020326 CED Cedarwoods Project Draft CC Resolution — City Council - Successor Agency

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FULLERTON,

CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

INCLUDING MITIGATION MEASURES AND MITIGATION MONITORING

AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR A NEW INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE
BUILDING LOCATED AT 2461-2495 EAST ORANGETHORPE AVENUE

WHEREAS, applications were filed with the City of Fullerton Community and Economic Development Department for a Zoning Amendment (LRP -2025-0011) and a Major Site Plan (ZON-2025-0013), to amend the zoning designation along southerly side of the parcel from C-M-ES to M-P-100ES to be consistent with northerly half of the parcel and for the demolition of an existing business park for the construction of a new 110,232 square foot warehouse facility (Cedarwoods Fullerton Project) with associated onsite improvements on a parcel of land more specifically described as Orange County Assessor’s Parcel No. 338-172-24.

WHEREAS, the City of Fullerton, as Lead Agency, prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration to identify the potential environmental impacts associated with the construction and implementation of the project in conformance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Californ ia Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.).

WHEREAS, mitigation measures were identified to reduce or avoid significant effects on the environment, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program will be prepared to ensure and document compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation.

WHEREAS, the City of Fullerton is the Lead Agency on the project, and the Planning Commission is the advisory body to the City Council, which is the decision- making body for the applications associated with the proposed project.

WHEREAS, the City provided a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration to all owners, as well as to all properties within 300 feet of the project site and to potentially interested public agencies and to the Orange County Clerk -Recorder advertising a 20- day public review period.

WHEREAS, comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration were received and responses to comments were prepared and made available as an attachment to the project.

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration dated November 2025, Technical Appendices and the responses to comments.

Resolution No. 2026-XX

Page 2 ends

WHEREAS, on December 10, 2025, the Planning Commission approved the Major Site Plan and recommend ed that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Cedarwoods Fullerton Project, PRJ2025-00005.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FULLERTON RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

1. The City Council, as a result of its consideration of the administrative record during the public review process, finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration ( PRJ2025- 00005) adequately addresses the anticipated environmental impacts for the project , including both the Zoning Amendment (LRP -2025-0011) and Major Site Plan (ZON - 2025-0013). The City Council finds no evidence from which one can fairly argue that the project will have a significant adverse effect on the environment and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the Lead Agency’s independent judgement and analysis.

2. The City Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Cedarwoods Fullerton Project , PRJ2025- 00005, located at 2461 to 2495 East Orangethorpe Avenue.

ADOPTED BY THE FULLERTON CITY COUNCIL ON FEBRUARY 3, 2026

___________________________
Fred Jung
Mayor

ATTEST:

_____________________________
Lucinda Williams, MMC
City Clerk

_____________________________
Date

Attachments:

• Exhibit A – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration dated November 2025 CedarwoodsFullerton Project
Initial Study/Mitigated NegativeDeclaration
Prepared By:

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
1100 Town and Country Road, Suite 700
Orange, CA92868
November 2025
Kimley» Horn
ThisPageIntentionally LeftBlank
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Pagei
Tableof Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTIONANDPURPOSE ................................................................................................... iv

1.1 PurposeandScopeof the Initial Study ............................................................................... 1

1.2 Summaryof Findings ......................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Initial StudyPublicReviewProcess .................................................................................... 2

1.4 ReportOrganization .......................................................................................................... 3

2.0 DESCRIPTIONOFPROPOSEDPROJECT .......................................................................................... 4

2.1 ProjectLocationandSetting .............................................................................................. 4

2.2 ExistingGeneralPlanLandUseandZoning ........................................................................ 5

2.3 ProjectCharacteristics ....................................................................................................... 6

2.4 DiscretionaryActionsandApprovals .................................................................................. 9

3.0 INITIALSTUDYCHECKLIST ........................................................................................................... 20

3.1 EnvironmentalFactorsPotentiallyAffected ..................................................................... 22

4.0 ENVIRONMENTALEVALUATION ................................................................................................. 23

4.1 AESTHETICS .................................................................................................................... 23

4.2 AGRICULTUREANDFORESTRYRESOURCES ...................................................................... 27

4.3 AIRQUALITY .................................................................................................................... 29

4.4 BIOLOGICALRESOURCES ................................................................................................. 54

4.5 CULTURALRESOURCES .................................................................................................... 58

4.6 ENERGY ........................................................................................................................... 61

4.7 GEOLOGYANDSOILS ....................................................................................................... 73

4.8 GREENHOUSEGASEMISSIONS......................................................................................... 79

4.9 HAZARDSANDHAZARDOUSMATERIALS .......................................................................... 95

4.10 HYDROLOGYANDWATERQUALITY................................................................................ 101

4.11 LANDUSEANDPLANNING ............................................................................................. 110

4.12 MINERALRESOURCES .................................................................................................... 115

4.13 NOISE ............................................................................................................................ 116

4.14 POPULATIONANDHOUSING ......................................................................................... 138

4.15 PUBLICSERVICES ........................................................................................................... 140

4.16 RECREATION .................................................................................................................. 144

4.17 TRANSPORTATION ......................................................................................................... 146

4.18 TRIBALCULTURALRESOURCES ...................................................................................... 150 O
urore”
o" UL4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Pageii

4.19 UTILITIESANDSERVICESYSTEMS ................................................................................... 156

4.20 WILDFIRE ....................................................................................................................... 163

4.21 MANDATORYFINDINGSOFSIGNIFICANCE ..................................................................... 165

5.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 167 Tables
Table1: ExistingOn-SiteLandUse ........................................................................................................... 4 Table2: ExistingSurroundingLandUseDesignationsandZoning ............................................................. 6 Table3: BuildingSummary ...................................................................................................................... 7 Table4: Air ContaminantsandAssociatedPublicHealthConcerns......................................................... 31 Table5: AmbientAir QualityData.......................................................................................................... 33 Table6: StateandFederalAmbientAir QualityStandards ..................................................................... 34 Table7: SouthCoastAir BasinAttainmentStatus .................................................................................. 37 Table8: SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrictSignificanceThresholds ...................................... 40 Table9: LocalSignificanceThresholdsfor ConstructionandOperations ................................................ 41 Table10: ProjectConstructionEmissions............................................................................................... 45 Table11: ProjectOperationalEmissions ................................................................................................ 46 Table12: Equipment-SpecificGradingRates .......................................................................................... 48 Table13: LocalizedProjectConstructionEmissions ............................................................................... 49 Table14: LocalizedProjectOperationalEmissions ................................................................................. 50 Table15: EnergyResourcesUsedto GenerateElectricityfor SouthCaliforniaEdison ............................. 62 Table16: AnnualOrangeCountyElectricityConsumption...................................................................... 63 Table17: AnnualOrangeCountyAutomotiveFuelConsumption ........................................................... 63 Table18: ProjectConstructionEnergyConsumption ............................................................................. 68 Table19: ProjectOperationalEnergyConsumption ............................................................................... 70 Table20: ProjectConstructionGreenhouseGasEmissions .................................................................... 89 Table21: ProjectOperationalGreenhouseGasEmissions ...................................................................... 90 Table22: RegionalTransportationPlan/SustainableCommunitiesStrategyConsistency ........................ 91 Table23: GeneralPlanPolicyConsistency ........................................................................................... 111 Table24: ExistingNoiseMeasurementLocationsandMeasurements.................................................. 117 Table25: LandUseCompatibilityfor CommunityNoiseEnvironments ................................................ 120 Table26: Cityof FullertonNoiseStandards.......................................................................................... 121 Table27: Cityof PlacentiaNoiseStandards ......................................................................................... 124 Table28: TypicalConstructionNoiseLevels ......................................................................................... 127 Table29: ProjectConstructionNoiseLevels ......................................................................................... 129 Table30: CompositeNoiseLevels ........................................................................................................ 133 Table31: TypicalConstructionEquipmentVibrationLevels ................................................................. 135 O
urore”
o" UL4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Pageiii
Table32: VMTAnalysis ........................................................................................................................ 148 Table33: ProjectWaterDemand ......................................................................................................... 157 Table34: ProjectSewerDemand ......................................................................................................... 158 Figures
Figure1: RegionalMap .......................................................................................................................... 10 Figure2: VicinityMap ............................................................................................................................ 11 Figure3: ExistingOn-SiteConditions...................................................................................................... 12 Figure4: ExistingLandUseDesignation ................................................................................................. 13 Figure5: ExistingZoningClassifications ................................................................................................. 14 Figure6: ProposedZoningClassification ................................................................................................ 15 Figure7: ConceptualSitePlan ............................................................................................................... 16 Figure8: ConceptualElevations ............................................................................................................. 17 Figure9: ConceptualLandscapePlan ..................................................................................................... 18 Figure10: ConceptualUtility Plan .......................................................................................................... 19 Figure11: NoiseMonitoring LocationsMap ......................................................................................... 118 Appendices
AppendixA: Air QualityandGreenhouseGasModelingData
AppendixB: CulturalResourcesMemorandum
AppendixC: EnergyCalculations
AppendixD: GeotechnicalEngineeringInvestigation
AppendixE: PaleontologicalResourcesRecordsSearch
AppendixF: PhaseI EnvironmentalSiteAssessment
AppendixG: PreliminaryWaterQualityManagementPlan
AppendixH: HydrologyandHydraulicsReport
AppendixI: NoiseandVibrationData
AppendixJ: Water DemandAssessment
AppendixK: SewerCapacityAssessment
AppendixL: TransportationAssessmentPoliciesandProcedures (TAPP) Worksheetand TripGeneration Table
O
urore”
o" UL4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Pageiv
ThisPageIntentionally LeftBlank
O
urore”
o" UL4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page1

1.0 INTRODUCTIONANDPURPOSE

1.1 Purposeand Scopeof the Initial Study
Pursuantto State CaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality Act (CEQA) GuidelinesSection15367, the City of Fullerton (City) isthe LeadAgencyfor theCedarwoodsFullertonProject (proposedProjector Project). The LeadAgencyis the public agencythat has the principalresponsibilityfor carryingout or approvinga project. TheCityhasthe authority for environmentalreviewin accordancewith CEQAandcertificationof the environmentaldocumentation.

ThisInitial Studyhasbeenpreparedto evaluatethe potential environmentaleffectsassociatedwith the constructionandoperationof the proposedProject. Thisdocumenthasbeenpreparedin accordancewith the CEQA (California Public ResourcesCode [PRC] §21000 et seq.) and the State CEQAGuidelines CaliforniaCodeof Regulations, Title14, §15000et seq). Pursuantto CEQArequirements, thisInitial Study includesa descriptionof the proposedProject; an evaluationof the Project’s potential environmental impacts; the findingsof the environmentalanalyses; andrecommendedmitigationmeasuresto avoidor lessenthe Project’ssignificantadverseenvironmentalimpacts.

This Initial Study evaluateseach of the environmental issue areas contained in the Environmental ChecklistFormprovidedin Section3.0below. It providesdecision-makersandthepublicwith information concerningthe potential environmentaleffectsassociatedwith the Project’s constructionand ongoing operations, and waysto avoid or reducepotential environmentalimpacts. TheCity will usethis Initial Studyasa resourcewhenconsideringandtakingactionon the Project. Anyresponsibleagencymayelect to usethis environmentalanalysisfor discretionaryactionsassociatedwith Projectimplementation. No trusteeagenciesareapplicableto this Project.

1.2 Summaryof Findings
Based on the EnvironmentalChecklistForm completed for the proposed Project and supporting environmentalanalyses, the Projectwould result in no impact or a lessthan significantimpact on the majority of the environmentalissuesanalyzedin this Initial Study. Thefollowing environmentalstudy areas would have no impact or a less than significant impact: Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Air Quality, BiologicalResources, Energy, GreenhouseGasEmissions, Hazardsand Hazardous Materials, Hydrology, LandUseandPlanning, MineralResources, PopulationandHousing, PublicServices, Recreation, UtilitiesandServiceSystems, andWildfire. TheProject’simpactson the followingissueareas wouldbelessthan significantwith mitigationincorporated: CulturalResources, GeologyandSoils, Noise, andTribalCulturalResources. Allimpactswouldbelessthan significantafter mitigation.

Assetforth in StateCEQAGuidelinesSection15070 (Decisionto PrepareaNegativeor MitigatedNegative Declaration), apublicagencyshallprepareor havepreparedaproposednegativedeclarationor mitigated negativedeclarationfor a projectpursuantto CEQAwhen:
a) Theinitial study showsthat there is no substantialevidence, in light of the whole record beforethe agency, that the projectmayhavea significanteffecton the environment, or b) Theinitial studyidentifiespotentiallysignificanteffects, but:
1) Revisionsin the projectplansor proposalsmadeby, or agreedto by the applicantbefore aproposedmitigatednegativedeclarationandinitial studyarereleasedfor publicreview O
urore”
o" UL4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page2
would avoid the effectsor mitigate the effectsto a point where clearlyno significant effectswouldoccur, and
2) Thereisno substantialevidence, in light of the wholerecordbeforethe agency, that the projectasrevisedmayhavea significanteffecton the environment.

1.3 Initial StudyPublicReviewProcess
TheCityhasprovidedthe Noticeof Intent (NOI) to adopta Mitigated NegativeDeclaration (MND) to the OrangeCountyClerk-Recorderandmailedthe NOIto responsibleagencies, nearbypropertyowners, and other parties who expressedinterest in receivingthe NOI. In conjunctionwith the NOI, the City has releasedthe Initial Study/Mitigated NegativeDeclaration (IS/MND) for a 20-day public review period pursuantto StateCEQAGuidelinesSection15105. As the Projectdoesnot affect resourcesunder the jurisdictionof a Statetrusteeor responsibleagencyandisnot consideredregionallysignificant, a 20-day reviewperiodisappropriate. Duringthepublicreviewperiod, theIS/MND, includingtechnicalappendices, canbeaccessedon the City’swebsiteandisavailablefor reviewat the locationlistedbelow. https:// portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/Browse.aspx?id=1539720&repo=r-3261686e Cityof Fullerton
CommunityandEconomicDevelopmentDepartment
303WestCommonwealthAvenue – 2ndFloor
Fullerton, CA92382
In reviewingthe IS/MND, affectedpublicagenciesandinterestedmembersof the publicshouldfocuson the adequacyof the documentin identifyingandanalyzingthe Project’spotentialenvironmentalimpacts andthe waysin whichthe potentiallysignificantimpactscanbeavoidedor mitigated.

If publicagenciesor anymembersof the publichavecommentson the IS/MND, theycanbesentto:

DavidLopez, SeniorPlanner
Cityof Fullerton – CommunityandEconomicDevelopmentDepartment 303WestCommonwealthAvenue – 2ndFloor
Fullerton, CA92382
714) 738-6878
[email protected]
Commentssent via emailshouldinclude “CedarwoodsFullertonProject” in the subjectline and a valid mailingaddress.

Followingreceiptandevaluationof commentsfrom agencies, organizations, and/or individuals, the City will determine whether the commentsraise any substantialnew environmentalissues. If so, further documentationmay be required. If not, or if the issuesraiseddo not providesubstantialevidencethat the Project would have a significanteffect on the environment, the IS/MND and the Project will be consideredfor adoptionandapproval, respectively.

O
urore”
o" UL4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page3

1.4 Report Organization
Thisdocumentincludesthe followingsections:

Section1.0 – Introduction and Purpose. Thissectionprovidesan introduction andoverviewdescribing purposeof the CEQAdocumentandthe Initial Studyconclusions.

Section2.0 – Descriptionof ProposedProject. This section includesthe Project Description, which identifiesthe Projectlocation, keycharacteristics, andincludesa list of anticipateddiscretionaryactions.

Section3.0 – Initial Study Checklist. The EnvironmentalChecklistForm providesan overviewof the potentialimpactsthat mayor maynot resultfrom Projectimplementation.

Section4.0 – EnvironmentalEvaluation. Thissectioncontainsan analysisof environmentalimpactsfor eachresourceareaidentifiedin the EnvironmentalChecklistForm.

Section5.0 – References. Thesectionidentifiesresourcesusedto preparethe Initial Study.

O
urore”
o" UL4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page4

2.0 DESCRIPTIONOFPROPOSEDPROJECT

2.1 Project Location and Setting
The CedarwoodsFullertonproject site (project site) is locatedin OrangeCounty, in the southeastern portion of theCityof Fullerton (City). Theprojectislocatedwithin a largelyurbanizedareaof theCitynear its boundarywith the cities of Anaheimand Placentia. Regionalaccessis providedvia StateRoute57 SR-57) approximately0.5mile to the eastand SR-91 approximately0.4 mile to the southof the project site. Figure1: RegionalMap depictsthe projectsitein a regionalcontext.

Theapproximately4.79-acre (roundedto 4.8acres) projectsiteiscomprisedof onegenerallyrectangular- shaped developed parcel (Assessor’s ParcelNumber [APN] 338-172-24) located at 2461-2495East OrangethorpeAvenue. Thesiteisgenerallyborderedby industrialwarehouse/manufacturingusesto the north andeast, OrangethorpeAvenueto the south, anda smalllocal-servingcommercialretail strip mall and towing companylot to the west. AcrossOrangethorpeAvenueto the south of the project site are additional industrial uses, which are within the incorporatedboundariesof the City of Anaheim. Local vehicular accessis currently provided directly via two drivewayson OrangethorpeAvenueand one drivewayat the terminusof the CypressWaycul-de-sac, seeFigure2: Vicinity Map.

On-SiteLandUses
Theproject site is relativelyflat andgraduallyslopesnorth to southfrom approximately215feet to 193 feetabovemeansealevel. Theprojectsitewasdevelopedin 1983asa five-buildingmulti-tenantbusiness park, referred to as “CedarwoodsBusinessPark” and currentlyoperatesassuch. Thefive buildingshave a total of approximately85,700squarefeet of industrialand commercialuses, a surfaceparkinglot, and landscaping, as depictedon Figure3: ExistingOn-Site Conditions. Table1: ExistingOn-Site LandUse summarizesthe existingbuildingson the site. Prior to the current development, the project site was historicallyusedfor agriculturalpurposesor wasvacant.

Table1: ExistingOn-SiteLandUse
BuildingType Address/Unit
Building1 - southwestsideof the project site
Two-story, concretetilt-up officebuilding 2461EastOrangethorpeAvenue, Unit 101 2461EastOrangethorpeAvenue, Unit 102
2461EastOrangethorpeAvenue, Unit 103
2461EastOrangethorpeAvenue, Unit 104
2461EastOrangethorpeAvenue, Unit 105
2461EastOrangethorpeAvenue, Unit 200
Building2 – west sideof the project site
Single-story, concretetilt-up industrialbuilding 2465/2467EastOrangethorpeAvenue 2469EastOrangethorpeAvenue
2471EastOrangethorpeAvenue
Building3 – north sideof the project site
two-story, concretetilt-up industrialbuilding 2473EastOrangethorpeAvenue 2475EastOrangethorpeAvenue
2477EastOrangethorpeAvenue
2479EastOrangethorpeAvenue
O
urore”
eFULO.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page5
Table1: ExistingOn-SiteLandUse
BuildingType Address/Unit
2483EastOrangethorpeAvenue
Building4 – eastsideof the project site
single-story, concretetilt-up industrialbuilding 2487EastOrangethorpeAvenue 2489EastOrangethorpeAvenue
2491EastOrangethorpeAvenue
2493EastOrangethorpeAvenue
Building5 – southeastsideof the project site
two-story, concretetilt-up officebuilding 2495EastOrangethorpeAvenue, Unit 100 2495EastOrangethorpeAvenue, Unit 101
2495EastOrangethorpeAvenue, Unit 110
2495EastOrangethorpeAvenue, Unit 200
2495EastOrangethorpeAvenue, Unit 210
Source: Orswell & Kasman, Inc. (October, 2023). PhaseI EnvironmentalSiteAssessmentReport. IncludedasAppendixF.

2.2 ExistingGeneralPlanLandUseand Zoning
TheFullertonPlan (GeneralPlan) identifies12geographicfocusareasin the Cityto concentratepotential changethroughcommunity-ledplanningprocesses. TheproposedProjectislocatedwithin FocusAreaK:

SoutheastIndustrial, whichrecommendsamaximumFloorAreaRatio (FAR) of 1.0andhighlyrecommends future developmenttypesof officeandindustrialuses.

GeneralPlanExhibit2: CommunityDevelopmentPlandepictsthe City’s communitydevelopmenttypes landusedesignations) whichidentifiesthe projectsitedesignatedasIndustrial (I) with a permitted 0.35 to 0.5FAR.1,2 TheIndustrial (I) designationismeantto protectandenhancethe City’smajoremployment areas by providing opportunities for manufacturing, product assembly, researchand development, warehousing, and supportingusesand amenities.3 Figure4: ExistingLandUseDesignationdepictsthe existingon-siteandsurroundingproperties’ landusedesignations. TheproposedProjectisconsistentwith and would be an allowed use within the existing community development type. No GeneralPlan amendmentwouldberequired.

TheCityof FullertonZoningMap depictsthe City’s zoningclassificationsand identifiesthat the project siteiszonedManufacturingParkwith a100,000-square-foot minimumlot sizeand anEmergencyShelter Overlay (MP-100-ES) on the northernportion of the site. TheMP-100-ESzoningclassificationisintended for a wide range of light industrial activities, often basedon a multi-tenant type development. The proposedProjectis consistentwith the existingMP-100-ESzoningclassificationon the northern portion of the site. On the remainingsouthern portion of the property, the project site is zonedCommercial Manufacturingwith an EmergencyShelterOverlay (CM-ES). TheCM zoningclassificationis intendedto providefor selectedareaswhereon- premisesretail salesandservicesalongwith the relatedassembling, processingand manufacturingcan be carried out. The proposedwarehouseProjectwould not be an allowedusewithin the CMzone. Therefore, the Projectwouldrezonethe southernportion of the site to 1 Cityof Fullerton. (2025). Fullerton - GoZoneGISWebtool. Availableat:
https:// gis.cityoffullerton.com/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=38a7db5f8a8748b1818bc31269bfa3b0 2 MaximumFARincreasebasedon focusareapolicies
3 Cityof Fullerton. (2012). TheFullertonPlan, Page125
O
urore”
eFULO.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page6
MP-100-ES. The ESOverlay would remain on the entirety of the site. Figure 5: Existing Zoning Classificationsand Figure6: ProposedZoningClassificationdepictsthe existingand proposedzoning districtsfor the projectsiteandsurroundingproperties. In addition, theexistingcommunitydevelopment typesand zoningdistrictsare summarizedin Table2: ExistingSurroundingLandUseDesignationsand Zoning.

Table2: ExistingSurroundingLandUseDesignationsandZoning Direction
CommunityDevelopmentType
land usedesignation) ZoneClassification
ProjectSite Industrial
ManufacturingParkwith a 100,000square-foot
minimumlot size (MP-100)
CommercialManufacturing (CM)
EmergencyShelterOverlay (ES)
North Industrial ManufacturingParkwith a 200,000square-foot minimumlot size (MP-200)
South Cityof Anaheim: Industrial (I-L) Cityof Anaheim: Industrial East Industrial ManufacturingParkwith a 100,000square-foot minimumlot size (MP-100)
West Industrial
Manufacturing, General (MG)
CommercialManufacturing (CM)
EmergencyShelterOverlay (ES)
Sources:

Cityof Fullerton. Fullerton - GoZoneGISWebtool. Availableat:
https:// gis.cityoffullerton.com/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=38a7db5f8a8748b1818bc31269bfa3b0. RetrievedJuly, 2025 Cityof Anaheim. ZoningandGeneralPlanViewer. Availableat:
https:// gis.anaheim.net/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=a5931cb4134b4a7ebf5a629e95f56e8f. RetrievedJuly, 2025

2.3 Project Characteristics
SiteDevelopment
TheApplicantis proposingthe demolitionof the existingapproximately85,700-square-foot Cedarwoods BusinessParkand the constructionand operationof a new110,232-square-foot warehouse/distribution facilitywith a gatedtruckcourt, surfaceparkinglot, andlandscaping. Theproposedbuildingwouldconsist of 100,232 squarefeet of warehousespaceand 10,000 squarefeet of ancillaryoffice space. Theoffice spacewould be split evenlybetweenthe groundlevelandmezzaninewith one areaon the north of the buildingandone areaon the southof the buildingto maximizeflexibility for a future tenant. Consistent with the proposed MP-100-ESzoning district, the proposed structure would be a concrete tilt-up warehousebuildingandwouldhavea maximumroof line of approximately44 feet in height, inclusiveof the parapet, anda FARof 0.53. A solarphotovoltaic (PV) systemwould be installedon the roof over the office areas of the warehouse. The office areas are the only areas that are being proposed to be mechanicallyventilated. TheProjectwouldhave91passengervehicleparkingstallsonthe north andwest perimetersof the site. Thetruckcourt, whichisproposedto have15dockdoors, wouldbelocatedon the west sideof the building; seeTable3: BuildingSummary. Additionalsite componentswould includea trash enclosure, pump house, and bike racks to be located near the ancillary office spacesin the warehousebuilding. SeeFigure7: ConceptualSitePlan.

O
urore”
eFULO.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page7
Table3: BuildingSummary
Warehouse
sf)
Office
sf)
Mezzanine
Office (sf)
Total
Building (sf)
Loading
Docks
AutomobileParkingStalls
Required1 Proposed
100,232 5,000 5,000 110,232 15 91 91

1. Warehouseparkingspacerequirement1 spacefor every2,000sf, Officeparkingspacerequirement1 spacefor every250sf. sf = squarefeet
Source: FullertonMunicipalCode (FMC) Chapter15.40
TheproposedProjectiscurrentlyplannedasa “speculativeproject.” Therefore, thefuture tenantsof the buildingare not currentlyknown. Without knowingthe identity of a future tenant, the exactnumberof future employeesor hoursof operationcannotbe determined. Therefore, this IS/MNDand associated technicalreportsuseapproximatepotential on-site employees, hoursof operation, and vehiculartraffic generationbasedon the proposedProject’s characteristics (i.e., squarefootage). ThisIS/MND and the associatedtechnicalreports haveassumedusesand intensitiesthat may be greaterthan what might actuallybeexpectedat buildoutandoperation, whichprovidea conservativeestimationof impacts.

CirculationandParking
Theproposedwarehousefacility wouldcontinueto providevehicularaccessfrom two drivewayson East OrangethorpeAvenueand one driveway at the terminus of the CypressWay cul-de-sac. Passenger vehicleswouldhaveaccessto the projectsitefrom the three driveways. Thedrivewayoff of CypressWay wouldbea64-foot-widetruckingressandegresspoint that wouldprovideaccessto thegatedtruckcourt on the westsideof the building, aswell passengervehicleparking. TheCypressWaydrivewaywouldalso havean 8-foot high rolling gate and knoxpad lock. ThewesterndrivewayalongOrangethorpeAvenue would be 40feet wide and allow for truck ingressand egress. Thewesterndrivewaywould alsoprovide accessto the gatedtruck courtandpassengervehicleparking. TheeasterndrivewayalongOrangethorpe Avenuewouldbe 26feet widewith an8-foot highrollinggateandknoxpadlock, whichwouldexclusively allowfor passengerandemergencyvehicleingressandegress. Theeasterndrivewaywouldprovideaccess to the drive aislealongthe easternperimeterof the site whichwould leadto passengervehicleparking.

All internal driveaisleswould be26 feet wide andaccommodatestandardfire laneturning radiusesand hammerheadturnaround maneuversfor emergencyvehiclesand fire services. All entry gateson the project site would be equippedwith knoxboxesfor accessby the Cityof FullertonFireDepartmentand PoliceDepartmentfor emergencies.

Consistentwith the FullertonMunicipal Code (FMC) Table15.40.050.A, the Projectwould provide 91 vehicleparkingspaces: 44standardstalls, 26compactstalls, 4 electricvehiclechargingstations (EVCS), 13 electricvehiclecapablestalls, and4 Americanswith DisabilitiesAct (ADA) stallsfor employeeand visitor parking. Passengervehicleparkingstallsare proposedon the north and west perimetersof the project site. Thegatedtruck court wouldbelocatedon the westsideof the warehouseandwouldbesecuredby 8-foot-high rolling gates. Pedestrianaccesswithin the project site would be provided by sidewalks.

ExistingpedestriansidewalksalongOrangethorpeAvenuewouldremain.

BuildingDesign, Landscaping, Lighting
Theconceptualdesignfor the Projectincludesconcretetilt-up panelswith architecturaltreatments, such aspanelreveals, variationin façadematerial, and horizontaland verticalarticulationsto providevisual reliefon the buildingfacades, asshownin Figure8: ConceptualElevations. Theexteriorelevationswould bewhite andgreywith bluewindowglazing. Rooftopmechanicalequipmentwouldbescreened, if visible O
urore”
eFULO.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page8
from the publicright-of-way. Consistentwith FMCTable15.40.040.B, a retainingwall would be located along a portion of the westernperimeter of the site and an 8-foot-high wrought iron fencewould be locatedalongthe westernperimeterof the site containingthe truck court area, the easternhalf of the northernperimeterof the site, andthe entirety of the easternperimeterof the site.

TheProjectwould be subjectto compliancewith the developmentstandardsin FMCSection15.40.040, which include requirementsfor building setbacks. Consistentwith the FMC, the proposedwarehouse would be set back over 20 feet from OrangethorpeAvenue. The Project would also be subject to compliancewith the developmentstandardsin FMCSection15.40.040.F, whichincluderequirementsfor landscapingand FMCChapter15.50, which outline additionallandscapingand irrigation requirements.

TheProjectwouldprovidea total of 19,109squarefeet of landscaping, whichwouldincludegroundcover, shrubs, and treesfocusednear parkinglot areas, the warehouse, site perimeter, and drivewayentries, seeFigure9: ConceptualLandscapePlan.

Sitelighting would be usedto provideadequatelightingfor circulation, safety, andsecurity. All project siteentries, exits, parkingareas, loadingareas, trashenclosures, outdoorareas, andpedestrianpathways would includeduskto dawn lighting for securitypurposes. Lightingprovidedto illuminate any parking areashallbearrangedsoasto reflectthe light andglareawayfrom adjacentproperties.

Utility andOff-SiteImprovements
TheProjectwouldconnectwith the existingutility infrastructure, includingwater service, sanitarysewer service, storm draininfrastructure, andelectrical, asdepictedin Figure10: ConceptualUtility Plan. The Cityof Fullertonwouldcontinueto providewater serviceto the projectsiteviaconnectionto anexisting 12-inch water main in OrangethorpeAvenueand an 8-inch water main in CypressWay. The Project proposeswater connectionsfor domesticwater, fire protection, and landscapeirrigation. TheProject includesrelocationof the existingon-sitewater loop. TheCityof Fullertonwouldalsocontinueto provide sewerserviceto the projectsitevia connectionto anexisting8-inchsanitarysewermainin CypressWay.

A secondarypoint of connectionmay be extended to an existing City of Placentiasewer main in OrangethorpeAvenue. TheProjectdoesnot proposeconnectionto or useof naturalgas. Theprojectsite iscurrentlyservedandwouldcontinueto beservedby SouthernCaliforniaEdison (SCE).

RoadwayImprovements
Along OrangethorpeAvenue, the existing western driveway would be relocated resulting in the constructionof a new drivewaywith sidewalkand curb andgutter improvementsand reconstructionat the existingdrivewaylocation. Theexistingeasterndrivewayon OrangethorpeAvenuewould remainin its existinglocationandconfiguration.

Construction
Projectconstructionis expectedto commencein late 2027with a durationof approximately13 months completedin one phase. Approximately929cubicyards (cy) of fill areanticipated. Thefinal gradingplan wouldbereviewedandapprovedby the Cityprior to gradingpermit issuance.

O
urore”
o" UL4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page9

2.4 Discretionary Actions and Approvals
Thefollowingdiscretionaryactionsand/or approvalsarerequiredfor the proposedProject:

Cityof Fullerton
Adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated NegativeDeclaration. TheproposedProjectrequires CEQAcompliancethroughthe adoptionof anIS/MNDprior to Projectapproval. ThisInitial Study and the proposedMND would serveas the primary environmentaldocumentfor all actions associatedwith approvalof the CedarwoodsFullertonProject.

ZoningAmendment (LRP-2025-0011). TheProjectwould require a zoningamendmenton the southern portion of the parcel from CommercialManufacturing with an EmergencyShelter Overlay (CM-ES) to ManufacturingParkwith a 100,000 square-foot minimum lot sizeand an EmergencyShelterOverlay (MP-100-ES) to beconsistentwith the northernhalf of the parcel.

Major Site Plan (ZON-2025-0013). TheProjectrequiresreview of the site improvementsand compliancewith the applicabledevelopmentstandards.

Other
SantaAnaRegionalWater QualityControlBoard (RegionalBoard). NationalPollutantDischarge EliminationSystem (NPDES) Compliance/LowImpactDevelopment (LID) approvals.

City of Placentia. Projectmay extenda point of connectionfrom the site to a City of Placentia ownedsanitarysewermainline in OrangethorpeAvenue. Asewerpermit wouldberequired.

Other permits required for the Projectmay include, but are not limited to, issuanceof encroachment permits for driveways, sidewalks, signs, building permits, gradingpermits, demolition permits, tenant improvementpermits, andpermitsfor newutility connections.

O
urore”
o" UL4
Not to scale.CedarwoodsFullertonProject
Source:
710
105
Lo s An ge l es
SanFernando
Malibu
Calabasas
La Cañada
Flintridge
Beverly Hills
Carson
South Gate
Huntington Park
Burbank
Glendale
Santa Monica
LongBeach
SimiValley
Downey
Inglewood
Torrance
Pasadena
EastLosAngeles
LosAngeles
1830ft
10066ft
2 10
15 15
5 405
Cerritos
Chino Hills
GlendoraArcadia
Tustin
La Habra
Jurupa Valley
Rancho
Cucamonga
Anaheim
WestCovina
Fontana
Norwalk
Fullerton
OntarioPomona
Corona
SantaAna
ElMonte
Orange
5688ft
4620ft
5 Or an ge
RanchoSanta
Margarita
Laguna Beach
San Clemente
Lake Forest
Fountain Valley
Laguna Niguel
MissionViejo
Huntington
Beach CostaMesa
Irvine
173
215
Grand Terrace
Crestline
Rialto SanBernardino
Riverside
Lakeland Village
Wildomar
Lake Elsinore
Cityof FullertonBoundary
ProjectSite
Fullerton
Figure1: RegionalMap
Source: ESRI, 2025Source: ESRI, 2025
PlacentiaPlacentia
rak d (
PAVJ
H
go
O
O
V
o
0 0
o0o
o
0 l-
o I I—
ow
l___I /
O
O
OO0PlIo
o
o
O
HFI
o\o
o I
o
o
o
o
T7
O
Y I )
o11
T 4 X,
J Aryoo
Mounvai^ n' s
0 ex c
o
V
w) Kimley» Horn
San
Joaquin
Hills '
Palos
Verde Hills
i
i
i
i
i
San
Fernando
Valley
2 C
1/))
O
o
1 9.

O1,
illIV
0 C
Chi' n^) Hills
Pn
1 0
Verdugo
Mb' untaa' ns
vo) 5
J
WP (
y.

I
I
I
1 o
IM
I ! 1
ven
te HU Monica
Mountams k ,
N aaw
L /
ySanta
Ana' Chin
6 Valley
Not to scale.

Source:

CedarwoodsFullertonProject
Figure2: Vicinity Map
Source: Nearmaps, 2025Source: Nearmaps, 2025 ProjectSite EOrangethorpeAveE OrangethorpeAve
SPlacentia
Ave
SPlacentia
Ave
SStateCollegeBlvd
SStateCollegeBlvd
CypressWayCypressWay
Bu
rtPl
Bu
rtPl
as TN399J21- 1 ‘ s
Fr = •
TTI-d
1 Iil '
3 a1.Xil“
B"
Voll-aln./nF1we.

S BT1
i
i
ie*
5T
m
OQ <—=
T .
w
I ma •
I - = a a
m
r
s
I
KimleyHorn
I
a
4 iM
i
il
3 3
J
O
2 ye
F
as
4 A
e
j
J
w
EH
T
i •
I
I
I
i
1J
U
I |
IH
@
dk
M
M
M
A
O
A
M
IA
F
E
E
1 1
ul
J
L
u
t
D
D
v
r
i,J
M29
1 i )
j.
eh
j
J
rt
st
r
7 m
I
I.

II/
nr
J-
L
d
t -
H.
i
i
A
9 l4
t
its
I
I
II-
1-
I
m
r
I
u
p
lo
is
u
n
il
ilss
H
IE
h
I i
1 511.
e
I »
s
I
igr *K
1 s
3 C
a
3 r
i 9/
10 J
D•r
J
x
o
sfl
th
m
a
s
J
1 J
1 iis
ariiF
l
m
iilium
III
I
II
II
5 Ja
1I. r
GPs
Not to scale.CedarwoodsFullertonProject
Figure3: Existing On-SiteConditions

O R A N G E T H O R P E A V E N U E

ARCHITECTURAL

PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SITE
DRC-A1.05N.T.S.

SCALE
1PHOTOGRAPHSOFTHESITE

CHECKED

SHEETTITLE

SHEETNUMBER
JOB No.

DRAWN
24-059
No. ISSUANCE DATE

STEVE HONG

CONSULTANTS

S T E V E K H O N G A R C H I T E C T

STEVE HONG
4 0 0 0 W E S T E R L Y P L A C E S U I T 1 0 0
N E W P O R T B E A C H C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 6 6 0
PROJECT MANAGER: STEVE HONG
714 - 822 - 1171, STEVE@SKHARCHITECT. COM

CIVIL ENGINEER

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
PACIFIC CONSULTING GROUP, INC.

COSTA MESA,
CATEL: 818- 800-
6991EMAIL: KYLE@PACIFICCONSULTINGINC.

