at the Project site, consisting of soil vapor, soil, and groundwater sampling.
Soil Vapor Sampling
Soil vapor sampling was conducted at the Project site through the installation of soil vapor probes at a depth of 5 feet below ground surface at 50 locations. Additionally, nested probes were installed at 12 of the 50 locations, at a depth of 15 feet below ground surface and at another 5 locations, at a depth of 30 feet below ground surface. Replicate samples were collected in some sampling locations, resulting in 74 soil vapor samples.
The samples were collected and analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs). A total of ten VOCs were detected in soil vapor samples collected from the Project site, including tetrachloroethene (PCE); trichloroethene (TCE); chloroform; 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane (Freon 113); cis-1,2-dichloroethene (cis-1,2-DCE); benzene; 1,1-dichloroethene (1,1-DCE); 1,1,1-trichloroethane; trans-1,2-dichloroethene (trans-1,2-DCE); and vinyl chloride. Soil vapor concentrations were compared with Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) recommended screening levels for soil vapor screening for existing and future commercial uses. TCE was detected in 39 samples at concentrations above the DTSC- recommended screening level for existing commercial buildings, and in 36 samples at concentrations exceeding the DTSC-recom mended screening level for future commercial buildings. PCE was detected in 33 samples above the DTSC-recommended screening level for existing commercial buildings, and in 30 samples at concentrations exceeding the DTSC-recom mended screening level for future commercial buildings. Chloroform was detected in 9 samples exceeding the DTSC-recommended screening level for Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-7 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
existing commercial buildings, and in 7 samples at concentrations exceeding the DTSC-recommended screening level for future commercial buildings. Benzene was detected in one sample at a concentration exceeding the DTSC-recommended screening levels for existing and future commercial buildings. None of the other VOCs detected in soil vapor samples exceeded the DTSC-recommended commercial screening levels.
Soil sampling consisted of 20 soil borings drilled for the collection of soil samples. Borings at 14 locations extended to depths of 10 feet below ground surface, with samples collected at 1-, 5-, and 10-foot depths. Five locations were drilled to 20 feet below ground surface with samples collected at 5-foot intervals. One location was extended to 15 feet below ground surface, with samples collected a 1-, 5-, 10-, and 15-foot intervals. In addition, eight deep borings were drilled to collect groundwater samples (refer to discussion below regarding groundwater samples), and samples of soil for laboratory analysis were collected in two of the eight deep borings at 10-foot intervals from 10 feet to 80 feet below ground surface.
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) as diesel was detected in two soil samples, heavy -oil range TPH was detected in three soil samples, and TPH as gasoline and light hydrocarbons were not detected in any soil samples. The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) has established soil screening levels for assessing soils based on the potential for groundwater contamination. TPH concentrations detected in the soil samples do not exceed established thresholds and are not considered a threat to groundwater.
Several VOCs were detected in soil samples collected at the Project site. PCE was detected in 20 soil samples, TCE was detected in 22 samples, Cis-1,2-DCE was detected in one sample, and 1,1-DCE was detected in two of the collected soil samples. Additionally, of the four samples analyzed for organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), one sample had detectable concentrations of OCPs. All detected concentrations of VOCs and OCPs were below their corresponding DTSC-recom mended screening levels for both residential and commercial sites.
Metals detected in soil samples collected at the Project site include arsenic, barium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, nickel, vanadium, and zinc. With the exception of arsenic, all detected metals from soil samples were at or below concentrations typically found in southern California soil and below their corresponding DTSC-recom mended screening levels. Four samples were analyzed for hexavalent chromium. One sample detected the presence of hexavalent chromium, but the sample was at concentrations below the DTSC-recom mended screening levels for commercial uses. Additionally, a deeper soil sample from the same boring did not contain detectable concentrations of hexavalent chromium. With regards to arsenic, three samples from two borings contained arsenic at concentrations between 33.2 and 48.7 milligrams (mg) per kilogram (kg); all other samples contained arsenic concentrations of 10.5 mg/kg or less. In the two borings containing elevated arsenic levels, deeper samples from the same borings showed that the elevated arsenic concentrations were limited to soils less than 5 to 10 feet below ground surface, indicated that elevated arsenic levels do not extend vertically underground. As such, metals are not considered constituents of concern for the property (SCS Engineers 2022).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-8 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Groundwater Sampling
Eight deep borings were drilled at the Project site for the purpose of collecting grab groundwater samples. The borings were terminated approximately 2 to 3 feet into groundwater, which was encountered at depths ranging from 80 to 95 feet below ground surface. TCE and cis-1,2-DCE were detected in 6 of the 8 sample locations. TCE exceeded the California maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) in 5 of the 6 samples, and cis-1,2-DCE exceeded MCLs in 1 of the 6 samples. Four additional VOCs (1,1-Dichloroethane; 1,1-DCE; trans-1,2-DCE; and methyl tert-butyl) were detected in groundwater samples, but did not exceed their respective MCLs.
4.7.2.7 Indoor Air Quality
Based on the results of soil vapor testing conducted during the Phase II ESA, soil vapor beneath the Project site has been impacted by chlorinated VOCs, predominately TCE. Indoor air quality investigations were conducted to characterize the potential for vapor intrusion at the Project site. Various rounds of indoor air sampling were conducted, including 8-hour air monitoring events, continuous monitoring, and discrete sampling of materials and products used by a tenant at 9400 Hall Road. This sampling identified obvious evidence of indoor sources of PCE and TCE in products used by the tenant at 9400 Hall Road that were impacting the indoor air quality. Although elevated concentrations of VOCs are present in soil vapor beneath the 9399 Stewart and Gray Road and 9400 Hall Road buildings, the use of products that contain VOCs (namely TCE) by the tenant during the commercial manufacturing process appears to be the primary contributing source of VOCs in indoor air (SCS Engineers 2022). At the request of the property owner, the tenant was required to remove aerosol products which were initially identified as a source of significant TCE concentrations in indoor air. However, the tenant replaced those aerosol products with another that was also found to contain TCE at significant concentrations (at least 250 micrograms per cubic meter [µg/m3]) despite that the product's label did not identify TCE as an ingredient in the product. Further, the tenant's raw materials (padding, pillow stuffing, fabrics, etc.) were found to contain PCE and TCE.
The property owner implemented numerous measures, in various phases, to ensure that VOCs that may be present as a result of potential vapor intrusion have been mitigated. Efforts included measures to ensure that air exchange in the tenant spaces were increased to reduce VOCs in indoor air resulting from the tenant's operations, such as industrial fan use, increasing HVAC operation, installation of outside air intakes on HVAC units that didn't have them, sealing of electrical conduits and vaults, placement and operation of carbon filtration units, installation of roof vents, and installation of a high - volume supply fan on the roof. Routine indoor air quality monitoring was conducted on a quarterly basis through the third quarter of 2022, with quarterly monitoring reports submitted to the LARWQCB.
Monitoring of indoor air determined that the indoor air results are well below the OSHA guidance for worker safety in a commercial setting (SCS Engineers 2023a).
4.7.2.8 Ongoing Remediation
Due to the historic use of the Project site for manufacturing activities, and associated use of hazardous materials in various manufacturing processes, the soil and groundwater beneath the site have been exposed to various constituents that are now the subject of a voluntary cleanup effort by the property owner under an agreement with the LARWQCB (Case No. 1420/T10000011452). As discussed in the sections above, extensive sampling conducted at the Project site indicated the presence of various constituents, including VOCs in soil vapor; VOCs, OCPs, TPH, and metals in soil; and VOCs in Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-9 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
groundwater. Follow up testing in the form of soil vapor sampling and installation of groundwater monitoring wells has been conducted at the site on numerous occasions to document the vertical extent of VOCs in soil and soil vapor, to investigate the extent of VOCs in groundwater, and groundwater conditions. The distribution of TICE and PCE in soil vapor showed the primary area of impact at 9399 Stewart and Gray Road, on the eastern portion of the Project site. Much lower concentrations of PCE and TCE were identified at 9300 Hall Road on the western portion of the Project site. Similarly, TCE was the most prevalent VOC detected in groundwater, with highest concentrations beneath the warehouse at 9399 Stewart and Gray Road.
Groundwater monitoring has been ongoing since 2019. Routine work includes quarterly groundwater monitoring at seven on -site wells and three off -site wells. Six groundwater wells were installed and first monitored in April 2019. Quarterly monitoring of these wells has identified VOC impacts to groundwater. The primary VOCs detected were TCE and its degradation product cis-1,2-DCE, with the highest concentrations consistently detected in a groundwater monitoring well located at 9399 Stewart and Gray Road with lower concentrations in the surrounding groundwater monitoring wells. In April 2021, at the request of the LARWQCB, one additional groundwater monitoring well was installed on the southeastern portion of the Project site, in conjunction with a network of vapor extraction and vapor monitoring probes, as approved by the LARWQCB. The results of quarterly monitoring have shown a relatively consistent decreasing trend of VOCs. A request to reduce monitoring efforts of the on -site wells to a semi-annual basis and eliminate one on -site well that would be beneath the proposed building has been submitted to the LARWQCB for review (SCS Engineers 2023b).
In order to address soil vapor conditions at the Project site, the property owner is currently in the process of remediating the existing contamination in cooperation with the LARWQCB through operation of an on -site soil vapor extraction (SVE) system. The SVE system is intended to remove those constituents that exceed allowable concentration limits in order to allow for future redevelopment of the property. The SVE system commenced full-time operation in October 2021 and has operated continuously since its installation. The system includes a network of 11 vapor extraction wells, 8 vapor monitoring wells, and 11 vapor monitoring probes to remediate VOCs in the subsurface. Data collected from numerous vapor extraction and monitoring wells demonstrates that the western portion of the site has been effectively remediated (SCS Engineers 2023c). A request to abandon portions of the well network was submitted to the LARWQCB in June 2023 for review and if approved, appropriate abandonment would be conducted of locations that can be removed prior to surface demolition and grading activities. Wells that are not abandoned prior to demolition would be protected in place and repurposed for the re -installation of the system following Project construction.
Monitoring of soil vapor and groundwater conditions on -site is ongoing with oversight by the LARWQCB, and quarterly monitoring reports are submitted to the LARWQCB for review to track the progress of the remediation effort. While substantial progress has been made on remediating the soil, continued use of the SVE system is proposed following Project implementation to continue to remediate the eastern portion of the site. Post -construction remediation activities would occur in accordance with the Multi - Media Management Plan (MMP) prepared for the Project (SCS Engineers 2023d), with oversight by the LARWQCB.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-10 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4.7.3 Regulatory Framework
4.7.3.1 Federal
Toxic Substances Control Act
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976 provides the USEPA with authority to require reporting, record -keeping and testing requirements, and restrictions relating to chemical substances and/or mixtures. The USEPA reviews all "new" chemicals (i.e., those not on the inventory) and regulates (or bans) those found to be an "unreasonable risk to human health or the environment." The TSCA also addresses exposure to specific chemicals, or classes of chemicals, in various subchapters of the law, including asbestos, (indoor) radon levels, lead (such as in paints and toys), dioxin, hexavalent chromium and PCBs. It also bans the use of chlorofluorocarbons in manufacturing.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, was enacted by Congress on December 11, 1980 and provides federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment. Federal actions related to CERCLA are limited to sites on the National Priorities List (NPL) for cleanup activities, with NPL listings based on the USEPA Hazard Ranking System (HRS). The HRS is a numerical ranking system used to screen potential sites based on criteria such as the likelihood and nature of the hazardous material release, and the potential to affect people or environmental resources. CERCLA was amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) on October 17, 1986. SARA stressed the importance of permanent remedies and innovative treatment technologies in cleaning up hazardous waste sites; required Superfund actions to consider the standards and requirements found in other state and federal environmental laws and regulations; provided new enforcement authorities and settlement tools; increased state involvement in every phase of the Superfund program; increased the focus on human health problems posed by hazardous waste sites; encouraged greater citizen participation in making decisions on how sites should be cleaned up; and increased the size of the trust fund to $8.5 billion.
Resources Conservation and Recovery Act
The federal Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, provides for the management of hazardous wastes from generation to disposal to ensure that it is handled in a manner that protects human health and the environment. Under RCRA, the USEPA has established regulations and procedures for the generation, transportation, storage, and disposal activities of hazardous waste handlers, as well as technical standards for the design and safe operation of treatment, storage, and disposal facilities to minimize the release of hazardous waste into the environment. RCRA's corrective action program is designed to investigate and guide the cleanup of any contaminated air, groundwater, surface water, or soil from hazardous waste management of spills or releases into the environment as a result of the past and present activities at RCRA-regulated facilities.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-11 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Emergency Planning and Community Right -to -Know Act
The federal Emergency Planning and Community Right -To -Know Act (EPCRA) was enacted to inform communities and residents of chemical hazards in their area. Businesses are required to report the locations and quantities of chemicals stored on -site to both state and local agencies. EPCRA requires the USEPA to maintain and publish a digital database list of toxic chemical releases and other waste management activities reported by certain industry groups and federal facilities. The Toxic Release Inventory tracks the management of certain toxic chemicals that may pose a threat to human health and environment. This database, known as the Toxic Release Inventory, gives the community more power to hold companies accountable for their chemical management.
Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Federal Railroad Administration are the three entities that regulate the transport of hazardous materials at the federal level. The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (49 CFR 171, Subchapter C) governs the transportation of hazardous materials. These regulations are decreed by DOT and enforced by USEPA.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Congress passed the Occupational and Safety Health Act (OSHA) to ensure worker and workplace safety.
Their goal was to make sure employers provide their workers a place of employment free from recognized hazards to safety and health, such as exposure to toxic chemicals, excessive noise levels, mechanical dangers, heat or cold stress, or unsanitary conditions. To establish standards for workplace health and safety, the Act also created the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) as the research institution for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). OSHA is a division of the U.S. Department of Labor that oversees the administration of the Act and enforces standards in all 50 states. OSHA standards are listed in Title 29 CFR Part 1910.
OSHA's Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard (HAZWOPER) applies to five groups of employers and their employees. This includes any employees who are exposed or potentially exposed to hazardous substances (including hazardous waste) and who are engaged clean-up operations; corrective actions; voluntary clean-up operations; operations involving hazardous wastes at treatment, storage, and disposal facilities; and emergency response operations.
4.7.3.2 State
California Code of Regulations
Most state and federal regulations and requirements that apply to generators of hazardous waste are codified in CCR Title 22, Division 4.5. Title 22 contains detailed compliance requirements for hazardous waste generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. Because California is a fully authorized state under RCRA, most RCRA regulations are integrated into Title 22. The California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA)/California DTSC regulates hazardous waste more stringently than the USEPA through Title 22, which does not include as many exemptions or exclusions as the equivalent federal regulations. Title 22 also regulates a wider range of waste types and waste management activities than RCRA. The State has compiled a number of additional regulations from various CCR titles related to hazardous materials, wastes, and toxics into CCR Title 26 (Toxics), and Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-12 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
provides additional related guidance in Titles 23 (Waters) and 27 (Environmental Protection), although California hazardous waste regulations are still commonly referred to as Title 22.
CCR Title 24, Part 9, the California Fire Code is based on the International Fire Code, with necessary California amendments. The purpose of the California Fire Code is to establish the minimum requirements consistent with nationally recognized good practices to safeguard the public health, safety, and general welfare from the hazards of fire, explosion, or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures, and premises, as well as to provide safety and assistance to firefighters and emergency responders during emergency operations.
California Health and Safety Code
The CaIEPA/DTSC established rules governing the use of hazardous materials and the management of hazardous wastes. CHSC Section 25531, et seq., incorporates the requirements of SARA and the CAA as they pertain to hazardous materials. Under the California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CaIARP, CHSC Sections 25531 to 25545.3), certain businesses that store or handle more than 500 pounds, 55 gallons, or 200 cubic feet (for gases) of acutely hazardous materials at their facilities are required to develop and submit a Risk Management Plan (RMP) to the appropriate local authorities, the designated local administering agency, and the USEPA for review and approval. The RMP is intended to satisfy federal "right -to -know" requirements and provide basic information to regulators and first responders, including identification/quantification of regulated substances used or stored on site, operational and safety mechanisms in place (including employee training), and potential on- and off -site consequences of release and emergency response provisions.
Under CHSC Sections 25500-25532, businesses handling or storing certain amounts of hazardous materials are required to prepare a Hazardous Materials Business Emergency Plan (HMBEP), which includes an inventory of hazardous materials stored on site (above specified quantities), an emergency response plan, and an employee training program. HMBEPs are also required to include a written set of procedures and information created to help minimize the effects and extent of a release or threatened release of a hazardous material; and must be prepared prior to facility operation (with updates and amendments required for appropriate circumstances such as changes in business location, ownership, or operations).
Pursuant to CHSC Chapter 6.11, CaIEPA established the Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program (Unified Program), which consolidated a number of existing state programs related to hazards and hazardous materials. The Unified Program also allows the designation of Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPAs) to implement associated state regulations within their jurisdiction.
Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Act The Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Act requires facilities that handle hazardous materials in amounts above threshold quantities to establish and implement hazardous materials business plans. Pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 25504, hazardous materials business plans must contain a hazardous materials inventory disclosing the type, quantity, use, location, and health risks of every hazardous substance, chemical product, and waste handled by the facility; emergency response plans and procedures in the event of a reportable release or threatened release of a hazardous material; and provisions for employee training in safety procedures.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-13 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Emergency Response to Hazardous Materials Incidents
California has developed an emergency response plan to coordinate emergency services provided by federal, state, and local governments and private agencies. Response to hazardous material incidents is one part of this plan. The plan is managed by the California Emergency Management Agency, which coordinates the responses of other agencies, including CalEPA, the California Highway Patrol, CDFW, and RWQCB.
California Occupational Safety and Health Administration The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) is the primary agency responsible for worker safety 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). The regulations specify requirements for employee training, availability of safety equipment, accident - prevention programs, and hazardous substance exposure warnings.
4.7.3.3 Local
City of Downey General Plan
The City of Downey General Plan, Downey Vision 2025, is a long-range policy document that serves as a guide to address changes in the community. With regards to hazards and hazardous materials, applicable goals and policies of the General Plan are included in the Safety Element. The General Plan contains the following goal and supporting policies applicable to the Project in relation to hazards and hazardous materials:
Conservation Element
• Goal 4.2. Prevent the contamination of groundwater.
o Policy 4.2.1. Monitor and improve groundwater quality. ■ Program 4.2.1.3. Coordinate with local, regional, state and federal efforts to protect the groundwater supply and enhance groundwater quality. ■ Program 4.2.1.4. Discourage business practices and land use classes that contribute to soil contamination that degrade groundwater quality.
Safety Element
• Goal 5.2. Protect the health, safety, and welfare of residents, workers, and visitors from the improper use, storage, handling, and disposal of hazardous materials. o Policy 5.2.1. Monitor the generation, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials.
Program 5.2.1.1. Monitor inactive, active, or potential hazardous material contaminated properties, including the closed landfill at Rio San Gabriel Park for odor and toxic gases.
■ Program 5.2.1.2. Monitor the location, type of facility, and amount of hazardous materials kept at properties.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-14 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
o Policy 5.2.2. Prevent contamination from hazardous materials.
Program 5.2.2.1. Ensure that properties involving hazardous materials dispose of waste properly.
■ Goal 5.3. Maintain and improve fire protection services. o Policy 5.3.1. Provide adequate response to fire emergencies. ■ Program 5.3.1.3. Promote the design of private properties with fire lane width and turnaround capability appropriate for emergency vehicle access. o Policy 5.3.2. Promote fires prevention programs.
■ Program 5.3.2.6. Ensure access for emergency vehicles through security pedestrian and vehicular gates.