COMATTN: KYLE PROUTY
RODARTE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, INC.
740 13TH. SUITE 320
SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
TEL: 909- 771- 8171
EMAIL: LORENZO@RODARTELANDARCH. COM
ATTN: LORENZO RODARTE

L T C G G L L C

TRUENORTH
1 2
3 4
5 2
1 354
Source: SKHArchitect, 2025
3 4
5 KimleyHorn
A
a
I /
F
A
s
18 Sh
A
s
Y
c
J
59 11
s
I»
y %
M
V
F
hl
E
I.__
M
h
e
I..
aep
lilu
y
Al
I
A
I
ru
ne
1249t
i
a0
M
M
1‘
T
e
E
i
1 i
s
i
Er
5 7
0 1
It
d
I (
S
1“
i A
1 s
J
59 92
29gu
lw
as
17 A
r
l__
A
35 H
A ,
3 A
l
w
a
a
ill
Ij
al
Not to scale.CedarwoodsFullertonProject
Figure4: Existing Land UseDesignation
Source: Cityof Fullerton - GoZone, 2025
ProjectSite
LandUseDesignation
Industrial (I)
Avejet
peemot?et‘
I
pve
Rob!1 •
f
192 ft
0/
J93ft
l
l
l
J
g
i
Gis %
o
9 o
I S
i 5 /
3 o
5 v.
c
2 f
0 z
v)
woran9
1 Kimberly Ave
i1
oun"
I
Quality Inn
Placentia
Anaheim
Fullerton
E
Kimberly Ave
E Orangethorpe Ave
tn
w) Kimley>» Horn
Bu
rt
P
I
Sta
te
C
o
lle
g
e
B
M
S
S
ta
te
C
o
lle
g
e
B
lvd
S
ta
te
C
o
lle
g
e
B
lvd
Not to scale.CedarwoodsFullertonProject
Figure5: Existing ZoningClassifications
Source: Cityof Fullerton - GoZone, 2025
ProjectSite
Zoning
ManufacturingPark
Manufacturing, General
CommercialManufacturing
ES - EmergencyShelterOverlay
M- P- 200
M- P- 100
M- P- 100ES
f 0
M- G
I
E Orangethorpe Ave
S
J
l
192fi
l •
I
193 ft
4 I
i
i/
I 0

RAILROAD
Kimberly Ave
t
out"
pvee
ora09"N
o
oAveRob
IP
w) Kimley» Horn
i
Quality Inn
Placentia
Anaheim
Fullerton
3 9
O-
1 2
etnot?
M- P- 200ES
E Orangethorpe Ave

M- G ES'
OES
M- GES

RAILROAD
Kimberly Ave
M- GES
Bu
rt
P
I
PA
S
b
o
eis
s
k
Sta
te
C
o
lle
g
e
B
l
xte
r
S
t
Sta
te
C
o
lle
g
e
B
lvd
0 Not to scale.CedarwoodsFullertonProject
Figure6: ProposedZoningClassification
Source: Cityof Fullerton - GoZone, 2025
ProjectSite
Zoning
ManufacturingPark
Manufacturing, General
CommercialManufacturing
ES - EmergencyShelterOverlay
M- P- 100ES
E Orangethorpe Ave
M- P- 200
M- P- 100
f 0
M- G
AveRob
I t
I
193 ft
s
1 i
i
l
3 j s
1 0Is
192 ft

RAILROAD
Kimberly Ave
out"
3 9
O
O
pvee
ora09"N
O
O
IP
Quality Inn
Placentia
Anaheim
Fullerton
2 etnot?
M- P- 200ES
E Orangethorpe Ave

M- G ES'
OES
M- GES

RAILROAD
Kimberly Ave
M- GES
w Kimley>» Horn
Bu
rt
P
I
PA
S
b
o
eis
s
k
Sta
te
C
o
lle
g
e
B
l
xte
r
S
t
Sta
te
C
o
lle
g
e
B
lvd
1 Not to scale.

Source: SKHArchitect, 2025
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
Figure7: ConceptualSitePlan
EVCAP
EVC
S
EV

CHARGING
ONLY
EVC
S
EVC
S
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVC
S

COMPACTCOMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACT COMPACTCOMPACT COMPACT COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACTCOMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACT 6'-0" 6@8'=48'- 0"10@8'= 80'- 0"6'- 0"10@8'= 80'- 0"6'-0"6@8'-6"=51'-0" 6'-
0 4@
8 6
34 0
27@
8 6
229
6 20'-
0 7@
8 6
59 6
6'-
0 5@
8 6
42 6
4'-
0 45'-
10 23'-
8 40'-
0 6'-
0 6@
8 6
51 0
26'-
0 31'-
11 48'-
0 11"
503
0 21'-
2 50'-
0 55'-
6 56'-
0 56'-
0 56'-
0 56'-
0 56'-
0 56'-
0 56'-
0 55'-
6 6'-
0 26'-
0 16'-
0 POTENTIAL
OFFICE
19'-0"
26'-0"

DRIVEWAY
40'-0"

DRIVEWAY
57'-6"
15 DOCK
DOORS
TYP. TYP.

TYP. TYP.

TYP.

TYP.
25'-6"
8'HWIFENCE
20'-0"
8'HWIFENCE
25'-6"
8'H WI FENCE
20'- 0"
8'H WI FENCE
139
10 8'H
W
IFEN
CE
TYP. TYP.TYP.

TYP.TYP.

TYP.

TYP. TYP.

TYP.

TYP. TYP.
26'
WIDE
FIRE
LANE
26'
WIDE
FIRE
LANE
26' WIDEFIRELANE

C Y P R E S S W A Y

O R A N G E T H O R P E A V E N U E

POTENTIALOFFICE
TYP.

PROPERTYLINE

PROPERTYLINE
PRO
PE
R
TY
LINE
PRO
PER
TYLINE
40'-0"
329'-7"
573
0 369'-0"
470
7 29'-
2 101
6 6'-6"
139
4 RET
AIN
ING
W
ALL
W
WI
FENCE
TYP.
59'-
7 43'-
5 88'-
6 RET
AIN
IN
G
W
ALL
TYP. TYP.

TELESC. GATE, TYP.
175'-0"
8'H WI FENCE
528
7 8'
H
W
IFENC
E
TYP.

TYP.

TYP. TYP.
3@
8 6
25 6
43'-
0 19'- 0"
143'-0" 186'-0"
66'-0" 60'- 0" 60'-0"
34'-0" 6'-0"
8'- 0" 26'- 0"123'-6"19'- 0"6"
3@8'-6"= 25'-6"6'-6"34'-4"
SWINGGATE, TYP.
43'-
11 19'-0" 40'-0" 19'-0" 6'-6" 57'-6"
24'-
1 154'- 2"
TYP.

TYP.

TYP.
64'-
0 DRI
VEW
AY
R200 R20
0 R100 R9'-
0 ARCHITECTURAL

OVERALL SITE PLAN
DRC-A1.011" = 30'-0"
SCALE
1OVERALLSITEPLAN

CHECKED

SHEET TITLE

SHEET NUMBER
JOBNo.

DRAWN
24- 059
No. ISSUANCE DATE

STEVE HONG

CONSULTANTS

S T E V E K H O N G A R C H I T E C T

STEVE HONG
4 0 0 0 W E S T E R L Y P L A C E S U I T 1 0
0NE W P O R T B E A C H C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 6 6 0
PROJECT MANAGER: STEVE HONG
714 - 822 - 1171, STEVE@SKHARCHITECT. COM

CIVIL ENGINEER

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
PACIFIC CONSULTING GROUP, INC.

COSTA MESA,
CATEL: 818- 800- 6991
EMAIL: KYLE@PACIFICCONSULTINGINC. COM
ATTN: KYLE PROUTY
RODARTE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, INC.
740 13TH. SUITE
320SANDIEGO, CA 92101
TEL: 909- 771- 8171
EMAIL: LORENZO@RODARTELANDARCH.

COMATTN: LORENZO RODARTE

L T C G G L L C

GENERAL NOTES
SITE PAVING WITH HEAVY BROOM FINISH. SEECIVIL1

KEYNOTES

DECORATIVE PAVEMENT AT ENTRY - COLORED CONCRETE W/
SAW CUTPATTERN2
PRIMARYBUILDING3
PEDESTRIAN CONCRETE WALKWAY WITH MEDIUM BROOMFINISH4
RETAINING WALL.5
8' H WROUGHT IRON FENCE.6
8' H BLACK PAINTED VEHICULAR ROLLING GATE WITH KNOX
PADLOCK. MANUALLY OPERATED. PROVIDE CONDUITS FOR FUTURE

OPERATOR
7 5'- 6" X 6' X 4" THICK CONCRETE LANDING PAD AT ALL EXTERIOR MANDOORS WITH MEDIUM BROOM FINISH.
8 NOTUSED9
NOTUSED10
TRASHENCLOSURE11
PUMPHOUSE12
EXTERIOR CONCRETESTAIR13
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ELEC. TRANSFORMER
WITHBOLLARDPROTECTION AND LANDSCAPESCREENING14
15 LEGEND

1. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE WALL, FACE OF

CONCRETE CURB OR GRID LINES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE,

2. ENTIRE PROJECT SHALL BE PERMANENTLY MAINTAINED WITH A SMART AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM.

3. SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING SITE DRAINAGE, TOPOGRAPHY AND UTILITIES.

4. FOR PAVING SECTIONS, CONCRETE CURBS, SWALES AND GUTTERS SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS.

5. PROPERTY LINE ARE REFERENCE ONLY. REFER TO CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR HORIZONTAL CONTROL.

6. LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE DELINEATED WITH A MIN. 6" CONCRETE CURB.

STANDARD PARKING STALL 8'- 6" X 19'
COMPACT PARKING STALL 8'- 0" X 16'
SHORT TERM - BICYCLE RACK 5% OF PARKINGSTALL16
DESIGNATED SMOKING AREA - 25' AWAY FROM ANYENTRY17
ADA PARKING VAN 12' X 19' WITH 5' CLR AISLE

PROPERTY LINE
ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL. MAX 5% SLOPE AND MAX 2%
CROSS SLOPE WITH 48" MIN. CLEAR, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE

WITH ADA ACCESSIBLE RAMP

LANDSCAPE, SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS

APPLICANT/OWNER

PROJECT ADDRESS / APN
LTCGG LLC.
13925 CITY CENTER DRIVE, SUITE
200CHINOHILLS, CA 91709
ANNIE@HKV.

ONEATT: ANNIE TAVETIAN GALLAGHER

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2461- 2495 E. ORANGETHORPE AVE.

FULLERTON, CA
92831APN: 338- 172- 24
NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR ( 1) SPECULATIVE 110, 232 SF TYPE III- B, S- 1/B OCCUPANCY WAREHOUSE WITH ESFR FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM.

PROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS CONSIST OF TRASH ENCLOSURE,

PUMP HOUSE, SITE LIGHTING STANDARDS, WROUGHT IRON FENCE

AND HARDSCAPE/ LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS PER CITY
STANDARDSTOTALOCCUPANT LOAD; WAREHOUSE ( S- 1): 201 AND OFFICE ( B): 40.

PROJECT DATA

VICINITY MAP
NOT USED.

E. ORANGETHOPEAVE
S.

STATE

COLLEGE
BLVD
S.

PLACENTIA
AVE

PROJECTSITE

CYPRESS WAY
VAN ( 12' X19') EVCS WITH ISA SIGN AND MARKING "
EVCHARGINGONLY" WITH 5' ACCESSIBLE AISLE.

EV
CH
ARGING
ONL
Y
STANDARD EVCS PARKING STALL 8'- 6" X 19'EVCS
EVCAP.

EVCS
STANDARD EV CAPABLE PARKING STALL 8'- 6" X 19'
CO
MPACT

TRUENORTH
EVCAP
EVC
S
EV

CHARGIN
G
ONLY
EVC
S
EVC
S
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCA
P
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCAP
EVCA
P
EVC
S

COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT6'-0" 6@8'=48'-0"10@8'=80'-0"6'-0"10@8'=80'-0"6'-0"6@8'-6"=51'-0" 6'-0
4@
86 34
0 27@
86 229
6 20'-
0 7@
86 59
6 6'-0
5@
8 6
426
4'-
0 45'-
10 23'-
8 40'-
0 6'-
0 6@
86 51
0 26'-0"31'-11" 48'-0"11"
503
0 21'-
2 50'-
0 55'-
6 56'-
0 56'-
0 56'-
0 56'-
0 56'-
0 56'-
0 56'-
0 55'-6"6'-0"26'-0"16'-0"

POTENTIAL
OFFICE
19'-0"
26'-0"

DRIVEWAY
40'-0"

DRIVEWAY
57'-6"
15 DOCKDOO
RS
TYP. TYP.

TYP. TYP.

TYP.

TYP.
25'-6"
8'HWIFENCE
20'-0"
8'HWIFENCE
25'-6"
8'HWIFENCE
20'-0"
8'HWIFENCE
139
10 8'HWIFENC
E
TYP. TYP.TYP.

TYP.TYP.

TYP.

TYP. TYP.

TYP.

TYP. TYP.
26'

WIDEFIRELANE
26'

WIDEFIRELANE
26' WIDEFIRELANECYPRES SWAY

O R A N G E T H O R P E A V E N U E

POTENTIALOFFICE
TYP.

PROPERTYLINE

PROPERTYLINE
PRO

PERTYLINE
PR

OPERTYLINE
40'-0"
329'-7"
573
0 369'-0"
470
7 29'-2" 101'-6"
6'-6"
139
4 RET
AINING
WALLW
WI
FENCE
TYP.
59'-
7 43'-
5 88'-
6 RET

AININGWALL
TYP. TYP.

TELESC. GATE, TYP. 175'-0"8'HWIFENCE
528
7 8'HWIFENCE
TYP.

TYP.

TYP.TYP. TYP.
3@
8 6
25 6
43'-
0 19'-0"
143'-0" 186'-0"
66'-0" 60'-0" 60'-0"
34'-0" 6'- 0"
8'-0" 26'-0"123'-6"19'-0"6"
3@8'-6"=25'-6"6'-6"34'-4"
SWINGGATE, TYP.
43'-
11 19'-0" 40'-0" 19'-0" 6'- 6" 57'-6"
24'-
1 154'-2"TYP. TYP. TYP.64'-0" DRIVEWAY
R200 R20
0 R100 R9'
0 ARCHITECTURAL

OVERALL SITE PLAN
DRC-A1.011" = 30'-0"
SCALE
1OVERALLSITEPLAN

CHECKED

SHEETTITLE

SHEETNUMBER
JOBNo.

DRAWN
24-059
No. ISSUANCE DATE

STEVEHONG

CONSULTANTS

S T E V E K H O N G A R C H I T E C T

STEVEHONG
4 0 0 0 W E S T E R L Y P L A C E S U I T 1 00NE W P O R T B E A C H C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 6 60PROJECTMANAGER: STEVEHONG714 - 822 - 1171, STEVE@SKHARCHITECT. COM

CIVIL ENGINEER

LANDSCAPEARCHITECT
PACIFIC CONSULTING GROUP, INC.

COSTA MESA, CA
TEL: 818-800- 6991
EMAIL: KYLE@PACIFICCONSULTINGINC. COM
ATTN: KYLE PROUTY
RODARTE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, INC.
740 13TH. SUITE 320
SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
TEL: 909-771- 8171
EMAIL: LORENZO@RODARTELANDARCH. COM
ATTN: LORENZO RODARTE

L T C G G L L C

GENERALNOTES
SITE PAVING WITH HEAVY BROOM FINISH. SEECIVIL1

KEYNOTES

DECORATIVEPAVEMENTATENTRY - COLOREDCONCRETEW/
SAW CUTPATTERN2
PRIMARYBUILDING3
PEDESTRIANCONCRETEWALKWAYWITHMEDIUMBROOMFINISH4
RETAININGWALL.5
8'H WROUGHTIRONFENCE.6
8'H BLACKPAINTEDVEHICULARROLLINGGATEWITHKNOXPAD
LOCK. MANUALLY OPERATED. PROVIDE CONDUITS FOR FUTURE

OPERATOR
7 5'- 6" X 6' X 4" THICK CONCRETE LANDING PAD AT ALL EXTERIOR MANDOORS WITH MEDIUM BROOM FINISH.8
NOTUSED9
NOTUSED10
TRASHENCLOSURE11
PUMPHOUSE12
EXTERIORCONCRETESTAIR13
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ELEC. TRANSFORMER WITH
BOLLARD PROTECTION AND LANDSCAPESCREENING14
15 LEGEND

1. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE WALL, FACE OF

CONCRETECURBORGRIDLINESUNLESSNOTEDOTHERWISE,

2. ENTIREPROJECTSHALLBEPERMANENTLYMAINTAINEDWITHA SMART AUTOMATICIRRIGATIONSYSTEM.

3. SEECIVILDRAWINGSFORADDITIONALINFORMATIONREGARDINGSITE DRAINAGE, TOPOGRAPHY AND UTILITIES.

4. FOR PAVING SECTIONS, CONCRETE CURBS, SWALES AND GUTTERS SEECIVILDRAWINGS.

5. PROPERTYLINEAREREFERENCEONLY. REFERTOCIVILDRAWINGS
FORHORIZONTALCONTROL.

6. LANDSCAPEAREASSHALLBEDELINEATEDWITHA MIN. 6" CONCRETE CURB.

STANDARD PARKING STALL 8'- 6" X 19'
COMPACTPARKINGSTALL8'-0" X 16'
SHORTTERM - BICYCLERACK5% OFPARKINGSTALL16
DESIGNATEDSMOKINGAREA - 25' AWAYFROMANYENTRY17
ADAPARKINGVAN12' X 19' WITH5' CLRAISLE

PROPERTYLINE
ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL. MAX 5% SLOPE AND MAX 2%
CROSSSLOPEWITH48" MIN. CLEAR, UNLESSNOTEDOTHERWISE

WITHADAACCESSIBLERAMP

LANDSCAPE, SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS

APPLICANT/OWNERPROJECTADDRESS / APNLTCGG
LLC.13925 CITY CENTER DRIVE, SUITE200CHINOHILLS, [email protected]: ANNIETAVETIAN GALLAGHERPROJECTDESCRIPTION2461-
2495 E. ORANGETHORPE AVE.FULLERTON, CA92831APN: 338-172-24 NEWCONSTRUCTIONFOR (1) SPECULATIVE110,232SFTYPEIII-B,
S-1/B OCCUPANCYWAREHOUSEWITHESFRFIRESPRINKLERSYSTEM.

PROPOSEDSITEIMPROVEMENTSCONSISTOFTRASHENCLOSURE,

PUMP HOUSE, SITE LIGHTING STANDARDS, WROUGHT IRON FENCE

AND HARDSCAPE/ LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS PER CITY STANDARDS TOTALOCCUPANTLOAD; WAREHOUSE (S-1): 201ANDOFFICE (B): 40.

PROJECTDATA

VICINITYMAP
NOT USED.

E. ORANGETHOPEAVES. STATECOLLEGEBLVD S. PLACENTIAAVEPROJECTSITECYPRESSWAY VAN ( 12' X19') EVCS WITH ISA SIGN AND MARKING " EV
CHARGING ONLY" WITH 5' ACCESSIBLE AISLE.

EV
CHA
RGING
ON
LY
STANDARDEVCSPARKINGSTALL8'-6" X 19'
EVCS
EVCAP.

EVCS
STANDARDEVCAPABLEPARKINGSTALL8'-6" X 19'
CO
MPACT

TRUENORTH
66 e
T”s
i'
I
1 M
i
C4
s4---
I
D11
4 IE
1 LtLL
Ji
1 f
ill
1 —ir
TLi
i1— T
r
E
i
60 v

6. F
US
Hie
I —
I
I
Ej
1 a
J
I
o
fy
y
I
i
11 1
D1
fl
H
E
i-
e
H
0-
f
fM
II
r
T +
ii
iT —
i
il
1 JT
4I
1T4iI
n5II
I
BK
1 I
s--
Im
i
d
i38
9 959
8 i
18 6
t
o
hih
H
Hb
i
hl
h
il
lif811
i
LS
e
N
eo
lD
g8
E
I2§
3 22
9 8
2 2
2 60
6 s
t
6 8s
15 8
8 t
c8
s
989
188
s
Il
il
J
8 28
8 5
hi
hi
282
58988
55 2
2 a
I
te
e **
I
It
Em===
wh
VITASSs— Kimley»
Horn
Not to scale.

Source: SKHArchitect, 2025
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
Figure8: ConceptualElevations

EAST ELEVATION
1El H 5 " 7 5 I H%,
1 1 4
I I I I 1 ‘
Ives5
trt
ts
is44
d

ENLARGED NORTH ELEVATION
B)(A)
J
E)
A
B I [
I
I
1Ff
3 t
SCALE
1"= 20- 0" I5NORTHWESTELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION
3103) Q
k
0 t t f 0
IYP.
4 0
I
2]— al
S5s1
SCALE
1"= 20- 0" 1WESTELEVATION
f “[[£ 20(
1 •
T21
SOUTHWEST ELEVATION 6 SOUTH ELEVATION
@
B)
9)
B)( D)
B)
79 TH
A)()
10)( 6)
3 A) A)
5 I
@
9 t
Kimley» Horn
FITZGERALD FORMLINERS. 16021
PAINTED W/ SW 7076 CYBERSPACE

PAINTED CONCRETE SHERVN- MLLIAMS
SW2819 DOWNING SLATE

PAINTED CONCRETE SHERWNWLLIAMS
SW 7005 PURE WHITE

PAINTED CONCRETE SHERWN- MLLIAMS
SW7076 CYBERSPACE
CANOPY: REYNOBONDACM DURAGLOSS 5000

PROGRAM WHITE

GLAZING LEGEND

TEMPERED VISION GLASS

TEMPERED CONCRETE BACKED SPANDREL GLASS

COLOR / FINISH LEGEND
WAREHOUSE GLAZING AREA:

SINGLE PANE 2 VITROGLAZING VISTALCOOL PACIFICA.

OFFICE / POTENTIAL OFFICE AREAS:

VITROGLAZING, MISTACOOL ( 2) PACIFICA + SOLARBAN 60 ( 3) VLT: 26, SHGC: 0.17, U VALUE: 0. 29
1" INSULATED UNIT MTH2" AIRSPACE AND ( 2) 1" UNITS

GENERAL NOTES
ALL PAINT FINISHES ARE TO BE FLAT UNLESS NOTED OTHERMSE.2.

3. 5.

6. USE ADHESIVE BACK WOOD STRIPS FOR ALL REVEAL FORMS.

9. 12.

KEYNOTES

CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE MOCK UP PAINT FOR OWNER AND
ARCHITECT’ S APPROVAL PRIOR TO COMMENCING THE WORK.

ALL EXTERIOR DOORS AND LOUVERS SHALL BE FABRICATED AND
WEATHER STRIPPED TO MITHSTAND VIND EXPOSURE " C"

FOR SPANDREL GLAZING, ALLOW SPACE BEHIND SPANDREL TO
BREATH BY PROVIDING A MINIMUM 2" DIAMETER HOLE ON THE
CORNER.

STOREFRONT CONSTRUCTION: GLASS, METAL ATTACHMENTS AND
LINTELS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO RESIST WIND EXPOSURE " C"
MINDS. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS PRIOR TO
INSTALLATION.

WATER BLAST EXTERIOR FACE OF BUILDING WALLS PRIOR TO
PAINT.

ALL CONCRETE PANEL JOINTS SHALL BE CLEARED OF DEBRIS BY

PRESSURING WASHING THE CAVITY AND GRIND ANY SHARP EDGES PRIOR TO APPLY PANEL CAULK JOINT.

ALL PAINT COLOR CHANGES TO OCCUR AT INSIDE CORNERS
UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

CONTRACTOR SHALL FULL PAINT ONE CONCRETE PANEL MITH
SELECTED COLORS. ARCHITECT AND OWNER SHALL APPROVE
PRIOR TO PAINT REMAINDER OF BUILDING.

FIRST COAT OF PAINT TO BE ROLLED- ON AND THE SECOND COAT TO BE SPRAYED ON.

BACK SIDE OF PARAPETS TO HAVE SMOOTH FINISH AND BE PAINTED MTH ELASTOMERIC PAINT.

I
o-
o
8 eb
s
e1-
B
g
eB
gII(
o
B
2 o
8 B8
8 5
o
dl
b
llli
8 u5
O2OO
2OZOO
OOI
06 8
QOO i.: 22Oo
OuDQ78
D < IT
O | 8oOQ8
X
0 o 7 70O Z ? fl 8 mS ( 0 J 6
Not to scale.

Source: RodarteLandscapeArchitecture, 2025.

Figure9: ConceptualLandscapePlan
CedarwoodsFullertonWarehouseProject
9191
11/
TREE NAME QTY.SYMBOL WUCOLS

CHILOPSIS LINEARIS, DESERT WILLOW
24" BOX SIZE. STANDARD TRUNK.

PARKING LOT SHADE TREE

RHUS LANCEA, AFRICAN SUMAC
24" BOX SIZE. STANDARD TRUNK.

EVERGREEN SCREEN TREE

PINUS ELDARICA, MONDELL PINE
24" BOX SIZE. STANDARD TRUNK.

OLEA E. , OLIE TREE
36" BOX SIZE. STANDARD TRUNK.

GROUND COVERS

SYMBOL NAME WUCOLS
M
M
BACCHARIS P. ‘ TVIN PEAKS’, COYOTE BRUSH
1 GAL. SIZE @ 36" O. c.

ROSMARINUS O. ‘ PROSTRATUS’, CREEPING ROSEMARY
1 GAL. SIZE @ 36" O. C.

DIANELLA TASMANICA ‘ VARIEGATA’, WHITE STRIPED TASMAN FLAX LILY 1 GAL. SIZE @ 24" O. C.

SALVIA GREGGII, AUTUMN SAGE
I GAL. SIZE @ 36" O. C.

LANTANA C. ‘ NEW GOLD’, GOLD SPREADING LANTANA
1 GAL . SIZE @ 36" O. C.

SALVIA LEUCANTHA, MEXICAN BUSH SAGE
1 GAL. SIZE @ 42" O. C.

MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS, DEER GRASS
1 GAL. SIZE @0 36" O. C.

HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA, RED YUCCA
1 GAL. SIZE @ 36" O. c.

LANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS, PURPLE LANTANA
1 GAL. SIZE @ 30" O. C.

CAREX DIVULSA, BERKELY SEDGE
1 GAL. SIZE @ 18" O. c.
f Kimley» Horn
s
0m
I
92 82
35 28
o
82 ST
122
S
3 SO
wm
2 8
2 30
9 0
5?
88 s
0 8
28 0
5 68
629
1 d
O
949S
u
l
86 6
80 7
2 ii
68 28
Tm
g
uli
O
2m
m
X
0 3
50 3n
t
m
m
i
a
58 5
m
O
E
052
0 9
20 m
@
@
@
9 g
P
m
9 E
0 190
0 u
w
O
S
r
N
TG
S
P
II
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
w
59 1
CY
P
R
E
S
S
W
s -
8 M
J
2 0Q
8 2l
l
II
1 1
K
1 8
0 Q$
Q
5 O
80 m
i
m
ZD
0"
7 2
O
O
O
0 m
I
700
C
0 2
27 7
7 2
2 d
9 OR
A
N
G
E
T
H
O
R
P
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
m
69 1
PO
m
u
8 m c
Is
6 Eo
r
00 88
7 O
LL LLR
il
Is
2 8
2 08
0 02
O
0 N m
2 833
o
0 O
P
LU
Q
7 m
02 0
8 U
8 8
209e
85 E
3 1 *
0 2
M
e
0 o
70 3g9
88 I
mS
2 2
1 1OU
E
5 0 gs
u2N
2 4
O0)
LL
0 85
7 20
59 P
o
ol
6 09
5 3
32 27
1 os
9535
62 5
838
g
5 8
2888
Q3
88 28
9 9
28 28
20 5
9 6%
E
84 88
20 0
1 PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
W
A
T
E
R
E
A
S
E
M
E
N
T
22368
5u 12
55 P5
9 8
kg
g
0 9
N
I
m
m
9 7m
gs
P0
1 0
m
2 Um
iZ
S
2 0
y
IT
P
o
D
2 2
0 2
1Q
5 P
O
U
30 71
3 T
95 4©S
u
j
N
E
0 0
87 2
J8
0s
28 85
28 29
8 Wo
7 O’
ls
i
38 2
9 C
o
o
2 0
85 g
g
m
E
3 9
55 55
83 33
to83388883de
5 883
I
n
z
C
2 00F&
92 Z
s
85 988
8 820
38 85
If?Lm
k
i
3 tE
g
22 2
m
e
C
2 08
858
9 128
Not to scale.CedarwoodsFullertonProject
Figure10: ConceptualUtility Plan
Source: Pacific Consulting Group, 2025
EV

CHARGING
ONLY

DATE:

SCALE:

SHEETTITLE:

SHEETNUMBER:

ASNOTED
246
1 2495E

ORANGETHORPEAVE
FUL
LERTON
CA92831

05.02.2025
CED

ARWOODSFULLERTON
REVISIONS:

NOTFOR

CONSTRUCTION
24136
C400

UTILITYPLAN

THE EXISTENCE AND LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY PLANS

OR STRUCTURES SHOWN ON THESE PLANS WERE OBTAINED BY

A SEARCH OF AVAILABLE RECORDS AND MAY NOT REFLECT ALL
EXISTING UTILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE DUE

PRECAUTIONS OF THE RECORDED UTILITIES AS WELL AS ANY NOT

SHOWN AND SHALL CONFIRM ALL ALIGNMENTS AND GRADES BY
FIELD INVESTIGATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO TAKE

ALL PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES TO PROTECT THE UTILITIES

SHOWN, AND IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROTECTION OF, AND
ANY DAMAGE TO THESE LINES OR STRUCTURES.

UNDERGROUND UTILITIES &

STRUCTURES

COORDINATION POINT

BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY

WATER METER VAULT

FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION ( FDC)

FIRE WATER PIPE

IRRIGATION WATER
IR2) INSTALL 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC WATER PIPE.SIZE TO BE CONFIRMED.

ELECTRICAL
PROPOSED TRANSFORMER AND SWITCHGEAR. SEE ELECTRICAL PLANS.

NOTES:
w) KimleyHorn

BACKFLOW PREVENTORS SHOWN HEREON, ARE FOR COORDINATION PURPOSES ONLY.

THE CONTRACTOR AGREES THAT HE SHALL ASSUME SOLE AND

COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR JOB SITE CONDITIONS DURING

THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT, INCLUDING
SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY: THAT THIS

REQUIREMENT SHALL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS; AND THAT THE CONTRACTOR

SHALL DEFEND, INDEMNIFY, AND HOLD THE OWNER AND THE

ENGINEER HARMLESS FROM ANY AND ALL LIBAILITY, REALL OR

ALLEGED, IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF WORK ON

THIS PROJECT, EXCEPTING FOR LIABILITY ARISING FROM THE
SOLE NEGLIGENCE OF THE OWNER OR THE ENGINEER.

CAUTION: THE ENGINEER PREPARING THESE PLANS WILL NOT BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR, OR UABLE FOR, UNAUTHORIZED CHANGES OR
USES OF THESE PLANS. ALL CHANGES TO THE PLANS MUST BE

IN WRITING AND MUST BE APPROVED BY THE PREPARER OF
THESE PLANS.

ENGINEER’ S NOTICE TO CONTRACTOR
IR3) INSTALL APPROVED 2" REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW PREVENTOR.

SEE PLUMBING PLANS FOR DETAILS. SIZE TO BE CONFIRMED.

IR4) POINT OF CONNECTION TO IRRIGATION SYSTEM. SEE IRRIGATION PLANS FOR CONTINUATION, DETAIL AND SPECIFICATION.

3. SERVICE LATERALS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER CITY OF FULLERTON STANDARD PLAN 701.

4. SEE SHEET C010 FOR KNOWN EXISTING UTILITIES WITHIN SITE. SHOWN EXISTING UTILITIES ARE BASED UPON AVAILABLE RECORDS.

2. ALL STREET TRENCHES REQUIRED FOR THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITY CONNECTIONS SHALL COMPLY WITH CITY OF FULLERTON STANDARDS NO. 312 AND 313.

IR1) 2” IRRIGATION WATER METER PER CITY OF FULLERTON STD. DETAIL 602. . CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WATER SERVICE CONNECTION WITH JHA. SIZE TO BE CONFIRMED.

STORM DRAIN SHOWN FOR REFERENCE

WATER PIPE
ss--------- SANITARY SEWER PIPE FIRE WATER

DEMOLITION OF EXISTING UTILITY CONTRACTOR TO ORDER AND COORDINATE NEW FIRE WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FROM JHA.

W7) INSTALL 8" DOMESTIC WATER MAIN. SEE CITY OF FULLERTON STANDARD PLAN 600 & 701.

CONSTRUCTIONNOTESLEGEND

SANITARYSEWERLANDSCAPEAREA BY OTHERS

PEDESTRIAN CONCRETE

ASTROTURF

PERMEABLE PAVEMENT BY OTHERS

RETAINING WALL

PROPERTY LINE

GRADE BREAK

RIDGE LINE

FLOW LINE

DOMESTIC WATER

CATCH BASIN

AREA DRAIN
GARDEN WALL ( W2) 3" DOMESTIC WATER METER PER CITY OF FULLERTON STANDARD PLAN 603. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WATER SERVICE CONNECTIONWITHPOINTOF CONNECTION JHA. SIZE TO BE CONFIRMED.

POSSIBLE NEW SEWER LATERAL HOUSE CONNECTION. NEW HOUSE

CONNECTION TO BE COORDINATED WITH THE CITY OF PLACENTIA AND INSTALLED PER CITY OF PLACENTIA STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS.

INSTALL 6” PVC, SDR- 35 SANITARY SEWER PIPE. MIN. SLOPE = 2%.

SIZE TO BE VERIFIED
POINT OF CONNECTION 5‘ OUTSIDE BUILDING ENVELOPE. SEE PLUMBING DRAWINGS FOR CONTINUATION.

CONTRACTOR TO ORDER AND COORDINATE NEW DOMESTIC WATER

SERVICE CONNECTION FROM JHA
CONTRACTOR TO LOCATE AND CONNECT TO EXISTING SEWER LATERAL.

IF UNAVAILABLE OR INSUFFICIENT SIZE, INSTALL HOUSE CONNECTION PER CITY OF FULLERTON STD PLAN NO. 209A & 209B.

S3)
w1)
s)
S2)
S4)
EL
L
1F6)—
30 iX184.67 F5 )F3
m 11-

CYPRESS WAY
EXISTING ( SS1—,

SEWER MAIN , ,
27 ( SS3)
SS F4)
W5)(
W3(2)—°

20. 00‘ ' —
W4W2)
o
F3(TYP)
HHAI77W1
Li
LiII §
I I
1 L
I

I---------
1tI
rciT1I1[ ]20° PR

DPOSEDIWATER
EASEME
NI41
I
SB SD-
t IF6720.00*
I I f
18 1
I 1,
D4
W7
I*
I3JII
E -
I
i—
I
88|
I ( SS4)
W3W61
I1:::

F2
GB. 5 ==
w-
E IR4)0IR311T( wO- A( iR2) 1ftwDGan—
L)UEwrLF6 EXISTING(
ss1) SEWER MAIN
E. ORANGETHORPE AVE€
W41W2
W5)
1 E
1 i
1 i
1 j
i
1 i
i
1 i
t
Ji
i
i
i
I
1 188. 50
FF187.83 PAD
188. 50
FF187.67 PAD
1 I
188. 50
FF187.83 PAD

EXISTING

WATER MAIN
4 CP)
EX: SS---- -
EX. WB"*
EX. PUBLIC FIRE

HYDRANT TO BE

RELOCATED
1ssB" Eexow
I
r
I
ss=
I
9m9m2
9 F
@
@
@ g
4 9728
2 8 a 1 0
33 29Emds259<9280F& 85S2
2 i 8
i!
i45
6iil 33A
s
NT
S
s8
8 885F
s
28 5
88 8 okRS35
312
9 29
m
Fg
@
@
@
88 5
g8gi g
g338880Oeo
g3
s * 8
igl8,
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page20

3.0 INITIALSTUDYCHECKLIST

1. Projecttitle:

CedarwoodsFullertonProject

2. Leadagencynameand address:

Cityof Fullerton
303WestCommonwealthAvenue
Fullerton, California92832

3. Contactpersonand phonenumber:

DavidLopez, SeniorPlanner
CommunityandEconomicDevelopmentDepartment
714) 738-6878
[email protected]

4. Projectlocation:

TheProjectwould be locatedat 2461- 2495EastOrangethorpeAvenue, Fullerton, CA92838. The approximately4.79-acreprojectsiteincludesoneparceldescribedasAPN338-172-24.

5. Projectsponsor'snameandaddress:

LTCGGLLC
Attn: AnnieGallagher
13925CityCenterDrive, Suite200
ChinoHills, CA91709

6. GeneralPlandesignation:

Industrial (I)

7. Zoning:

ManufacturingParkwith a 100,000 square-foot minimum lot sizeand an EmergencyShelter Overlay (MP-100-ES)
CommercialManufacturingwith anEmergencyShelterOverlay (CM-ES)

8. Descriptionof project:

SeeSection2.3: ProjectCharacteristics.

9. Surroundingland usesand setting:

SeeSection2.1: ProjectLocationandSetting.

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required ( e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement).

SantaAnaRegionalWaterQualityControlBoard
Cityof Placentia

11. HaveCaliforniaNativeAmericantribestraditionally andculturally affiliated with the project area requestedconsultationpursuantto PublicResourcesCodesection21080.3.1? If so, isthere aplan for consultationthat includes, for example, the determination of significanceof impactsto tribal cultural resources, proceduresregardingconfidentiality, etc.? Referto Section4.18: TribalCulturalResourcesfor details.

O
urore”
o" UL4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page21
NOTE: Conductingconsultationearly in the CEQAprocessallowstribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponentsto discussthe levelof environmentalreview, identify and addresspotential adverseimpactsto tribal culturalresources, andreducethe potentialfor delayandconflictin the environmentalreviewprocess. (SeePublic ResourcesCodesection21080.3.2.) Informationmayalsobeavailablefrom theCaliforniaNativeAmericanHeritage Commission’s SacredLandsFileper PublicResourcesCodesection5097.96 and the CaliforniaHistoricalResources Information Systemadministeredby the California Office of HistoricPreservation. Pleasealso note that Public ResourcesCodesection21082.3(c) containsprovisionsspecificto confidentiality.

O
urore”
o" UL4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page22

3.1 Environmental FactorsPotentially Affected
Theenvironmentalfactorscheckedbelowwouldbepotentiallyaffectedby this project, involvingat least one impactthat isa “PotentiallySignificantImpact” asindicatedby the checkliston the following pages.

All impactscanbemitigatedto a lessthan significantlevel.

Aesthetics
Air Quality
AgriculturalandForestry
Resources
BiologicalResources
CulturalResources
Energy
Geology/Soils
GreenhouseGasEmissions
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology/WaterQuality
LandUse/Planning
MineralResources
Noise
Population/Housing
PublicServices
Recreation
Transportation
TribalCulturalResources
Utilities/ServiceSystems
Wildfire
MandatoryFindingsof
Significance
DETERMINATION:

Onthe basisof this initial evaluation (checkone):

I find that the proposedproject COULDNOThavea significanteffect on the environment, and a NEGATIVEDECLARATIONwill beprepared.

I find that althoughthe proposedprojectcouldhavea significanteffect on the environment, there will not be a significanteffect in this casebecauserevisionsin the project havebeenmadeby or agreedto by the projectproponent. AMITIGATEDNEGATIVEDECLARATIONwill beprepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTREPORTisrequired.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a " potentially significant impact" or " potentially significant unlessmitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequatelyanalyzedin anearlierdocumentpursuantto applicablelegalstandards, and2) hasbeen addressedbymitigationmeasuresbasedontheearlieranalysisasdescribedonattachedsheets. An ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTREPORTis required, but it mustanalyzeonly the effectsthat remainto beaddressed.