City of Downey Municipal Code
The City of Downey Municipal Code, Article III, Chapter 4 contains the City's Hazardous Material Code, including the following sections, which are applicable to the Project:
Section 3404. Disclosure of a Hazardous Material Information Any business which is permitted under a Los Angeles County Certified Unified Program Facility Permit (also referred to as a "Consolidated Permit") to handle hazardous materials must electronically certify or submit updated hazardous materials inventory and contingency plan information via the statewide information management system (also known as California Environmental Reporting System [CERS]) annually by March 1.
Section 3405. Hazardous Materials Information Management and Record Releases A) Hazardous Materials Business Plan information shall be electronically maintained on the web -based California Environmental Reporting System (CERS). The management and maintenance of CERS is the responsibility of the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA). It will be the responsibility of the Downey Fire Department to maintain access to CERS for mandated regulatory activities.
B) Under the Emergency Planning and Community Right -to -Know Act (EPCRA) [42U.S.C. Section 11001, et seq.] the citizens of Downey, and the public at -large, have the right to know the chemical hazardous present in their community. Downey Fire Department is authorized to release information to help local communities protect public health, safety, and the environment from chemical hazards. Downey Fire's information release shall comply with the requirements set forth in the California Public Records Act [Government Code Section 6250, et seq.], Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code Section 25512, et seq., and Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations.
South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1166
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1166, Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Decontamination of Soils, sets requirements to control the emission of VOCs from Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-15 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
excavating, grading, handling, and treating VOC-contaminated soil as a result of leakage from storage or transfer operations, accidental spillage, or other deposition. Specific requirements of Rule 1166 are outlined in Section (c) of Rule 1166 and include:
1. A person excavating an underground storage tank and/or transfer piping storing or previously storing VOC materials, or excavating or grading soil containing VOC materials shall:
A. Apply for, obtain, and operate pursuant to a mitigation plan approved by the Executive Officer prior to commencement of excavation or handling. The mitigation plan general requirement and application requirements are found in Attachment A to this rule. A copy of the approved plan must be on site during the entire excavation period.
B. Notify the Executive Officer at least 24 hours prior to excavation using a form approved by the Executive Officer which is fully completed. If the excavation does not commence on the start date, renotification is required. An alternative notification procedure may be authorized for multiple excavations within a single facility, with prior written approval from the Executive Officer.
C. Monitor for VOC contamination pursuant to subdivision (e), at least once every 15 minutes commencing at the beginning of excavation or grading and record all VOC concentration readings in a format approved by the Executive Officer; and D. When VOC-contaminated soil is detected during excavation or grading:
i. Implement the approved mitigation plan.
Notify the Executive Officer within 24 hours of detection of VOC-contaminated soil.
iii. Monitor and record VOC concentration readings as prescribed in the plan.
Monitoring records must be kept available on site.
iv. Keep calibration records for all monitoring instruments available on site.
2. A person handling VOC-contaminated soil at or from an excavation or grading site shall:
A. Segregate VOC-contaminated stockpiles from non-VOC contaminated stockpiles such that mixing of the stockpiles does not take place.
B. Spray VOC-contaminated soil stockpiles with water and/or approved vapor suppressant and cover them with plastic sheeting for all periods of inactivity lasting more than one hour.
C. Conduct a daily visual inspection of all covered VOC contaminated soil stockpiles to ensure the integrity of the plastic covered surfaces. A daily inspection record must be maintained on site.
D. Comply with the provisions in subparagraph (c) (1)(A) and clause (c)(1)(D)(i).
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-16 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
E. Maintain a record of the identification and business addresses of the generator, transporter and storage/treatment facilities. Such record shall be signed by each party at the time custody is transferred.
F. Treat or remove contaminated soil from an excavation or grading site within 30 days from the time of excavation.
If the VOC concentration in the excavated soil is measured at greater than 1000 ppm, spray the soil with water or vapor suppressant and:
A. As soon as possible, but not more than 15 minutes, place the soil in sealed containers, or
B. As soon as possible, but not more than 15 minutes, load into trucks, moisten with additional water, cover and transport off site, or
C. Implement other alternative storage methods approved in writing by the Executive Officer.
4. A person treating VOC-contaminated soil shall:
A. Obtain a permit to construct and operate treatment equipment, as applicable, from the Executive Officer, and
B. Implement VOC-contaminated soil decontamination measures, as approved by the Executive Officer in writing, which result in Best Available Control Technology applied during all segments, and which include, but are not limited to, at least one of the following:
Installation and operation of an underground VOC collection system and a disposal system prior to excavation.
Collection and disposal of the VOC from the excavated soil on -site using equipment approved by the Executive Officer.
iii. Any equivalent VOC-contaminated soil control measure previously approved in writing by the Executive Officer.
5. A person shall not engage in or allow any on -site or off -site spreading, grading or screening of VOC-contaminated soil, which results in uncontrolled evaporation of VOC to the atmosphere.
6. Loading trucks for contaminated soil must meet the following:
A. The truck and trailer shall be adequately tarped prior to leaving the site; no excavated materials shall extend above the sides or rear of the truck or trailer to prevent soil spillage during transport, and
B. The exterior of the truck, trailer and tires shall be cleaned off prior to the truck leaving the site.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-17 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4.7.4 Significance Criteria and Thresholds
The significance criteria used to evaluate the Project impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to hazards and hazardous materials would occur 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?
e) Result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area 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? 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?
Through the analysis in the IS/NOP (see Appendix A of this EIR), it was determined that the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts or no impacts associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials (Threshold a); hazardous emissions or hazardous materials within one -quarter mile of a school (Threshold c); airport hazards (Threshold e); and risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires (Threshold g). Accordingly, these issues are not further analyzed in this EIR.
4.7.5 Methodology and Assumptions
The Phase I ESA prepared for the proposed Project (see Appendix F) included a site reconnaissance; site research; a historical land use review; interviews with site personnel; and a search of relevant federal, tribal, state and local regulatory agency databases and records. The site reconnaissance was conducted on January 10, 2017 to observe and document existing site conditions. The interiors of the existing on -site buildings were observed, and the site grounds and perimeter were systematically traversed on foot. Available previous environmental reports and site records were reviewed, including those from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Los Angeles County Fire Department, Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, and South Coast Air Quality Management District. Additionally, historic aerial photographs, historic U.S. Geological Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-18 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Survey topographic maps, City directories, and Sanborn Fire Insurance maps were reviewed. The regulatory database search was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) and included a comprehensive search of listed facilities on numerous federal and state agency databases within a radius of 0.25 mile from the Project site.
The Phase II ESA prepared for the Project (see Appendix G) included soil vapor, soil, and groundwater, sampling. Investigation activities were conducted on February 13, 14, 15, and 17, and March 13, 14, 16, and 17, 2017. Soil vapor sampling consisted of installing soil vapor probes at 50 locations throughout the site at depths of 5, 15, and 30 feet. The collected samples were analyzed for VOCs using EPA Method 8260SV (equivalent to EPA Method 8260B).
Soil sampling was conducted using a truck -mounted direct -push drill rig. A total of 20 soil borings were drilled for the collection of soil samples at depths of 1, 5, 10, and 15 feet. In total, 66 soil samples were analyzed for TPH using EPA Method 8015M, 76 soil samples were analyzed for VOCs by EPA Method 8260B, 30 soil samples were selected for analysis of CAM -metals using EPA Method 6010B/7471A, four soil samples were selected for analysis of hexavalent chromium using EPA Method 7199, and four soil samples were selected for analysis of organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) using EPA Method 8081A.
Groundwater sampling included eight deep borings that were drilled with a truck -mounted hollow -stem auger drill rig. Samples were collected at 10-foot intervals from 10 to 80 feet below ground surface. All samples for laboratory analysis were prepared in the field for analysis of VOCs using EPA Method 5035.
Asbestos sampling involved the collection of 342 bulk samples from the on -site structures on January 10 and 11, 2017. Bulk samples were analyzed using Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) and Dispersion Staining in accordance with the EPA Interim Method for the Determination of Asbestos in Bulk Samples (40 CFR 763, Subpart F, Appendix A).
Lead -based paint sampling was conducted on January 10 and 11, 2017 and involved collection and testing of paint chip and bulk samples from the structures in general accordance with HUD Title 10, 40 CFR Part 745 and Title 24 Part 35. A total of 18 composite bulk samples of paint chips were collected for analysis by use of hand tools. All paint samples were analyzed using EPA Method 7000 with EPA Method 3050 used for sample digestion.
Lead in drinking water sampling was conducted on January 10 and 11, 2017 and involved collection of four drinking water samples from breakroom sinks in the four major existing buildings on the site.
Drinking water samples were tested for lead using EPA Method 200.8
4.7.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 4.7-b: Would the Project 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?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Hazardous materials releases can occur if there are existing hazardous materials at the Project site that would be disturbed by Project construction or operation, or if future Project construction or operation activities involve the handling of substantial amounts of hazardous materials with a potential to result in upset and accident conditions. The Project Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-19 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
does not propose handling substantial amounts of hazardous materials in the future. Some hazardous substances typical of warehouse operations would be used (e.g., cleaning agents, oils) but not the type or quantity that would create a significant risk associated with accidental release. Use of hazardous materials would occur in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.
Soil and Groundwater
The Project site has been impacted by historical and current use of hazardous materials in various manufacturing processes. As a result of these uses, the soil and groundwater beneath the site have been exposed to various constituents and contamination at the site has been documented. During soil vapor testing, VOC concentrations in samples exceeded DTSC screening levels for TCE, PCE, chloroform, and benzene. Additionally, VOCs, OCPs, TPH, and metals were detected in soil samples, but not in concentrations that exceeded associated screening requirements. Groundwater samples contained VOCs exceeding MCLs for TCE and cis-1,2-DCE. As discussed above, the Project site is the subject of an ongoing cleanup and remediation process, which includes indoor air quality monitoring, groundwater monitoring, and operation of an SVE system, as described in Section 4.7.2.8.
The SVE system is intended to remove those constituents that exceed allowable concentration limits in order to allow for future redevelopment of the property. Indoor air quality monitoring, groundwater monitoring, and the SVE system operation is ongoing with oversight by the LARWQCB. Quarterly monitoring reports are submitted to the LARWQCB for review to track the progress of the remediation effort. Remediation efforts will continue until such time as LARWQCB determines that contamination has been remediated to their satisfaction. As discussed in Section 4.7.2.8, a request to reduce monitoring efforts of the on -site groundwater wells and eliminate one on -site well that would be beneath the proposed building has been submitted to the LARWQCB for review. A request to the LARWQCB was also made to abandon portions of the vapor extraction well network. Additional requests to abandon wells and monitoring probes that have met cleanup goals and/or asymptotic conditions will be made to the LARWQCB and if approved, appropriate abandonment will be conducted of locations that can be removed prior to demolition and grading activities. However, groundwater monitoring and SVE operation (and associated maintenance and monitoring) is anticipated to continue following Project implementation. Any remaining wells and/or vapor monitoring probes not abandoned prior to construction activities will require protection during pre -demolition, demolition, grading, and construction or, if necessary, may need to be abandoned and replaced with approval by the LARWQCB and permitting through Los Angeles County (for groundwater only).
Remediation work is conducted in accordance with work plans that are reviewed and approved by LARWQCB prior to implementation of new work or new remediation activities. Thus, while the Project site has documented contamination, the existing ongoing and continued remediation of the site under regulatory supervision by the LARWQCB under approved work plans would ensure that site contamination would not result in a significant hazard to the public to the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
Additionally, an MMP has been prepared for the Project (SCS Engineers 2023d) that provides guidance for managing soil, vapor, and groundwater encountered during activities associated with Project construction. The recommendations and measures identified in the MMP would be required to be implemented during construction activities, as outlined in Mitigation Measure HAZ-1. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 and compliance with applicable federal, state, and local Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-20 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
regulatory requirements, potential impacts associated with accidental release of hazardous materials would be reduced to less than significant levels.
Hazardous Building Materials
The buildings at the Project site have been tested for asbestos -containing material, lead -based paint, and the presence of lead in drinking water. Based on the specific investigations for these materials conducted at the Project site, asbestos -containing material has been identified in the buildings located at 9301 Stewart and Gray, 9400 Hall Road, 9399 Stewart and Gray Road, and 9333/9363 Stewart and Gray Road. No asbestos -containing materials were identified in the buildings located at 300 Hall Road, 9350 Hall Road, and 9402 Hall Road.
Regarding lead -based paint, none of samples collected in the building at 9300 Hall Road, 9399 Stewart and Gray Road, 9333/9363 Stewart and Gray Road, 9350 Hall Road, or 9402 Hall Road were found to contain concentrations of lead greater than 0.01 percent. One sample collected at 9301 Stewart and Gray Road contained lead in a concentration of 0.015 percent, which is below the guideline of
0.06 percent. Two samples from the building at 9400 Hall Road contained concentrations of lead greater than 0.06 percent lead by weight.
Drinking water sampling was conducted at the Project site to determine the presence or absence of lead in the drinking water. None of the drinking water samples were found to contain concentrations of lead that exceeded the USEPA action level for drinking water (15 µg/L).
Based on the results of the investigations for asbestos -containing material, lead -based paint, and the presence of lead in drinking water, demolition activities associated with the Project could result in releases of asbestos and lead associated with the presence of asbestos -containing material and lead - based paint. The risk of release of asbestos would be associated with the removal of the buildings at 9301 Stewart and Gray, 9400 Hall Road, 9399 Stewart and Gray Road, and 9333/9363 Stewart and Gray Road. The risk of release of lead would be associated with the removal of the building at 9400 Hall Road.