I find that although the proposedproject could have a significanteffect on the environment, becauseall potentially significanteffects (a) have been analyzedadequatelyin an earlier EIRor NEGATIVEDECLARATIONpursuantto applicablestandards, and (b) havebeenavoidedor mitigated pursuantto that earlierEIRor NEGATIVEDECLARATION, includingrevisionsor mitigationmeasures that areimposeduponthe proposedproject, nothingfurther isrequired.

CERTIFICATION:

Signature
11/ 5/2025
Date
O
urore”
eFULO.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page23

4.0 ENVIRONMENTALEVALUATION

4.1 AESTHETICS

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. AESTHETICS. Exceptasprovidedin PublicResourcesCodeSection21099, would the project:
a) Haveasubstantialadverseeffect on a scenicvista? X b) Substantiallydamagescenicresources, includingbut not limited to trees, rockoutcroppings, andhistoricbuildings within a Statescenichighway?
X
c) In non-urbanizedareas, substantiallydegradethe existing visualcharacteror qualityof publicviewsof the site and
its surroundings? (Public views are those that are
experiencedfrom publiclyaccessiblevantagepoint). If the project isin an urbanizedarea, would the project conflict with applicablezoning and other regulationsgoverning
scenicquality?
X
d) Createa new sourceof substantiallight or glare which would adverselyaffectdayor nighttimeviewsin the area?
X
a) Havea substantialadverseeffecton ascenicvista?
NoImpact. Therearenoscenicvistasthat arevisiblefrom the projectsite. Ascenicvistaisdefined asa viewpointthat providesexpansiveviewsof a highlyvaluedlandscapefor the public’sbenefit.

Scenicvistaswithin the City includeviewsof the West and EastCoyoteHills, which are located approximately8.1 milesnorthwestand3.1 milesnorth of the project site respectively.4 Viewsof theCoyoteHillsareobstructedbyexistingnearbydevelopmentandarenot visiblefrom theproject site. Therefore, Projectimplementationwould not havean adverseeffect on a scenicvista. No impactswouldoccur, andnomitigationisrequired.
b) Substantiallydamagescenicresources, includingbut not limited to trees, rockoutcroppings, and historicbuildingswithin a Statescenichighway?
No Impact. Accordingto the CaliforniaDepartment of Transportation (Caltrans) State Scenic HighwaySystemMap, there are no officially designatedscenichighwayswithin the City or near the project site.5 Theclosesteligiblescenichighwaynearthe project site isSR-57, approximately 10 milesto the north, andthe closestofficiallydesignatedscenichighwayis SR-91 startingat the intersectionof SR55andSR-91, approximately6 milesto theeast. TheProjectwouldnot bevisible 4 Cityof Fullerton. (2012). TheFullertonPlan - FinalProgramEIR, Section5.3AestheticsandLight/Glare. Retrievedfrom:
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/3700/637470826653170000. AccessedSeptember10, 2025. 5 CaliforniaDepartmentof Transportation. (2019). CaliforniaStateScenicHighwayMap. Retrievedfrom https:// caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa. Accessedon September10, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page24
from any State scenichighway. The City has identified sceniccorridors for specialplanning consideration, aswell asScenicCorridorDesignGuidelinesin order to providea seriesof special controlsfor land improvementsfronting theserights-of-way. Theprojectsite is not locatedon a City-designatedsceniccorridor. Therefore, the Projectwouldnot damagescenicresourcesandno impactwouldoccur.
c) If the projectisin anurbanizedarea, would the projectconflictwith applicablezoningandother regulationsgoverningscenicquality?
Lessthan SignificantImpact. Theprojectsite islocatedwithin an urbanizedareaof Fullertonand isborderedby existingindustrial, warehouse, andretail uses. Theprojectsiteislocatedwithin the SoutheastIndustrialFocusArea, which is envisionedto be characterizedby preservedindustrial and employment-generatingusesand to undergomoderateto significantchangethrough infill, reuse, revitalization, and redevelopmentby TheFullertonPlan. TheProjectproposesto remove the existingon-sitestructuresandconstructa newindustrialbuilding, consistentwith thevisionof TheFullertonPlanand the existingland useand zoningfor the project site. TheProjectwould be subjectto therequirementsof FMCChapter15.40, IndustrialZoneClassifications, whichaddresses permitted andprohibiteddevelopmentintendedto providefor industrialuses. TheProjectwould alsobe subjectto FMCSection15.40.040, SiteDevelopmentStandards, whichaddressesbuilding exterior design, screeningof rooftop equipment, landscaperequirements, buildingheight limits, setbackrequirements, andfencesandwalls, amongstothers; refer to Section4.11: LandUseand Planning.

Aspart of theCity’sSitePlanReviewprocessrequiredunderFMCChapter15.47, SitePlanReview, the Project’s site plan would be reviewed and only approved after finding the proposed development, includingthe usesandthephysicaldesignof the developmentisconsistentwith the intent and general purposes of the chapter, and would not adversely affect surrounding developmentin the area. Criteriausedfor reviewof a site plan includes: creatinga development that ispleasantin characterandisharmoniouswith the pastdevelopmentof Fullerton; minimizing the disruptionof existingnatural featuressuchastreesand other vegetationandnaturalground forms; illustratingadesigncompatibilitywith the desireddevelopingcharacterof the surrounding area; recognizingviews, climateandthenatureof outsideactivitiesinthedesignof exteriorspaces; preservingpublic views and scenicvistasfrom unreasonableencroachment; screeningexterior trashandstorageareasandserviceyardsfrom viewof nearbystreetsandadjacentstructuresin a manner that is compatible with building site design; designingand/or screeningall rooftop mechanicaland electrical equipment as an integral part of the building design; designing landscapingto create a pleasingappearancefrom both within and off the site; and providing landscapingadjacent to and within parking areasin order to screenvehiclesfrom view and minimize the expansiveappearanceof parking areas (FMCSection15.47.060, DesignReview Criteria).

Consistentwith FMC Section15.40.040, the Project would be set back over 20 feet from OrangethorpeAvenue, providingvisualrelief from public view. Additionally, the project would provide a total of 19,109 squarefeet of landscaping, includingground cover, shrubs, and trees focusednearparkinglot areas, the warehouse, siteperimeter, anddrivewayentries (seeFigure9:

Conceptual LandscapePlan) to create a visually pleasingexterior and screen views of the warehouse, specificallytrashandstorageareas, parkinglots, andthetruckcourt, from publicview.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page25
The warehousewould also have a maximum roof line of approximately 44 feet which be compatiblewith theexistingsceniccharacterof surroundingbuildingsandwouldscreenallrooftop mechanical and electrical equipment. These project characteristicsalign with the desired development characteristicsof the surrounding area and align with FMC Section15.40.040.

Therefore, the Projectwould not conflict with applicablezoningandother regulationsgoverning scenicqualityandno impactwouldoccur.
d) Createa new sourceof substantiallight or glare which would adverselyaffect day or nighttime viewsin the area?
LessThanSignificantImpact. Theproject site is developedwith a businessparkand is bordered by industrial, warehouse, andretail usesandtherefore, currentlyexperienceslightingtypicalof a developedand urbanizedarea (securityand landscapelighting, automobileheadlights, potential glarefrom glasssurfaces, etc.).

Glareiscreatedbythereflectionof sunlightandelectriclightsfrom windowsandbuildingsurfaces.

Daytimeglareisgenerallycausedby the reflectionof sunlightfrom highlyreflectivesurfacesat or aboveeyelevel. Reflectivesurfacesaretypicallyassociatedwith buildingsconstructedwith broad expansesof highly polishedsurfacesor broad, light-colored areasof paving. Daytimeglare is usuallypresentduringearlymorningandlate afternoonhourswhenthe sunisat a low angleand the potential existsfor intense reflected light to interfere with vision and driving conditions.

Daytime glare may also hinder outdoor activities performed within surrounding land uses.

Nighttimeglareincludesdirect, intense, focusedlight, alongwith reflectedlight. Glaregenerated bydirectlight typicallycomesfrom mobilesources (e.g., automobiles). Glareisalsolessfrequently causedbyintensestationarysources, suchasfloodlightsor cargocranelights. Aswith daytimesun glare, intensenighttimelight maycauseundesirableinterferencewith drivingor other activities.

TheProjectwouldremovethe existingon-sitestructuresandconstructa newwarehousebuilding.

Nonighttimeconstructionisproposedandconstructionactivitieswouldbesubjectto FMCSection

15.90.050, which restrictsconstructionactivitiesto betweenthe hoursof 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM Monday through Saturday. Therefore, the proposed project would not require construction lighting, exceptfor securityandsafetylighting.

When the proposedProject is operational, it would generatelight from two primary sources:
interior buildinglightingandexteriorlighting (e.g., signage, parkingarealighting, securitylighting, and landscapelighting), which would be similarto existingconditionsand typical of warehouse uses. With respectto the warehousestructure, the exterior elevationswould be white and grey with blue window glazing (Figure8: ConceptualElevations). TheProjectwould be required to complywith the CaliforniaCodeof Regulations (CCR) Title 24 standardswhich would require all glassused in the building designto have minimal reflectivity to reduce glare to surrounding neighbors. Buildingswith largefacadesconstructedof reflectivesurfaces (e.g., brightly colored building facades, metal surfaces, and reflective glass) could increaseexistinglevelsof daytime glare. TheProject’sproposeddesigndoesnot includesuchsurfacesor components.

Accessto the project site would continue to occurfrom the two existingdrivewaysalong East OrangethorpeAvenueand onedrivewayat theterminusof the CypressWaycul-de-sac. Passenger vehicleswould haveaccessto the project site from all three driveways. Therefore, the Project wouldnot introducenewconditionsrelatedto headlightsfrom vehiclesandtrucksexitingthe site.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page26
Alllightinginstalledwouldbesubjectto compliancewith the provisionsof theFMC, whichincludes standardsfor the provision of lighting in the various non-residentialzones. Specifically, FMC Section15.56.110, Illuminationof Premises, requireslightingwithin parkingareasto be arranged soasto reflectthe lightandglareawayfrom adjacentproperties. FMCSection15.40.080.Frequires all on-site lightingwithin industrialzonesto limit glare/spilloveronto adjacentpropertieswith a residential zone classification; it is noted that residentially zoned properties are not located adjacentto the project site. Additionally, the proposeddevelopmentwould undergo site plan review to ensure compliancewith the development standards of the M-P zoning district.

Therefore, compliancewith the FMCprovisionsspecificto lighting would ensureproper design, installation, andoperationof all exteriorlighting, therebyreducingthe potential for glareeffects, light spilloveronto adjacentproperties, or conflictswith adjacentlanduses. Therefore, compliance with the City’sestablishedregulatoryframework, whichwouldbeverifiedthroughthe City’splan review process, would ensurepotential impactsassociatedwith proposedProjectlighting and glarewouldbereducedto a lessthan significantimpact.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page27

4.2 AGRICULTUREANDFORESTRYRESOURCES

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2. AGRICULTUREANDFORESTRYRESOURCES. In determiningwhether impactsto agriculturalresourcesare significantenvironmental effects, lead agenciesmay refer to the CaliforniaAgriculturalLandEvaluation and SiteAssessmentModel (1997) preparedby the CaliforniaDepartmentof Conservationasan optional model to usein assessingimpactson agricultureandfarmland. In determiningwhether impactsto forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agenciesmay refer to information compiledby the CaliforniaDepartmentof Forestryand FireProtectionregardingthe State’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and RangeAssessmentProject and the Forest Legacy Assessmentproject; andforest carbonmeasurementmethodologyprovidedin ForestProtocolsadopted by the CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard. Would the project:
a) ConvertPrimeFarmland, UniqueFarmland, or Farmland
of StatewideImportance (Farmland), as shown on the
mapspreparedpursuant to the FarmlandMapping and
Monitoring Programof the CaliforniaResourcesAgency,
to non-agriculturaluse?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a WilliamsonActcontract?
X
c) Conflict with existingzoning for, or causerezoningof, forest land (asdefined in PublicResourcesCodesection
12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code section
51104(g))?
X
d) Resultin thelossof forestlandor conversionof forestland to non-forest use?
X
e) Involveother changesin the existingenvironmentwhich, dueto their locationor nature, couldresultin conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversionof
forest landto non-forest use?
X
a) ConvertPrimeFarmland, UniqueFarmland, or Farmlandof StatewideImportance (Farmland), as shownonthemapspreparedpursuantto theFarmlandMappingandMonitoringProgramofthe CaliforniaResourcesAgency, to non-agriculturaluse?
No Impact. Theprojectsiteislocatedin anurbanizedareaalongthe southernborderof Fullerton andadjacentto the citiesof AnaheimandPlacentia. Theprojectsiteisborderedbyindustrialuses to the north, EastOrangethorpeAvenueto the south, andindustrialand commercialusesto the eastandwest. Therearenoagriculturalor forestryresourceslocatedon or nearthe projectsite.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page28
Theproject site is currentlydevelopedwith a five-buildingmulti-tenant businesspark. TheState of CaliforniaDepartmentof ConservationFarmlandMappingand Monitoring Program (FMMP) mapsdesignatethe projectsite asUrbanandBuilt-Up Land6. UrbanandBuilt-Up Landis defined aslanddevelopedat a densityof at leastonedwellingunit (du) per1.5acres, or approximatelysix structuresto a 10-acre parcel.7 Landusesincludebut are not limited to residential, industrial, office/commercial, institutional, and publicadministration. Thereis no PrimeFarmland, Unique Farmland, Farmlandof StatewideImportance, or Farmlandof LocalImportanceonthe projectsite or in the vicinityof the project site.8 Additionally, no farmlandwouldbeconverted. Therefore, the Project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, andno impactwouldoccur.
b) Conflictwith existingzoningfor agricultural use, or a WilliamsonAct contract? NoImpact. AWilliamsonActcontractbetweenlocalgovernmentsandprivatelandownersrestricts specifiedparcelsof landto agriculturalor relatedopenspaceusein return for a lowerpropertytax assessment. Theproject siteis not undera WilliamsonAct contract.8 Accordingto Chapter15.30 CommercialZoneClassificationsof the FMC, the existingzoningdistrict (C-M) for the project site doesnot allow for agriculturalusewithout the approvalof a conditionalusepermit (CUP).9 A CUP has not been requestedor required. Therefore, the proposedProjectwould not conflict with agriculturalzoningdesignationor a Williamsoncontract, andno impactwouldoccur. c) Conflictwith existingzoningfor, or causerezoningof, forestland (asdefinedin PublicResources Codesection12220(g)), timberland (as definedby PublicResourcesCodesection4526), or timberlandzonedTimberlandProduction (asdefinedbyGovernmentCodesection51104(g))? Or, d) Resultinthelossofforestlandorconversionofforestlandto non-forestuse? No Impact. The proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning for forest land, timberland, or timberlandproduction. Theproject site and surroundingareasare not zonedfor forest land or timberland.10 Theexistingzoningfor the project site doesnot permit forest land, timberland, or timberlandproduction. Therefore, the Projectwouldnot resultin the lossof forest landor conversionof forestlandto a non-forestuse, andno impactwouldoccur. e) Involve other changesin the existingenvironmentwhich, dueto their location or nature, could resultin conversionof Farmland, to non-agriculturaluseor conversionof forestlandto non- forestuse?
No Impact. Theproject site and surroundingareado not include, nor are locatedproximateto, agriculturalusesor forest lands.13 Therefore, the Projectwould not directly or indirectlyresult in the conversionof propertyfrom agriculturalor timberlanduses, andno impactwouldoccur. 6 CaliforniaDepartmentof Conservation. (ND). CaliforniaImportant FarmlandFinder. Retrievedfrom:
https:// maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/. AccessedJuly9, 2025. 7 CaliforniaDepartmentof Conservation. (ND). ImportantFarmlandCategories. Retrievedfrom:
https:// www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Important-Farmland-Categories.aspx. AccessedJuly9, 2025. 8 CaliforniaDepartmentof Conservation. (ND). CaliforniaWilliamsonActEnrollmentFinderMap. Retrievedfrom:
https:// maps.conservation.ca.gov/agriculture/. AccessedJuly9, 2025. 9 Cityof Fullerton. (2024). MunicipalCode. Retrievedfrom: https:// codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/fullerton/latest/fullerton_ca/0-0-0-30337.

AccessedJuly10, 2025.
10 Cityof Fullerton. (2023). Cityof FullertonZoningMapAtlas. Retrievedfrom:
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/1542/637449029859970000. AccessedJuly9, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page29

4.3 AIRQUALITY

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflictwith or obstructimplementationof the applicable air qualityplan? X
b) Resultin a cumulativelyconsiderablenet increaseof any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicablefederalor Stateambient
airqualitystandard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
X
d) Resultin other emissions (suchasthoseleadingto odors adverselyaffectingasubstantialnumberof people?
X
Air quality modelingoutputs and resultsare includedin Appendix A: Air Quality and GreenhouseGas EmissionsDataof this Initial Study.

Background
ClimateandTopography
The California Air ResourcesBoard (CARB) divides the State into 15 air basinsthat share similar meteorologicaland topographicalfeatures. Theproject site is locatedwithin the SouthCoastAir Basin SCAB), whichincludesthenon-desertportionsof LosAngeles, Riverside, andSanBernardinocounties, as well asall of OrangeCounty. TheSCABis on a coastalplainwith connectingbroad valleysandlow hills, bounded by the PacificOceanon the southwest and high mountains forming the remainder of the perimeter11. TheSCAB’sairqualityisdeterminedbynaturalfactorssuchastopography, meteorology, and climate, in additionto the presenceof existingair pollutionsourcesandambientconditions.

TheSCABispart of a semi-permanenthigh-pressurezonein the easternPacific. Asa result, the climateis mild and temperedby coolseabreezes. Thisusuallymild weatherpattern is occasionallyinterrupted by periods of extreme heat, winter storms, and Santa Ana winds. The annual average temperature throughout the 6,645-square-mile SCABrangesfrom low 60 to high 80 degreesFahrenheitwith little variance. With more oceanicinfluence, coastalareas show less variability in annual minimum and maximum temperaturesthan inland areas. Contrastingthe steadypattern of temperature, rainfall is seasonallyand annually highly variable. Almost all annual rainfall occurs between the months of 11 SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. (1993). CEQAAirQualityHandbook.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page30
NovemberandApril. Summerrainfallisreducedto widelyscatteredthundershowersnearthe coast, with slightlyheavieractivityin the eastandoverthe mountains.

Althoughthe SCABhasa semiaridclimate, the air closerto the Earth’s surfaceis typicallymoist because of the presenceof a shallowmarine layer. Exceptfor occasionalperiodswhen dry, continentalair is brought into the SCABby offshore winds, the “oceaneffect” is dominant. Periodsof heavy fog are frequentandlow cloudsknownashighfogarecharacteristicclimaticfeatures, especiallyalongthe coast.

Annualaveragehumidityis70percentat the coastand57 percentin the easternportionsof the SCAB.

Wind patternsacrossthe SCABarecharacterizedbywesterlyor southwesterlyon-shorewindsduringthe dayandeasterlyor northeasterlybreezesat night. Wind speedistypicallyhigherduringthe dry summer months than during the rainy winter. Betweenperiodsof wind, air stagnationmay occur in both the morningandeveninghours. Air stagnationisoneof the criticaldeterminantsof air qualityconditionson anygivenday. Duringwinter andfall, surfacehigh-pressuresystemsoverthe SCAB, combinedwith other meteorologicalconditions, result in very strong, downslopeSantaAna winds. Thesewinds normally continuefor a few daysbeforepredominantmeteorologicalconditionsarereestablished.

Themountainrangesto the eastaffectthe diffusionof pollutantsby inhibiting the eastwardtransportof pollutants. TheSCAB’sair qualitygenerallyrangesfrom fair to poorandislikeairqualityin mostof coastal Southern California. The entire region experiencesheavy concentrationsof air pollutants during prolongedperiodsof stableatmosphericconditions.

In additionto the characteristicwind patternsthat affect the rate andorientationof horizontalpollutant transport, two distinct types of temperature inversionscontrol the vertical depth through which air pollutantsaremixed. Theseinversionsarethe marineinversionandtheradiationinversion. Theheightof the baseof the inversionat anygiventime is calledthe “mixingheight.” Thecombinationof windsand inversionsisa criticaldeterminantleadingto highlydegradedair qualityfor the SCABin the summerand generallygoodair qualityin the winter.

Air Pollutantsof Concern
Theair pollutantsemitted into the ambientair by stationaryandmobilesourcesare regulatedby State andfederallaws. Theseregulatedair pollutantsareknownas “criteriaair pollutants” andarecategorized into primaryandsecondarypollutants.

Primaryair pollutants are emitted directly from a sourceand includecarbonmonoxide (CO), reactive organicgases (ROG), nitrogen oxide (NOX), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarseparticulatematter (PM10), fine particulatematter (PM2.5), andlead. Oftheseprimarypollutants, CO, NOX, SO2, PM10, andPM2.5arecriteria pollutants. ROGandNOXarecriteria pollutant precursorsandform secondarycriteriapollutantsthrough chemicalandphotochemicalreactionsin the atmosphere. Forexample, the criteria pollutant ozone (O3) is formed by a chemicalreaction between ROGand NOXin the presenceof sunlight. The principal secondarypollutantsareO3andnitrogendioxide (NO2). Sourcesandhealtheffectscommonlyassociated with criteria pollutants are summarizedin Table 4: Air Contaminantsand AssociatedPublic Health Concerns.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page31
Table4: Air Contaminantsand AssociatedPublicHealthConcerns Pollutant Major Man-MadeSources HumanHealthEffects
ParticulateMatter
PM10andPM2.5)
Powerplants, steelmills, chemical
plants, unpavedroadsandparkinglots,
wood-burningstovesandfireplaces,
automobiles, andothers.

Increasedrespiratorysymptoms, suchas
irritation of the airways, coughing, or difficulty
breathing; asthma; chronicbronchitis;
irregularheartbeat; nonfatalheartattacks;
andprematuredeathin peoplewith heart or
lungdisease. Impairsvisibility.

Ozone (O3) Formedby achemicalreactionbetween
reactiveorganicgases / volatileorganic
compounds (ROGor VOC)1 andnitrogen
oxides (NOX) in the presenceof sunlight.

Motor vehicleexhaust, industrial
emissions, gasolinestorageand
transport, solvents, paints, andlandfills.

Irritatesandcausesinflammationof the
mucousmembranesandlungairways; causes
wheezing, coughing, andpainwheninhaling
deeply; decreaseslungcapacity; aggravates
lungandheart problems. Damagesplants;
reducescropyield.

SulfurDioxide
SO2)
Acolorlessgasformed whenfuel
containingsulfurisburnedandwhen
gasolineisextractedfrom oil. Examples
arepetroleumrefineries, cement
manufacturing, metalprocessing
facilities, locomotives, andships.

Respiratoryirritant. Aggravateslungandheart
problems. In the presenceof moistureand
oxygen, sulfurdioxideconvertsto sulfuricacid,
whichcandamagemarble, iron, andsteel.

Damagescropsandnaturalvegetation.

Impairsvisibility. Precursorto acidrain.

CarbonMonoxide
CO)
Anodorless, colorlessgasformedwhen
carbonin fuel isnot burnedcompletely;
acomponentof motor vehicleexhaust.

Reducesthe abilityof bloodto deliveroxygen
to vital tissues, affectingthe cardiovascular
andnervoussystem. Impairsvision, causes
dizziness, andcanleadto unconsciousnessor
death.

NitrogenDioxide
NO2)
Areddish-brown gasformedduringfuel
combustionfor motor vehiclesand
industrialsources. Sourcesinclude
motor vehicles, electricutilities, and
other sourcesthat burn fuel.

Respiratoryirritant; aggravateslungandheart
problems. Precursorto O3. Contributesto
globalwarmingandnutrient overloading,
whichdeteriorateswater quality. Causes
brown discolorationof the atmosphere.
1 VolatileOrganicCompounds (VOCsor ReactiveOrganicGases [ROG]) arehydrocarbons/organicgasesthat are formed solelyof hydrogen and carbon. Thereareseveralsubsetsof organicgasesincludingROGsandVOCs. Both ROGsandVOCsare emitted from the incomplete combustionof hydrocarbonsor other carbon-basedfuels. Themajorsourcesof hydrocarbonsarecombustionengineexhaust, oil refineries, andoil-fueledpowerplants; other commonsourcesarepetroleumfuels, solvents, dry cleaningsolutions, andpaint (viaevaporation).

Source: CaliforniaAir PollutionResourcesBoard. (N.D.). CriteriaAir Pollutants . Retrievedfrom: https:// www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants.

AccessedAugust26, 2025.

ToxicAir Contaminants
Toxicaircontaminants (TACs) areairbornesubstancesthat cancauseshort-term (acute) or long-term (i.e., chronic, carcinogenic, or cancer-causing) adversehumanhealtheffects (i.e., injuryor illness). TACsinclude both organicandinorganicchemicalsubstances. Theymaybeemittedfrom avarietyof commonsources, includinggasolinestations, automobiles, dry cleaners, industrialoperations, andpaintingoperations. The current Californialist of TACsincludesmore than 200 compounds, includingparticulateemissionsfrom diesel-fueledengines.

CARBidentifieddieselparticulatematter (DPM) asa toxic air contaminant. DPMdiffersfrom other TACs in that it isnot a singlesubstancebut ratheracomplexmixtureof hundredsof substances. Dieselexhaust AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page32
is a complexmixtureof particlesandgasesproducedwhenanengineburnsdieselfuel. DPMisa concern becauseit causeslungcancer; manycompoundsfound in dieselexhaustarecarcinogenic. DPMincludes the particle-phaseconstituentsin dieselexhaust. Thechemicalcompositionandparticlesizesof DPMvary between different enginetypes (heavy-duty, light-duty), engineoperatingconditions (idle, accelerate, decelerate), fuel formulations (high/low sulfurfuel), andthe yearof the engine. Someshort-term (acute) effects of diesel exhaustinclude eye, nose, throat, and lung irritation, and dieselexhaustcan cause coughs, headaches, light-headedness, and nausea. DPMposesthe greatesthealth risk amongthe TACs.

Almostalldieselexhaustparticlemassis10micronsor lessin diameter. Dueto their extremelysmallsize, theseparticlescanbeinhaledandeventuallytrappedin the bronchialandalveolarregionsof the lung.

AmbientAir Quality
CARBmonitors ambient air quality at approximately250 air monitoring stationsacrossthe State. Air quality monitoring stations usually measurepollutant concentrationsten feet above ground level; therefore, air quality is often referred to in terms of ground-level concentrations. Existinglevels of ambient air quality, historical trends, and projections near the project site are documented by measurementsmade by the SouthCoastAir Quality ManagementDistrict (SCAQMD), the SCAB’s air pollution regulatory agencythat maintainsair quality monitoring stations, which processambient air qualitymeasurements.

Thepollutantsof concernin theSCABareO3, NO2, PM10, andPM2.5. Theairmonitoringstationnearestthe project site that monitors ambient concentrationsfor O3, NO2, PM10, andPM2.5 is the Anaheim – Loara SchoolStationlocatedapproximately3.6milesto the southeast. Localair qualitydatafrom 2022to 2024 the latest currentlyavailable) are providedin Table5: Ambient Air Quality Data, whichliststhe annual monitored maximumconcentrationsand number of exceedancesof the NationalAmbient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) andCaliforniaAmbientAir QualityStandards (CAAQS).

SensitiveReceptors
Sensitivepopulationsare more susceptibleto the effectsof air pollution than the generalpopulation.

Sensitivereceptorsthat arein proximityto localizedsourcesof toxicsareof particularconcern. Landuses consideredsensitivereceptorsinclude residences, schools, playgrounds, childcarecenters, long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescentcenters, and retirement homes. The nearest sensitivereceptorsto the projectsiteareresidentialuseslocatedapproximately765feet to thesoutheast andInterfaceRehablocatedapproximately975feet to the east.12 12 Thenearestsensitivereceptorsarelocatedin the Cityof Placentia. Thedistancewasmeasuredfrom the projectsite property line to the nearestsensitivereceptorproperty line on GoogleEarthImagery (2025).

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page33
Table5: AmbientAir QualityData
CriteriaPollutant 20221 20231 20241
Ozone (O3)
1-hour MaximumConcentration (ppm) 0.102 0.089 0.104
8-hour MaximumConcentration (ppm) 0.076 0.076 0.079
Numberof DaysStandardExceeded
CAAQS1-hour (>0.09ppm) 1 0 3
NAAQS8-hour (>0.070ppm) 1 2 3
CarbonMonoxide (CO)
1-hour MaximumConcentration (ppm) 1.188 2.513 2.770
Numberof DaysStandardExceeded
NAAQS1-hour (>35ppm) 0 0 0
CAAQS1-hour (>20ppm) 0 0 0
NitrogenDioxide (NO2)
1-hour MaximumConcentration (ppm) 0.053 0.051 0.053
Numberof DaysStandardExceeded
NAAQS1-hour (>100ppm) 0 0 0
CAAQS1-hour (>0.18ppm) 0 0 0
ParticulateMatter LessThan10Microns (PM10)
National24-hour MaximumConcentration 67.0 97.8 118.9
State24-hour MaximumConcentration 66.7 99.4 42.7
StateAnnualAverageConcentration (CAAQS=20 µg/m3) - - -
Numberof DaysStandardExceeded
NAAQS24-hour (>150 µg/m3) - - 0
CAAQS24-hour (>50 µg/m3) - - -
ParticulateMatter LessThan2.5 Microns (PM2.5)
National24-hour MaximumConcentration 33.1 45.6 49.7
State24-hour MaximumConcentration 33.1 50.7 49.7
Numberof DaysStandardExceeded
NAAQS24-hour (>35 µg/m3) 0 1.0 5.1
1 Measurementsfor O3, CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5 takenat the Anaheim – LoaraSchoollocatedat 1630PampasLane, Anaheim, CA92802 CARB #30178).

NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards; CAAQS = CaliforniaAmbient Air Quality Standards; ppm = parts per million; µg/m3 = microgramsper cubicmeter; – = not measured
Source: All pollutant measurementsarefrom the CARBAerometricDataAnalysisandManagementsystemdatabase https:// www.arb.ca.gov/adam) exceptfor CO, whichwere retrievedfrom the CARBAirQualityandMeteorologicalInformationSystem https:// www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/aqdselect.php).

Regulations
FederalCleanAir Act
Air qualityisfederallyprotectedbythe FederalCleanAirAct (FCAA) anditsamendments. UndertheFCAA, the U.S. EnvironmentalProtectionAgency (U.S. EPA) developedtheprimaryandsecondaryNAAQSfor the criteria air pollutants includingO3, NO2, CO, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and lead. Dependingon whether the standardsare met or exceeded, the localair basinis classifiedas in “attainment” or “nonattainment.” AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page34
Someareasare unclassified, which means no monitoring data are available. Unclassifiedareas are consideredto be in attainment. Proposedprojectsin or near nonattainmentareascould be subjectto more stringent air-permitting requirements. The FCAArequires that each state prepare a State Implementation Plan (SIP) to demonstrate how it will attain the NAAQSwithin federally imposed deadlines. Air quality attainment plans outline emissionslimits and control measuresto achieveand maintainthesestandardsby the earliestpracticaldate. TheU.S. EPAhasdesignatedenforcementof air pollution control regulations to the individual states. Applicable federal and State standards are summarizedin Table6: StateandFederalAmbient Air QualityStandards.

Table6: Stateand FederalAmbient Air QualityStandards
Pollutant AveragingTime StateStandards1,2 FederalStandards3,4,5 Ozone (O3)6 1 Hour 0.09ppm (180 µg/m3) NA
8 Hour 0.070ppm (137 µg/m3) 0.070ppm (137 µg/m3)
RespirableParticulateMatter
PM10)7
24-Hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3
AnnualArithmeticMean 20 µg/m3 NA
FineParticulateMatter
PM2.5)
7 24-Hour NA 35 µg/m3
AnnualArithmeticMean 12 µg/m3 9.0 µg/m3
CarbonMonoxide (CO) 1 Hour 20ppm (23mg/m3) 35ppm (40mg/m3) 8 Hour 9.0 ppm (10mg/m3) 9.0 ppm (10mg/m3)
NitrogenDioxide (NO2)
8 1 Hour 0.18ppm (339 µg/m3) 100ppb (188 µg/m3)
AnnualArithmeticMean 0.030ppm (57 µg/m3) 0.053ppm (100 µg/m3) SulfurDioxide (SO2)9
1 Hour 0.25ppm (655 µg/m3) 75ppb (196 µg/m3)
24Hour 0.04ppm (105 µg/m3) 0.14ppm (365 µg/m3)
AnnualArithmeticMean NA 0.03ppm (80 µg/m3)
Lead (Pb)10,11
30-DayAverage 1.5 µg/m3 NA
CalendarQuarter NA 1.5 µg/m3
Rolling3-Month Average NA 0.15 µg/m3
VisibilityReducingParticles12 8 hours SeeNote11 NA
Sulfates (SO4-2) 24Hour 25 µg/m3 NA
HydrogenSulfide (H2S) 1 Hour 0.03ppm (42 µg/m3) NA
VinylChloride (C2H3CI)10 24Hour 0.01ppm (26 µg/m3) NA
1 Californiastandardsfor O3, carbonmonoxide (exceptLakeTahoe), sulfur dioxide (1-hour and 24-hour), nitrogen dioxide, suspended particulatematter (PM10, PM2.5, andvisibilityreducingparticles), arevaluesthat arenot to be exceeded. All othersarenot to be equaledor exceeded. Californiaambientair qualitystandardsarelistedin the Tableof Standardsin Section70200of Title17 of the CaliforniaCodeof Regulations.
2 Concentrationexpressedfirst in units in which it was promulgated. Equivalentunits givenin parenthesesare basedupon a reference temperatureof 25°Candareferencepressureof 760torr. Mostmeasurementsof air qualityareto becorrectedto areferencetemperature of 25°Canda referencepressureof 760torr; ppmin this tablerefersto ppmby volume, or micromolesof pollutantper moleof gas. 3 Nationalstandards (other than ozone, particulatematter, andthosebasedon annualarithmeticmean) are not to be exceededmore than oncea year. Theozonestandardis attainedwhenthe fourth highest8-hour concentrationmeasuredat eachsite in a year, averagedover threeyears, isequalto or lessthanthe standard. ForPM10, the 24hour standardisattainedwhenthe expectednumberof dayspercalendar yearwith a 24-hour averageconcentrationabove150 µg/m3isequalto or lessthan one. ForPM2.5, the 24 hour standardisattainedwhen 98 percentof the dailyconcentrations, averagedover three years, are equalto or lessthan the standard. Contactthe U.S. EPAfor further clarificationandcurrentnationalpolicies.
4 NationalPrimaryStandards: Thelevelsof air qualitynecessary, with an adequatemarginof safetyto protect the publichealth. 5 OnOctober1, 2015, the national8-hourozoneprimaryandsecondarystandardswere loweredfrom 0.075to 0.070ppm. 6 OnFebruary7, 2024, the nationalannualPM2.5 primarystandardwasloweredfrom 12.0 µg/m3to 9.0 µg/m3. Theexistingnational24-hour PM2.5 standards (primaryandsecondary) wereretainedat 35 µg/m3, aswasthe annualsecondarystandardof 15.0 µg/m3. Theexisting24- hour PM10standards (primaryandsecondary) of 150 µg/m3alsowereretained. Theform of the annualprimaryandsecondarystandardsis AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page35
Table6: Stateand FederalAmbient Air QualityStandards
the annualmean, averagedover3 years.
7 Toattainthe 1-hour nationalstandard, the 3-yearaverageof the annual98thpercentileof the 1-hour dailymaximumconcentrationsat each site must not exceed100ppb. Notethat the national1-hour standardis in unitsof partsper billion (ppb). Californiastandardsare in units of parts per million (ppm). Todirectlycomparethe national1-hour standardto the Californiastandardsthe unitscanbe convertedfrom ppb to ppm. In this case, the nationalstandardof 100ppb is identicalto 0.100ppm. 8 OnJune2, 2010, anew1-hour SO2standardwasestablishedandthe existing24-hourandannualprimarystandardswererevoked. Toattain the 1-hour nationalstandard, the 3-yearaverageof the annual99thpercentileof the 1-hour dailymaximumconcentrationsat eachsitemust not exceed75ppb. The1971SO2nationalstandards (24-hourandannual) remainin effectuntil oneyearafter anareaisdesignatedfor the 2010 standard, except that in areas designatednonattainment for the 1971 standards, the 1971 standards remain in effect until implementationplansto attain or maintainthe 2010standardsareapproved. Notethat the 1-hour standardisin unitsof partsper billion ppb). Californiastandardsare in unitsof partsper million (ppm). Todirectlycomparethe 1-hour standardto the Californiastandardthe unitscanbe convertedto ppm. In this case, the nationalstandardof 75ppb is identicalto 0.075ppm. 9 TheARBhasidentified lead and vinyl chlorideas “toxic air contaminants” with no thresholdlevelof exposurefor adversehealth effects determined. Theseactionsallowfor the implementationof controlmeasuresat levelsbelowthe ambientconcentrationsspecifiedfor these pollutants.
10 Thenational standardfor lead wasrevisedon October15, 2008to a rolling 3-month average. The1978lead standard (1.5 µg/m3as a quarterly average) remainsin effect until one year after an area is designatedfor the 2008standard, exceptthat in areasdesignated nonattainment for the 1978standard, the 1978standardremainsin effect until implementation plansto attain or maintain the 2008 standardareapproved.
11 In 1989, the ARBconverted both the general statewide 10-mile visibility standard and the LakeTahoe30-mile visibility standard to instrumentalequivalents, which are “extinctionof 0.23 per kilometer” and “extinction of 0.07 per kilometer” for the statewideand Lake TahoeAir Basinstandards, respectively.
ppm = partsper million; ppb = partsperbillion; µg/m3 = microgramsper cubicmeter; mg/m3 = milligramspercubicmeter; NA = no information available
Source: SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. (2024). Tableof Air QualityStandards . Retrievedfrom:
https:// ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/AAQS%20Table_ADA_FINAL_07222024.pdf. AccessedAugust27, 2025.

FederalEmissionsStandardsfor On-RoadTrucks
To reduce emissionsfrom on-road, heavy-duty diesel trucks, the U.S. EPAestablisheda series of increasinglystrict emissionstandardsfor new engines, starting in 1988. TheU.S. EPApromulgatedthe final and cleaneststandardswith the 2007Heavy-Duty HighwayRule. Theparticulatematter emission standardof 0.01 gramper horsepower-hour (g/hp-hr) isrequiredfor newvehiclesbeginningwith Model Year2007. Also, the NOXand nonmethanehydrocarbonstandardsof 0.20 g/hp-hr and 0.14 g/hp-hr, respectively, were phasedin together between2007and 2010on a percentof salesbasis: 50 percent from 2007to 2009and 100percentin 2010.