There is no risk of release associated with lead in drinking water, and groundwater contamination is addressed above. The risk of release of hazardous materials associated with the structures containing asbestos -containing material and lead -based paint is a potentially significant impact, requiring mitigation. With implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-2 and HAZ-3, and compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulatory requirements, potential impacts associated with accidental release of hazardous materials would be reduced to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures
HAZ-1 VOC-Contaminated Soil. The following shall be implemented during Project construction to address VOC-contaminated soil:
Soil Handling: If impacted soil is encountered, the area shall be delineated as necessary with cones, caution tape, stakes, chalk, or flagging and the area shall not be disturbed further until an environmental professional is on site for observation and determination of whether testing and/or excavation work is required. Stockpile staging areas shall be delineated prior to the start of excavation. The specific equipment, means, and methods to be utilized for soil removal, handling, and disposition shall be selected based on the nature of the work to be conducted and its location on the site.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-21 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Areas from which contaminated or potentially contaminated soil is being excavated, disturbed, or handled shall be secured by temporary fencing and/or caution tape, as appropriate. Exclusion and support zones, if any, staging areas, and decontamination pads shall also be delineated.
An environmental field coordinator shall be present full-time during soil removal and handling activities in areas in which contaminated soil has been encountered or has the potential to be encountered. This individual shall be responsible for observations of soil conditions, air monitoring, maintaining communications, ensuring compliance with the MMP, and any oversight of sampling.
If testing of suspect materials confirm that contaminated soils are present, notification and permitting with the SCAQMD shall be required along with implementation of necessary mitigation controls and monitoring pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 1166.
If excavation is conducted during the rainy season (November through April), provisions shall be made to prevent off -site migration of sediment in runoff. Best management practices shall be implemented for runoff control in accordance with the construction permit, regulatory requirements, and the SWPPP. Measures may include placement of sandbags, straw rolls, and/or hay bales to control runoff and to act as filters. If precipitation accumulates within any excavation, it shall be pumped out and disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations.
Fugitive Dust and Vapor Control: Appropriate procedures shall be implemented to control the generation of airborne dust by soil removal activities, including, but not limited to, some or all of the following:
o Generation of dust and emission of VOCs (if any) during construction activities shall be minimized, as necessary, by the use of water as a dust suppressant. The water shall be available from on -site water service, via a water truck, or through a metered discharge from a fire hydrant located on or proximate to the Project site. When necessary, the grading contractor shall control dust generation by spraying water prior to daily work activities, during excavation/loading activities (as necessary to maintain concentrations below action levels), and at truck staging locations. During construction activities, watering equipment shall be continuously available to provide proper control measures. o Activities that have the potential to generate fugitive dust shall cease in the event wind conditions change creating an uncontrollable condition. If required, the environmental field coordinator shall monitor on -site meteorological instrumentation and/or coordinate with off -site meteorological professionals to identify conditions that require cessation of work.
Soil Excavation and Stockpiling: Impacted soil that is excavated and not immediately removed from the site shall be stockpiled on and covered with plastic sheeting to control dust and minimize exposure to precipitation. The edges of the plastic sheeting shall have an overlap of at least 24 inches. Plastic sheeting shall be secured at the base of the stockpile and along seams of overlapping plastic sheeting, if any, with sandbags or by equivalent means. If a stockpile remains on site during the rainy season, a perimeter sediment barrier, constructed of material such as Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-22 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
straw bales or fiber roll, shall also be installed. The stockpiles shall remain covered until the soil is ready for final disposition.
A bi-weekly inspection of stockpiles shall be conducted, as appropriate, to verify cover integrity.
Any gaps, tears, or other deficiencies shall be documented by the environmental field coordinator and corrected immediately. Records shall be kept of stockpile inspections and any repairs made. During stockpile removal, only the working face of the stockpile shall be uncovered.
If the stockpiled impacted soil is to be transported off site for disposal or recycling, the soil shall be profiled for waste characteristics. Waste profiling shall consist of collecting soil samples for laboratory analysis at the frequency required by the disposal/recycling facility to which the soil is to be transported. A minimum of four samples shall be collected from a stockpile of up to 1,000 cubic yards. For each approximately 500 cubic yards of stockpile material, an additional sample shall be collected and analyzed. Soil samples shall be analyzed for parameters required by the disposal/recycling facility. If no specific analytical program is required by the disposal/recycling facility, analysis shall include VOCs, metals, and TPH.
Air and Soil Monitoring, Sampling, and Testing: monitoring and sampling activities to be performed shall include:
o Air Monitoring: Air monitoring shall be conducted by an air monitoring/health and safety professional under the guidance of the environmental field coordinator in areas where potential VOC-contaminated soil is to be disturbed. Areas of the site requiring such monitoring shall include those areas where ongoing remediation is occurring. An air monitoring/health and safety professional shall be present during ground -disturbing activities and shall record monitoring data on field sheets, which will be kept as part of Project documentation. Air monitoring shall include the following:
Real-time aerosol monitors and industrial hygiene air sampling equipment and media shall be deployed to measure dust levels and/or concentration of chemicals of potential concern in dust.
■ Vapor concentrations shall be monitored using an organic vapor analyzer fitted with a photo ionization detector. If readings using the photo ionization detector reach or exceed 50 parts per million, the provisions of SCAQMD Rule 1166 shall be implemented, as outlined in Section (c) of Rule 1166. o Soil Monitoring: During pre -demolition, demolition, grading, and construction activities, visual observation of the exposed soil beneath building foundations, floors, pavement, and subsurface features shall be conducted by a monitoring/health and safety professional under the guidance of the environmental field coordinator. A field form shall be completed daily to document the areas of soil suspected of being contaminated, if any. Any observed discoloration, odor, or other evidence of potential hazardous materials shall be documented and serve as the basis for further evaluation. o Soil Sampling and Testing: Based on field indications, soil samples may be collected to evaluate the presence of suspected chemicals or compounds in exposed soil. Selected Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-23 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
soil samples shall be analyzed by an appropriately certified, off -site laboratory, with the analytical methods selected based on the following criteria:
■ Visual and Olfactory Observation: Soil that is odorous or appears dark or oil stained shall be analyzed for TPH by EPA Method 8015M modified and for VOCs by EPA Method 8260B. Soil that appears discolored in a manner typical of metals impacts (e.g., red, yellow, green, gray, silvery) shall be analyzed for California Code of Regulations Title 22 metals using EPA Method 601013/7000. ■ Elevated VOC Levels: A soil sample (or samples) shall be collected for laboratory testing if the headspace VOC measurement exceeds 100 ppm, as measured with a photo ionization detector calibrated to hexane during the on -site screening.
Samples may be analyzed for VOCs using EPA Method 8260 (VOCs) and/or TPH by EPA Method 8015M modified.
Soil samples for laboratory analysis shall be collected using hand tools (for instance hand auger or hand trowel) and placed in glass jars, brass tubes, or other appropriate containers. Samples to be analyzed for VOCs (if deemed necessary) shall be field preserved using EPA Method 5035. After collection, samples shall be sealed, uniquely labeled, and placed in a chilled cooler pending delivery to the analytical laboratory. All soil samples shall be tracked from point of collection through the laboratory using chain -of -custody documentation. Re - useable soil sampling equipment (hand auger, trowel, shovel, etc.) shall be decontaminated prior to re -use to reduce the potential for cross -contamination.
Laboratory analytical data shall also be used to characterize excavated soil to determine the appropriate location for off -site disposal. Soil with no visual or olfactory evidence of impacts and not containing chemicals of potential concern may be re -used on the Project site. Soil export manifest records documenting the destination of all excavated and exported soil shall be maintained.
• Import Fill Soils: Off -site soils brought to the Project site for use as backfill (import fill), if necessary, shall be tested in general conformance with the DTSC Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material document (2001). Import fill shall be tested for target compounds based on knowledge of the fill source area; however, as a minimum, the fill should be tested for the following constituents (or have been tested and documented at the source):
o TPH-cc using EPA Method 8015
o VOCs using EPA Method 8260B
o Title 22 metals using EPA Methods 601013/7471
o Pesticides using EPA Method 8081A
Other analyses may be required contingent on the source of the import fill or recommendations by the supervising professional. A minimum of one sample for laboratory analysis is suggested per 1,000 tons of import fill per borrow site (single source). For quantities above 5,000 tons of import fill per borrow site (single source), one sample for laboratory analysis is suggested per 5,000 tons of import fill.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-24 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZ-2 Asbestos -Containing Material Removal. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, removal of asbestos -containing materials shall be conducted in the buildings at 9301 Stewart and Gray, 9400 Hall Road, 9399 Stewart and Gray Road, and 9333/9363 Stewart and Gray Road. A Licensed State of California asbestos abatement contractor must remove all known asbestos -containing materials, consistent with applicable Division of Occupational Safety (Title 8, Industrial Relations, Division 1.
Department of Industrial Relations, Chapter 4. Division of Industrial Safety, Subchapter 4. Construction Safety Orders, Article 4. Dust Fumes, Mists, Vapors, and Gases, Section 1529. Asbestos) and SCAQMD (Rule 1403 — Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/ Renovation Activities) guidelines. The Licensed State of California asbestos abatement contractor shall provide documentation of removal activities to the City.
HAZ-3 Lead -Based Paint Removal. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, removal of lead -based paint shall be conducted in the building at 9400 Hall Road. The removal of lead -containing materials shall comply with applicable regulations for demolition methods and dust suppression. Lead containing materials shall be managed in accordance with applicable regulations including, at a minimum, the hazardous waste disposal requirements (CCR Title 22, Division 4.5); and the State Lead Accreditation, Certification and Work Practice Requirements (CCR Title 17, Division 1, Chapter 8). Verification that the specified procedures were followed shall be provided to the City.
Threshold 4.7-d: Would the Project 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? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As shown in Table 4.7-1, five addresses associated with the Project site have been listed in regulatory databases associated with the presence and/or release of hazardous materials. Additionally, an adjacent address is also identified as a facility potentially impacted by the presence of hazardous materials. As discussed in response to Threshold 4.7-b above, contamination has been documented at the Project site and is the subject of ongoing remediation activities, including indoor air quality monitoring, groundwater monitoring, and operation of an SVE system. Thus, while the Project would be located on a hazardous materials site, the condition of the site is well documented and is the subject of ongoing remediation under the supervision of LARWQCB.
Monitoring the continued remediation of the site under regulatory supervision by the LARWQCB would ensure that site contamination would not result in a significant hazard to the public or the environment.
As discussed above in Threshold 4.7-b above, implementation of the recommendations and measures identified in the Project MMP would be required during construction activities, as outlined in Mitigation Measure HAZ-1. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 and compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulatory requirements, potential impacts associated with listed hazardous materials sites and the resultant hazard on the public or environment would be reduced to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures
See Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 above.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-25 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Threshold 4.7-f: Would the Project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site does not contain any emergency facilities and neither the Project site nor any of the public streets adjacent to the site serve as an emergency evacuation route.
Additionally, there are no emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans in effect in the local area. During construction and long-term operation of the Project, adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles would be required to be maintained along public streets that abut the Project site.
Furthermore, improvements planned as part of the Project are not anticipated to adversely affect traffic operations in the local area, including along adjacent segments of Stewart and Gray Road. As part of the City's discretionary review process, City staff would review the Project's site and circulation plans to ensure that appropriate emergency ingress and egress would be available to -and -from the Project site and that circulation on the Project site is adequate for emergency vehicles.
Additional reviews would be conducted by various City departments, including the City police and fire departments, as part of future implementing discretionary applications (e.g., parcel map, plot plan, etc.), as well as part of future grading and building permit applications, in order to ensure adequate emergency ingress and egress are adequately accommodated. Moreover, the Project would involve the provision of a series of continuous 26-foot-wide fire lanes throughout the Project site, which would serve to improve emergency access to and through the property. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
4.7.7 Cumulative Impacts
Because the issue of hazards and hazardous materials tends to be site -specific in nature, the cumulative study area includes existing and planned developments within a one -mile radius of the Project site. A one -mile radius is appropriate because that is the standard distance used in regulatory database searches of properties that may generate or store toxic materials. The cumulative projects listed in Table 3-1 consist of residential, commercial, manufacturing, warehouse, car washes, a truck terminal project, and transportation improvements. While the residential, commercial, and transportation uses would not be anticipated to require the use of hazardous materials, the manufacturing, warehouse, car washes, and truck terminal may require the transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials other than small quantities typical of residential and most commercial uses.
All cumulative projects would be required to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local regulations related to the handling and storage of hazardous materials, including the requirements for spill containment and cleanup procedures. Proper handling and storage of hazardous materials would minimize the potential for accidental spills, while implementation of spill containment and cleanup procedures would prevent significant hazard to the public or the environment in the event of accidental spills. Any cumulative project that proposes development of a potential hazardous materials site would be required to remediate the existing site contamination consistent with applicable regulations.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-26 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Therefore, cumulative impacts related to hazardous materials would be less than significant and not cumulatively considerable.
With regard to emergency response and emergency evacuation plans, as discussed above, the Project site does not contain any emergency facilities nor does it serve as an emergency evacuation route.