EmissionStandardsfor Off-RoadDieselEngines
Toreduceemissionsfrom off-roaddieselequipment, the U.S. EPAestablisheda seriesof cleaneremission standardsfor new off-road dieselengines. Tier1 standardswere phasedin from 1996to 2000 (year of manufacture), dependingonthe enginehorsepowercategory. Tier2 standardswerephasedin from 2001 to 2006. Tier3 standardswere phasedin from 2006to 2008. Tier4 standards, which generallyrequire add-on emissioncontrol equipmentto attain them, werephasedin from 2008to 2015.

CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard
CARBadministersCalifornia’s air quality policy. TheCAAQSwere establishedin 1969 pursuant to the Mulford-CarrellAct. Thesestandardsaregenerallymore stringentandapplyto more pollutantsthan the NAAQS. In addition to the criteria pollutants, CAAQShave been establishedfor visibility reducing particulates, hydrogensulfide, andsulfates.

The CaliforniaCleanAir Act (CCAA), which was approvedin 1988, requiresthat eachlocal air district prepareandmaintainanAirQualityManagementPlan (AQMP) to achievecompliancewith CAAQS. These AQMPsalsoserveasthe basisfor the preparationof the SIPfor meetingthe NAAQS. Likethe U.S. EPA, CARBalso designatesareaswithin Californiaas either attainment or nonattainment for eachcriteria AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page36
pollutant basedon whether the CAAQShavebeenachieved. Under the CCAA, areasare designatedas nonattainmentfor a pollutant if air qualitydatashowsthat aCAAQSwasviolatedat leastonceduringthe previousthreecalendaryears. Exceedancesthat areaffectedbyhighlyirregularor infrequenteventssuch aswildfires, volcanoes, etc. are not consideredviolationsof the CAAQS, andare not usedasa basisfor designatingareasasnonattainment. TheapplicableCAAQSaresummarizedin Table6.

SouthCoastAir Quality ManagementDistrict
TheSCAQMDistheair pollutioncontrolagencyfor OrangeCountyandtheurbanportionsof LosAngeles, Riverside, andSanBernardinocounties. TheSCAQMD’sprimaryresponsibilityisensuringthat NAAQSand CAAQSare attained and maintainedin the SCAB. The SCAQMDis also responsiblefor adopting and enforcingrulesandregulationsconcerningair pollutant sources, issuingpermitsfor stationarysourcesof air pollutants, inspectingstationarysourcesof airpollutants, respondingto citizencomplaints, monitoring ambient air quality andmeteorologicalconditions, awardinggrantsto reducemotor vehicleemissions, conductingpubliceducationcampaigns, and manyother activities. All projectsare subjectto SCAQMD rulesandregulationsin effectat the time of construction.

TheSCAQMDis alsothe lead agencyin chargeof developingthe AQMP, with input from the Southern CaliforniaAssociationof Governments (SCAG) andCARB. TheAQMPisa comprehensiveplanthat includes control strategiesfor stationaryand areasources, aswell as for on-road and off-road mobile sources.

SCAGhasthe primary responsibilityfor providingfuture growth projectionsand the developmentand implementation of transportation control measures. CARB, in coordination with federal agencies, providesthe control elementfor mobilesources.

The2016AQMPwasadoptedby the SCAQMDGoverningBoardon March 3, 2017. Thepurposeof the AQMPisto setforth a comprehensiveandintegratedprogramthat wouldleadthe SCABinto compliance with the federal24-hour PM2.5air qualitystandard, and to updatethe SCAQMD’scommitmentstowards meetingthe federal8-hourO3standards. TheAQMPincorporatesscientificandtechnologicalinformation and planningassumptions, includingthe 2016 RegionalTransportationPlan/SustainableCommunities Strategy (RTP/SCS) andupdatedemissioninventorymethodologiesfor varioussourcecategories.

OnOctober1, 2015, theU.S. EPAstrengthenedthe NAAQSfor ground-levelO3. The2022AQMP, adopted by the SCAQMDGoverningBoardon December2, 2022, wasdevelopedto addressthe requirementsfor meeting the 2015 8-hour O3standard. The 2022 AQMPbuilds upon measuresalreadyin placefrom previous AQMPs. It also includes a variety of additional strategiessuch as regulation, accelerated deploymentof availablecleanertechnologies (e.g., zeroemission [ZE] technologies, when cost-effective and feasible, and low NOXtechnologiesin other applications), best managementpractices, co-benefits from existingprograms (e.g., climate and energyefficiency), incentives, and other FCAAmeasuresto achievethe 20158-hourO3standard. The2022AQMPincorporatesthe latestscientificandtechnological information and planning assumptions, includingthe 2020 RTP/SCSand updatedemissioninventory methodologiesfor varioussourcecategories.

TheSCAQMDpublishedthe CEQAAir QualityHandbook (approvedby the SCAQMDGoverningBoardin 1993 and augmentedwith guidancefor LocalSignificanceThresholds [LST] in 2008).13 The SCAQMD guidancehelpslocalgovernmentagenciesand consultantsdevelopenvironmentaldocumentsrequired 13 SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. (2008). FinalLocalizedSignificanceThresholdMethodology. Retrievedfrom:
https:// www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/localized-significance-thresholds. AccessedAugust 27, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page37
by CEQAand identifies thresholds of significancefor criteria pollutants for both construction and operation (seediscussionof thresholdsbelow). With the help of the CEQAAir Quality Handbookand associatedguidance, locallanduseplannersandconsultantscananalyzeanddocumenthow existingand proposed projects affect air quality, in order to meet the CEQAreview processrequirements. The SCAQMDperiodicallyprovidessupplementalguidanceandupdatesto the handbookon their website.

TheStateandfederalattainmentstatusdesignationsfor the SCABaresummarizedin Table7: SouthCoast Air BasinAttainment Status. TheSCABis currentlydesignatedasa nonattainmentareawith respectto the StateO3, PM10, and PM2.5 standards, as well as the national O3and PM2.5 standards. TheSCABis designatedasattainmentor unclassifiedfor the remainingNAAQSandCAAQS.

Table7: SouthCoastAir BasinAttainment Status
Pollutant State Federal
Ozone (O3)
1 HourStandard) Nonattainment Nonattainment (Extreme)
Ozone (O3)
8 HourStandard) Nonattainment Nonattainment (Extreme)
ParticulateMatter (PM2.5)
24HourStandard) – Nonattainment (Serious)
ParticulateMatter (PM2.5)
AnnualStandard) Nonattainment Nonattainment (Serious)
ParticulateMatter (PM10)
24HourStandard) Nonattainment Attainment (Maintenance)
ParticulateMatter (PM10)
AnnualStandard) Nonattainment –
CarbonMonoxide (CO)
1 HourStandard) Attainment Attainment (Maintenance)
CarbonMonoxide (CO)
8 HourStandard) Attainment Attainment (Maintenance)
NitrogenDioxide (NO2)
1 HourStandard) Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment
NitrogenDioxide (NO2)
AnnualStandard) Attainment Attainment (Maintenance)
SulfurDioxide (SO2)
1 HourStandard) Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment
SulfurDioxide (SO2)
24HourStandard) Attainment –
Lead (Pb)
30DayStandard) – Unclassifiable/Attainment
Lead (Pb)
3 Month Standard) Attainment –
Sulfates (SO4-2)
24HourStandard) Attainment –
HydrogenSulfide (H2S)
1 HourStandard) Unclassified –
Source: SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. (2022). 2022Air QualityManagementPlan.; United StatesEnvironmentalProtection Agency. (2022). NonattainmentAreasfor CriteriaPollutants (GreenBook).

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page38
Thefollowing is a list of SCAQMDrulesthat are requiredof constructionactivitiesassociatedwith the proposedProject:

Rule401 (VisibleEmissions) – A personshallnot dischargeinto the atmospherefrom anysingle sourceof emissionwhatsoeveranyair contaminantfor a periodor periodsaggregatingmorethan three minutes in any 1 hour that is dark or darker in shadeas that designatedNo. 1 on the RingelmannChart, aspublishedby the UnitedStatesBureauof Mines.

Rule402 (Nuisance) – This rule prohibits the dischargefrom any source whatsoeversuch quantities of air contaminantsor other material which causeinjury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyanceto any considerablenumber of personsor to the public, or which endangerthe comfort, repose, health, or safetyof any suchpersonsor the public, or which cause, or havea natural tendencyto cause, injury or damageto businessor property. Thisrule doesnot applyto odorsemanatingfrom agriculturaloperationsnecessaryfor the growingof cropsor the raisingof fowl or animals.

Rule403 (FugitiveDust) – Thisrule requiresfugitive dust sourcesto implementbest available control measuresfor all sources, and all forms of visibleparticulatematter are prohibitedfrom crossing any property line. This rule is intended to reduce PM10 emissionsfrom any transportation, handling, construction, or storageactivity that has the potential to generate fugitivedust. PM10suppressionBestAvailableControlMeasuresaresummarizedbelow. a) Portionsof a constructionsite to remain inactivelongerthan a period of three months will beseededandwatereduntil grasscoverisgrownor otherwisestabilized. b) All on-site roadswill be pavedassoonasfeasibleor wateredperiodicallyor chemically stabilized.
c) All materialtransportedoff-sitewill beeither sufficientlywateredor securelycoveredto preventexcessiveamountsof dust.
d) Thearea disturbedby clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavationoperationswill be minimizedat all times.
e) Wherevehiclesleavea constructionsiteandenteradjacentpublicstreets, thestreetswill be sweptdaily or washeddown at the end of the work dayto removesoiltrackedonto the pavedsurface.

Rule431.2 (SulfurContentof LiquidFuels) - Thisrule limits the sulfurcontentin dieselandother liquidfuelsfor thepurposeof both reducingthe formationof sulfuroxidesandparticulatesduring combustionandto enabletheuseof add-oncontroldevicesfor dieselfueledinternalcombustion engines.

Rule1113 (ArchitecturalCoatings) – Thisrulerequiresmanufacturers, distributors, andendusers of architecturaland industrialmaintenancecoatingsto reduceROGemissionsfrom the useof thesecoatings, primarilybyplacinglimits on the ROGcontentof variouscoatingcategories.

Rule1143 (Paint Thinnersand Solvents) – Thisrule governsthe manufacture, sale, and useof paint thinnersandsolventsusedin thinning of coatingmaterials, cleaningof coatingapplication equipment, and other solventcleaningoperationsby limiting their volatile organiccompound AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page39
VOC) content. Thisrule regulatestheVOCcontentof solventsusedduringconstruction. Solvents usedduringthe constructionphasemustcomplywith this rule.

Rule 1403 (AsbestosEmissionsfrom Demolition/RenovationActivities) – This rule requires ownersandoperatorsor anydemolitionor renovationactivityandthe associateddisturbanceof asbestos-containingmaterials, anyasbestosstoragefacility, or anyactivewastedisposalsite to implementwork practicerequirementsto limit asbestosemissionsfrom buildingdemolitionand renovationactivities, includingthe removaland associateddisturbanceof asbestos-containing materials.

Rule 1470 ( Requirements for Stationary Diesel-Fueled Internal Combustion and Other CompressionIgnition Engines) – Thisrule would minimizeemissionsassociatedwith stationary enginesover 50 horsepowerby establishingoperatingrequirementsand emissionstandards, enforcingthe AirborneToxicsControlMeasure, andrequiringownersandoperatorsto submita ComplianceStatusReportanda CompliancePlanto the SCAQMD.

Rule2305 (WarehouseIndirectSourceRule) - Rule2305wasadoptedbythe SCAQMDGoverning Board on May 7, 2021 to reduce NOX and particulate matter emissionsassociatedwith warehousesand mobile sourcesattracted to warehouses. Thisrule appliesto all existingand proposedwarehousesover 100,000squarefeet located in the SCAQMD. Rule2305 requires warehouseoperatorsto trackannualvehiclemilestraveled (VMT) associatedwith truck trips to andfrom the warehouse. Thesetrip milesareusedto calculatethe Project’sWarehouseActions and Investmentsto ReduceEmissions (WAIRE) PointsComplianceObligation. WAIREPointsare earnedbasedon emissionreductionmeasuresandwarehouseoperatorsarerequiredto submit an annual WAIREReport which includestruck trip data and emissionreduction measures.

Reductionstrategieslisted in the WAIREmenu includeacquireZEor near zeroemission (NZE) trucks; require ZE/NZEtruck visits; require ZEyard trucks; install on-site ZEcharging/fueling infrastructure; installon-siteenergysystems; andinstallfiltration systemsin residences, schools, andother buildingsintheadjacentcommunity. Warehouseoperatorsthat donot earna sufficient numberof WAIREpointsto satisfythe WAIREPointsComplianceObligationwouldberequiredto pay a mitigation fee. Fundsfrom the mitigation fee will be usedto incentivizethe purchaseof cleanertrucksandcharging/fuelinginfrastructurein communitiesnearby.

TheFullertonPlan
AdoptedonMay 1, 2012, Chapter17: Air QualityandClimateChangeof theCityof FullertonGeneralPlan NaturalEnvironmentElementestablishesgoalsandpoliciesto improvelocalair quality and protect the community from potentially adverseair quality impacts. Thefollowing GeneralPlangoalsand policies have beenadoptedby the City for the purposeof mitigating air emissionsresultingfrom its land use decisionsandareapplicableto the proposedProject.

GOAL21 Protectionandimprovementof air quality.

P21.1 Jobs-HousingBalanceSupportregionaland subregionalefforts to improvethe alignmentof housingoptionsandemploymentopportunitiesto reducecommuting.

P21.2 TransportationSystemSupportregionalandsubregionaleffortsto promotea transportation systemcoordinatedwith air qualityimprovements.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page40
P21.4 BalancedLandUseSupportprojects, programs, policiesandregulationsto promotea balance of residential, commercial, industrial, recreationaland institutional useslocatedto provide optionsto reducevehicletrips andvehiclemilestraveled.

P21.5 ProductHandlingandDisposalImpactsSupportprojects, programs, policiesandregulations to reduce impacts to air quality from the improper handlingand disposalof commercial products.

P21.6 ConstructionImpactsSupportprojects, programs, policiesandregulationsto reduceimpacts to air qualitycausedby privateandpublicconstructionprojects.

P21.7 DevelopmentImpactsSupportprojects, programs, policiesandregulationsto reduceimpacts to air qualitycausedby the designor operationof a siteor use.

Thresholdsof Significance
Thesignificancecriteria establishedby SCAQMDmay be relied upon to makethe determinationslisted above. Accordingto the SCAQMD, anair qualityimpactisconsideredsignificantif a projectwouldviolate anyNAAQSor CAAQS, contributesubstantiallyto an existingor projectedair qualityviolation, or expose sensitivereceptorsto substantialpollutant concentrations.

RegionalEmissionsThreshold
The SCAQMDhas establishednumeric thresholds of significancefor air pollutants resulting from construction and operational activities of land use development projects within the SCAQMD jurisdictionalboundaries, asshownin Table8: SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrictSignificance Thresholds. If the SCAQMDthresholdsare exceeded, a potentially significantimpact may occur, and additionalanalysisis warrantedto fully assessthe significanceof impacts. However, ultimately the City, asthe LeadAgencyunderCEQA, determinesthe thresholdsof significancefor impacts.

Table8: SouthCoastAir Quality ManagementDistrict SignificanceThresholds Pollutant MassDailyThresholds (poundsper day)
Construction Operations
VolatileOrganicCompounds (VOC) 75 55
NitrogenOxides (NOX) 100 55
CarbonMonoxide (CO) 550 550
SulfurOxides (SOX) 150 150
ParticulateMatter up to 10Microns (PM10) 150 150
ParticulateMatter up to 2.5 Microns (PM2.5) 55 55
Source: SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. (2023). SouthCoastAQMDAir QualitySignificanceThresholds.

LocalizedCarbonMonoxide
TheProjectwould be subjectto the CAAQSand NAAQSfor CO. Theseare addressedthoughan analysis of localizedCOimpactsknownasthe CO “hot spots” analysis, whichdetermineswhether the changein the level of serviceof an intersectionas a result of the Projectwould have the potential to result in exceedancesof the CAAQSor NAAQS. The 2003 AQMPis the most recent AQMPthat addressedCO concentrations. As part of the 2003 AQMPCOModeling Attainment Demonstration, an analysiswas AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page41
performedutilizingdispersionmodeling.14 Asaninitial screeningstep, if a projectroadwaysegmentdoes not exceedanaveragedailytraffic (ADT) of 100,000perday, then the projectdoesnot needto preparea detailedCOhot spotanalysis.

LocalizedSignificanceThreshold
The SCAQMDdevelopedthe LSTsfor emissionsof NO2, CO, PM10, PM2.5 in responseto the SCAQMD GoverningBoards' EnvironmentalJusticeEnhancementInitiative (I-4). TheSCAQMDprovidedthe Final LocalizedSignificanceThresholdMethodology (datedJune2003 [revised2008]) to assistleadagenciesin analyzinglocalizedimpacts associatedwith project-specificemissions. LSTsrepresent the maximum emissionsthat can be generatedat the project site that are not expectedto causeor substantially contribute to an exceedanceof the most stringent CAAQSor NAAQS. LSTsare basedon the ambient concentrationsof that pollutant within the project sourcereceptor area (SRA), as demarcatedby the SCAQMD, the distanceto the nearestsensitivereceptor, andthe projectsiteacreage.

TheSCAQMD’s LocalizedSignificanceThresholdMethodologyprovideson-sitemassemissionsrate look- up tables. Theproject site is locatedwithin SCAQMDSRA16 (North OrangeCounty). LSTthresholdsare provided for source-receptor distancesof 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500meters. Thesensitivereceptors nearesttheprojectsiteareresidentialuseslocatedapproximately765feet (233meters) to thesoutheast.

Table9: LocalSignificanceThresholdsfor Constructionand Operationssummarizesthe LSTsfor 1-acre, 2-acre, and 5-acre projects in SCAQMDSRA16 with sensitivereceptorslocated200 meters from the projectsite.

Table9: LocalSignificanceThresholdsfor ConstructionandOperations DailyAcres
Disturbed/
ProjectSize
Maximum Emissions (poundsper day)
Construction Operations
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5 NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
1 Acre 159 1,975 53 20 159 1,975 13 5
2 Acres 186 2,444 60 24 186 2,444 15 6
5 Acres 249 3,605 78 34 249 3,605 19 8
NOX = nitrogenoxides; CO = carbonmonoxide; PM10 = coarseparticulatematter; PM2.5 = fine particulatematter Source: SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. (2008). LocalizedSignificanceThresholdMethodology.

LSTsassociatedwith all acreagecategoriesare providedin Table9 for informational purposesand to demonstratethe LSTsincreaseasacreagesincrease. It shouldbenotedthat LSTsarescreeningthresholds and are therefore conservative. TheconstructionLSTacreageis determinedbasedon the daily acreage disturbedby the Project. LSTanalysisfor constructionis requiredfor all projectsthat disturb 5 acresor lesson a singleday. TheoperationalLSTacreageisbasedon the total areaof the projectsite.

Methodology
This air quality impact analysisconsidersconstructionand operational impacts associatedwith the Project. Wherecriteriaairpollutantquantificationwasrequired, emissionsweremodeledusingtheCARB- approvedCaliforniaEmissionsEstimatorModel (CalEEMod). CalEEModisa Statewidelanduseemissions computer model designedto quantify potential criteria pollutant emissionsassociatedwith both 14 SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. (2003). Air QualityManagementPlan, AppendixV, ModelingandAttainment Demonstrations. Retrievedfrom: https:// www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/air-quality-management-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan/2003- aqmp. AccessedAugust27, 2025.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page42
construction and operationsfrom a variety of land use projects. Air quality impacts were assessed accordingto methodologiesrecommendedby CARBandthe SCAQMD.

Projectconstructionwouldgenerateemissionsfrom constructionequipment, trucks, workervehicles, and ground-disturbing activities. Daily regional construction emissions are estimated by assuming constructionoccursat the earliestfeasibledate (i.e. a conservativeestimateof constructionactivities) andapplyingoff-road, fugitivedust, andon-roademissionsfactorsin CalEEMod.

Project operations would generate emissionsfrom area sources (consumerproducts, architectural coating, and landscapingequipment), energysources (electricityusage), mobilesources (motor vehicles from Project-generatedvehicle trips), an emergencyfire pump, and off-road forklift usage. Project- generatedincreasesin operationalemissionswouldbepredominantlyassociatedwith motor vehicleuse.

Themobile sourceemissionswere estimatedin CalEEModbasedon the Projectvehicletrip generation outlined in Table 1 from AppendixL. The trip generation table includesa comparisonof the trips associatedwith the existing and proposedusesand is informed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) LandUseCodesin the City’s TransportationAssessmentPolicies & Procedures (TAPP) AnalysisLevelof Service (LOS) section. Theareaandenergysourceemissionswerequantifiedin CalEEMod basedon land use activity data. The emergencyfire pump emissionswere calculatedusing default emissionsratesfrom the U.S. EPA. Theoff-roadforklift emissionswerecalculatedusingdefaultemissions ratesfrom CARB.

TheproposedProject’sregionalconstructionandoperationalemissionswerecomparedto the SCAQMD’s significancethresholdsto determinethe significanceof the Project’simpacton regionalair quality; refer to Table5. TheproposedProject’s localizedconstructionand operationalemissionswere evaluatedin accordancewith the SCAQMD’sLSTmethodology, whichuseson-sitemassemissionsrate look-up tables andProject-specificmodeling. LSTsrepresentthemaximumon-siteemissionsfrom a projectthat arenot expectedto causeor contributeto anexceedanceof the moststringentapplicableNAAQSandCAAQS.

ImpactAnalysis
a) Conflictwith or obstructimplementationof the applicableair quality plan? LessThanSignificantImpact. The U.S. EPArequires each state with nonattainment areasto prepareandsubmitaSIPthat demonstratesthemeansto attaintheNAAQS. TheSIPmustintegrate federal, state, andlocalplan componentsand regulationsto identify specificmeasuresto reduce pollution in nonattainment areas, usinga combinationof performancestandardsand market- basedprograms. Similarly, underStatelaw, theCCAArequiresanair qualityattainmentplanto be preparedfor areasdesignatedas nonattainment regardingthe NAAQSand CAAQS. Air quality attainment plansoutline emissionslimits and control measuresto achieveand maintain these standardsby the earliestpracticaldate.

Theprojectsiteislocatedwithin the SCAB, whichisunderSCAQMD’sjurisdiction. TheSCAQMDis required, pursuantto the FCAA, to reduceemissionsof criteria pollutantsfor whichthe SCABisin nonattainment. Toreducesuchemissions, the SCAQMDdraftedthe 2016AQMPand2022AQMP AQMPs).15 TheAQMPsestablishesa programof rules and regulationsdirectedat reducingair pollutantemissionsandachievingNAAQSandCAAQS. TheAQMPsarearegionalandmulti-agency 15 The 2016AQMP (adopted in March 2017) was developedto addressattainment of multiple O3and PM2.5 standards. The 2022AQMP adoptedin December2022), wasdevelopedto addressattainmentof the 20158-hour O3standard.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page43
effort includingthe SCAQMD, theCARB, theSCAG, andtheU. S. EPA. TheAQMPspollutantcontrol strategiesare basedon the latest scientificandtechnicalinformation andplanningassumptions, includingSCAG’s ConnectSoCal, updatedemissioninventory methodologiesfor varioussource categories, and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. SCAG’s latest growth forecastswere definedin consultationwith local governmentsand with referenceto local generalplans. The Project is subjectto the SCAQMD’sAQMPs.

Criteriafor determiningconsistencywith the AQMPsaredefinedby the followingindicators:

ConsistencyCriterion No. 1: TheProjectwould not result in an increasein the frequencyor severityof existingair qualityviolations, or causeor contributeto newviolations, or delaythe timely attainmentof the AQMP’sair qualitystandardsor the interim emissionsreductions.

ConsistencyCriterion No. 2: The Project would not exceedthe AQMP’s assumptionsor incrementsbasedon the yearsof the Projectbuild-out phase.

Accordingto the SCAQMD’sCEQAAirQualityHandbook, the purposeof the consistencyfindingis to determineif a project is inconsistentwith the assumptionsand objectivesof the regionalair quality plans, and thus if it would interfere with the region’s ability to complywith CAAQSand NAAQS.16
Theviolationsto which ConsistencyCriterionNo. 1 refersare CAAQSand NAAQS. Asaddressed below in Table10: ProjectConstructionEmissionsandTable11: ProjectOperationalEmissions, the Projectwould not exceedthe short-term constructionor long-term operationalthresholdsof significanceandwould thereforenot violateanyair qualitystandards. Assuch, the Projectwould not result in an increasein frequencyor severityof existingair quality violations, or causeor contributeto newviolations, or delaythe timelyattainmentof air qualitystandardsor the interim emissionsreductionsspecifiedin the AQMPs. Therefore, the Projectwouldbeconsistentwith the first criterion.

ConcerningConsistencyCriterionNo. 2, the 2022AQMPcontainsair pollutantreductionstrategies basedon SCAG’s latest growth forecastsincludedin the 2020RTP/SCS. SCAG’s growth forecasts aremadein consultationwith localgovernmentsandwith referenceto their localgeneralplans.

TheProjectis anticipatedto employapproximately113 employees17and could indirectlyinduce populationgrowth if future employeesmoveinto the Cityto workat theproposedwarehouse. The Projectwould provideemploymentopportunitieswithin a Citywith substantialhousingstock. As such, it is likelythat the Projectwould employcurrentresidentsof the City. In the eventthat the operator of the proposedfacility draws employeesthat are not from the local community, the Projectwouldnot directlyresultin the developmentof newhousing.

Thepopulationand employmentforecasts, which are adoptedby SCAG’s RegionalCouncil, are basedonthe localplansandpoliciesapplicableto the City. Asthe Projectwouldnot directlyresult in the developmentof new housingand the project site land use designation (Industrial) is consistentwith theGeneralPlan, the Projectwouldnot causetheGeneralPlanbuildouthousehold or employmentforecaststo be exceeded. Additionally, asthe SCAQMDhasincorporatedthese 16 SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. (1993). CEQAAirQualityHandbook. 17 Basedon employeegenerationfactor of one employeeper 979 sf of warehouseuse provided, the Projectis anticipated to employ approximately113employees. Source: NatelsonCompany, Inc. (2001). EmploymentDensityStudySummaryReport, Table6A.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page44
same projections into the AQMPs, it can be concludedthat the proposedProject would be consistentwith secondcriterion.

Basedon the foregoing, the Projectwouldnot conflictwith or obstructthe implementationof the AQMPsor anyapplicableair qualityplanandimpactsto thisregardwouldbelessthan significant. b) Resultin a cumulativelyconsiderablenet increaseof any criteria pollutant for whichthe project region is non-attainment underan applicablefederal or Stateambientair quality standard? LessThan Significant Impact: RegionalConstructionEmissions. Project constructionactivities would generateshort-term emissionsof criteria air pollutants. Thecriteria pollutantsof primary concernwithin the area includeO3-precursorpollutants (i.e., ROGand NOX), PM10, and PM2.5.

Construction-generatedemissionsare short-term andof temporaryduration, lastingonly aslong as constructionactivitiesoccur, but would be considereda significantair quality impact if the volumeof pollutantsgeneratedexceedsthe SCAQMD’sthresholdsof significance.

Projectconstructionwouldresultin the temporarygenerationof criteriapollutantemissionsfrom all phases of construction, including demolition, site preparation, grading, infrastructure improvements, buildingconstruction, paving, andarchitecturalcoatingapplications.18 Constructionresultsin the temporary generationof emissionsresultingfrom site grading, road paving, motor vehicleexhaustassociatedwith constructionequipmentandworker trips, and the movement of constructionequipment, especiallyon unpavedsurfaces. Emissionsof airborne particulate matter are largelydependenton the amount of grounddisturbanceassociatedwith sitepreparationactivities, aswell asweatherconditionsandthe appropriateapplicationof water.

Projectconstructionactivitieswouldoccuroverapproximately13months, anticipatedto beginas earlyasthe third quarter of 2027andendingasearlyasthe third quarterof 2028. Construction- generated emissionsassociatedwith the Project were calculated using CalEEMod, which is designedto model emissionsfor land usedevelopmentprojects, basedon typical construction requirements. Fugitivedustemissionsfrom constructionmaytemporarilybecomea nuisanceand potential health hazardto those living and working nearby. Projectconstructionwould comply with SCAQMDrulesand regulations, includingSCAQMDRule402 (Nuisance), Rule403 (Fugitive Dust), and Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). SCAQMDRule 402 (Nuisance) prohibits the dischargeof air contaminantsor other materialthat causea nuisance. SCAQMDRule403 (Fugitive Dust) requires fugitive dust control measures. SCAQMDRule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) provides specificationson painting practicesand regulatesthe ROGcontent of paint. Project constructionwouldadditionallycomplywith CARB’santi-idlingregulations, whichprohibitsheavy- duty dieselvehicleidlingfor more than five minutes. Rule403wasappliedin CalEEModto reduce fugitive dust emissions. See Appendix A for more information regarding the construction assumptions.
18 Althoughnot proposed, this analysisconservativelyassumesthe Projectwould includefull-width grindandoverlayalongCypressWay.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page45
Short-term constructionemissionsattributable to the Projectaresummarizedin are summarized in Table10: ProjectConstructionEmissions.

Table10: ProjectConstructionEmissions
ConstructionYear
MaximumDailyEmissions (poundsper day)1, 2
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
2027 3.10 28. 03 29.02 0.07 7.36 3.76
2028 58.75 16.24 25.92 0.04 1.50 0.74
MaximumEmissions 58.75 28.03 29.02 0.07 7.36 3.76
SCAQMDThreshold 75 100 550 150 55 150
ThresholdExceeded? No No No No No No
1 As recommendedby the SCAQMD, emissionswere calculatedusingCalEEModversion 2022.1 and the worst-caseseasonal maximumdailyemissionsare reported.
2 SCAQMDRule403FugitiveDustwasapplied. SCAQMDRule403reduction/creditsinclude: properlymaintainmobileandother constructionequipment; replaceground cover in disturbed areasquickly; water exposedsurfacesthree times daily; cover stockpileswith tarps; water all haul roadstwice daily; and limit speedson unpavedroads to 15 miles per hour. Reductions percentagesfrom the SCAQMDCEQAHandbook (TablesXI-A throughXI-E) wereapplied.

ROG = reactiveorganicgases; NOX = nitrogenoxides; CO = carbonmonoxide; SO2 = sulfurdioxide; PM10 = coarseparticulatematter; PM2.5 = fine particulatematter; SCAQMD = SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict Source: CalEEModversion2022.1. Referto AppendixA for the modeloutputs.

Table 10 shows the Project construction-related emissionswould not exceedthe applicable SCAQMDthresholdswithout assumingcompliancewith SCAQMDRules402 (Nuisance) and 1113 Architectural Coatings) and CARB’s anti-idling regulations. Therefore, the actual Project constructionemissionswouldbeevenlowerthanreportedin Table10. Assuch, impactsassociated with Projectregionalconstructionemissionswouldbelessthan significant.

LessThanSignificantImpact: RegionalOperationalEmissions. TheProject’soperationalemissions wouldbeassociatedwith areasources (consumerproducts, architecturalcoating, andlandscaping equipment), energysources, mobilesources (motor vehiclesfrom Project-generatedvehicletrips), anemergencyfire pump, andoff-roadforklifts. Primarysourcesof operationalcriteriapollutants arefrom motor vehicleuseandareasources.

Long-term operationalemissionsattributable to the Projectare summarizedin Table11: Project OperationalEmissions. Asshownin the table, the Project’s operational-relatedemissionswould not exceed the applicable SCAQMDthresholds. As such, impacts associatedwith Project operationalregionalemissionswouldbelessthan significant.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page46
Table11: ProjectOperationalEmissions
Source MaximumDailyEmissions (poundsper day)
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Area1 3.44 0.04 4.79 < 0.01 0.01 0.01
Energy1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0.00
Mobile – Trucks1 0.12 5.76 2.51 0.05 2. 01 0.60
Mobile – PassengerVehicles1 0.44 0.35 3.96 0.01 1. 08 0.28 EmergencyFirePump 0.11 0.08 0.05 < 0.01 0.01 0.01
Off-RoadForklifts 0.04 0.23 3.21 < 0.01 0.01 0.01
Total2 4.16 6.46 14. 52 0.07 3. 12 0.90
SCAQMDThreshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
ThresholdExceeded? No No No No No No
1 As recommendedby the SCAQMD, emissionswere calculatedusing CalEEModversion2022.1 and the worst-caseseasonal maximumdailyemissionsare reported.
2 Totalsmaynot addup exactlydueto roundingin the modelingcalculations.

ROG = reactiveorganicgases; NO2 = nitrogendioxide; CO = carbonmonoxide; SO2 = sulfurdioxide; PM10 = coarseparticulatematter; PM2.5 = fine particulatematter; SCAQMD = SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict PM10 = particulatematter 10 microns in diameteror less; PM2.5 = particulatematter 2.5micronsin diameteror less; SCAQMD = SouthCoastAir ManagementDistrict Source: CalEEModversion2022.1. Referto AppendixA for the modeloutputs.

Theoperationalemissionsourcesaredescribedbelow.

Area Source Emissions. Area source emissionswould be generated due to consumer products, architecturalcoatings, andlandscapingequipment. Consumerproductsarevarious solventsused in non-industrial applications, which emit VOCsduring product use. These typically include cleaningsupplies, kitchen aerosols, cosmetics, and toiletries. The entire Projectwould not use consumerproductsas specifiedby the CalEEModUserGuide. The proposedwarehousebuildingwould includeoffice spacesandmayhavesmallkitchenareas andbathroomsthat wouldusecleaningproductsandkitchenaerosols, howeverthe majority of the squarefootageof the proposedwarehousebuildingwould be usedfor warehousing and distribution. Assuch, negligiblequantitiesof personalcareproducts, home, lawn, and gardenproducts, disinfectants, sanitizers, polishes, cosmetics, and floor finisheswould be used.

Areasourceemissionswerecalculatedin CalEEModusingdefaultratesbasedon a Statewide average. Therefore, ROGemissionsare likely overestimatedand therefore a conservative assumptionfor the purposesof this analysis.

EnergySourceEmissions. Energysourceemissions (e.g., water heatingsystems) would be generateddueto naturalgasusageassociatedwith the Project. However, the Projectwould be all-electricand would not connectto or utilize naturalgas. Therefore, the Projectwould not generateenergysourceemissions.

Mobile SourceEmissions. Mobile sourcesare emissionsfrom motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporativeemissions. Dependingupon the pollutant being discussed, the potentialair qualityimpactmaybeof eitherregionalor localconcern. Forexample, ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 are all pollutantsof regionalconcern. NOXand ROGreact with sunlightto form O3, known asphotochemicalsmog. Additionally, wind currentsreadilytransportPM10 AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page47
and PM2.5. However, COtendsto be a localizedpollutant, dispersingrapidlyat the source.

Project-generatedvehicleemissionsare basedon the trip generationestimatesand have beenincorporatedinto CalEEMod, asrecommendedby the SCAQMD. Accordingto Table1 in AppendixL, the Projectwould resultin a net reductionof 422total daily vehicletrips to the project site. As such, the Project would result in net mobile sourceemissionreductions comparedto existingconditions. However, it is conservativelyassumedthe Projectwould generateapproximately212 total daily vehicletrips (146 passengervehiclesand 66 truck vehicles). The mobile sourceemissionsincludedin Table 11 are therefore a conservative estimation.

CalEEModdefaultswere adjustedto reflect the warehousetruck trip lengthsand fleet mix characteristics. Thewarehousetruck trip lengthswereincreasedto 33.2 miles, basedon the distanceto the Portsof LosAngelesand LongBeach, aswell asCARBestimatesfor drayage trucks.19 Trucksare classifiedby type (or axle configuration) into light heavy-duty trucks LHDT), mediumheavy-duty trucks (MHDT), andheavy heavy-duty trucks (HHDT), reflectinga mix of largetrucks with 2, 3, and 4 or more axles. To better representwarehouse-specific operations, the warehousefleet mix wasadjustedto represent17 percentLHDT, 23 percent MHDT, and60percentHHDT.20 Mobilesourceemissionsratesin CalEEModutilizedtheCARB- developedEMissionFACtors (EMFAC) 2021emissionsratesconsistentwith the methodology describedin the CalEEModUser’sGuide.

EmergencyFirePump. An emergencyfire pump would only be usedto provideadditional water pressurefor anearly-suppressionfast-responsefire sprinklersystemandwouldnot be part of the Project’s normal daily operations. Although the Project proposesan electric emergencyfire pump, this analysisconservativelyassumesthe Projectwould utilizea diesel emergencyfire pump. Therefore, emissionsassociatedwith a dieselemergencyfire pump were included to be conservative. Emissionsfrom a diesel emergencyfire pump was calculatedseparatelyfrom CalEEModusingdefaultemissionrates; referto AppendixA. If the Projectwereto installadieselemergencyfire pump, the enduser (the future operatorof the proposedwarehousebuilding) wouldberequiredto obtaina permit from the SCAQMDprior to installation. The diesel emergencyfire pump must comply with SCAQMDRule 1470 Requirementsfor StationaryDiesel-FueledInternal Combustionand Other Compression IgnitionEngines), whichwouldminimizeemissionsif andwhena dieselemergencyfire pump isused.

Off-RoadForklifts. Operationaloff-road emissionswould be generatedby off-road cargo handling equipment used during operational warehouseactivities. Although the Project proposesthree electricforklifts, it wasconservativelyassumedthat the proposedwarehouse buildingwould utilize three dieselforklifts for loadingand unloadinggoods. Emissionsfrom dieselforklifts werecalculatedseparatelyfrom CalEEModusingdefaultemissionrates; refer to AppendixA. It shouldbenotedthat the Projectdoesnot includecoldstorage. Therefore, 19 CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard. (N.D.). MobileSourceEmissionsInventory (MSEI) Documentation – DrayageTrucks, AppendixB: Emissions EstimationMethodologyfor On-RoadDiesel-FueledHeavy-DutyDrayageTrucksat CaliforniaPortsandIntermodalRailYards. Retrieved from: https:// ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/mobile-source-emissions-inventory/msei-documentation-road-heavy-duty-diesel.

AccessedSeptember9, 2025.
20 WSP. (2017). RCTCTruckStudyandRegionalLogisticsMitigation Fee, TechnicalMemorandum1: ExitingandFutureConditions, Warehouse- RelatedLandUseData & TruckTravelPatterns.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page48
this analysismodels the proposedwarehousebuilding as unrefrigerated, and the Project wouldnot includeemissionsfrom transportrefrigerationunits. c) Exposesensitivereceptorsto substantialpollutant concentrations? LessThanSignificantImpact: LocalizedConstructionEmissions. TheSCAQMDprovidedthe Final LocalizedSignificanceThresholdMethodology (datedJune2003 [revised2008]) for guidance.21 The LSTmethodologyassistsleadagenciesin their project-specificanalysisof the potential localized impactsassociatedwith proposedprojects. LSTsrepresentthe maximumemissionsof NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 generatedat a project site that are not expectedto causeor contribute to an exceedanceof the CAAQSor NAAQS (the more stringent of the two).22 The SCAQMD’s methodologystatesthat “off-sitemobileemissionsfrom the Projectshouldnot beincludedin the emissionscomparedto LSTs.” Therefore, only the emissionsincludedin the CalEEMod “on-site” emissionsoutputswereconsideredfor the LSTanalysis.

TheconstructionLSTsare basedon the ambient concentrationsof that pollutant for eachSRA, distanceto the nearestsensitivereceptor, anddailyacresdisturbed. Theproject siteis locatedin SCAQMDSRA16 (North OrangeCounty). Thenearestsensitivereceptorsto the project site are residentialuseslocatedapproximately765feet (233meters) to the southeast.

SinceCalEEModcalculatesconstructionemissionsbasedon the numberof equipmenthoursand the maximum daily soil disturbanceactivity possiblefor each piece of equipment, Table 12:

Equipment-SpecificGradingRateswasusedto determinethe maximumdailydisturbedacreage for the constructionLSTanalysis.23
Table12: Equipment-SpecificGradingRates
Construction
Phase
Equipment
Type
Equipment
Quantity
AcresGraded
per 8-HourDay
OperatingHours
per Day
AcresGraded
per Day
Grading Graders 1 0.5 8 0.5
Dozers 1 0.5 8 0.5
Total 1
1 Totalacresgradedeachdayisbasedon the numberof equipmenthoursandthe maximumdailysoildisturbanceactivitypossible for eachpieceof equipment, not the total acreageof the projectsite.

Source: CalEEModversion2022.1. Referto AppendixA for modeloutputs.

Basedon the dailyconstructionequipmentassumedfor the Projectandasidentifiedin Table12, Projectconstructionisanticipatedto disturba maximumof 1-acrein a singleday.

Asthe LSTguidanceprovidesthresholdsfor distancesto sensitivereceptorsof 25, 50, 100, 200, and500metersandprojectsdisturbing1-, 2-, and5-acresin size, the LSTsfor 1-acreat 200meters in SCAQMDSRA16wereutilizedfor this analysis.
21 SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. (N.D.) LocalizedSignificanceThresholds. http:// www.aqmd.gov/home/rules- compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/localized-significance-thresholds. AccessedSeptember8, 2025. 22 Ibid.
23 SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. (2005). SampleConstructionScenariosfor ProjectsLessthanFiveAcresin Size. https:// www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/final-sample-construction-scenario- report.pdf?sfvrsn=2. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page49
Table 13: LocalizedProject ConstructionEmissionssummarizesthe localizedemissionsduring eachindividualandoverlappingconstructionphase.

Table13: LocalizedProjectConstructionEmissions
ConstructionPhase
Maximum DailyEmissions (poundsper day)1, 2
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Individual ConstructionPhases
Demolition (2027) 19.90 18.63 5.51 1.45
SitePreparation (2027) 27.97 28.28 6.28 3.70
Grading (2027) 14.23 17.27 2.44 1.44
InfrastructureImprovements (2027) 3.66 5.14 0.10 0.09
InfrastructureImprovements (2028) 3.58 5.14 0.09 0.08
BuildingConstruction (2027) 9.39 12. 94 0.34 0.31
BuildingConstruction (2028) 8.92 12. 94 0.30 0.28
ArchitecturalCoating (2028) 0.81 1.12 0.02 0.01
Paving (2028) 6.63 9.91 0.26 0.24
OverlappingConstructionPhases3
InfrastructureImprovements + Building
Construction (2027) 13.05 18.08 0.44 0.40
InfrastructureImprovements + Building
Construction (2028) 12.50 18.08 0.39 0.36
BuildingConstruction + Paving (2028) 15.55 22.85 0.56 0.51 MaximumEmissions 27.97 28.28 6.28 3.70
SCAQMDLocalizedScreeningThreshold
1-acreof disturbanceat 200meters) 159 1,975 53 20
ThresholdExceeded? No No No No
1 As recommendedby the SCAQMD, emissionswere calculatedusing CalEEModversion2022.1 and the worst-caseseasonal maximumdailyemissionsare reported.
2 SCAQMDRule403FugitiveDustappliedfor constructionemissions. SCAQMDRule403reduction/creditsinclude: properlymaintain mobile andother constructionequipment; replacegroundcoverin disturbedareasquickly; water exposedsurfacesthree times daily; waterall haulroadsthreetimesdaily; andlimit speedsonunpavedroadsto 15milesper hour. Reductionspercentagesfrom the SCAQMDCEQAHandbook (TablesXI-A throughXI-E) wereapplied. 3 Totalsmaynot addup exactlydueto roundingin the modelingcalculations.

Asshownin Table13, pollutant emissionson the peakdayof constructionwould not exceedthe respectiveSCAQMDLSTsandthereforewouldnot resultin substantialconcentrationsof pollutants at the nearestsensitivereceptorsor causeor contributeto anexceedanceof theCAAQSor NAAQS.

Impactsassociatedwith localizedProjectconstructionemissionswouldbelessthansignificant.

LessThanSignificantImpact: Airborne Fungus. Coccidioidomycosis, commonlyknownasValley Fever, is a lung infectioncausedby inhalingairbornesporesof the Coccidioidesimmitis fungus.

Thesesporesaretypicallyfoundin soilandcanbecomeairbornewhenthe groundisdisturbedby wind, construction, farming, or other soil-disruptingactivities. Onceinhaled, the sporestransform into spherulesin the lungs, which grow and releaseendospores, continuingthe infection cycle.

Symptomsrangefrom mild flu-like illnessto more severerespiratory conditions, with fatigue, AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page50
cough, rash, andjoint pain beingthe most common. Whilemost healthyindividualsrecoverfully within six months without treatment and gain lifelong immunity, certain populations (e.g., immunocompromisedindividuals) areat higherriskfor developingsevereor disseminateddisease.

Diagnosisrequireslaboratory testing, includingserology, cultures, or microscopicexamination.

Thoughnot contagiousbetweenpeople, ValleyFeverposesa significantpublichealthconcernin endemic areas. The fungus is endemic to the southwesternUnited States, including parts of Californiasuchasthe AntelopeValley. However, the Projectsiteisnot locatedin anendemicarea for ValleyFever.24 Therefore, impactswouldbelessthan significant.

LessThan SignificantImpact: LocalizedOperational Emissions. Accordingto the SCAQMDLST methodology, LSTswouldapplyto the operationalphaseof a projectonly if it includesstationary sourcesor attractsmobilesourcesthat mayspendlong periodsqueuingand idlingat the project site (e.g. warehouseor transfer facilities). Sincethe Projectproposesa warehousebuilding, the operationalLSTprotocol is conservativelyappliedto both the stationarysourceemissionsand a portion of the mobilesourceemissions.

TheLSTanalysisonly includeson-site sources. However, the CalEEModmodel outputs do not separateon- andoff-siteemissionsfor mobilesources. Fora worst-casescenarioassessment, the emissionsshownin Table14: LocalizedProjectOperationalEmissions, conservativelyincludeall on-site stationary sources, on-site emergencyfire pump, on-site off-road forklifts, and on-site mobilesources, sincea portion of mobilesourcescouldincludetruck vehiclesidlingon the site.25 The project site is located in SCAQMDSRA16 (North OrangeCounty). The nearestsensitive receptorsto the project site are residentialuseslocatedapproximately765feet (233 meters) to the southeast. Theproject site is approximately4.8 acres. TheLSTguidanceprovidesthresholds for distancesto sensitivereceptorsof 25, 50, 100, 200, and500metersand for projects1, 2, and 5 acresinsize. SinceLSTsincreasewith acreage, theLSTsfor 5-acresat 200metersinSCAQMDSRA 16 wereutilizedfor this analysis.

Table14: LocalizedProjectOperationalEmissions
Source MaximumDailyEmissions (poundsper day)1
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
On-siteEmissionSources (Area, Energy, Mobile –
Trucks, EmergencyFirePump, andOff-Road
Forklifts)1, 2

0.52 8.13 0.08 0.04
SCAQMDLocalizedScreeningThreshold
5-acreprojectsiteat 200meters) 249 3,605 19 8
ThresholdExceeded? No No No No
1 Mobileon-siteemissionswerecalculatedusingthe following: mobileon-siteemissions = (vehicleon-sitetrip distance/vehicletotal trip distance) * mobileemissions; whereit isconservativelyassumedthe vehicleon-sitetrip distanceisconservativelyassumedto be approximately1-mile andthe vehicletotal trip distancemodeledin CalEEModis 33.2-miles. 2 Totalsmaynot addup exactlydueto roundingin the modelingcalculations.

NO2 = nitrogendioxide; CO = carbonmonoxide; PM10 = coarseparticulatematter; PM2.5 = fine particulatematter, SCAQMD = South CoastAir ManagementDistrict
Source: CalEEModversion2022.1. Referto AppendixA for modeloutputs. 24 California Department of Public Health, Valley Fever , https:// www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/ValleyFeverBasics.aspx, accessedOctober2025.
25 Theon-site one-way trip lengthis conservativelyassumedto be approximately1-mile, which is approximately3 percentof the 33.2-mile truck trip lengthmodeledin CalEEMod.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page51
Table14 showsthe peakday operationalpollutant emissionswould not exceedthe respective SCAQMDLSTsand therefore would not result in substantialconcentrationsof pollutants at the nearestsensitivereceptorsor causeor contribute to an exceedanceof the CAAQSor NAAQS.

Impactsassociatedwith localizedProjectoperationalemissionswould belessthan significant.

LessThan SignificantImpact: Criteria Pollutant Health. On December24, 2018, the California SupremeCourtissuedanopinionidentifyingtheneedto providesufficientinformationconnecting a project’s air emissionsto health impacts or explain why such information could not be ascertained (SierraClubv. Countyof Fresno [FriantRanch, L.P.] [2018] Cal.5th, CaseNo. S219783).

TheSCAQMDhasset its CEQAsignificancethresholdsbasedon the FCAA, whichdefinesa major stationarysource (in extremeO3nonattainmentareassuchasthe SCAB) asemitting 10 tons per year. Thethresholdscorrelatewith the trigger levelsfor the federal New SourceReview (NSR) ProgramandSCAQMDRule1303for newor modifiedsources. TheNSRProgram26 wascreatedby the FCAAto ensurethat stationarysourcesof air pollutionareconstructedor modifiedin amanner that is consistentwith attainment of health-based NAAQS, which establishthe levels of air pollutant emissionsnecessary, with an adequatemarginof safety, to protect the public health.

Therefore, projectsthat do not exceedthe SCAQMD’smassemissionsthresholdsandLSTswould not violateanyNAAQSor CAAQSor contributesubstantiallyto anexistingor projectedair quality violation. Assuch, no criteriapollutant healthimpactswouldoccur.

As previously discussed, localizedimpacts of on-site Project emissionson nearby sensitive receptors were found to be less than significant (refer to Table 13 and Table 14). The LSTs representthe maximumemissionsfrom a projectthat arenot expectedto causeor contributeto an exceedanceof the moststringentNAAQSor CAAQS. TheLSTsweredevelopedby the SCAQMD basedon the ambientconcentrationsof that pollutant for eachSRAand distanceto the nearest sensitivereceptor. TheNAAQSandCAAQSestablishthelevelsof airpollutantemissionsnecessary, with an adequatemargin of safety, to protect public health, includingprotecting the health of sensitivepopulations. Information on health impactsrelated to exposureto O3and particulate matter emissionspublishedbythe U.S. EPAandCARBhavebeensummarizedanddiscussedabove in the Regulatory section. Since Project-related emissionswould not exceed the regional thresholdsor the LSTs, Project-relatedemissionswouldnot exceedthe CAAQSor NAAQSor cause an increasein the frequencyor severityof existingviolationsof air quality standards. Therefore, sensitivereceptorswouldnot be exposedto criteria pollutant levelsin excessof the health-based ambient air quality standards. Impactsassociatedwith Projectcriteria pollutant health effects wouldbelessthan significant.

LessThanSignificantImpact: ToxicAir Contaminants
Construction. Projectconstructionwouldresult in temporaryincreasesin TACsemissionssuchas DPMfrom off-road dieselequipmentand vehicletrips. Theuseof diesel-poweredconstruction equipmentandvehicletrips wouldbetemporaryandepisodic. Thedurationof exposurewouldbe short, and the exhaustfrom constructionequipmentdissipatesrapidly. Theamountto whichthe receptorsareexposed (afunctionof concentrationanddurationof exposure) isthe primaryfactor 26 Codeof FederalRegulation (CFR) [i.e., PSD (40 CFR52.21, 40CFR51.166, 40 CFR51.165 (b)), NonattainmentNSR (40 CFR52.24, 40 CFR

51.165, 40CFRpart 51, AppendixS).

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page52
used to determine health risk (i.e., potential exposure to TAC emission levels that exceed applicablestandards). Health-relatedrisksassociatedwith DPMemissionsareprimarilyassociated with long-term exposureand associatedrisk of contractingcancer. As such, the calculationof cancerriskassociatedwith exposureto TACsistypicallycalculatedbasedon a long-term periodof exposure. Based on updated guidelines from the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, cancerrisksarebasedon constantdailyexposurefor 30 yearsfor off-siteresidential receptorsand 25 yearsfor off-site worker receptors. Constructionactivitieswould occurover an approximately13-month period, which would constitute approximatelythree percent of the residentialand four percentof the worker exposuredurations. Furthermore, Projectcompliance with Californiaregulations (e.g., CaliforniaCodeof Regulations [CCR], Title 13, Sections2485and 2449), which reduce DPM and criteria pollutant emissionsfrom in-use off-road diesel-fueled vehiclesand limit the idlingof heavy-duty constructionequipmentto no more than five minutes, would further reduce nearby sensitive receptors’ exposureto temporary and variable DPM emissions. TACimpactsduringProjectconstructionwouldbelessthan significant.

Operations. TheProjectwouldgeneratetoxicair contaminants (i.e., DPM) from heavy-duty truck operations. Asnotedabove, cancerrisksarebasedonconstantdailyexposurefor 30yearsfor off- site residential receptors and 25 years for off-site worker receptors according to OEHHA methodologies. The nearestsensitivereceptorsto the project site are residentialuseslocated approximately765 feet to the southeast. Therefore, the nearestsensitivereceptorswould have limited exposureto on-siteemissionsdueto distanceattenuationandthe highlydispersivenature of TACs. Additionally, CAPCOAguidanceadvisesavoidingsitingsensitiveuseswithin 1,000feet of distributioncenterswith more than 100trucksper day. Underexistingconditions, the projectsite currentlygenerates28trucktrips perday. Asthe Projectisexpectedto generate66 trucktrips per day, the Projectwould result in a net increaseof 38 truck trips. Therefore, the Project-generated trucktrips wouldbewell belowthe100trucksperdaythreshold. Therefore, significanthealthrisks relatedto operationalDPMemissionsarenotanticipatedandaquantitativehealthriskassessment is not required. Additionally, the Project’s criteria pollutant emissionswould remain below SCAQMD’s thresholdsfor regionaland localair quality standards, indicatingno significantlong- term health impacts; refer to Table11 and Table14. Therefore, the Projectwould not expose sensitivereceptorsto substantialpollutant concentrationsof TACsduring operations. Impacts associatedwith ProjectoperationalTACemissionswouldbelessthan significant.

LessThanSignificantImpact: CarbonMonoxideHotspots. Ananalysisof CO “hot spots” isneeded to determine whether the changein the level of serviceof an intersectionfrom the proposed Projectwouldhavethepotentialto resultin exceedancesof the CAAQSor NAAQS. It haslongbeen recognizedthat COexceedancesare causedby vehicularemissions, primarily when vehiclesare idling at intersections. Vehicleemissionsstandardshavebecomeincreasinglystringentin the last 20years. Currently, theCOstandardinCaliforniaisamaximumof 3.4 gramspermilefor passenger cars (requirementsfor certain vehiclesare more stringent). With the turnover of older vehicles, introductionof cleanerfuels, andimplementationof control technologyonindustrialfacilities, CO concentrationshavesteadilydeclined.

Accordingly, with the steadilydecreasingCOemissionsfrom vehicles, evenverybusyintersections do not result in exceedancesof the COstandard. COattainmentwithin the SCABwasthoroughly AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page53
analyzedaspart of theSCAQMD’s2003AQMP. TheSCABwasre-designatedasattainmentin 2007 andis no longeraddressedin the SCAQMD’sAQMP.

The 2003 AQMPis the most recent AQMPthat addressesCOconcentrations. As part of the SCAQMDCOhot spotanalysis, theWilshireBoulevardandVeteranAvenueintersection, oneof the mostcongestedintersectionsin SouthernCaliforniawith anADTvolumeof approximately100,000 vehiclesper day, was modeled for CO concentrations. This modeling effort identified a CO concentrationhighof 4.6partspermillion (ppm), whichiswellbelowthe35-ppmfederalstandard.

The proposedproject consideredherein would not produce the volume of traffic required to generateaCOhot spotin the contextof SCAQMD’s2003COhot-spotanalysis. Asthe COhotspots were not experiencedat the Wilshire Boulevardand Veteran Avenueintersection even as it accommodates100,000vehiclesdaily, it canbe reasonablyinferred that COhotspotswould not be experiencedat any intersectionwithin the Project vicinity from the 212 daily vehicletrips attributable to the Project. Assuch, impactsassociatedwith ProjectCOhot spotswould be less than significant.
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adverselyaffecting a substantial numberof people?
LessThanSignificantImpact: ConstructionOdor. Projectconstructionwouldgenerateodorsfrom equipmentdieselexhaust, architecturalcoatingscontainingVOCs, andpavingactivities. However, theseodorswould be temporary, arenot expectedto affect a substantialnumber of peopleand would disperserapidly. Additionally, the Projectwould berequiredto complywith SCAQMDRule 402 (Nuisance) to preventodor nuisanceson sensitivereceptors. SCAQMDRule402 (Nuisance) states:

A personshallnot dischargefrom anysourcewhatsoeversuchquantitiesof air contaminantsor other materialwhichcauseinjury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyanceto anyconsiderablenumber of personsor to the public, or which endangerthe comfort, repose, healthor safetyof anysuch personsor the public, or whichcause, or havea natural tendencyto cause, injury or damageto businessor property.”
Constructionodors would be further minimized through Project compliancewith heavy-duty constructionequipment idling requirements (CCR, Title 13, Sections2449(d)(3) and 2485,) and establishedregulationsthat addressconstructionmaterialsstorage, use, and disposal (Codeof FederalRegulation, Part 1926 – Safetyand Health Regulationsfor Construction, SubpartH – Materials Handling, StorageUseand Disposal, et al.). As such, impactsassociatedwith Project constructionodorswouldbelessthan significant.

LessThan Significant Impact: Operational Odor: The SCAQMDCEQAAir Quality Handbook identifies certain land uses aspotentially significantsourcesof odors. Theseland usesinclude agriculture (farmingandlivestock), wastewatertreatmentplants, foodprocessingplants, chemical plants, compostingfacilities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglassmolding. The Project proposesthe developmentof a warehouse, whichwouldnot involvethe typesof usesthat would emit objectionableodorsaffectingconsiderablenumbersof people. Therefore, the Projectwould not includeany of the land usesthat havebeen identified by the SCAQMDas significantodor sources. Impactsassociatedwith Projectoperationalodor wouldbelessthan significant.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page54

4.4 BIOLOGICALRESOURCES

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

4. BIOLOGICALRESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any speciesidentified asa candidate, sensitive, or specialstatusspeciesin local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
CaliforniaDepartmentof FishandGameor U.S. Fishand
WildlifeService?
X
b) Havea substantialadverseeffect on anyriparianhabitat or other sensitivenaturalcommunityidentifiedin localor
regionalplans, policies, regulationsor by the California Department of Fishand Gameor USFishand Wildlife
Service?
X
c) Havea substantialadverseeffect on Stateor federally
protectedwetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernalpool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrologicalinterruption, or other means?
X
d) Interfere substantiallywith the movementof any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife speciesor with
establishednativeresidentor migratorywildlifecorridors, or impedethe useof nativewildlife nurserysites?
X
e) Conflictwith any localpoliciesor ordinancesprotecting biologicalresources, suchasa tree preservationpolicyor
ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approvedlocal, regional, or Statehabitat conservationplan?
X
a) Haveasubstantialadverseeffect, eitherdirectlyor throughhabitat modifications, onanyspecies identifiedasacandidate, sensitive, orspecialstatusspeciesinlocalorregionalplans, policies, or regulations, or by the CaliforniaDepartmentof FishandGameor U.S. FishandWildlife Service? LessThanSignificantImpact. Theproject site islocatedwithin an urbanizedareaandiscurrently developedwith a businesspark and associatedimprovements, includingsurfaceparking and ornamentallandscaping. Thesurroundingareaisdevelopedandcomprisedprimarilyof industrial andcommercialuses. Asindicatedin TheFullertonPlanEIR, the areasoutsideof the WestCoyote AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page55
Hills and EastCoyoteHills FocusAreasare primarily developedand do not contain areas of naturallyvegetatedvacantlandwith naturalvegetationsupportiveof sensitivespecies.

Theprojectsiteandsurroundingareadonot providesuitablehabitatfor anyspecialstatusspecies, are devoidof sensitivehabitat, and do not containwetlandsor wetland habitat. Theproject site doescontain ornamentalvegetationwith the potential of providingsuitablenestinghabitat for birds. TheProjectwould be requiredto complywith standardcondition (SC) BIO-1, whichwould requireconstructionactivitiesto be completedin compliancewith the Migratory Bird TreatyAct MBTA) andSections3503, 3503.5, 3513of theCaliforniaFishandGameCode (CFGC). UnderMBTA provisions, it is unlawful “by any meansor mannerto pursue, hunt, take, capture (or) kill” any migratorybirdsexceptaspermittedbyregulationsissuedbytheUSFWS. Theterm “take” isdefined by USFWSregulationto meanto “pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, captureor collect” any migratory bird or any part, nest or eggof any migratory bird coveredby the conventions, or to attempt those activities. Followingcompliancewith SCBIO-1, the proposedProject’s potential impactsto nestingmigratorybirdswouldbelessthan significantandnomitigationisrequired. b) Havea substantialadverseeffect on any riparian habitat or other sensitivenatural community identified in localor regional plans, policies, regulationsor by the CaliforniaDepartmentof Fish andGameor USFishandWildlife Service? Or,
c) Havea substantialadverseeffect on State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernalpool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological? No Impact. Asnoted above, the project site is locatedwithin an urbanizedareaand is currently developedwith a businesspark and associatedimprovements, including surfaceparking and ornamentallandscaping. Thesurroundingareaisdevelopedandcomprisedprimarilyof industrial and commercialuses. Basedon review of the U.S. Fishand Wildlife Service (USFWS) National WetlandsInventory, the projectsitedoesnot containanymappedfeatures.27 Further, the project sitedoesnot containanywaterresources (e.g., streams, creeks, channels, vernalpools) nor would any of the proposedland usespotentially affect wetlands. The project site does not contain riparian habitats, sensitivenatural communities, or wetlands. Therefore, the proposedProject would not have a substantialadverseeffect on any riparian habitat, other sensitivenatural community, or federallyprotectedwetlands, andno impactwouldoccur. d) Interfere substantiallywith the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife speciesor with establishednative residentor migratory wildlife corridors, or impedethe useof native wildlife nurserysites?
LessThanSignificantImpact. A wildlife corridor canbe definedas a physicalfeature that links wildlife habitats, oftenconsistingof nativevegetationthat joinstwo or morelargerareasof similar wildlife habitat. Corridors enable migration, colonization, and genetic diversity through interbreedingandarethereforecriticalfor themovementof animalsandthecontinuationof viable populations. Asindicatedin TheFullertonPlanEIR, althoughtheEastCoyoteHillsandWestCoyote Hills areascontain significantplant and animal populations, these areasare isolatedfrom one another by three milesof urbanizationand are surroundedby developedareas. Therefore, they donotprovidereliableconnectionsto other largehabitatpatches. Areasoutsideof theEastCoyote 27 U.S. FishandWildlifeService. N.D. NationalWetlandsInventory. https:// fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper.

AccessedSeptember2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page56
Hills and West CoyoteHills areas, suchas the project site, are urbanizedand generallydo not functionaswildlife corridors.

Asindicated, the projectsiteislocatedwithin anurbanizedareaandiscurrentlydevelopedwith a business park and associated improvements, including surface parking and ornamental landscaping. The surrounding area is developed and comprised primarily of industrial and commercialuses. The project site and surroundingarea do not serve as a native resident or migratorywildlife corridor or wildlife nurserysite, asthe areais completelydevelopedandthere are no openspaceareasor corridorswithin or adjacentto the projectsite.

While the project site is not a wildlife corridor, it hasthe potential to supportnestingmigratory birds that are protected by the MBTA and CFGC. Therefore, potential impactscould occur if vegetationclearingis undertakenduring the breedingseason. TheProjectwould be requiredto comply with SCBIO-1, which outlinesMBTAand CFGCrequirementsincludingpre-construction nestingbird surveysif avoidanceduring the nestingseasonis not feasible. If active nests are identified, suitablebufferswould be establishedand the buffer areaswould be avoideduntil the nestsare no longer occupied, and the juvenilebirds can surviveindependentlyfrom the nests.

Therefore, followingcompliancewith SCBIO-1, the proposedProject’spotentialimpactsto nesting migratorybirdswouldbelessthan significantandnomitigationisrequired. e) Conflict with any local policiesor ordinancesprotecting biological resources, suchas a tree preservationpolicyor ordinance?
LessThanSignificantImpact. FMCChapter9.06, CommunityForestry, addressesthe planning, planting, maintenance, andremovalof all treesandother landscapematerialin anystreetor other publicarea; overanylandscapematerialin anystreetmedian, parkwaystrip or other landscaped portion of a publicright-of-way; over treesand other landscapematerialin other public spaces underthe jurisdictionof the Citysuchasparks, trails andpublicbuildings; and overcertaintrees on privateproperty. It alsoallowsfor the designationandprotectionof LandmarkTrees.

The Project would involve the removal of existing trees on the property, including along the frontageof the project site; no Citytreeswould be removedand no LandmarkTreesare located onthesite. TheProjectwouldprovidenewtrees, shrubs, andgroundcoverwithin the projectsite.

Theproposedtrees and landscapingwould be in accordancewith the City’s requirements. The Projectwould be requiredto complywith SCBIO-2, which would requireapprovalof a plot plan prior to the issuanceof abuildingpermit, incompliancewith FMCSection9.06.090, PlantingTrees.

Implementationof this standardconditionwouldensureimpactsremainlessthansignificant. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ConservationPlan, Natural Community ConservationPlan, or other approvedlocal, regional, or Statehabitat conservationplan? No Impact. The project site is not located within the boundaries of an adopted Habitat ConservationPlan, NaturalCommunityConservationPlan, or other approvedlocal, regional, or Statehabitat conservationplan. Therefore, the Projectwould not conflictwith anyof theseplans andno impactwouldoccur.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page57
StandardConditionsandRequirements
SCBIO-1 Nesting Migratory Birds. To ensure compliancewith the Migratory Bird Treaty Act MBTA) andCaliforniaFishandGameCode (CFGC) Sections3503, 3503.5, and3513and to avoid potential impactsto nestingbirds, vegetationclearing, and ground-disturbing activitiesshallbe conductedoutsideof the bird nestingseason (generallyJanuary15 to August31 for raptorsandFebruary15 to August31 for other bird species). If avoidance of the nestingseasonisnot feasible, then a qualifiedbiologistshallconducta nestingbird surveywithin sevendaysprior to anydisturbanceof the site, includingbut not limited to vegetationclearing, disking, demolition activities, and grading. If the qualifiedbiologist determinesthat no activebird or raptor nestsoccur, the activitiesshallbe allowedto proceedwithout anyfurther requirements.

If activenestsof anyspeciesprotectedby the MBTAor CFGCareidentified, the biologist shallestablishsuitabledisturbancelimit buffersaroundthe nestsmarkedusingflagging or staking. Thedisturbancelimit buffer sizeshalldependon the site conditions, level of activity within the buffer, and speciesobserved. Thedisturbancelimit buffer zonesshall beavoideduntil the nestsareno longeroccupied. Anyactivenestsshallbemonitoredby aqualifiedbiologistduringactiveconstruction, at afrequencydeterminedusingtheir best professionaljudgment, but not lessthan twice per week. If potential affectsto nesting birds are observed, avoidance and minimization measuresmay be adjusted, and constructionactivitiesstoppedor redirectedby the qualifiedbiologist usingtheir best professionaljudgementto avoidtakeof nestingbirds. Oncea nestisno longeroccupied andthe juvenilebirdscansurviveindependentlyfrom the nest, the project canproceed without further regardto the nestsite.

SCBIO-2 TreePlanting. Alltreeplantings, removals, or alterationsassociatedwith the projectshall beconductedin accordancewith the requirementssetforth in the FullertonCommunity Forestry Ordinance (Fullerton Municipal Code, Chapter 9.06 et seq.). Specifically, in compliancewith Section9.06.090, PlantingTrees, prior to the issuanceof a building permit, theApplicant/Developershallsubmita PlotPlanof the proposeddevelopmentso the Director of DevelopmentServicescan determine the tree requirementsfor site development. Theplot planshall:

1. Clearlyshowall existingtrees, notinglocation, species, size, andcondition;

2. Notewhetherexistingtreeswill beretained, removed, or relocated;

3. Showproposedutilities, driveways, sidewalksandtreeplantinglocations, andthesize andspeciesof proposedstreettrees; and

4. Conformwith groundandaerialsetbackspecifications, asdefinedin the Community ForestManagementPlan.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page58

4.5 CULTURALRESOURCES

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

5. CULTURALRESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Causea substantialadversechangein the significanceof ahistoricalresourcepursuantto Section15064.5?
X
b) Causea substantialadversechangein the significanceof anarchaeologicalresourcepursuantto Section15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outsideof dedicatedcemeteries?
X
A CulturalResourcesInventoryandEvaluationReporthasbeenpreparedfor the proposedProjectandis includedin AppendixB: CulturalResourcesMemorandumin this Initial Studyandsummarizedbelow. a) Causea substantial adversechangein the significanceof a historical resourcepursuant to in Section15064.5?
No Impact. StateCEQAGuidelinesSection15064.5 defines “historicresources” asresourceslisted in the CaliforniaRegisterof HistoricalResourcesor determinedto be eligibleby the California HistoricalResourcesCommissionfor listingin theCaliforniaRegisterof HistoricResources.28 CEQA allowslocal historicresourceguidelinesto serveasthe CaliforniaRegisterof HistoricResources criteria if enactedby locallegislationto actasthe equivalentof the Statecriteria. Theprojectsite is currently developed with an existing five-building multi-tenant businesspark that was constructedin 1983. Reviewof historicalaerialimagerydatingbackto 1952showsthat theproject site was plantedagriculturalland. By 1980, largewarehouseswere constructedadjacentto the project site to the east, west, and south. By1987, the project site wasdevelopedinto its current configurationwith five buildingsanda parkingarea.

A cultural resourcesrecordssearchwas conductedon July22, 2025through the SouthCentral CoastalInformationCenter (SCCIC) for the projectsiteanda0.5-milebuffer. Resultsindicatedthat no cultural resourceshavebeenpreviouslyrecordedon and that no cultural studieshavebeen conductedat the project site (Appendix B). Resultsnoted that 17 cultural studieshave been conductedwithin the0.5-milebufferthat resultedin the recordationof oneculturalresource. The resource, identifiedasP-19-18604/P-30-176663, islocatedapproximately0.4 mileto the north of theprojectsiteandisnotedastheBurlingtonNorthernSantaFe (BNSF, formerlyAtchison, Topeka, andSantaFe) Railway, originallyconstructedin 1888.

In addition, aspartof theCulturalMemorandumpreparedfor the Project, areviewof thefollowing cultural resource databaseswere conducted: National Registerof Historic Places, California Registerof Historic Places, National Historic Landmarks, and the Built EnvironmentResources 28 CaliforniaPublicResourcesCodeSection5020.1(k), Section5024.1(g).

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page59
Directory. A review of resourcedatabasesand repositoriesdid not result in the identificationof anypresentculturalresourcesin the projectsite.

Additionally, TheFullertonPlanEIRdoesnot identify anyhistoricresourcesstructureslocatedon the project site, nor isthe project site locatedwithin a historicdistrict in the City.29 Therefore, no known historicalresourcespursuantto Section15064.5 were identified on the project site, and the proposedProjectwould not causea changein the significanceof a historicalresource. No impactwouldoccurandno mitigationisrequired.
b) Causea substantialadversechangein the significanceof anarchaeologicalresourcepursuantto Section15064.5?
LessThanSignificantImpactwithMitigationIncorporated. Asstatedabove, resultsof the records searchindicate that 17 cultural studies have been conductedwithin the 0.5-mile buffer that resultedin the recordationof oneculturalresource. Theoneresource, identifiedasP-19-18604/P- 30-176663, is locatedapproximately0.4 mile to the north of the project site andis noted asthe BurlingtonNorthernSantaFe (BNSF, formerly Atchison, Topeka, and SantaFe) Railway, originally constructedin 1888. No resourceswere documentedwithin or adjacentto the project site. A requestwassubmittedto the NativeAmericanHeritageCommission (NAHC) to reviewthe Sacred LandsFile (SLF) databasefor any sacredlandscapeor Tribalresourceswithin or near the project site. A negativeresponsewasreceivedon September5, 2024, which indicatedthat no recorded SLFswereon file within or nearthe projectsite.

Geologicmapsindicatethe project site is underlaidby youngalluvialfan deposits (Qyf) from the Holoceneand late Pleistoceneperiods. Thesedepositsare known to havea higher potential to containarcheologicalresources. TheCulturalMemorandumpreparedfor the Projectconcluded that due to the presenceof Holocene-age subsurfacesedimentsand the proximity to available freshwatersourcesin the vicinity, the sensitivityof the project site for containingintact buried prehistoricarchaeologicalresourceswouldbeconsideredmoderateto high. However, dueto the absenceof knownprehistoricarchaeologicalsitesin theimmediateareaandthe prior construction and development of the existing businesspark, the potential to encounter intact buried archaeologicalresourceson the siteisconsideredlow (AppendixB).

Assuch, archaeologicalresourcesarenot anticipatedto occur; however, there isthe potentialfor unknownor undiscoveredresourcesto be uncoveredthrough constructionactivities. Therefore, the proposedProject would be subject to MM CUL-1, which requires that in the event of an inadvertentdiscoveryof aculturalresource, earthworkandground-disturbingactivitieswouldhalt within 60 feet andthe Projectarchaeologistwouldcoordinatewith the CityandconsultingTribes to ensureappropriateidentificationand evaluationof the artifact and resource. If resourcesare potentiallysignificant, the archaeologistwould preparea mitigation plan for approvalby the City and consultingtribe. Therefore, with implementationof MM CUL-1, the proposedProjectwould not causea substantialadversechangein the significanceof anarchaeologicalresourcepursuant to CEQAGuidelinesSection15064.5; impactswouldbelessthansignificantimpactwith mitigation incorporated.
29 Cityof Fullerton. 2012. TheFullertonPlanFinalProgramEIR – Section5.10CulturalResources. Retrievedfrom:
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/3686/637470826615030000. AccessedSeptember2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page60
c) Disturbany humanremains, includingthoseinterred outsideof dedicatedcemeteries? LessThanSignificantImpactwith MitigationIncorporated. No dedicatedcemeteriesare on or near the project site. Thedisturbanceof most Native Americanhuman remainsis typically in associationwith prehistoricarchaeologicalsites. As discussedpreviously, the project site is not nearanidentifiedarchaeologicalresource. Giventheextentof on-sitedisturbancesthe projectsite has a low potential for intact archaeologicalresources. However, as noted above, due to the presenceof Holocene-agesubsurfacesedimentsandproximityto water, there islow potentialfor the Project’s ground-disturbing activities to encounter human remains. Notwithstanding, if previously unknown human remains are discoveredduring the Project’s ground-disturbing activities, asubstantialadversechangein thesignificanceof sucharesourcecouldoccur. If human remainsare found, implementationof MM TCR-2 would be required, which detailscompliance with CaliforniaStateHealthand SafetyCodeSection7050.5 and PublicResourcesCodeSection 5097.98 for inadvertent discoveryof human remains. Therefore, with implementationof MM TCR-2, the proposedProject would not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of a dedicatedcemetery. A less than significantimpact would occur with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measures
MM CUL-1 In the eventthat archaeologicalresourcesare inadvertentlyunearthedor encountered duringdemolition, excavation, and/or gradingactivities, allworkwithin 60feetof thefind shall cease and an archaeologist that meets Secretary of Interior professional qualificationsin archaeologyand the consultingTribes, if any, shallbe contacted. The archaeologistshallrecordandevaluatethe resourcefor potential significance. Thelead agencyshallconfer with the consultingTribes, if any, regardingthe significanceof the resourceand its potential as a Tribal CulturalResource (TCR) under CEQA. Shouldthe archaeologistand/or consulting Tribes have concerns that the find is potentially significant, the archaeologistshallpreparea mitigation plan for reviewandapprovalby the leadagencyandanyconsultingTribes. If avoidanceof the resource(s) isnot feasible, salvageoperationrequirementspursuantto StateCEQAGuidelinesSection15064.5 shall befollowed.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page61

4.6 ENERGY

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

6. ENERGY. Would the project:
a) Resultin potentiallysignificantenvironmentalimpactdue to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessaryconsumptionof
energy resources, during project construction or
operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for
renewableenergyor energyefficiency?
X
Energycalculationsandresultsareincludedin AppendixC: EnergyCalculationsandsummarizedbelow.

Background
Energyconsumptionisanalyzeddueto the potentialdirectandindirectenvironmentalimpactsassociated with the Project. Suchimpactsincludethedepletionof non-renewableresourcesandpollutantemissions duringshort-term constructionandlong-term operationalphases.

Electricity. Over the past 15 years, electricity generation in California has undergonea transition.

Historically, Californiahasrelied heavilyon oil- and gas-fired plants to generateelectricity. Spurredby regulatory measuresand tax incentives, California’s electrical system has become more reliant on renewable energy sources, including cogeneration, wind energy, solar energy, geothermal energy, biomassconversion, transformationplants, andsmallhydroelectricplants. Unlikepetroleumproduction, electricitygenerationisnot usuallytied to the locationof the fuel sourceandcanbedeliveredovergreat distancesvia the electricalgrid.

Energycapacity, or electricalpower, isgenerallymeasuredin watts (W) while energyuseismeasuredin watt-hours (Wh). Forexample, if a light bulb hasa capacityratingof 100W, the energyrequiredto keep the bulb on for onehour wouldbe100Wh. If ten 100W bulbswereon for onehour, the energyrequired wouldbe1,000Wh or onekilowatt-hour (kWh). Ona utility scale, agenerator’scapacityistypicallyrated in megawatts (MW), whichisonemillion watts, while energyuseismeasuredin megawatt-hours (MWh) or gigawatt-hours (GWh), whichisonebillion watt-hours.