Additionally, there are no emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans in effect in the local area, and the Project construction activities are not anticipated to adversely affect operations of existing local roadways in the area, including Hall Road, Stewart and Gray Road, or Woodruff Avenue. In addition, the Project would involve the provision of a series of continuous 26-foot-wide fire lanes throughout the Project site, which would serve to improve emergency access to and through the property. Thus, there is no potential for the Project to contribute to cumulative impacts associated with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
4.7.8 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
No significant unavoidable impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials have been identified.
4.7.9 References
SCS Engineers. 2023a. Fourth Quarter 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report, Downey Industrial Center; 9300, 9350, and 9400 Hall Road, 9301, 9333, and 9399 Stewart and Gray Road; Downey, California 90241. January 5, 2023. Available at:
htt s: documents. eotrackerawaterboards,ea, ov esi u loads eo re ort 1973071634 T1000 0011452aPDF.
2023b Off -site Well Installation and Second Quarter 2023 Groundwater Monitoring Report, Downey Industrial Center; 9300, 9350, and 9400 Hall Road, 9301, 9333, and 9399 Stewart and Gray Road; Downey, California 90241. July 15, 2023. Available at:
httDs://documents.geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/esi/UDloads/geo reDort/1376771211/T1000 ENME1
2023c. Second Quarter 2023 Remedial Action Status Report, Downey Industrial Center; 9300, 9350, and 9400 Hall Road, 9301, 9333, and 9399 Stewart and Gray Road; Downey, California 90241. July 31, 2023. Available at: https:AZdocuments.geotracker.waterboards.ca. ov esiZ uploadslgeo report02705443973/T10000011452.PDF.
2023d. Multi -Media Management Plan; Downey Industrial Center; 9300, 9350, and 9400 Hall Road, 9301, 9333, and 9399 Stewart and Gray Road; Downey, California 90241. March 7, 2023.
Available at: htt s: documents. eotracker,waterboards.ca. ov esi uploadslgeo re ort 3420257210 T10000011452.PDF.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-27 December 2023
Exhibit D
Section 4.7
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
SCS Engineers (continued)
2017a. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Downey Industrial Center; 9300, 9350, and 9400 Hall Road; 9301, 9333, and 9399 Stewart & Gray Road, Downey, California 90241 (APNs 6284- 017-013 through -017). January 31, 2017.
2017b. Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Downey Industrial Center; 9300, 9350, and 9400 Hall Road; 9301, 9333, and 9399 Stewart & Gray Road, Downey, California 90241 (APNs 6284- 017-013 through -017). April 13, 2017.
2017c. Asbestos, Lead -Based Paint, and Lead in Drinking Water Sampling, Downey Industrial Center; 9300, 9350, 9400, and 9402 Hall Road, and 9301, 9333/9363, and 9399 Stewart & Gray Road; Downey, California 90241. February 2, 2017.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.7-28 December 2023
Exhibit D
4.8.1 Introduction
Section 4.8
Hydrology and Water Quality
The purpose of this section is to identify existing surface hydrology, groundwater, water quality and drainage patterns of the Project site and potential effects from implementation of the proposed Project.
A Low Impact Development (LID) Plan was prepared for the Project (Kimley-Horn & Associates 2021; Appendix 1). The analysis of this section is based on the LID Plan and other information available from relevant public agencies.
4.8.2 Environmental Setting
4.8.2.1 Regional Setting
The Project site is within the San Gabriel River watershed, which encompasses 689 square miles in the eastern portion of Los Angeles County. The upper portions of this watershed are largely undeveloped, consisting of riparian and woodland habitats that are only partially accessible for recreational use. The middle portion of the watershed is heavily engineered to prevent flooding and allow for groundwater recharge. The lower portion of the watershed flows through a concrete -lined channel in urban areas before reaching a soft bottom channel near the City of Long Beach.
4.8.2.2 Project Setting
Stormwater runoff generated from the Project site is conveyed via sheet flow from north to south into the municipal storm drain system, which outlets to the San Gabriel River. The San Gabriel River Reach 2 is located approximately 0.5 mile east of the Project site, near the boundary of the City.
Water quality objectives and beneficial uses are identified in the Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties (Basin Plan; LARWQCB 2014). Existing beneficial uses of the San Gabriel River Reach 2 include Wildlife Habitat and Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species.
Groundwater Recharge and Warm Freshwater Habitat are intermittent beneficial uses. Municipal and Domestic Supply, Industrial Service Supply, and Industrial Process Supply have been identified as potential beneficial uses.
The following impairments for the San Gabriel River Reach 2 are listed on the 2020-2022 Clean Water Act (CWA) 303(d) List of Impaired Waterbodies: Cyanide, Lead, and Temperature, water (SWRCB 2022).
Based on these listings in Category 5, the law requires the development of action plans, called Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), to improve water quality. A TMDL was adopted in 2007 to address metals (lead for Reach 2) in the San Gabriel River. No TMDL has been adopted for cyanide or water temperature.
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Draft Environmental Impact Report Page 4.8-1 December 2023
Exhibit D
4.8.3 Regulatory Framework
4.8.3.1 Federal
Clean Water Act
Section 4.8
Hydrology and Water Quality
The CWA (33 U.S.C. Section 1251 et seq.; 1972) is the primary federal law that protects the nation's waters, including lakes, rivers, aquifers, and coastal areas. The primary goals of the CWA are to maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters and to make all surface waters fishable and swimmable. The CWA forms the basic national framework for the management of water quality and the control of pollution discharges; it provides the legal framework for several water quality regulations, including the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), effluent limitations, water quality standards, pretreatment standards, antidegradation policy, nonpoint-source discharge programs, and wetlands protection. CWA Section 402 established the NPDES to regulate the discharge of pollutants from point sources into surface waters of the United States.
The USEPA has delegated the administrative responsibility for portions of the CWA to State and regional agencies. In California, the SWRCB administers the NPDES permitting program and is responsible for developing NPDES permitting requirements. The SWRCB works in coordination with the RWQCBs to preserve, protect, enhance, and restore water quality.
Under CWA Section 303(d), states, territories, and authorized tribes are required to develop lists of impaired waters that are too polluted or otherwise degraded to meet the water quality standards set by states, territories, or authorized tribes. The law requires that these jurisdictions establish priority rankings for waters on the lists and develop TMDLs for these waters. A TMDL is a calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can receive and still safely meet water quality standards.
4.8.3.2 State
Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter -Cologne Act) established the principal California legal and regulatory framework for water quality control. The Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act is embodied in California Water Code § 13000 et seq. It grants the SWRCB and the RWQCBs power to protect surface water and groundwater quality and is the primary vehicle for implementing California's responsibilities under the federal Clean Water Act. The SWRCB is divided into nine regions, each overseen by an RWQCB. The SWRCB is responsible for protecting California's surface waters and groundwater supplies. The City is within the jurisdiction of the LARWQCB.