SouthernCaliforniaEdison (SCE) isthe City’selectricityproviderandprovideselectricityto approximately 15 million people, 180 incorporated cities, 15 counties, 5,000 large businesses, and 280,000 small businessesthroughout its 50,000-square-mile servicearea.30 SCEproducesand purchasestheir energy from a mix of conventionaland renewablegeneratingsources. Table 15: EnergyResourcesUsedto GenerateElectricityfor SouthCaliforniaEdisonidentifiesthe SCE2023electricpowermix comparedto the Statewide2023powermix.
30 SouthCaliforniaEdison. (N.D.). Bythe Numbers: Who We Serve. Retrievedfrom: https:// www.sce.com/about-us/who-we-are. Accessed September8, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page62
Table15: EnergyResourcesUsedto GenerateElectricityfor SouthCaliforniaEdison EnergyResources 2023SCEPowerMix 2023CAPowerMix
EligibleRenewable1 37.6% 36.9%
BiomassandBiowaste 0.1% 2.1%
Geothermal 5.2% 4.8%
EligibleHydroelectric 0.7% 1.8%
Solar 19.8% 17.0%
Wind 11.7% 11.2%
Coal 0.0% 1.8%
LargeHydroelectric 4.5% 11.7%
NaturalGas 20.0% 36.6%
Nuclear 9.1% 9.3%
Other 0.1% 0.1%
UnspecifiedSourcesof Power2 28.8% 3.7%
Total 100.0% 100.0%
1 The eligiblerenewablepercentageabovedoesnot reflect the RenewablePortfolio Standardcompliance, which is determined usinga different methodology.
2 Electricitythat hasbeenpurchasedthroughopenmarkettransactionsandarenot traceableto specificgenerationsources.

Source: SouthCaliforniaEdison. (N.D.). 2023PowerContentLabel, SouthernCaliforniaEdisonCompany. https:// www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/7362. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

Accordingto the CaliforniaEnergyCommission (CEC), in 2024, the total electricity demandfor the SCE service area was approximately282,783 GWh, while electricity use attributable to the County was approximately19,225GWh.31 Theresidential, non-residential, andtotal electricitydemandbetween2014 and 2024in the Countyis summarizedin Table16: AnnualOrangeCountyElectricityConsumption. In 2014, residentialusescomprised35percentof theCounty’selectricitydemand, whilenon-residentialuses comprised65 percent. By 2024, thesepercentageschangedto 37 percentfor residentialusesand 41 percentfor non-residentialuses. Althoughthe total electricitydemandhasfluctuatedfrom yearto year, overall, between2014and2024, the County’stotal electricitydemanddecreasedbyapproximatelyseven percent.
31 CaliforniaEnergyCommission. (2025). ElectricityConsumption. Retrievedfrom: https:// www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy- almanac/california-electricity-data/california-energy-consumption-dashboards-0. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page63
Table16: AnnualOrangeCountyElectricityConsumption
Year
Million Kilowatt-Hour (GWh)
ResidentialElectricity
Consumption
Non-residentialElectricity
Consumption
Total Electricity
Consumption
2024 7,136.36 12,088.79 19,225.15
2023 6,863.69 11,989.58 18,853.26
2022 7,248.21 12,324.02 19,572.24
2021 7,079.36 11,649.68 18,729.04
2020 7,499.77 11,663.68 19,163.45
2019 6,763.44 12,641.46 19,404.90
2018 6,778.06 13,154.40 19,932.46
2017 6,760.51 13,318.86 20,079.37
2016 6,672.07 13,512.77 20,184.84
2015 6,892.71 13,840.86 20,733.57
2014 6,987.88 13,622.43 20,610.31
Source: CaliforniaEnergyCommission. (2025). ElectricityConsumption. https:// www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california- electricity-data/california-energy-consumption-dashboards-0. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

Transportation. Of California’s total energy usage, the breakdown by sector is 44.5 percent transportation, 21.4 percent industrial, 17.1 percent residential, and 17.0 percent commercial.32 Transportationenergydemandin Californiaislargelyrelatedto vehiculartraffic (e.g., passengervehicles, light duty trucks, semi-trucks, etc.), with most transportation-related energydemandcurrentlymet by gasolineanddieselfuel. Gasolineanddieselfuel issuppliedto Cityresidentsand non-residentsby widely distributedservicestationsboth insideandaroundtheCity. Table17: AnnualOrangeCountyAutomotive Fuel Consumptionsummarizesthe gasolineand dieselfuel demand between 2014 and 2024 in the County. Asshownin thetable, between2014and2024, the County’sgasolineconsumptionhasincreased by approximately0.003percentanddieselconsumptionhasincreasedby approximately18percent.

Table17: AnnualOrangeCountyAutomotive FuelConsumption
Year Million Gallons
GasolineConsumption DieselConsumption
2024 1,142.03 135.73
2023 1,164.40 134.66
2022 1,181.10 133.11
2021 1,191.38 131.23
2020 1,053.93 126.41
2019 1,214.39 126.23
2018 1,192.66 125.69
2017 1,200.68 128.63
2016 1,198.45 125.02
2015 1,165.32 117.23
2014 1,138.33 114.86
Source: CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard. (2022). EMFAC2021, EmissionsInventory. https:// arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions- inventory/cd60f29daaedd924a75a9316202d7f56a9b573e5. AccessedSeptember8, 2025. 32 UnitedStatesEnergyInformationAdministration. (2025). CaliforniaStateProfileandEnergyEstimates, CaliforniaEnergyConsumptionby End-UseSector. Retrievedfrom: https:// www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page64
Regulations
EnergyandIndependenceSecurityAct of 2007
The EnergyIndependenceand SecurityAct (EISA; PublicLaw110-140) was signedinto law by former PresidentGeorgeW. Bushon December19, 2007. Thepurposeof the EISAis to achieveenergysecurity in the United States by increasing renewable fuel production, improving energy efficiency and performance, protectingconsumers, improvingvehiclefuel economy, and promotingresearchon GHG captureand storage. Underthe EISA, the RenewableFuelStandard (RFS) program (RFS2) wasexpanded in severalkeyways:

Expandedthe RFSprogramto includediesel, in additionto gasoline; Increasedthe volumeof renewablefuel requiredto beblendedinto transportationfuel; Establishednew categoriesof renewablefuel and set separatevolumerequirementsfor each; and
Requiredthe U.S. EPAto apply lifecycleGHGperformancethresholdstandardsto ensurethat eachcategoryof renewablefuel emitsfewerGHGsthan the petroleumfuel it replaces.

RFS2laysthefoundationfor achievingsignificantreductionsof GHGemissionsfrom theuseof renewable fuels, reducingimported petroleum, and encouragingthe developmentand expansionof our nation’s renewablefuelssector.

TheEISAalsoincludesa varietyof newstandardsfor lightingandfor residentialandcommercialappliance equipment. Theequipmentincludesresidentialrefrigerators, freezers, refrigerator-freezers, metal halide lamps, andcommercialwalk-in coolersandfreezers.

RenewablePortfolio Standards33
In 2002, CaliforniaestablisheditsRenewablePortfolioStandard (RPS) programwith thegoalof increasing the annualpercentageof renewableenergyin the State’selectricitymix by the equivalentof at leastone percentof sales, with anaggregatetotal of 20percentby2017. TheCaliforniaPublicUtilitiesCommission CPUC) subsequentlyacceleratedthat goal to 2010 for retail sellersof electricity (PublicUtilities Code 399.15(b)(1)). Then-GovernorSchwarzeneggersignedExecutiveOrder S-14-08 in 2008, increasingthe targetto 33percentrenewableenergyby2020. In September2009, GovernorSchwarzeneggercontinued California’s commitment to the RPSby signingExecutiveOrder S-21-09, which directsunder its AB32 authorityto enactregulationsto helpthe StatemeetitsRPSgoalof 33percentrenewableenergyby2020.

In September2010, CARBadopteditsRenewableElectricityStandardregulations, whichrequireall of the State’s load-servingentities to meet this target. In October 2015, then-GovernorBrown signedinto legislationSenateBill (SB) 350, which requiresretail sellersand publiclyowned utilities to procure 50 percent of their electricity from eligiblerenewableenergyresourcesby 2030. Signedin 2018, SB100 revisedthe goalof the programto achievethe 50 percentrenewableresourcestarget by December31, 2026, andto achievea60percenttarget by December31, 2030.

SB100establisheda further goalto haveanelectricgrid that isentirelypoweredbycleanenergyby2045.

UnderSB100, theStatecannotincreasecarbonemissionselsewherein thewesterngridor allowresource shufflingto achievethe 100percentcarbon-freeelectricitytarget. Approvedin 2022, SB1020revisedthe 33 CaliforniaPublicUtilitiesCommission. (2025). RenewablePortfolioStandard (RPS) Program. Retrievedfrom: https:// www.cpuc.ca.gov/rps/.

AccessedSeptember2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page65
Statepolicy to provide that eligiblerenewableenergyresourcesand zero-carbonresourcessupply90 percentof all retail salesof electricityto Californiaend-usecustomersbyDecember31, 2035; 95percent of all retail salesof electricityto Californiaend-usecustomersby December31, 2040; 100percentof all retail salesof electricity to Californiaend-use customersby December31, 2045; and, 100 percent of electricityprocuredto serveall Stateagenciesby December31, 2035.

CaliforniaBuildingEnergyEfficiencyStandards: Title 24, Part 6 TheCaliforniaEnergyCode (Title24, Part6) wascreatedaspart of theCaliforniaBuildingStandardsCode Title 24 of the CCR) by the CaliforniaBuildingStandardsCommissionin 1978 to establishstatewide buildingenergyefficiencystandardsto reduceCalifornia’senergyuse. In general, Title24 EnergyCodeis designedto reducewasteful and unnecessaryenergyconsumptionin newly constructedand existing buildings. TheCECupdatesthe Title24EnergyCodeeverythreeyearsto allowconsiderationandpossible incorporationof newenergyefficiencytechnologiesandmethods. TheTitle24EnergyCodeconservenon- renewableresources, suchasnaturalgas, andensurerenewableresourcesareextendedasfar aspossible to reducethe needfor constructingnew powerplants.

In December2024, the 2025 Title 24 EnergyCodewas approvedby the CaliforniaBuildingStandards Commissionfor inclusioninto the CaliforniaBuildingStandardsCode. The 2025 Title 24 EnergyCode encouragesefficient electric heat pumps, establisheselectric-ready requirements for new homes, expandssolarphotovoltaicandbattery storagestandards, strengthensventilationstandards, andmore.

Buildingswhosepermit applicationsare appliedfor on or after January1, 2026, must complywith the 2025Title24EnergyCode.

TheTitle 24 EnergyCodeincludeprovisionsapplicableto all buildings, residentialand non-residential, whichdescriberequirementsfor documentationandcertificatesthat the buildingmeetsthe standards.

Theseprovisionsincludemandatory requirementsfor efficiencyand designof the following types of systems, equipment, and appliances: air conditioningsystems; heat pumps; water chillers; gas- and oil- fired boilers; coolingequipment; water heatersandequipment; poolandspaheatersandequipment; gas- fired equipment includingfurnacesand stoves/ovens; windows and exterior doors; joints and other building structure openings (envelope); insulation and cool roofs; lighting control devices; and solar photovoltaicsystems.

Thestandardsincludeadditionalmandatoryrequirementsfor spaceconditioning (coolingand heating), water heating, indoor and outdoor lighting systems, as well as equipmentin non-residential, high-rise residential, andhotel or motel buildings. Mandatoryrequirementsfor low-riseresidentialbuildingscover indoor andoutdoor lighting, fireplaces, spacecoolingandheatingequipment (includingductsandfans), and insulationof the structure, foundation, and water piping. Thestandardsrequiresolarphotovoltaic systemsfor newhomes. In additionto themandatoryrequirements, thestandardscallfor further energy efficiencythat can be provided through a choicebetween performanceand prescriptivecompliance approaches. Separatesectionsapplyto low-riseresidentialand to non-residential, high-riseresidential, andhotel or motel buildings. In buildingsdesignedfor mixeduse (e.g., commercialandresidential), each sectionmustmeetthe standardsapplicableto that type of occupancy.

CaliforniaGreenBuildingStandards
The CaliforniaGreenBuilding StandardsCode (CCR, Title 24, Part 11), commonlyreferred to as the CALGreenCode, is a statewidemandatoryconstructioncodethat was developedand adoptedby the CaliforniaBuildingStandardsCommissionand the CaliforniaDepartmentof Housingand Community AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page66
Development. CALGreenstandardsrequire new residentialand commercialbuildingsto comply with mandatorymeasuresunderfivetopicalareas: planninganddesign; energyefficiency; waterefficiencyand conservation; material conservationand resourceefficiency; and environmentalquality. CALGreenalso providesvoluntary tiers and measuresthat local governmentsmay adopt which encourageor require additionalmeasuresin the five greenbuildingtopics. Themostrecentupdateto the CALGreenCodewas adoptedin December2024 (2025CALGreenCode) andcontinuesto improveuponthe existingstandards for new constructionof, and additions and alterations to, residential and non-residential buildings.

Buildingswhosepermit applicationsare appliedfor on or after January1, 2026, must complywith the 2025CALGreenCode.

CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoardScopingPlan
AdoptedDecember15, 2022, CARB’s 2022ScopingPlanfor AchievingCarbonNeutrality (2022Scoping Plan) setsa path to achievetargetsfor carbonneutralityandreduceanthropogenicGHGemissionsby85 percentbelow 1990levelsby 2045in accordancewith AB1279. Toachievethe targetsof AB1279, the 2022ScopingPlanrelieson existingandemergingfossilfuel alternativesandcleantechnologies, aswell as carbon capture and storage. Specifically, the 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on zero-emission transportation; phasingout useof fossilgasusefor heatinghomesandbuildings; reducingchemicaland refrigerantswith high globalwarmingpotential (GWP); providingcommunitieswith sustainableoptions for walking, biking, andpublictransit; displacementof fossil-fuel fired electricalgenerationthrough use of renewableenergyalternatives (e.g., solararraysand wind turbines); andscalingup new optionssuch asgreenhydrogen.

Thekeyelementsof the 2022CARBScopingPlanfocuson transportation. Specifically, the 2022Scoping Planaims to rapidly move towards ZEtransportation (i.e., electrifyingcars, buses, trains, and trucks), which constitutes California’s single largest source of GHGs. The regulations that impact the transportationsectorare adoptedand enforcedby CARBon vehiclemanufacturersand are outsidethe jurisdictionand control of local governments. The2022ScopingPlanacceleratesdevelopmentof new regulationsaswell asamendmentsto strengthenregulationsandprogramsalreadyin place.

TheFullertonPlan
The FullertonPlanestablishesgoalsand policiesaimed at sustainingand conservingenergyand fuel consumptionwithin the City. Thefollowingpoliciesareapplicableto the proposedProject:

P1.12 Energy- and Resource-EfficientDesignSupportprojects, programs, policiesand regulations to encourageenergyand resourceefficient practicesin site and building designfor private andpublicprojects.

P6.12 BicycleParkingandFacilitiesSupportprojects, programs, policies, andregulationsto provide convenientbicycleparkingandother bicyclefacilitiesin existingand potential high demand locationswithin the City, suchas educationalinstitutions, parks, businessdistricts, transit stops, retail, commercialandemploymentcenters.

P22.2 GHGEmissionsfrom ElectricalGenerationSupportregionalandsubregionaleffortsto reduce greenhousegasemissionsassociatedwith electricalgenerationthroughenergyconservation strategiesandalternative/renewableenergyprograms.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page67
P22.9 DevelopmentSupportprojectswhich voluntarily desireto implement site and/or building design features exceedingminimum requirements to reduce project greenhousegas emissions.

Methodology
This section analyzesenergy use from electricity and transportation fuel associatedwith Project constructionand operations. It shouldbe noted that the project would not connectto or utilize natural gas. Theelectricityassociatedwith Projectwater usagewasquantifiedusingthe water usageandwater energyintensityfactorsfrom theCalEEModUserGuide, AppendixG. TheProjectbuildingelectricityusage wasbasedonCalEEMod, whichquantifiesenergyusefor occupanciesusingdefaultrates. Thesolarpanel energy reduction was quantified using the hourly capacity, assumedto be 34.1 kW, and the annual averagesun exposure; refer to Appendix A. Transportationfuel associatedwith Projectconstruction worker, vendor, andhaultruck trips werequantifiedusingCalEEModemissionoutputsandconversation ratiosfrom theClimateRegistry. Transportationfuelassociatedwith Projectoperationalvehicletrips was quantifiedusingCalEEModoutputsandCARBEMFAC2021for typicaldailyfuel usagein the County. The energyassociatedwith Projectconstructionandoperationswascomparedto the County’sannualenergy consumption.

ImpactAnalysis
a) Resultin potentially significantenvironmentalimpactdueto wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumptionof energyresources, during project constructionor operation? Less Than Significant Impact: Construction Energy. Project construction would consist of demolition, sitepreparation, grading, infrastructureimprovements, buildingconstruction, paving, and architectural coating applications.34 Project construction activities would occur over approximately13months, anticipatedto beginasearlyasthe third quarterof 2027andendingas early asthe third quarter of 2028. Projectconstructionwould includeelectricity useassociated with water utilizedfor dust control, dieselfuel from on-road haulingtrips, vendortrips, and off- road constructiondieselequipment, aswell asgasolinefuel from on-roadworkercommutetrips.

Becauseconstructionactivities typically do not require natural gas, it is not included in the followingdiscussion. Energyusageassociatedwith Projectconstructionissummarizedin Table18:

ProjectConstructionEnergyConsumption.
34 Althoughnot proposed, the modeledProjectconstructionequipmentandwater usageconservativelyaccountfor the full-width grindand overlayimprovementsalongCypressWay.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page68
Table18: ProjectConstructionEnergyConsumption
Source
ProjectConstruction
Energy
OrangeCountyAnnual
Energy1, 2
PercentageIncrease
Countywide
Electricity (GWh)
Water 0.0005 19,225 0.000003%
Diesel (Gallons)
Off-Site 36,902 136,186,585 0.03%
On-Site 13,039 136,186,585 0.01%
Total 49,941 136,186,585 0.04%
Gasoline (Gallons)
Off-Site 7,362 1,068,836,093 0.0007%
1 TheCounty’smostrecenttotal electricitydatain 2024. Source: CaliforniaEnergyCommission. (2025).:
https:// www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/california-energy-consumption-dashboards-

0. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.
2 TheCounty’santicipatedfuelusagein 2027 (the first constructionyear). Source: CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard. (2022).

EMFAC2021, EmissionsInventory. Retrievedfrom: https:// arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions- inventory/cd60f29daaedd924a75a9316202d7f56a9b573e5. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

GWh = gigawatt-hours
Referto AppendixCfor the energycalculations.

Theenergysourcesare describedin further detailbelow.

Water Electricity. Electricityusageassociatedwith water usagefor constructiondustcontrol is calculatedbasedon the total gallonsof water usedduringsoildisturbingactivitiesandthe energyintensity. Thetotal gallonsof water usediscalculatedbasedon theacreagedisturbed duringgradingandsite preparationandthe dailywateringrate per acredisturbed. Thetotal acresdisturbedarecalculatedusingthe methodologydescribedin Chapter4.2 of AppendixC of the CalEEModUser’sGuide. Thewater applicationrate of 3,020gallonsper acreper dayis from the Air andWasteManagementAssociation’sAir PollutionEngineeringManual (1992).

The energy intensity value is based on the CalEEModdefault supply, distribution, and treatment energyintensityper gallonof water for the SouthCoastHydrologicRegion.

Off-site Diesel Construction Trips. The diesel fuel associatedwith on-road construction mobiletrips iscalculatedbasedonVMTfrom vendorandhaulingvehicletrips, the CalEEMod defaultdieselfleet percentage, andvehiclefuel efficiencyin milesper gallon (MPG). VMTfor the entire constructionperiod is calculatedbasedon the number of trips multiplied by the trip lengthsfor eachphaseshownin CalEEMod. Constructionfuel wascalculatedbasedon CalEEModemissionsoutputsandconversionratiosfrom the ClimateRegistry.

On-Site Diesel ConstructionEquipment. Similarly, the constructiondieselfuel associated with the off-roadconstructionequipmentiscalculatedbasedonCalEEModemissionsoutputs andconversionratiosfrom the ClimateRegistry.

Off-SiteGasolineConstructionTrips. Thegasolinefuel associatedwith on-roadconstruction mobile trips is calculatedbasedon VMT from worker vehicletrips, the CalEEModdefault gasolinefleet percentage, andvehiclefuel efficiencyin.

Asshownin Table18, the total electricitydemandassociatedwith Projectconstructionwould be approximately0.0005GWhandwouldrepresentlessthan 0.01 percentof the electricityusagein the Countyin 2024. SCE’stotal energysalesareprojectedto be99,361GWhof electricityin 2027 AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page69
thefirst yearof Projectconstruction).35TheProjectconstructionelectricityconsumptionof 0.0005 GWhwould representlessthan 0.01 percentof SCE’s projectedsales. Therefore, it is anticipated that SCE’s existingand plannedelectricitycapacityandelectricitysupplieswould be sufficientto servethe Project’stemporaryconstructionelectricitydemand.

As indicatedin Table18, Projectconstructionis anticipatedto consumeapproximately49,941 gallonsof dieseland approximately7,362gallonsof gasoline. TheCounty’s annualgasolinefuel usein 2027is anticipatedto be approximately136,186,585gallonsof dieseland 1,068,836,093 gallonsof gasoline.36 Assuch, the Projectconstructiondieselusewould representapproximately

0.04 percentof the annualdieselusedin the Countyand the Projectconstructiongasolineuse would representlessthan 0.01 percentof the annualgasolineusedin the County. Basedon the total Project’s relativelylow constructionfuel useproportionalto annualCountyuse, the Project would not substantiallyaffect existingenergyfuel suppliesor resources. Additionally, the useof constructionfuel wouldbetemporaryandwouldceaseoncethe Projectisfully developed.

New capacity or additional sourcesof construction fuel are not anticipated to be required.

Transportationfuels (gasolineand diesel) are producedfrom crudeoil, whichcanbe domesticor importedfrom variousregionsaroundthe world. Basedoncurrentprovenreserves, currentcrude oil productionwould be sufficientto meet demandthrough 2050.37 Assuch, it is expectedthat existing and planned transportation fuel supplieswould be sufficient to serve the Project’s temporaryconstructiondemandandProjectconstructionwouldhaveanominaleffectonthelocal andregionalenergysupplies.

Thereare no unusualcharacteristicsthat would necessitatethe useof constructionequipment that would be lessenergy-efficient than at comparableconstructionsitesin the region or State.

Due to increasingtransportation costsand fuel prices, contractorsand ownershave a strong financial incentive to avoid wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessaryuse of energy during construction. Additionally, the Project would comply with CARBrequirements which limits construction equipment idling to five minutes or less. This requirement indirectly relates to construction energy conservationbecausewhen air pollutant emissionsare reducedthrough monitoringandthe efficientuseof equipmentandmaterials, energyuseisreduced. Furthermore, Projectcompliancewith thelatestU.S. EPAandCARBengineefficiencyemissionsstandardswould minimizeunnecessaryfuel use.

Substantialreduction in energyinputs for constructionmaterialscan be achievedby selecting buildingmaterialscomposedof recycledmaterialsthat requiresubstantiallylessenergyto produce than non-recycledmaterials. Theproject-relatedincrementalincreasein the useof energybound in constructionmaterialssuchasasphalt, steel, concrete, pipes, andmanufacturedor processed materials (e.g., lumberandgas) wouldnot substantiallyincreasedemandfor energycomparedto overall local and regional demand for constructionmaterials. It is reasonableto assumethat productionof buildingmaterialssuchasconcrete, steel, etc., wouldemployall reasonableenergy 35 CaliforniaEnergyCommission. (2023). CEDU2022BaselineForecast- SCE, Form1.1.b: ElectricitySalesbySector. https:// www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/ 2022-integrated-energy-policy-report-update-2.

AccessedSeptember8, 2025.
36 CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard. (2022). EMFAC2021, EmissionsInventory. https:// arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions- inventory/cd60f29daaedd924a75a9316202d7f56a9b573e5. AccessedSeptember8, 2025. 37 USEnergyInformationAdministration. (2025). CaliforniaStateEnergyConsumptionProfile. https:// www.eia.gov/state/print.php?sid=CA.

AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page70
conservationpracticesin the interestof minimizingthe costsof business. Asstatedabove, Project constructionwould not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessaryenergyconsumptionand impactsarelessthan significant.

LessThanSignificantImpact: OperationalEnergy. Theenergyconsumptionassociatedwith Project operations would occur from building energy, water use, and transportation fuel use. The proposed Project would not connect to or utilize natural gas. Project operational energy consumptionis summarizedin Table19: Project OperationalEnergyConsumption. It shouldbe notedthat Table19 conservativelydoesnot take credit for energyconsumptionoccurringunder existingconditions. For example, the Projectwould result in a net reduction of 422 total daily vehicletrips whencomparedto existingconditions; refer to Table1 in AppendixL. Therefore, the Project’s energyconsumptionpresentedin the table is conservativeand would be substantially lower whenaccountingfor existingconditions.

Table19: ProjectOperationalEnergyConsumption
Source
ProjectOperational
Energy
OrangeCountyAnnual
Energy1, 2
PercentageIncrease
Countywide
Electricity (GWh)
Building 0.721 19,225 0.004%
Water 0.171 19,225 0.0009%
Solar - 0.062 19,225 0.0003%
Total 0.830 19,225 0.004%
Diesel (Gallons)
Mobile 99,967 135,357,141 0.07%
Gasoline (Gallons)
Mobile 24,112 1,048,783,959 0.002%
1 TheCounty’smostrecenttotal electricitydatain 2024. Source: CaliforniaEnergyCommission. (2025).:
https:// www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/california-energy-consumption-dashboards-

0. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.
2 TheCounty’santicipatedfuelusagein 2028 (the first operationalyear). Source: CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard. (2022).

EMFAC2021, EmissionsInventory. Retrievedfrom: https:// arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions- inventory/cd60f29daaedd924a75a9316202d7f56a9b573e5. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

GWh = gigawatt-hours
Referto AppendixCfor the energycalculations.

Theenergysourcesare describedin further detailbelow.

BuildingElectricity: Theelectricityusefrom the Projectis basedon CalEEModdefaultsand landuseactivitydata.

Water Electricity: The electricity associatedwith indoor and outdoor Project operational water usageis quantified using the annual water usageand energy intensity factor. The annualwater usageis basedon CalEEModdefaultsand land useactivity data. Theindoor energyintensityvalueisbasedon the CalEEModdefaultsupply, distribution, treatment, and wastewaterenergyintensityper gallonof water for the SouthCoastHydrologicRegion. The outdoor energyintensity value is basedon the CalEEModdefault supply, distribution, and treatment energyintensityper gallonof water for the SouthCoastHydrologicRegion.

SolarPanels: Theelectricity providedby on-site solar panelswas quantified basedon the systemsizeand the yearlyaveragesunexposure. Thesolarpanelsare assumedto havean AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page71
hourlycapacityof 34.1 kW. Theaveragesunexposureisassumedto be1,825hoursper year basedon five dailypeakhoursper day, 365daysperweek; refer to AppendixA.

DieselTruckand GasolinePassengerVehicleTrips: Thegasolineand dieselfuel associated with on-roadvehiculartripsiscalculatedbasedonthefleetmixandtotal VMTfromCalEEMod and averagefuel efficiencyfrom the Departmentof Transportation. Thetotal VMTis based on the dailyProjecttrip generationanddailytrip lengths. Accordingto Table1 in AppendixL, the Projectwould generateapproximately146passengervehiclesand 66 truck vehicles. As addressedin Section4.3, Air Qualityabove, the truck fleet mix and daily trip lengthswere adjusted in CalEEModto better represent warehouse-specificoperations. The passenger vehiclefleet mix isbasedon CalEEModdefaults.

Table19 showsthe Project’s annual operationalelectricaldemandwould total approximately

0.830GWhper year, consideringa reductionof 0.062GWhprovidedby the on-site solarpanels.

SCE’Sforecastedsalesin 2028 (thefirst operationalyear) is100,400GWh. 38 TheproposedProject would representlessthan 0.01 percentof SCE’s projectedsales. SCEwould reviewthe Project’s estimatedelectricityconsumptionto ensurethat the estimatedpowerrequirementwouldbepart of the total load growth forecastfor their serviceareaandaccountedfor in the plannedgrowth of the power system. Basedon thesefactors, it is anticipatedthat SCE’s existingand planned electricity capacityand supply would be sufficient to serve the Project’s electricity demand.

Furthermore, the Projectdesignand operationswould be subjectto compliancewith the latest CALGreenCodeandTitle24Standards.

Asshownin Table19, the Projectisanticipatedto consume101,005gallonsof dieseland34,716 gallonsof gasoline. TheCounty’sannualdieselandgasolinefuel usein 2028isanticipatedto be 135,357,141gallonsand1,048,783,959gallons, respectively. TheProject’soperationaldieseland gasolineusewould representapproximately0.07 percentof dieseluseandapproximately0.003 percent of gasolineuse in the County. Therefore, the proposedProjectwould not result in a substantialdemandfor energythat wouldrequireexpandedsuppliesor the constructionof other infrastructure or expansionof existingfacilities. Transportationfuels (gasolineand diesel) are producedfrom crudeoil, which canbe domesticor imported from variousregionsaround the world. Basedoncurrentprovenreserves, theglobalsupplyof crudeoil, other liquidhydrocarbons, and biofuelsis expectedto be adequateto meet the world’s demandfor liquid fuelsthrough 2050.39
Projectoperationswould not substantiallyaffect existingenergyor fuel suppliesor resources.

Furthermore, the Projectwouldcomplywith applicableenergystandardsandnewcapacitywould not be required. As such, Project operations would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessaryenergyconsumptionandimpactsarelessthan significant. b) Conflictwith or obstructa Stateor localplan for renewableenergyor energyefficiency? LessThanSignificantImpact. Asconcludedabove, the Projectwould not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessaryconsumptionof energyresources. 38 California Energy Commission. (2023). CEDU2022 BaselineForecast – SCE. https:// www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/reports/2022- integrated-energy-policy-report-update/2022-iepr-workshops-notices-and-2. AccessedSeptember11, 2025. 39 USEnergyInformationAdministration. (2025). CaliforniaStateEnergyConsumptionProfile. https:// www.eia.gov/state/print.php?sid=CA.

AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page72
Buildingsadheringto the latest Title 24 Standardsand CALGreenCodewould be more energy efficientthan buildingsdesignedwith the prior code. Projectdesignandoperationswouldcomply with the 2025Title24Standards, 2025CALGreenCode, andapplicableenergyregulations. Assuch, the proposedwarehousewouldbemore energyefficientthan the existingon-siteuses. According to Table1 in AppendixL, Projectimplementationwouldresultin a net reductionof 422total daily trips whencomparedto existingconditions. Therefore, thetransportationfuelconsumptionwould be reducedby Projectimplementation. Althoughthe Cityhasnot adoptedanyspecificplansthat addressenergy efficiency, the City of Fullerton Climate Action Plan (CAP, adopted in 2012) establishesenergy and water conservation strategies to reduce citywide GHG emissions.

Therefore, compliancewith the CAPstrategieswould further result in energyconservationand efficiency. Assuch, the Projectwould not conflict with applicableplansfor renewableenergyor energyefficiency.

The Project would receiveelectricity from SCE, which is subjectto the RPS. TheRPSrequires investor-ownedutilities, electricserviceproviders, andcommunitychoiceaggregatorsto increase total procurementfrom eligiblerenewableenergyresourcesto 33percentby2020and50percent by 2030. As noted above, SB100 revisedthe goal of the program to achievethe 50 percent renewable resourcestarget by December31, 2026, and to achievea 60 percent target by December31, 2030. SB100alsoestablisheda further goalto haveanelectricgrid that is entirely poweredby cleanenergyby 2045. Renewableenergyis generallydefinedasenergythat comes from resourceswhicharenaturallyreplenishedwithin a humantimescale, suchassunlight, wind, tides, waves, andgeothermalheat. TheSCEsatisfiesits renewableenergyportfolio standardsand consistsof approximately37.6 percentof renewableenergysources. 40 TheProjectwould not otherwiseconflict with or obstruct compliancewith plansfor renewable energy. As such, the Project would be designedto meet all applicableState building energy efficiencystandardsaswell asthe City’senergyefficiencystandards. Therefore, the Projectwould not conflict with or obstructa Stateor localplan for renewableenergyor energyefficiencyand impactswouldbelessthan significant.
40 SouthCaliforniaEdison. (N.D.). 2023PowerContentLabel, SouthernCaliforniaEdisonCompany. Retrievedfrom:
https:// www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/7362. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page73

4.7 GEOLOGYANDSOILS

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

7. GEOLOGYANDSOILS. Would the project:
a) Directlyor indirectly causepotential substantialadverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Ruptureof a known earthquakefault, asdelineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo EarthquakeFault
ZoningMap issuedby the StateGeologistfor the
area or basedon other substantialevidenceof a
knownfault? Referto Divisionof MinesandGeology
SpecialPublication42.

X
ii) Strongseismicgroundshaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Resultin substantialsoilerosionor the lossof topsoil? X c) Belocatedon a geologicunit or soil that is unstable, or that would becomeunstableasa result of the project,
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
X
d) Belocatedon expansivesoil, asdefinedin Table18-1-Bof the Uniform BuildingCode (1994), creating substantial
direct or indirectrisksto life or property?
X
e) Havesoilsincapableof adequatelysupportingthe useof
septictanksor alternativewastewaterdisposalsystems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resourceor siteor uniquegeologicfeature?
X
NorCalEngineering, Inc. prepareda GeotechnicalEngineeringInvestigation (GeotechnicalInvestigation) for the proposed Project. The report is included in this Initial Study as Appendix D: Geotechnical EngineeringInvestigationandissummarizedbelow.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page74
a) Directlyor indirectlycausepotential substantialadverseeffects, includingthe risk of loss, injury, ordeathinvolving:
i) Ruptureof a knownearthquakefault, asdelineatedon the mostrecentAlquist-Priolo EarthquakeFaultZoningMapissuedby theStateGeologistfor the areaor basedonother substantialevidenceof a knownfault? Referto Divisionof MinesandGeologySpecial Publication42.

No Impact. Alquist-PrioloEarthquakeFaultZonesare regulatoryzonessurroundingactivefaults locatedwithin Californiathat werecreatedthroughtheAlquist-PrioloEarthquakeFaultZoningAct.

If anactivefault isfound, a structurefor humanoccupancycannotbeplacedoverthe traceof the fault and must be setbackfrom the fault (typically50 feet). Theproject site is not locatedwithin an Alquist-Priolo EarthquakeFaultZoneas designatedby the CaliforniaGeologicalSurvey. The nearestAlquist-Priolofault zoneis approximately5 miles to the northeastof the project site.41 Therefore, the Projectwouldnot directlyor indirectlycausepotential substantialadverseeffects, includingthe riskof loss, injury, or deathdueto directfault rupture. Noimpactwouldoccur. ii) Strongseismicgroundshaking?
LessThanSignificantwith Mitigation Incorporated. TheCity of Fullerton, similarto the rest of California, is locatedwithin a seismicallyactiveregionasa result of beinglocatednearthe active marginbetweenthe North AmericanandPacifictectonicplates. Thelocalandregionalfaultsthat havethe potential to affect the Cityare depictedin TheFullertonPlanFinalProgramEIR, Exhibit

5.7-1, RegionalFaults, anddescribedin Table5.7-1, Descriptionsof RegionalFaults. Thetwo faults that traverseFullerton are the Norwalk Fault and PuenteHills Fault. As previouslynoted, the project site is not within a designatedAlquist-PrioloEarthquakeFaultZone. Thefault nearestto the project site is the ElModenoFault, whichis locatedapproximately1.8milesto the southeast andiscapableof producinga magnitude6.8earthquake.

Dueto the numerousfaultsin the region, rupture of anyof thesefaultsor of anunknownfault in the regioncouldcauseseismicgroundshakingat the projectsite. Theintensityof groundshaking on the project site would dependon the earthquake’s magnitude, distanceto the epicenter, and geologyof the areabetweentheprojectsiteandtheepicenter. Therefore, Projectimplementation could exposepeopleand structuresto potential adverseeffectsinvolvingstrongseismicground shakingif not constructedin alignmentwith the regulatoryframeworkidentifiedbelow.

Statelawsand local ordinancesrequire that, prior to construction, potential seismichazardsbe identified and mitigated, as needed, to protect public health and safety from substantialrisks throughappropriateengineeringpractices. Projectconstructionwouldbe requiredto conformto CBCand CaliforniaHealthand SafetyCodeseismicdesignrequirements (or applicableadopted codeat the time of plan submittalor gradingandbuildingpermit issuancefor construction). The building and safety standardsestablishedby these codes have been developed to address structuralintegrity during a seismicevent. Chapter14.03 – BuildingCodeof the FMCadoptsthe 2022 CaliforniaBuildingCode (CBC), which outlines requirementsand structural standardsfor 41 Department of ConservationCalifornia GeologicalSurvey. (N.D.). California EarthquakeHazardsZone Application. Retrieved from:
https:// maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/. AccessedJuly11, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page75
buildingin the Cityincludingdesignrequirementsto mitigate the effectsof potential earthquake hazards.

TheGeotechnicalInvestigationpreparedfor the Projectevaluatedvariousgeologicand seismic hazards based on site-specific parameters, including a seismicity evaluation, and provides recommendations concerning seismic design parameters, foundations, slabs, and general earthwork and grading, among others (see AppendixD). The Project would comply with SC GEO-2, which would ensure the City would review all Project plans and all other relevant constructionpermitsto verifycompliancewith theGeotechnicalEngineeringInvestigation (NorCal Engineering, Inc., 2023) recommendationsand other applicableCoderequirements. With the implementationof SCGEO-2 and consideringthe Projectwould complywith applicableseismic designrequirements, impactsassociatedwith strongseismicgroundshakingwould be lessthan significant.
iii) Seismic-related groundfailure, includingliquefaction? LessThanSignificantImpact. Liquefactionis a phenomenonwhere earthquake-inducedground vibrationsincreasethe pore pressurein saturated, granularsoilsuntil it is equalto the confining, overburdenpressure. Whenthis occurs, the soilcancompletelyloseits shearstrengthand enter a liquefiedstate. Liquefaction-related effectsincludelossof bearingstrength, amplifiedground oscillations, lateralspreading, andflow failures. Theprojectsiteisnotsituatedin anareaof historic occurrenceof liquefaction, within a CGSLiquefactionZone, or localgeological, geotechnicaland groundwaterconditionsto indicatea potentialfor permanentgrounddisplacement (AppendixD).

Therefore, theProjectwouldnot causepotentialsubstantialadverseeffectsinvolvingliquefaction.

Impactswouldbelessthan significantwith mitigation.
iv) Landslides?
No Impact. Landslidescan occurif ground shakingand/or heavyrainfall disturb areasof steep slopesconsistingof unstablesoils. As concludedin the GeotechnicalInvestigation, due to the relativelyflat topographydescendinggraduallyfrom north to south, the site is not within a zone of possible earthquake-induced landslides. Additionally, the California Geological Survey’s LandslideInventoryreportsthe projectsite isnot within a landslidehazardzone.42 Therefore, the proposedProject would not directly or indirectly causepotential substantialadverseeffects, includingthe risksof lossor death, involvinglandslides, andno impactwouldoccur. b) Resultin substantialsoilerosionor the lossof topsoil? Lessthan SignificantImpact. GeotechnicalInvestigationindicatedthat the projectsiteisrelatively flat andiscomposedof fineto mediumgrained, siltysandwith occasionalgravelat a depthranging from 1 to 1.5 feetbelowgroundsurface (bgs). Anundisturbednaturalsoilclassifiedaslight brown, fine to mediumgrained, silty to slightlysilty sandwasencounteredbeneaththe fill soils. Grading andearthworkactivitiesduringconstructionwouldexposesoilsto potentialshort-term erosionby wind and water. Duringconstruction, the proposedProjectwould be subjectto compliancewith erosionand siltation control measuresand the NationalPollutant DischargeEliminationSystem 42 CaliforniaDepartmentof Conservation. (2024). LandslideInventory (Beta). https:// maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/lsi/app/, AccessedJuly11, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page76
NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater DischargesAssociatedwith Constructionand Land Disturbance Activities ( Order No. 2013-0001-DWQ, and all subsequent amendments) ConstructionGeneralPermit). TheNPDESpermit requiresdevelopmentandimplementationof a StormwaterPollutionPreventionPlan (SWPPP) andmonitoringplan, whichmustincludeerosion- control and sediment-control Best ManagementPractices (BMPs) that would meet or exceed measuresrequiredby the ConstructionGeneralPermitto control potential construction-related pollutants. Erosion-control BMPsare designedto preventerosion, whereassedimentcontrolsare designedto trap sedimentonceit hasbeenmobilized. Followingcompliancewith NPDESandthe Projectwould not result in substantialsoil erosionor the lossof topsoil. Impactsare lessthan significantandno mitigationisrequired.
c) Belocatedon a geologicunit or soil that is unstable, or that would becomeunstableasa result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
LessThanSignificantwith Mitigation Incorporated.

Landslides. Asnoted in Thresholda)iv) above, the project site is not subjectto landslidesdue to locationand topography. In addition, the project site is not locatedin a zoneidentifiedasbeing susceptibleto landslidesbytheCaliforniaGeologicalSurvey’sLandslideInventory. Therefore, given no landslideswould occurdue to project site and arealocationand topography, there would be no impactasa resultof landslidesandno mitigationisrequired.

LateralSpreading. Lateralspreadingisthe finite, horizontalmovementof materialassociatedwith pore pressurebuild-up or liquefaction. Thisprocesscan occur in a shallowunderlyingdeposit duringanearthquakein areassusceptibleto liquefaction. Tooccur, lateralspreadingrequiresthe existenceof a continuous and laterally unconstrainedliquefiable zone. Given the very low probability of liquefaction, impactsfrom lateral spreadingwould be lessthan significantand no mitigation isrequired.

Subsidence. Soilsubsidenceischaracterizedbysinkingor descendingsoilsthat occurastheresult of a heavyload beingplacedon underlyingsedimentsand may be triggeredby seismicevents.

Seismically-inducedsettlementdependson the relativesubsurfacesoildensity. Settlementsfrom collapsible soils can be relatively large and damagingto improvements. The Geotechnical Investigationdeterminedon-sitesoilsto consistentof fill andnaturalsoilboth generallyclassified asfine to mediumgrainedsilty sandandobservedto be mediumdense. Asrecommendedin the GeotechnicalInvestigationall disturbedsoil or fill shallbe removed, and approvedimport soils would be placedand compactedasoutlinedin the report to complywith applicablestandardsto avoidinstabilitydueto subsidence. Compliancewith SCGEO-2, wouldensuretheCitywouldreview all Project plans and all other relevant construction permits to verify compliancewith the GeotechnicalEngineering Investigation (NorCal Engineering, Inc., 2023) recommendations.

Therefore, in this regard, the Projectwould havea lessthan significantimpact with mitigation incorporated.

Liquefactionor collapse. Asnoted abovein Thresholda)iii) the project site is not situatedin an area of historic occurrenceof liquefaction, within a CGSLiquefactionZone, or local geological, geotechnical and groundwater conditions to indicate a potential for permanent ground AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page77
displacement. Therefore, the Project would not cause potential substantialadverse effects involvingliquefaction. Impactswouldbe lessthan significantwith mitigation. d) Be located on expansivesoil, as defined in Table18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creatingsubstantialdirect or indirect risksto life or property? LessThan Significant. Soilsthat expand and contract in volume (“shrink-swell” pattern) are consideredto be expansiveand may causedamageto abovegroundinfrastructureasa result of densitychangesthat shiftoverlyingmaterials. Fine-grainsiltsandclaysedimentsaremostlikelyto exhibit shrink-swell patterns in response to changing moisture levels. As outlined in the GeotechnicalInvestigation, testingof the uppersoilsindicatedanexpansionindexof 0, classifying the on-siteexpansionpotentialasverylow. Therefore, impactsfrom expansivesoilswouldbeless than significantandnomitigationisrequired.
e) Havesoilsincapableof adequatelysupportingthe useof septictanksor alternative wastewater disposalsystemswheresewersare not availablefor the disposalof wastewater? No Impact. Thereisexistingsewerinfrastructurein the vicinityof the project site that isavailable to servethe proposedProject. TheProjectwouldconnectto the existingsanitarysewersystemfor wastewaterdisposaland would not include the use of septic tanks. Therefore, the proposed Project would not have soils incapableof adequatelysupporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposalsystemswhere sewers are not availablefor the disposalof wastewater. Noimpactwouldoccur.
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Lessthan SignificantImpact With Mitigation Incorporated. Paleontologicalresourcesare found in geologicaldepositsof sedimentaryrock (i.e., sandstone, siltstone, mudstone, claystone, or shale). Thepotential for the occurrenceof a unique geologicfeature dependson the rock type exposedat the surfacein a givenareaand potential effectson paleontologicalresourceswould primarily be associatedwith ground-disturbing activities. A paleontologicalresourcesrecords searchwasrequestedfrom the WesternScienceCenterin July2025; seeAppendixE. Therecords searchidentifiedQuaternaryalluvialunitsonthe projectsitethat areconsideredto befossiliferous andhighlypaleontologicallysensitive. TheWesternScienceCenterrecordsearchindicatesthat no paleontologicalresourceshave been discoveredwithin the project site or a one-mile radius; however, QuaternaryalluvialunitsthroughoutSouthernCaliforniahaveproducedlargequantities of fossils. Therefore, MM GEO-1 isrequiredto reducethe Project’spotentialimpactsto a lessthan significantlevel. MM GEO-1 details the appropriate stepsshouldpaleontologicalresourcesbe encounteredduring ground-disturbing activities. If paleontologicalresourcesare inadvertently unearthedduringexcavationandgradingactivities, allearth-disturbingactivitieswithin a 100-foot radiusof the area of discoverywould cease. Additionally, the Applicantwould haveto retain a qualified professionalpaleontologistto evaluatethe significanceof the finding and create an appropriate course of action. Following compliancewith MM GEO-1, the Project’s potential impacts to a unique paleontologicalresource/site or geologic feature would be less than significant.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page78
StandardConditionsandRequirements
SCGEO-1 Projectplansand designsshallcomply with FullertonMunicipalCodeChapter14.03 – BuildingCode, which incorporatesthe 2022 CaliforniaBuildingStandardsCodewhich containsall regulationsfor howbuildingsaredesignedandconstructed, andareintended to ensurethe maximumstructuralintegrity andsafetyof privateandpublicbuildings.

SCGEO-2 Prior to GradingPermit issuance, the City shall review all Projectplans and all other relevant constructionpermits to verify compliancewith the GeotechnicalEngineering Investigation (NorCalEngineering, Inc. 2023) recommendationsand other applicable Coderequirements.

Mitigation Measures
MM GEO-1 PaleontologicalResources. In the eventthat paleontologicalresourcesareinadvertently unearthed during excavationand gradingactivities, the contractor shall immediately ceaseall earth-disturbingactivitieswithin a 100-foot radiusof the areaof discovery. The Applicantshallretain a qualifiedprofessionalpaleontologistsubjectto approvalby the City of Fullerton, to evaluatethe significanceof the finding and appropriatecourseof action. If avoidanceof the resource(s) is not feasible, the Applicantshallfollow salvage operation requirementspursuantto StateCEQAGuidelinesSection15064.5. After the Applicanthasappropriatelyavoidedor mitigatedthe find, work in the areamayresume.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page79

4.8 GREENHOUSEGASEMISSIONS

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

8. GREENHOUSEGASEMISSIONS. Wouldthe project:
a) Generategreenhousegas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purposeof reducing the emissionsof
greenhousegases?
X
Thegreenhousegas (GHG) modelingoutputs and resultsare includedin Appendix A: Air Quality and GreenhouseGasEmissionsDataandsummarizedbelow.

Background
The “greenhouseeffect” is the natural processthat retainsheat in the troposphere, the bottom layerof the atmosphere. Without the greenhouseeffect, thermal energywould “leak” into space, resultingin a much colder and inhospitableplanet. With the greenhouseeffect, the global averagetemperatureis approximately61 F (16 C). GHGsarethe componentsof the atmosphereresponsiblefor the greenhouse effect. Theamountof heat retainedis proportionalto the concentrationof GHGsin the atmosphere. As human activities and natural sourcesreleasemore GHGsinto the atmosphere, GHGconcentrations increase, and the atmosphereretains more heat, increasingthe effectsof climate change. The Kyoto Protocolidentifiedsixgasesfor emissionreductiontargets: carbondioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC), perfluorocarbons (PFC), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). When accountingfor GHGs, all typesof GHGemissionsareexpressedin termsof CO2equivalents (CO2e) andare typicallyquantifiedin metric tons (MT) or million metrictons (MMT).

CO2, CH4, andN2Ocauseapproximately80 percentof the total heat stored in the atmosphere. Human activities, aswell asnaturalsources, emit thesethree gases. Eachof the GHGsaffectsclimatechangeat differentratesandpersistsin the atmospherefor varyinglengthsof time. TheGWPistherelativemeasure of the potential for a GHGto trap heat in the atmosphere. TheGWPallowscomparisonsof the global warmingimpactsof different gases. Specifically, it isa measureof howmuchenergythe emissionsof one ton of a gaswill absorbover a givenperiod, relativeto the emissionsof one ton of CO2. Thelargerthe GWP, the more that a givengaswarmsthe Earthcomparedto CO2over that period. GWPsprovidea commonunit of measure, whichallowsanalyststo addup emissionsestimatesof different gases (e.g., to compileanationalGHGinventory) andallowspolicymakersto compareemissionsreductionopportunities acrosssectorsandgases.

Stationarysourcecombustionof naturalgasin equipmentsuchaswaterheaters, boilers, processheaters, andfurnacesemitsGHGs, primarilyCO2, CH4, andN2O. GHGsarealsoemitted from mobilesourcessuch ason-roadvehiclesandoff-roadconstructionequipmentburningfuelssuchasgasoline, diesel, biodiesel, propane, or natural gas (compressedor liquefied). Indirect GHGemissionsresult from electric power AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page80
generatedelsewhere (i.e., power plants) usedto operateprocessequipment, lighting, and utilities at a facility. Includedin GHGquantificationis electricpower, which is usedto pump the water supply (e.g., aqueducts, wells, pipelines) andthe disposalanddecompositionof municipalwastein landfills.43 Regulations
EnergyIndependenceand SecurityAct of 2007
TheEISAof 2007, amongother keymeasures, requiresthe following, whichwouldaid in the reductionof nationalGHGemissions:

Increasethe supplyof alternativefuel sourcesby settinga mandatoryRenewableFuelStandard requiringfuel producersto useat least36billiongallonsof biofuelin 2022.

Seta targetof 35mpgor thecombinedfleet of carsandlighttrucksbymodelyear2020anddirect the NationalHighwayTrafficSafetyAdministration (NHTSA) to establisha fuel economyprogram for medium- andheavy-duty trucksandcreatea separatefueleconomystandardfor work trucks.

Prescribeor revisestandardsaffectingregionalefficiencyfor heatingand coolingproductsand proceduresfor new or amendedstandards, energyconservation, energyefficiencylabelingfor consumerelectronicproducts, residentialboiler efficiency, electricmotor efficiency, and home appliances.

On April 9, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order calling for the sunset of various environmental regulations. The order affects piecesof severalkeystoneenergy and environmental legislation, includingthe EISAof 2007.

UnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgencyEndangermentFinding TheU.S. EPAauthority to regulateGHGemissionsstemsfrom the UnitedStatesSupremeCourtdecision in Massachusettsv. EPA (2007). TheSupremeCourtruledthat GHGsmeetthe definition of air pollutants undertheexistingFCAAandmustberegulatedif thesegasescouldbereasonablyanticipatedto endanger publichealthor welfare. Respondingto the Court’sruling, the U.S. EPAfinalizedanendangermentfinding in December2009. Basedon scientificevidenceit found that sixGHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6) constitutea threat to publichealthandwelfare. Therefore, it is the SupremeCourt’s interpretation of the existingFCAAand the U.S. EPA’sassessmentof the scientificevidencethat form the basisfor the U.S. EPA’sregulatoryactions.

In responseto PresidentTrump’s “UnleashingAmericanEnergy” ExecutiveOrder, publishedon January 20, 2025, the U.S. EPAannouncedits intentionto reconsiderregulationsandactionsthat relyonthe2009 GreenhouseGasEndangermentFinding (EndangermentFinding) on March 12, 2025. The March 12 announcementspecificallytargetsthe followingwhichimpactGHGemissions:

AdvancedCleanTrucksPlan, including:
o Controlof Air Pollutionfrom NewMotor Vehicles: Heavy-DutyEngineandVehicleStandards o Multi-PollutantEmissionsStandardsfor Model Year2027andLaterLight- andMedium-Duty Vehicles
o GHGEmissionsStandardsfor Heavy-DutyVehicles – Phase3.

CorporateAverageFuelEconomy (CAFE) Standards
43 CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard. (2008). ClimateChangeScopingPlan.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page81
FederalVehicleStandards
In responseto the UnitedStatesSupremeCourtrulingdiscussedabove, ExecutiveOrder13432wasissued in 2007 directing the U.S. EPA, the Departmentof Transportation, and the Department of Energyto establishregulationsthat reduceGHGemissionsfrom motor vehicles, non-road vehicles, and non-road enginesby2008. In 2009, the NHTSAissueda finalruleregulatingfuel efficiencyandGHGemissionsfrom carsand light-duty trucksfor model year2011, and in 2010, the U.S. EPAand NHTSAissueda final rule regulatingcarsandlight-duty trucksfor modelyears2012to 2016.

In 2010, anExecutiveMemorandumwasissueddirectingthe Departmentof Transportation, Department of Energy, U.S. EPA, and NHTSAto establishadditional standardsregardingfuel efficiencyand GHG reduction, cleanfuels, andadvancedvehicleinfrastructure. In responseto this directive, the U.S. EPAand NHTSAproposedstringent, coordinatedfederalGHGand fuel economystandardsfor modelyears2017 to 2025light-duty vehicles. Theproposedstandardsprojectedto achieve163 gramsper mile of CO2in model year 2025, on an averageindustryfleet-wide basis, which is equivalentto 54.5 mpg if this level were achievedsolelythrough fuel efficiency. Thefinal rule wasadoptedin 2012for model years2017– 2021, andNHTSAintendsto setstandardsfor modelyears2022–2025in a future rulemaking. OnJanuary 12, 2017, the U.S. EPAfinalizedits decisionto maintainthe current GHGemissionsstandardsfor model years2022–2025carsandlight trucks.

In addition to the regulationsapplicableto carsandlight-duty trucksdescribedabove, in 2011, the U.S.

EPAand NHTSAannouncedfuel economyand GHGstandardsfor medium- and heavy-duty trucks for modelyears2014–2018. Thestandardsfor CO2emissionsandfuelconsumptionaretailoredto threemain vehiclecategories: combinationtractors, heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, and vocationalvehicles.

Accordingto the U.S. EPA, this regulatoryprogramwill reduceGHGemissionsandfuel consumptionfor the affectedvehiclesby 6 to 23 percentoverthe 2010baselines.

In August2016, the U.S. EPAand NHTSAannouncedthe adoptionof the phasetwo programrelatedto thefueleconomyandGHGstandardsfor medium- andheavy-duty trucks. Thephasetwo programapplies to vehicleswith modelyear2018–2027for certaintrailers, andmodelyears2021–2027for semi-trucks, largepickuptrucks, vans, andall typesandsizesof busesandwork trucks. Thefinal standardslower CO2 emissionsbyapproximately1.1 billionmetrictonsandreduceoil consumptionbyupto two billionbarrels overthe lifetime of the vehiclessoldunderthe program.

OnSeptember27, 2019, the U.S. EPAandthe NHTSApublishedthe “SaferAffordableFuel-Efficient (SAFE) VehiclesRulePartOne: OneNationalProgram” (84 FederalRegulation51,310 (Sept. 27, 2019). TheSAFE Rule (Part One) revokedCalifornia’s authority to set its own GHGemissionsstandardsand set zero- emissionvehiclemandatesin California. OnMarch31, 2020, theU.S. EPAandNHTSAfinalizedrulemaking for SAFEPart Two, which setsCO2emissionsstandardsand CAFEstandardsfor passengervehiclesand light duty trucks, coveringmodel years2021-2026. Thecurrent U.S. EPAadministrationrepealedSAFE RulePartOne, effectiveJanuary28, 2022, andisreconsideringPartTwo.

On June7, 2024, the NHTSAfinalizedtheir CAFEstandardsfor model year2030to 2035. Thefinal rule requiresanindustry-widefuelaverageof approximately50.4 mpgfor passengercarsandlight-duty trucks andanindustryfleet-wideaveragefor heavy-duty pickuptrucksandvansof roughly2.851gallonsper100 miles.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page82
In responseto PresidentTrump’s “UnleashingAmericanEnergy” ExecutiveOrder, publishedon January 20, 2025, the U.S. EPAannouncedits intention to reconsiderregulationsand actionsthat rely on the EndangermentFindingonMarch12, 2025. Thisincludesthe CAFEstandards. OnJune6, 2025, theNHTSA publishedaninterpretiverulethat establishesthe NHTSA’sauthorityto revisetheCAFEstandardswithout considerationof electricvehicles. Implementationof thesestandardsremainsuncertain.

CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard
CARBisresponsiblefor the coordinationandoversightof Stateandlocalair pollutioncontrol programsin California. Variousstatewideand local initiatives to reduceCalifornia’s contribution to GHGemissions have raised awareness about climate change and its potential for severe long-term adverse environmental, social, and economiceffects. Californiais a significantemitter of CO2ein the world and produced371.1grossMMTCO2ein 2022.44 In California, the transportationsectoristhe largestemitter of GHGs, followedby industrialoperationssuchasmanufacturingandoil andgasextraction.

TheStatelegislaturehasenacteda seriesof billsthat constitutethe most aggressiveprogramto reduce GHGsof anystatein the nation. Somelegislation, suchasthe landmarkAB32, CaliforniaGlobalWarming SolutionsActof 2006, wasspecificallyenactedto addressGHGemissions. Other legislation, suchasTitle 24BuildingEnergyEfficiencyStandardsandTitle20ApplianceEnergyStandards, wereoriginallyadopted for other purposessuchasenergyandwater conservationbut alsoprovideGHGreductions.

AssemblyBill 32
AssemblyBill (AB) 32, the CaliforniaGlobalWarmingSolutionsAct of 2006, instructedCARBto develop and enforceregulationsfor the reportingand verificationof statewideGHGemissionsand establisheda Stategoal of reducingGHGemissionsto 1990levelsby the year2020. AB32 additionallyestablisheda timeline for adoptinga scopingplanfor achievingGHGreductionsin a technologicallyandeconomically feasiblemanner. TheScopingPlanwasfirst approvedby CARBin 2008andisupdatedeveryfive years.

CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoardScopingPlan
AdoptedDecember15, 2022, CARB’s 2022ScopingPlanfor AchievingCarbonNeutrality (2022Scoping Plan) setsa path to achievetargetsfor carbonneutrality and reduceanthropogenicGHGemissionsby 85 percentbelow1990levelsby2045in accordancewith AB1279. Toachievethe targetsof AB1279, the 2022ScopingPlanrelieson existingandemergingfossilfuel alternativesandcleantechnologies, aswell as carbon capture and storage. Specifically, the 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on zero-emission transportation; phasingout useof fossilgasusefor heatinghomesandbuildings; reducingchemicaland refrigerantswith high GWP; providingcommunitieswith sustainableoptions for walking, biking, and public transit; displacementof fossil-fuel fired electricalgenerationthrough useof renewableenergy alternatives (e.g., solararraysand wind turbines); and scalingup new optionssuchasgreenhydrogen.

The2022ScopingPlansetsoneof themostaggressiveapproachesto reachcarbonneutralityin theworld.

Unlike the 2017 ScopingPlan, CARBno longer includesa numeric per capita threshold and instead advocatesfor compliancewith a localGHGreductionstrategy (i.e., CAP) consistentwith CEQAGuidelines Section15183.5.

Thekeyelementsof the 2022CARBScopingPlanfocuson transportation. Specifically, the 2022Scoping Planaimsto rapidlymovetowardszero-emissiontransportation (i.e., electrifyingcars, buses, trains, and 44 CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard. (2024). CurrentCaliforniaGHGEmissionsInventoryData. Retrievedfrom: https:// ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg- inventory-data. AccessedSeptember11, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page83
trucks), which constitutesCalifornia’s singlelargest sourceof GHGs. The regulationsthat impact the transportationsectorare adoptedand enforcedby CARBon vehiclemanufacturersand are outsidethe jurisdiction and control of local governments. The2022ScopingPlanacceleratesdevelopmentof new regulationsaswell asamendmentsto strengthenregulationsandprogramsalreadyin place.

Includedin the 2022 ScopingPlanis a set of LocalActions (2022 ScopingPlanAppendixD) aimed at providing local jurisdictionswith tools to reduceGHGsand assistthe Statein meeting the ambitious targets set forth in the 2022 ScopingPlan. AppendixD to the 2022ScopingPlanincludesa sectionon evaluatingplan-levelandproject-levelalignmentwith the State’sClimateGoalsin CEQAGHGanalyses. In this section, CARBidentifiesseveralrecommendationsandstrategiesthat shouldbe consideredfor new developmentin order to determine consistencywith the 2022 ScopingPlan. Notably, this section is focusedon Residentialand Mixed-Use projects.45 CARBspecificallystates that AppendixD does not addressother land uses (e.g., industrial) as contemplatedby the Project.46 However, CARBplans to explorenew approachesfor other land usetypesin the future.47 Assuch, it would be inappropriateto apply the requirementscontainedin AppendixD of the 2022 ScopingPlanto any land usetypesother than residentialor mixed-useresidentialdevelopment.

SenateBill 32 (CaliforniaGlobalWarming SolutionsAct of 2006: EmissionsLimit) Signedinto law in September2016, SB32 codifiesthe 2030GHGreductiontarget in ExecutiveOrderB- 30-15 (40percentbelow1990levelsby2030). Thebill authorizesCARBto adoptaninterim GHGemissions leveltargetto beachievedby2030. CARBalsomustadoptrulesandregulationsin anopenpublicprocess to achievethe maximum, technologicallyfeasible, andcost-effectiveGHGreductions.

SB 100 and SB 1020 (California RenewablesPortfolio Standard Program: Emissionsof GreenhouseGases)
Signedinto law in September2018, SB100increasedCalifornia’srenewableelectricityportfolio from 50 to 60 percentby 2030. SB100 also establisheda further goal to havean electricgrid that is entirely poweredby cleanenergyby2045. SB1020providesadditionalgoalsfor the path to the 2045goalof 100 percentcleanelectricityretail sales. It createsa target of 90 percentcleanelectricityretail salesby 2035 and95 percentcleanelectricityretail salesby2040.

AB1279 (TheCaliforniaClimateCrisisAct)
AB1279establishesthe policyof the Stateto achievecarbonneutralityassoonaspossible, but no later than 2045; to maintain net negativeGHGemissionsthereafter; and to ensurethat by 2045 statewide anthropogenicGHGemissionsarereducedat least85 percentbelow1990levels. Thebill requiresCARB to ensurethat ScopingPlanupdatesidentify andrecommendmeasuresto achievecarbonneutrality, and to identify andimplementpoliciesandstrategiesthat enableCO2removalsolutionsandcarboncapture, utilization, andstoragetechnologies.

Title20 ApplianceEfficiencyRegulations
The appliance efficiency regulations (CCRTitle 20, Sections1601-1608) include standardsfor new appliances. Twenty-three categoriesof appliancesare includedin the scopeof theseregulations. These 45 CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard. (2022). 2022ScopingPlanfor AchievingCarbonNeutrality, AppendixD: LocalActions, Page21 46 Ibid.
47 Ibid.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page84
standardsincludeminimumlevelsof operatingefficiency, andother cost-effectivemeasures, to promote the useof energy- andwater-efficientappliances.

Title24 BuildingEnergyEfficiencyStandards
California’sEnergyEfficiencyStandardsfor ResidentialandNonresidentialBuildings (CCRTitle24, Part6) wasfirst adoptedin 1978in responseto a legislativemandateto reduceCalifornia’senergyconsumption.

Thestandardsare updatedperiodicallyto allow considerationandpossibleincorporationof new energy efficienttechnologiesandmethods. Energyefficientbuildingsrequirelesselectricity; therefore, increased energyefficiencyreducesfossilfuel consumptionanddecreasesGHGemissions.

Buildingswhosepermit applicationsare appliedfor on or after January1, 2026, must complywith the 2025Title24EnergyCode.

Title24 CaliforniaGreenBuildingStandardsCode
TheCaliforniaGreenBuildingStandardsCode (CCRTitle 24, Part11 code) commonlyreferred to asthe CALGreenCode, is a statewidemandatoryconstructioncodedevelopedand adoptedby the California Building StandardsCommissionand the Department of Housingand CommunityDevelopment. The CALGreenCoderequiresnew residentialandcommercialbuildingsto complywith mandatorymeasures under the topics of planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency/conservation, material conservationand resourceefficiency, and environmentalquality. The CALGreenCodealso provides voluntary tiers and measuresthat local governmentsmay adopt that encourageor require additional measuresin the five greenbuildingtopics: planningand design; energyefficiency; water efficiencyand conservation; material conservationand resourceefficiency; and environmentalquality. TheCALGreen Codealsoprovidesvoluntarytiers and measuresthat local governmentsmay adopt that encourageor require additionalmeasuresin the five greenbuildingtopics. Themost recent updateto the CALGreen Codewasadoptedin December2024 (2025CALGreenCode) andcontinuesto improveuponthe existing standardsfor new constructionof, and additions and alterations to, residential and non-residential buildings. Buildingswhosepermit applicationsare appliedfor on or after January1, 2026, must comply with the 2025CALGreenCode.

SouthCoastAir Quality ManagementDistrict
TheSCAQMDistheair pollutioncontrolagencyfor OrangeCountyandtheurbanportionsof LosAngeles, Riverside, andSanBernardinocounties. Theagency’s primaryresponsibilityisto ensurethat CAAQSand NAAQSare attained and maintainedin the SCAB. The SCAQMDis also responsiblefor adopting and enforcingrulesandregulationsconcerningair pollutant sources, issuingpermitsfor stationarysourcesof air pollutants, inspectingstationarysourcesof airpollutants, respondingto citizencomplaints, monitoring ambient air quality andmeteorologicalconditions, awardinggrantsto reducemotor vehicleemissions, conductingpubliceducationcampaigns, and manyother activities. All projectsaresubjectto applicable SCAQMDrules and regulationsin effect at the time of constructionand operation. The following are SCAQMDrulesrelevantto GHG:

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page85
Rule1415 (Reductionof RefrigerantEmissionsfrom StationaryAir ConditioningSystems) – The purpose of this rule is to reduce emissionsof high-GWP refrigerants from stationary air conditioningsystemsbyrequiringprojectsto reclaim, recover, orrecyclerefrigerantandminimize leakage.

Rule2305 (WAIREProgram) – Thepurposeof this rule is to reduceNOXand particulatematter emissionsassociatedwith warehousesand mobile sourcesattractedto warehouses. Rule2305 wouldalsoreduceGHGemissions. Thisrule appliesto all existingandproposedwarehousesover 100,000squarefeet locatedin the SCAQMD. Rule2305requireswarehouseoperatorsto track annualVMTassociatedwith truck trips to andfrom the warehouse. Thesetrip milesare usedto calculatea warehouse’sWAIREPointsComplianceObligation. WAIREPointsareearnedbasedon emissionreductionmeasuresandwarehouseoperatorsarerequiredto submitanannualWAIRE Report which includestruck trip data and emissionreduction measures. Reductionstrategies listedin the WAIREmenu includeacquireZEor near zeroemissionNZEtrucks; requireZE/NZE truckvisits; requireZEyardtrucks; installon-siteZEcharging/fuelinginfrastructure; installon-site energysystems; and install filtration systemsin residences, schools, and other buildingsin the adjacentcommunity. Warehouseoperatorsthat donot earna sufficientnumberof WAIREpoints to satisfythe WAIREPointsComplianceObligationwould be required to pay a mitigation fee.

Fundsfrom the mitigation fee will be used to incentivizethe purchaseof cleanertrucks and charging/fuelinginfrastructurein communitiesnearby.

SouthernCaliforniaAssociationof Governments
TheSCAGupdatesConnectSoCal, the RTP/SCS, everyfour years. Themost recentConnectSoCal (2024- 2050RTP/SCS) is a long-rangevisionplan for a more resilientandequitablefuture andcontainspolicies andstrategiesfor achievingthe region’ssharedgoalsthrough2050.48 TheRTP/SCSisa long-rangevision plan that balancesfuture mobility and housingneedswith economic, environmental, and publichealth goals so that the region can grow smartly and sustainably. The strategy was prepared through a collaborative, continuous, and comprehensiveprocesswith input from local governments, county transportation commissions, tribal governments, non-profit organizations, businesses, and local stakeholderswithin thecountiesof Imperial, LosAngeles, Orange, Riverside, SanBernardino, andVentura.

TheSCAGregionmustachievespecificfederalair qualitystandardsandisrequiredby Statelaw to lower regionalGHGemissions. PerSB375, CARBhasset GHGreductiontargetsat 8 percentbelow 2005 per capitaemissionslevelsby2020, and19 percentbelow2005per capitaemissionslevelsby 2035.

TheFullertonPlan
Adoptedon May 1, 2012, Chapter17: Air Qualityand ClimateChangeof TheFullertonPlanestablishes the followingapplicablegoalandpoliciesaimedat reducingGHGemissions:

GOAL22: Participationin regionaleffortsto addressclimatechangeandits localimpacts.

P22.1 Motor Vehicle-related GHGEmissionsSupportregionaland subregionalefforts to reduce greenhousegasemissionsassociatedwith transportation through land use strategiesand policies, transportation system improvements, and transportation demand management programs.
48 Southern California Associationof Governments. (2024). ConnectSoCal (2024 – 2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable CommunitiesStrategy).

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page86
P22.2 GHGEmissionsfrom ElectricalGenerationSupportregionalandsubregionaleffortsto reduce greenhousegasemissionsassociatedwith electricalgenerationthroughenergyconservation strategiesandalternative/renewableenergyprograms.

P22.3 GHGEmissionsfrom Water ConveyanceSupportregionaland subregionalefforts to reduce greenhousegasemissionsassociatedwith water conveyancethrough water conservation strategiesandalternativesupplyprograms.

P22.4 Solid Waste-Related GHGEmissionsSupport regional and subregionalefforts to reduce emissionsassociatedwith solid waste through increasedrecyclingprogramsand reduced wastestrategies.

P22.6 GHGEmissionsfrom WasteSupportprojects, programs, policiesand regulationsto reduce greenhousegasemissionsfrom wastethroughimprovedmanagementof wastehandlingand reductionsin wastegeneration.

P22.8 SustainableCommunitiesStrategiesSupportprojects, programs, policiesandregulationsto coordinatefuture community-basedplanningeff orts of the FocusAreasfor consistencywith the SCAGSustainableCommunitiesStrategyand OrangeCountySustainableCommunities Strategy.

P22.9 DevelopmentSupportprojects which voluntarily desireto implement site and/or building design features exceedingminimum requirements to reduce project greenhousegas emissions.

Cityof FullertonClimateActionPlan
TheCityof FullertonCAPprovidesa frameworkto reduceGHGemissionsto a levelconsistentwith the Statereductiontargets. TheCAPestablishesa baselineemissionsinventory, future emissionprojections, and strategies, actions, and measuresto meet reduction targets. The CAPincludes the following strategies:

Transportationand Mobility Strategy. Promotea balancedtransportationsystemthat promotes the useof publictransportationandbicycles, reducescongestion, andhelpsencourageresidents to engagein healthyandactivelifestyles.

EnergyUseand ConservationStrategy. Reducethe carbonfootprint of municipaloperationsto serveasa leaderfor the communityand supportthe constructionof buildingsthat are energy efficientandincorporateclean, renewableenergysources.

Water UseandEfficiencyStrategy. Conserveandprotectwaterresourcesandpromoteefficiency throughpubliceducation.

SolidWasteReductionand RecyclingStrategy. Managesolidwastegenerationanddiversionin order to achievea zero-wastefuture.

Thresholdsof Significance
SouthCoastAir Quality ManagementDistrict
TheSCAQMDformed a GHGCEQASignificanceThresholdWorkingGroupto provideguidanceto local leadagenciesondeterminingsignificancefor GHGemissionsintheir CEQAdocuments. Thisworkinggroup was formed to assistSCAQMD’s efforts to developa GHGsignificancethresholdand is composedof a AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page87
wide variety of stakeholdersincludingthe StateOffice of Planningand Research, CARB, the Attorney General’sOffice, a varietyof city andcountyplanningdepartmentsin the SCAB, variousutilities suchas sanitation and power companies throughout the SCAB, industry groups, and environmental and professionalorganizations. The Working Group has proposeda tiered approachto evaluatingGHG emissionsfor development projects where SCAQMDis not the lead agency, wherein projects are evaluatedsequentiallythrougha seriesof “tiers” to determinewhether the project islikelyto resultin a potentiallysignificantimpactdueto GHGemissions.

With the tiered approach, a project is comparedagainstthe requirementsof eachtier sequentiallyand would not result in a significantimpact if it complieswith any tier. Tier 1 excludesprojects that are specificallyexemptfrom SB97 from resultingin a significantimpact. Tier2 excludesprojectsthat are consistentwith a GHGreductionplan that hasa certifiedfinal CEQAdocumentandcomplieswith AB32 GHGreductiongoals. Tier 3 excludesprojectswith annualemissionslower than a screeningthreshold.

TheSCAQMDhasadopteda thresholdof 10,000 MTCO2eper year for industrial projectsand a 3,000 MTCO2ethresholdwasproposedfor non-industrialprojectsbut hasnot beenadopted. DuringWorking GroupMeeting #7 it wasexplainedthat this thresholdwasderivedusinga 90 percent capturerate of a largesamplingof industrialfacilities. DuringMeeting #8, the WorkingGroupdefinedindustrialusesas production, manufacturing, and fabrication activities or storage and distribution (e.g., warehouse, transferfacility, etc.). TheWorkingGroupindicatedthat the10,000MTCO2eperyearthresholdappliesto both emissionsfrom constructionandoperationalphasesplusindirectemissions (electricity, water use, etc.). TheSCAQMDconcludedthat projectswith emissionslessthan the screeningthresholdwould not resultin a significantcumulativeimpact.

Tier 4 consistsof three options. Under the Tier4 first option, SCAQMDinitially outlined that a project wouldbe excludedif designfeaturesand/or mitigationmeasuresresultedin emissions30 percentlower than businessasusualemissions. However, the WorkingGroupdid not provide a recommendationfor this approach. TheWorkingGroupfoldedthe Tier4 secondoption into the third option. Underthe Tier4 third option, a projectwouldbeexcludedif it wasbelowanefficiency-basedthresholdof 4.8 MTCO2eper servicepopulation per year. Tier 5 would excludeprojects that implement off-site mitigation (GHG reduction projects) or purchaseoffsets to reduce GHGemissionimpacts to less than the proposed screeninglevel.

Whenthe tiered approachis appliedto a proposedproject andthe project is found not to complywith Tier1 or Tier2, a project’semissionsarecomparedagainsta screeningthreshold, asdescribedabove, for Tier 3. Thescreeningthreshold formally adopted by SCAQMDis an “interim” screeningthreshold for stationarysourceindustrialprojectswhere the SCAQMDis the leadagencyunderCEQA. Thethreshold wastermed “interim” becausethe SCAQMDanticipatedthat CARBwould adopta statewidesignificance threshold that would inform and provide guidanceto SCAQMDin its adoption of a final threshold.

However, no statewidethresholdwaseveradopted, andthe interim thresholdremainsin effect.

For projects for which SCAQMDis not the lead agency, no screeningthresholdshave been formally adopted. However, the SCAQMDWorkingGrouprecommendeda thresholdof 10,000MTCO2eper year for industrial projects and 3,000 MTCO2eper year for residentialand commercialprojects. SCAQMD determinedthat these thresholdswould “capture” 90 percent of GHGemissionsfrom these sectors, capture” meaningthat 90percentof total emissionsfrom all newprojectswouldbesubjectto sometype AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page88
of CEQAanalysis (i.e., found potentially significant).49 For purposesof this analysis, the threshold of significanceisconservatively3,000MTCO2eper year.

Cityof FullertonClimateActionPlan
TheCAPdoesnot includequantitativeproject-levelCEQAthresholdsor percentagereductiontargetsfor individualprojects. However, the CAPestablishesthat projectsthat demonstrateconsistencywith the emissionprojections, emissionreduction targets, or strategiescontainedin the CAPwould havea less than significantimpacton climatechange.

Methodology
Projectconstructionwouldgenerateemissionsfrom off-roadequipmentusageandon-roadvehicletravel associatedwith haul, delivery, and construction worker trips. Annual construction emissionsare estimatedby assumingconstructionoccursat the earliestfeasibledate (i.e., a conservativeestimateof constructionactivities) andapplyingoff-road, fugitive dust, andon-road emissionsfactorsin CalEEMod.

Asrecommendedby the SCAQMD, the Projectconstructionemissionswere amortizedover the lifetime of the Projectandaddedto the Projectoperationalemissions.

Project operations would generate emissionsfrom area sources (consumerproducts, architectural coating, andlandscapingequipment), electricalgeneration, mobilesources (motor vehiclesfrom Project- generatedvehicletrips), water supplyandwastewatertreatment, solidwastegeneration, water usage, fugitive refrigerants, an emergencyfire pump, and off-road forklifts. Themobilesourceemissionswere estimatedin CalEEModbasedon the Projectvehicletrip generationtable includedin Appendix L and prepared by Kimley-Horn as informed by the City’s TAPPAnalysis. The Projectoperational emissions associatedwith area sources, electricity, water and wastewater, and solid waste were quantified in CalEEModbasedon land useactivity data. Theemergencyfire pump emissionswere calculatedusing default emissionsratesfrom the U.S. EPA. Theoff-road forklift emissionswere calculatedusingdefault emissionsratesfrom CARB. Asaddressedin Section4.6: Energy, the solarpanelisassumedto bea 34.1 kW systemandwould produce62.23MWh per year. Theuseof solarpanelswouldreducethe Project’s consumption of grid electricity and would thus reduce operational electricity GHGemissions. The emissionsreduction attributable to the solar panelswas calculatedbasedon the annual electricity providedby the solarpanelsand default electricityintensityfactor from the CalEEModUserGuide. The total Project emissionswere analyzedagainst the conservativeSCAQMD3,000 MTCO2eper year threshold.

ImpactAnalysis
a) Generategreenhousegas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
LessThanSignificantImpact: ConstructionGHGEmissions. Projectconstructionwould result in direct GHG emissions from construction equipment and the transport of materials and constructionworkersto and from the project site. Construction-generatedGHGemissionswould be temporary and would ceasewith completion of construction. Project constructionwould consist of demolition, site preparation, grading, infrastructure improvements, building 49 SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. (2008). StaffReport: Interim CEQAGHGSignificanceThresholdfor StationarySources, Rules andPlansandAttachmentE: Draft GuidanceDocument – InterimCEQAGreenhouseGas (GHG) SignificanceThreshold, page3-2.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page89
construction, paving, and architecturalcoatingapplications.50 Projectconstructionis anticipated to occur over an approximately 13-month period. Construction-generated GHG emissions associatedwith the ProjectwerecalculatedusingCalEEMod, whichisdesignedto modelemissions for land usedevelopmentprojectsbasedon typicalconstructionrequirements. SeeAppendixA for more informationregardingthe constructionassumptionsusedin this analysis.

Table 20: Project ConstructionGreenhouseGasEmissionspresentsthe total GHGemissions generatedduringProjectconstruction. Inaccordancewith theSCAQMD’sguidance, GHGemissions from constructionwere amortized (i.e., averagedannually) over the lifetime of the Project.51 As shown in the table, Project construction would result in 572 MTCO2eover the course of constructionandapproximately19MTCO2eper yearwhenamortized.

Table20: ProjectConstructionGreenhouseGasEmissions
Year MTCO2e
2028 236
2029 336
TotalConstruction1 572
Amortizedover 30Years 19
1 Totalmaynot addup exactlydueto roundingin the modelingcalculations.

MTCO2e = metrictons of carbondioxideequivalent
Source: CalEEModversion2022.1. Referto AppendixA for the modeloutputs.

Less Than Significant Impact: Operational GHG Emissions. Operational or long-term GHG emissionswould occurover the life of the Project. OperationalGHGemissionswouldresult from direct sources, suchas project-generatedvehiculartraffic, and emergencyfire pump, off-road forklifts, and area source usage (consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscape maintenanceequipment). OperationalGHGemissionswould also result from indirect sources, suchas electricitygeneration, water supplyand wastewatertreatment, solid wastegeneration, and fugitive refrigerantsfrom air conditioningor refrigerators. Operational-generatedemissions i.e., area, energy, water, wastewater, solidwaste, and fugitive refrigerants) associatedwith the ProjectwerecalculatedusingCalEEMod, whichisdesignedto modelemissionsbasedon landuse activity data and the Projectvehicletrip generation. TheProjectwould generateapproximately 212total dailyvehicletrips (146passengervehiclesand66truckvehicles); seeTable1 in Appendix L. TheGHGemissionsfrom anemergencydieselfirepumpandthreedieselforklifts werecalculated separatelyfrom CalEEModusingdefault emissionrates; refer to AppendixA. Thesolar panels emissionsreductionwascalculatedbasedon the annualelectricityprovidedby the solarpanels

62.23 MWh per year) anddefault electricityintensityfactor from the CalEEModUserGuide. The default electricityintensity factor is basedon the Project’s electricityprovider (SCE) and the first operational year (2028). The Project operationalGHGemissionsare summarizedin Table 21:

ProjectOperationalGreenhouseGasEmissions. It shouldbe noted that Table21 conservatively does not take credit for GHGemissionsoccurringunder existingconditions. For example, the Projectwould resultin a net reductionof 422 total daily vehicletrips when comparedto existing 50 Althoughnot proposed, this analysisconservativelyassumesfull-width grindandoverlayimprovementsalongCypressWay. 51 Theproject lifetime is basedon the standard30-year assumptionof the SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict (SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. [2009]. Minutesfor the GHGCEQASignificanceThresholdStakeholderWorkingGroup #13.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page90
conditions; refer to Table1 in Appendix L. Therefore, GHGemissionspresentedin Table21 are conservativeandwouldbesubstantiallylower whenaccountingfor existingconditions.

Table21: ProjectOperationalGreenhouseGasEmissions
Source MTCO2eper year
Construction 19
Area 2
Electricity 175
Mobile 1,223
Water 75
Waste 32
Refrigeration < 1
FirePump 1
Off-RoadForklifts 76
SolarPanels - 10
Total 1,604
SCAQMDThreshold 3,000
ThresholdExceeded? No
1 Totalmaynot addup exactlydueto roundingin the modelingcalculations.

MTCO2e = metrictons of carbondioxideequivalent, SCAQMD = SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict Source: CalEEModversion2022.1. Referto AppendixA for the modeloutputs.

Asshownin Table21, the total operationalGHGemissionsassociatedwith the proposedProject would not exceedthe most conservativeSCAQMDthreshold. Assuch, impactsin regardto GHG emissionsassociatedwith Projectimplementationwouldbelessthan significant. b) Conflictwith an applicableplan, policy or regulation adopted for the purposeof reducingthe emissionsof greenhousegases?
LessThan Significant Impact. This analysisdeterminesthe Project’s consistencywith SCAG’s RTP/SCS, CARB2022ScopingPlan, andCAP.

SCAGRTP/SCS. Under SB375, SCAG’s 2024-2050 RTP/SCSestablishesGHGemissionsgoalsto reduceGHGemissionsin the regionby eightpercentfrom 2005levelsby 2020and19 percentby 2035.52 TheRTP/SCSis a long-rangevisionplan that balancesfuture mobility andhousingneeds with economic, environmental, andpublichealthgoals. TheRTP/SCSplansaccountfor operations andmaintenancecoststo ensurereliability, longevity, andcosteffectiveness. TheRTP/SCSarealso supportedby acombinationof transportationandlandusestrategiesthat helptheregionachieve State GHGemissionsreduction goals and FCAArequirements, increasedhousing production, improvedequityand resilience, the preservationof natural lands, improvementof publichealth, increasedtransportation safety, support for the region’s vital goodsmovementindustriesand more efficient use of resources. GHGemissionsresulting from development-related mobile sourcesarethemostpotentsourceof emissions, andthereforeProjectcomparisonto the RTP/SCS isanappropriateindicatorof whetherthe Projectwouldinhibit thepost-2020GHGreductiongoals 52 CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard. (N.D.). SB375RegionalTargets. Retrievedfrom: https:// ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/sustainable- communities-program/sb-375-regional-targets. AccessedSeptember9, 2025.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page91
promulgatedby the State. TheProject’s consistencywith the 2024-2050RTP/SCSgoalsin Table 22: RegionalTransportationPlan/ SustainableCommunitiesStrategyConsistency.

Table22: RegionalTransportationPlan/SustainableCommunitiesStrategyConsistency SCAGGoals Compliance
2024REGIONALTRANSPORTATIONPLAN/SUSTAINABLECOMMUNITIESSTRATEGYCONSISTENCY1 Mobility: Buildandmaintain anintegratedmultimodal transportation network.

Supportinvestmentsthat arewell-
maintainedandoperated, coordinated,
resilientandresultin improvedsafety,
improvedairqualityandminimized
greenhousegasemissions.

N/A: Thisisnot a project-specificpolicyandisthereforenot applicable.

Ensurethat reliable, accessible,
affordable, andappealingtraveloptions
arereadilyavailable, while strivingto
enhanceequity in the offeringsin high-
needcommunities.

N/A: Thisisnot a project-specificpolicyandisthereforenot applicable.

Supportplanningfor peopleof allages,
abilities, andbackgrounds
N/A: Thisisnot a project-specificpolicyandisthereforenot applicable.

Communities: Develop, connect, andsustaincommunitiesthat arelivableandthriving.

Createhuman-centeredcommunitiesin
urban, suburban, andrural settingsto
increasemobility optionsandreduce
traveldistances.

Consistent: Theprojectsiteislocatedwithin 0.5 mile of SR- 91andSR-57andin anurbanareanearexistingemployment
opportunitiesandcommunityservices. TheProjectwould
alsoresultin a net reductionof 422dailyvehicletrips when comparedto existingconditions. Theprojectsitelocation
andthe reductionin dailytrips would reducetrip lengths, VMT, andassociatedGHGemissions.

Produceandpreservediversehousing
typesin aneffort to improveaffordability,
accessibility, andopportunitiesfor all
households.

N/A: TheProjectdoesnot proposeresidentialuses.

Therefore, thisisnot a project-specificpolicyandisnot
applicable.

Environment: Createa healthyregionfor the peopleof todayand tomorrow Developcommunitiesthat areresilient
andcanmitigate, adaptto, andrespond
to chronicandacutestressesand
disruptions, suchasclimatechange.

Consistent: TheProjectwoulddevelopacentralwarehouse
on aninfill site. TheProject’sreductionin net dailytrips and the projectsitelocationin anurbanareawould reduceVMT
andthe associatedGHGemissions. TheProjectwould
complywith allapplicableenergyefficiencyand
sustainabilitymeasures. Specifically, the Projectwould
includesolarpanels, whichwould reducethe Project’s
dependenceon the electricalgridandassociatedenergy
sourceemissions. TheProjectwouldadditionallyinclude
drought-tolerant landscapingandanirrigationsystemthat
would adjustrun timesbasedon localweatherconditions.

TheProjectislocatedapproximately16milesinlandand
would thereforenot besubjectto risksassociatedwith sea
levelrise. Theproposedwarehousewould includecentralair
conditionto offer relief from increasedexteriorsurface
temperatures. TheProjectpromotesGHG-reduction
AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page92
Table22: RegionalTransportationPlan/SustainableCommunitiesStrategyConsistency SCAGGoals Compliance
strategiesandiswell suitedto maintainingresiliencyagainst the effectsof climatechangeandassociatedhealthimpacts.

Integratethe region’sdevelopment
pattern andtransportationnetwork to
improveairquality, reducegreenhouse
gasemissionsandenablemore
sustainableuseof energyandwater.

Consistent: TheProjectisnot a transportationimprovement Project. However, Projectimplementationwould reducethe
total dailytrips andVMTto the projectsite, whencompared to existingconditions. Additionally, the projectsitelocation in anurbanareawould reducetruck trip lengthsandVMT.

Assuch, Projectimplementationwould reducemobile
associatedGHGemissions. Additionally, the reductionof
energyuse, improvementof airquality, andpromotion of
moreenvironmentallysustainabledevelopmentare
encouragedthroughcompliancewith the CaliforniaBuilding
EnergyEfficiencyStandardsandthe GreenBuilding
StandardsCode.

Conservethe region’sresources. Consistent: Asdescribedin Section4.2: Agricultureand ForestryResources, the projectsiteisnot locatedon or near landthat isdesignatedfor agriculturalpurposes. Therefore, Projectimplementationwould not resultin a lossof the
region’sresources.

Economy: Supporta sustainable, efficient, andproductiveregionaleconomicenvironmentthat providesopportunities for all peoplein the region.

Improveaccessto jobsandeducational
resources.

Consistent: TheProjectproposesa warehousedevelopment
within anurbanareawith residential, retail, andinstitutional landuses. TheProjectwouldprovideapproximately113jobs
in anurbanarea, whichwouldimproveaccessto jobs
opportunities.

Advancea resilientandefficientgoods
movementsystemthat supportsthe
economicvitality of the region,
attainmentof cleanair andqualityof life
for our communities.

Consistent: TheProjectproposesa warehousein anurban
areanearSR-91andSR-57. Therefore, the Projectwould
supportefficientgoodsmovementandwouldreduceVMT.

Additionally, the Projectwould provideapproximately113
jobsto the localarea. Assummarizedabove, the Project
would resultin lessthan significantair qualityandhealthrisk impacts.
1 Basedon employeegenerationfactor of oneemployeeper 979sf of warehouseuseprovided, the Projectis anticipatedto employ approximately113employees. Source: NatelsonCompany, Inc. (2001). EmploymentDensityStudySummaryReport, Table6A.

N/A = not applicable; SR = StateRoute; VMT = vehiclemilestraveled; LST = localizedsignificancethreshold; GHG = greenhousegas Sources: SouthernCaliforniaAssociationof Governments. (2024). ConnectSoCal (2024 – 2050RegionalTransportation Plan/SustainableCommunitiesStrategy).

Asshownin Table22, the Projectwouldbeconsistentwith the applicablegoalsof the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS. Therefore, the Projectwould not interfere with SCAG’s ability to achievethe region’s post-2020mobilesourceGHGreductiontargetsanda lessthan significantimpactwouldoccur.

CARB2022ScopingPlan. The2022ScopingPlansetsapathto achievetargetsfor carbonneutrality andreduceanthropogenicGHGemissionsby85percentbelow1990levelsby2045in accordance with AB 1279. The transportation, electricity, and industrial sectors are the largest GHG contributorsin the State. The2022ScopingPlanprovidesguidanceto achievetheAB1279targets primarily through zero-emissiontransportation (e.g., electrifyingcars, buses, trains, and trucks).

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page93
Additional GHGreductions are achievedthrough decarbonizingthe electricity and industrial sectors.

Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions in the latest 2022 Scoping Plan include implementingSB100, which would achieve100percentcleanelectricityby 2045; achieving100 percent ZEvehiclesin 2035 through AdvancedCleanCarsII,53 and implementingthe Advanced CleanFleetsregulationto deployZEbusesandtrucks.54 Additionaltransportationpoliciesinclude the PotentialPhasedAdvancedCleanEquipmentRegulation, CleanOff-RoadFleetRecognition Program, In-useOff-RoadDiesel-FueledFleetsRegulation, andAmendmentsto the In-useOff-Road Diesel-FueledFleetsRegulation. The2022 ScopingPlanwould continue to implement SB375.

ProjectGHGswould be further reducedthrough the Cap-and-TradeProgramcarbonpricingand SB905. SB905 requiresCARBto create the CarbonCapture, Removal, Utilization, and Storage Programto evaluate, demonstrate, andregulatecarbondioxideremovalprojectsandtechnology.

Asindicatedin Table21, approximately87 percentof the proposedProject’s GHGemissionsare from energy (i.e., electricitygeneration) andmobilesources, whichwould be further reducedby the 2022ScopingPlanmeasuresdescribedabove. TheProjectwould includesolarpanels, which would reducethe Project’s electricityconsumptionand associatedenergysourceemissions. The Projectwould resultin a net reductionof 422 total daily vehicletrips when comparedto existing conditions. Assuch, Projectimplementationwould decreaseVMTand associatedmobile source emissions. Additionally, energyand mobile sourceemissionswould further declinein the future due to statewide measuresdiscussedabove, as well as cleanertechnologyand fleet turnover.

Therefore, the reductionof GHGemissionswouldbeconsistentwith the 2022ScopingPlan’sgoal to reduceGHGemissions.

Followingcompliancewith all applicableregulations, the proposedProjectwouldnot conflictwith theState’sprogresstowardscarbonneutralityunderthe2022ScopingPlan. Whilethesemeasures arenot directlyapplicableto theProject, anycommercialactivityassociatedwith goodsmovement would be requiredto complywith thesemeasuresasadopted. TheProjectwouldnot obstructor interfere with efforts to increaseZEvehiclesor Stateefforts to improvesystemefficiency, nor conflictwith the State’sprogresstowardscarbonneutralityunderthe 2022ScopingPlan. It isalso noted that the Projectwould not convert any Natural and WorkingLandsand/or decreasethe urbanforest carbonstockin the State, whichare areasof emphasisin the 2022ScopingPlan. As such, the Projectwouldnot interferewith implementationof the 2022ScopingPlanandalessthan significantimpactwouldoccur.

Cityof FullertonClimateActionPlan. TheCAPincludesstrategiesdirectedat reducingcitywide GHGemissionsthroughenergyuseandconservation, wateruseandefficiency, transportationand mobility, and solid waste reduction and recycling. The CAPestablishesthat projects that demonstrateconsistencywith the emissionprojections, emissionreductiontargets, or strategies containedin the CAPwould havea lessthan significantimpact on climate change. Asstatedin 53 OnMay 22, 2025, the United StatesSenatevotedto revokethe waiver grantedby the Bidenadministrationfor the AdvancedCleanCarsII program. OnJune12, 2025, the TrumpAdministrationformallynullified the AdvancedCleanCarsII program. 54 On January13, 2025, CARBwithdrew their requestsfor CleanAir Act waiversfrom the U.S. EPAneededto supportfour recentlyadopted vehicleemissionsregulations: (1) the AdvancedCleanFleetsRegulations; (2) the In-UseLocomotiveRegulations; (3) part of the Commercial HarborCraftandOcean-GoingVesselsAt-BerthRegulations; and (4) part of the TransportRefrigerationUnit EngineStandardsRegulations.

Therefore, implementationof theseregulationsis currentlyunknown.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page94
Section4.3: Air Quality, the projectsiteisconsistentwith TheFullertonPlanlandusedesignation.

Therefore, project-related emissionshavebeenaccountedfor in the City’s projectedemissions forecast. Asstatedabove, the Projectwould complywith the CARB2022ScopingPlanstrategies aimedat reducingGHGemissions. Therefore, the Projectwould be consistentwith the emission reductiontargets. Additionally, Projectconsistencywith the CAPstrategiesarediscussedbelow:

EnergyUse and Conservation. The proposedProjectwould be an infill developmentand would be designedin compliancewith the latest Title 24 EnergyCodeand CALGreenCode.

Therefore, the Project would improve energy efficiency when compared to existing conditions.

Water Use and Efficiency. The Project would comply with the City’s Water Efficiency LandscapeOrdinance. TheProjectwould includedrought-tolerant landscapingandlow flow irrigation systemswith a smart controller that adjuststhe water flow basedon weather conditions. Furthermore, the Projectwould comply with the latest CALGreenCodewater conservationrequirements.

Transportationand Mobility. Theproject site’s locationwithin an urbanareawould reduce trip lengthsand VMT. Additionally, the Projectwould result in a net reductionof 422 total daily trips when comparedto existingconditions. Further, the Projectwould providelong- term bicycleparkingand4 EVCS, thuspromotingalternativemodesof transportation.

SolidWasteReductionandRecycling. Projectconstructionwouldcomplywith theCALGreen Code, which requires65 percent of waste to be diverted. Additionally, the Projectwould complywith AB341, which requiresimplementationof a recyclingprogramto divert solid wastefrom landfills.

Asdiscussedherein, the Projectwould beconsistentwith the City’semissionforecasts, emissions reductiontargets, and CAPstrategies. Impactsin regardto Projectconsistencywith the CAPare lessthan significant. Therefore, the Projectwould not conflict with an applicableplan, policy, or regulation adoptedfor the purposeof reducingGHGemissions. A lessthan significantimpact would occur, andnomitigationisrequired.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page95

4.9 HAZARDSANDHAZARDOUSMATERIALS

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

9. HAZARDSANDHAZARDOUSMATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposalof hazardousmaterials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environmentthrough reasonablyforeseeableupset and
accident conditions involving the releaseof hazardous
materialsinto the environment?
X
c) Emithazardousemissionsor handlehazardousor acutely
hazardousmaterials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mileof anexistingor proposedschool?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
GovernmentCodeSection65962.5 and, asaresult, would
it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
X
e) For a project locatedwithin an airport land useplan or, wheresuchaplanhasnot beenadopted, within two miles
of a publicairport or publicuseairport, wouldthe project result in a safety hazardor excessivenoise for people
residingor workingin the projectarea?
X
f) Impair implementationof or physicallyinterfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuationplan?
X
g) Exposepeopleor structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildlandfires?
X
Thebasisfor the followinginformationandanalysisisthe PhaseI EnvironmentalSiteAssessment (Phase I ESA) (Orswell & Kasman, October2023), whichis providedasAppendixF: PhaseI EnvironmentalSite Assessment.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page96
a) Createa significanthazardto the publicor the environmentthrough the routine transport, use, ordisposalof hazardousmaterials?
LessthanSignificantImpact. TheproposedProjectwould includethe demolitionof the existing businesspark and associatedimprovements. As stated in the Phase I EnvironmentalSite Assessment (ESA), duringthe site investigation, a visualinspectionwasconductedfor presumed asbestos-containingmaterials (PACMs), lead-basedpaint, andmold. It wasconcludedbasedonthe age of the building and visualinspectionthat PACMswere in good condition, lead-basedpaint would not be a healthhazard, and no mold concernswere identified. In addition, basedon the OrangeCountyCAEPAradonconcentrationZone3, theProjectwouldnot impactedby radongas.

Projectconstructionwouldinvolvethe transport, storage, useand/or disposalof limitedquantities of hazardousmaterials, suchasfuels, solvents, degreasers, andpaints. Theuseof thesematerials during construction would be short-term and would occur in accordancewith standard constructionpractices, aswell aswith applicablefederal, State, andlocalregulations. Potentially hazardousmaterialswouldbecontained, stored, andusedduringconstructionin accordancewith manufacturers’ instructionsandhandledin compliancewith applicablestandardsandregulations.

Examplesof suchactivities include fueling and servicingconstructionequipment and applying paintsand other coatings. Projectconstructionwould be temporary, and on-site activitieswould be governedby existingregulationsof severalagencies. Constructionactivitieswould be subject to compliancewith relevantregulatoryrequirementsand restrictionsconcerningthe transport, use, or disposalto prevent a significanthazardto the public or environment. The regulatory requirementsinclude SCAQMDRule 1403 (fugitive dust). In addition, should a spill or other hazardousmaterialsincident occur, constructionstaff would stop work and contacta qualified contractor that is well-versedin handlingsucha situation. All constructionactivitieswould be performedincompliancewith theCaliforniaDivisionof OccupationalSafetyandHealth (Cal/OSHA) regulations.

Projectoperationswouldnot involvethe useor storageof hazardoussubstancesotherthanlimited quantitiesof hazardousmaterialssuchassolvents, fertilizers, pesticides, andother materialsused for regularmaintenanceof buildingsand landscaping. Theuseof thesematerialsalreadyoccurs within the site associatedwith the existinguse, and the quantitiesof thesematerialswould not typicallybe at an amountthat would posea significanthazardto the publicor the environment.

Theroutinetransport, use, anddisposalof thesematerialsmustadhereto federal, State, andlocal regulationsfor transport, handling, storage, and disposalof hazardoussubstances; suchas the HazardousMaterials TransportationAct and HazardousMaterials ReleaseResponsePlansand InventoryAct, whichaddresssafehandlingproceduresandemergencyresponseproceduresin the eventof anaccidentalrelease. Therefore, followingcompliancewith applicablefederal, State, and local regulations, Projectoperationswould not result in a significanthazardto the publicor the environmentthroughtheroutinetransport, use, or disposalof hazardousmaterials. Impactswould belessthan significant, andnomitigationwouldberequired.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page97
b) Createa significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonablyforeseeable upset and accidentconditionsinvolving the release of hazardousmaterials into the environment?
LessThanSignificantImpact. Theprojectsitewasdevelopedin1983asafive-buildingmulti-tenant businesspark. The site is currently comprisedof approximately85,700 square-feet of office, industrial, andcommercialusesbetweenfivebuildings, a surface parkinglot, andlandscaping. Due to the project site’s existinguse, there is a potential that prior tenantsand land usescouldhave resultedin the accidentalreleaseof hazardousmaterialsinto the environment. APhaseI ESAwas preparedto identifyrecognizedenvironmentalconditions (RECs) that mayexistat the projectsite, including historical recognized environmental conditions ( HRECs), controlled recognized environmentalconditions (CRECs), andvapormigration. ThePhaseI ESAreportedno RECs, HRECs, or CREDsandno off-site locationswith potential threat of vapormigrationto the project site. As notedabove, there would be no potential presenceof asbestos-containingmaterials, lead-based paints, mold, or radon.

Outlinedin thePhaseI ESAareviewof theCAL-EPADepartmentof ToxicSubstancesControl (DTSC) and RegionalWater Quality Control Board (RWQCB) databasesdid identify multiple open DTSC/RWQCBcasessurroundingthe site, howevermostaredowngradientandrecentplumemaps are away from the project site. There are two DTSCcasesgeoreferencedcross-gradient as Winonics, Inc. and the PlacentiaAveneSchoolSite. Thesesites are listed to need evaluation; however, the PhaseI ESAstatesthat dueto the locationaldistanceawayfrom the project site, it would not likely havea significantimpacton the site. Thereare no hazardousclean-up caseson theprojectsite. Therefore, Projectconstructionwouldnot createa significanthazardto thepublic or to the environmentthroughreasonablyforeseeableupsetandaccidentconditionsinvolvingthe releaseof hazardousmaterialsinto the environment.

TheProjectwouldnot generateor facilitatethe generationof hazardousmaterials. Theproposed Projectwouldinvolvetypicalhazardousmaterials/chemicalsassociatedwith warehouseusessuch asfuels, paints, mechanicalfluids, cleaners, solvents, andfertilizersandpesticidesfor landscaping.

However, thetypesandquantitiesof materialsusedandstoredonsitewouldnot beof asignificant quantity to create a reasonablyforeseeableupset or accident. Additionally, any routine use, storage, and transport of hazardousmaterialsduringProjectoperationsmust adhereto federal, State, andlocalregulationsfor transport, handling, storage, anddisposalof hazardoussubstances.

Hazardousmaterials/chemicalssuch as fuels, cleaners, paints, solventsand fertilizers in low quantitiesdo not posea significantthreat related to the releaseof hazardousmaterialsinto the environment.

Title 24 requiressolar arrangementson industrial buildingsto havebattery storagesystemsto providebackuppower in caseof emergenciesor grid outages. Thebattery storagesystemwould beregulatedbyTitle24, Part9 CaliforniaFireCode (CFC). TheCFCincorporatesstandardsfrom the InternationalFireCode (IFC) and the NationalFireProtectionAssociation (NFPA) ( NFPA855), to mitigate fire, explosion, and toxicgasrisks. Batterystoragesystemsare requiredto complywith SCAQMDpermittingandregulatoryrequirements, that focuson fire safetyandsetemissionlimits of toxic air contaminants. SCAQMDRule1420.1 requiresnegativepressureenclosures, emission control devices, andambientair monitoringfor lead, for whichthe projectwouldneedto comply.

Furthermore, state-level legislationlike SenateBill 38 mandatessafetyprotocolsof emergency AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page98
responseplansfor battery storagesystemsthat aredesignedto complementthe CaliforniaPublic UtilitiesCommission, andthe SCAQMD'sownCleanEnergyPolicyaimsto promotebatterysystems that meetemissionstandardsandclimategoals. Therefore, with implementationof SCAQMDRule 1420.1, Senate Bill 38, and implementing measures consistent with the best practices recommendedby the SCAQMD, anyfuture battery storagesystemsthat wouldbeinstalledby the project, would not be anticipatedto add significantoperationalemissionsthat would contribute to hazardousimpactsor adversehealtheffects. Therefore, Projectoperationswouldnot result in the accidentalreleaseof hazardousmaterials. Operationalimpactswouldbe lessthan significant, andno mitigationisrequired.
c) Emit hazardousemissionsor handle hazardousor acutely hazardousmaterials, substances, or wastewithin one-quarter mile of an existingor proposedschool? No Impact. Thenearestschoolto the project site is CommonwealthElementarySchoollocated approximately1.0 mile north of the project site. Therefore, there are no schoolswithin one- quartermile of the projectsite. TheProjectisnot anticipatedto generatehazardousemissionsor involve the handlingof hazardousmaterials, substances, or waste in significantquantitiesthat would havean impact to surroundingschools. Thetypes of hazardousmaterialsthat would be routinely handledwould be limited to fuels, paints, mechanicalfluids, cleaners, solvents, and fertilizers and pesticidesfor site landscaping. The Project would be required to adhere to all applicablefederal, Stateand regionalregulationsregardinghandling, transport and disposalof hazardousmaterials. Therefore, the Project would not emit hazardousemissionsor handle hazardousmaterials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. No impactwouldoccur, andno mitigationisrequired. d) Belocatedona site whichisincludedon a list of hazardousmaterialssitescompiledpursuantto GovernmentCodeSection65962.5 and, as a result, would it createa significant hazardto the publicor the environment?
NoImpact. GovernmentCodeSection65962.5 refersto the HazardousWasteandSubstancesSite List, commonlyknown as the CorteseList, maintainedby the DTSC. The CorteseList identifies hazardouswasteand substancesitesincludingpublicdrinkingwater wellswith detectablelevels of contamination; sites with known USTshavinga reportable release; and solid wastedisposal facilitiesfrom whichthereisaknownmigration. TheCorteseListalsoincludeshazardoussubstance sites selectedfor remedial action; historic Cortesesites; and sites with known toxic material identified through the abandoned site assessmentprogram. Review of EnviroStor55and GeoTracker56 databasesindicate the project site is not on a list of hazardousmaterials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. No impact would occur and no mitigation isrequired.
e) Foraprojectlocatedwithinanairportlanduseplanor, wheresuchaplanhasnotbeenadopted, within two milesof a publicairportor publicuseairport, wouldthe projectresultin a safety hazardor excessivenoisefor peopleresidingor working in the project area? No Impact. FullertonMunicipal Airport is locatedin the westernportion of the City, within the Airport IndustrialFocusArea. Theprojectsiteisnot locatedwithin theAirportIndustrialFocusArea 55 Departmentof ToxicSubstanceControl. (2025). EnvirostorDatabase. Retrievedfrom https:// www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. 56 StateWaterResourcesControlBoard. (2025). GeoTracker. Retrievedfrom https:// geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page99
nor is it locatedwithin anyRunwayProtectionZoneor AccidentPotentialZones. Theproject site is locatedapproximately5 milesto the eastof the FullertonMunicipal Airport. Accordingly, the proposedProjectwouldnot resultin asafetyhazardfor peopleworkingintheareaassociatedwith the airport or projectsiteandimpactswouldbelessthan significant. f) Impair implementation of or physicallyinterfere with an adoptedemergencyresponseplan or emergencyevacuationplan?
LessThan Significant Impact. The Fullerton SafetyElementSupplementalidentifies potential evacuationroutes that couldbe usedduring a hazardevent. 57 Theseroadwaysare intendedto meet evacuationneeds. TheCity’s EmergencyOperationsPlanprovidesguidancefor the City’s planned response to extraordinary emergencysituations associatedwith natural disasters, terrorism, technologicalincidents, and nucleardefenseoperations. TheEmergencyOperations Plan anticipatesthat all major streets within the City would serveas evacuationroutes. City highwaysandarterialstreetsthat connectto SR-91andSR-57wouldserveaspotentialevacuation routes, in the eventof anextraordinaryemergencysituation.

OrangethorpeAvenue, whichthe projectsite islocatedadjacentto, isidentifiedasanemergency evacuationroute. Localaccessto the project site would still be providedviatwo drivewaysalong OrangethorpeAvenue. Projectoperationsarenot anticipatedto resultin significantqueuingalong adjacentroadwaysthat could potentially impedeemergencyvehiclesor impair any emergency evacuationplan. TheProjectdoesnot proposemodificationto roadwaysadjacentto the project site.

Project-relatedconstructionactivitiescouldtemporarilyimpactstreet accessandtraffic flow due to off-site improvements on OrangethorpeAvenue and potential extension of construction activitiesinto the rights-of-wayfor utility connections, resultingin temporarylaneclosures. Prior to the issuanceof a buildingpermit, the applicantisrequiredto submitappropriateplansfor plan reviewto ensurecompliancewith zoning, building, andfire codes. TheProjectwould be required to complywith standardconditionsSCHAZ-1andprepareaTrafficControlPlanfor implementation duringthe constructionphase, asdeemednecessarybythe CityTrafficEngineer, aswellasSCHAZ- 2, in whichthe CityCommunityandEconomicDevelopmentDepartmentwould consultwith the FullertonPoliceDepartmentto disclosetemporaryclosuresandalternativetravelroutes, in order to ensureadequateaccessfor emergencyvehicleswhenconstructionof a developmentresultsin temporary lane or roadway closures. Therefore, implementationof these standardconditions would ensurethe Projectwould not impair the implementationof or physicallyinterferewith an emergencyresponseplan or emergencyevacuationplan. Project impacts would be less than significantandno mitigationisrequired.
g) Exposepeople or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or deathinvolving wildland fires?
No Impact. TheCaliforniaDepartmentof ForestryandFireProtection (CALFIRE) hasmappedfire threat potential throughout California. CALFIREthreats are basedon the availabilityof fuel and thelikelihoodof anareaburning (basedontopography, fire history, andclimate). Accordingto CAL 57 Cityof Fullerton. (2024). SafetyElementSupplement, Exhibit1: PotentialEvacuationRoutesin Fullerton. Retrievedfrom:
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/8834/638586480019470000. AccessedJuly9, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page100
FIRE’sFireHazardSeverityZonesMap for theCity, the projectsiteisnot locatedin or neara State ResponsibilityArea (SRA) nor VeryHighFireHazardSeverityZone (VHFHSZ).58 Asillustratedin the Fullerton2021-2029SafetyElementExhibit5: FireHazardSeverityZonesin Fullertonthe project siteislocatedinaLocalResponsibilityArea (LRA).59 AsshowninCALFIRE’sFHSZViewer, the closest VHFHZto the projectsiteislocatedapproximately4 milesnorthwestof the site. Theprojectsiteis locatedwithin anurbanizedarea. Theprojectsite and surroundingareaare not within or located adjacentto any wildlandsor areasidentified as being at risk of wildland fires. Therefore, the proposedProjectwouldnot exposepeopleor structuresto a significantriskof loss, injury, or death involvingwildlandfires, andno impactwouldoccur.

StandardConditionsandRequirements
SCHAZ-1: Prior to construction, future developers shall prepare a Traffic Control Plan for implementationduringthe constructionphase, asdeemednecessaryby the City Traffic Engineer. ThePlanmayincludethe followingprovisions, amongothers:

At leastoneunobstructedlaneshallbemaintainedin both directionson surrounding roadways.

At any time only a singlelane is available, the developershallprovidea temporary traffic signal, signalcarriers (i.e., flagpersons), or other appropriatetraffic controlsto allow travelin both directions.

If constructionactivitiesrequire the complete closureof a roadway segment, the developershallprovideappropriatesignageindicatingdetours/alternativeroutes.

SCHAZ-2: The City Communityand EconomicDevelopmentDepartment shall consult with the FullertonPoliceDepartmentto disclosetemporaryclosuresandalternativetravelroutes, in order to ensure adequateaccessfor emergencyvehicleswhen construction of a developmentresultsin temporarylaneor roadwayclosures.
58 CALFIRE. (2024). FireHazardSeverityZonesViewer. Retrievedfrom: https:// egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. AccessedonJuly9, 2025. 59 Cityof Fullerton. (2024). SafetyElementSupplement, Exhibit5 FireHazardSeverityZonesin Fullerton. Retrievedfrom:
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/8834/638586480019470000. AccessedJuly9, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page101

4.10 HYDROLOGYANDWATERQUALITY

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

10. HYDROLOGYANDWATERQUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standardsor waste discharge requirementsor otherwisesubstantiallydegradesurface
or groundwater quality?
X
b) Substantiallydecreasegroundwatersuppliesor interfere substantiallywith groundwater rechargesuch that the
project may impede sustainable groundwater
managementof the basin?
X
c) Substantiallyalterthe existingdrainagepattern of the site or area, includingthroughthe alterationof the courseof
a streamor river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a mannerwhichwould:
i) Resultin substantialerosion or siltation on- or off- site?
X
ii) Substantiallyincreasethe rate or amountof surface
runoff in amannerwhichwouldresultin floodingon-
or offsite?
X
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwaterdrainagesystemsor providesubstantial
additionalsourcesof pollutedrunoff?
X
iv) Impedeor redirectflood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seichezones, risk releaseof pollutantsdueto projectinundation?
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
managementplan?
X
Thissectionis basedon the PreliminaryWater QualityManagementPlan (PWQMP) (PacificConsulting Group, Inc., 2025) which is included in its entirety as Appendix G: Preliminary Water Quality ManagementPlanandtheHydrologyandHydraulicReport (PacificConsultingGroup, Inc., 2025) whichis includedin its entirety asAppendixH: HydrologyandHydraulicReport.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page102
a) Violate anywater quality standardsor wastedischargerequirementsor otherwisesubstantially degradesurfaceorgroundwaterquality?
Lessthan SignificantImpact. Projectimpacts related to water quality could occur over three different periods:

Duringthe earthworkandconstructionphase, wherethe potential for erosion, siltation, and sedimentationwouldbethe greatest;
Followingconstruction, beforetheestablishmentof groundcover, whentheerosionpotential mayremainrelativelyhigh; and
After project completion, when impactsrelatedto sedimentationwould decreasemarkedly but thoseassociatedwith urbanrunoff wouldincrease.

Urbanrunoff, both dry and wet weather, dischargesinto storm drains, and in most cases, flows directlyto creeks, rivers, lakes, andthe ocean. Pollutedrunoff canhaveharmfuleffectsondrinking water, recreational water, and wildlife. Urban runoff pollution includes a wide array of environmental, and stormwater characteristicsdependent on site conditions (e.g., land use, imperviouscover, and pollution preventionpractices), rain events (duration, amount of rainfall, intensity, and time betweenevents), soil type andparticle sizes, the amountof vehiculartraffic, and atmosphericdeposition. Major pollutantstypicallyfound in runoff from urbanareasinclude sediments, nutrients, oxygen-demandingsubstances, heavy metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, pathogens, andbacteria. Most urbanstormwaterdischargesarenon-point sources.

Construction. Short-term construction activities associatedwith the proposed Project could impact water quality. Sourcesof potential construction-related storm water pollution include handling, storage, anddisposalof constructionmaterialscontainingpollutants; maintenanceand operationof constructionequipment; and site preparationactivities, suchasexcavation, grading and trenching. Thesesources, if not controlled, can generatesoil erosionand on- and off-site transport via storm run-off or mechanicalequipment. Poorly maintained vehiclesand heavy equipmentleakingfuel, oil, antifreeze, or other vehicle-relatedfluids on the project site are also common sources of storm water pollution and soil contamination. Implementation of the proposedProjecthasthe potential to producetypicalpollutantssuchasnutrients, heavymetals, pesticidesand herbicides, toxic chemicalsrelated to constructionand cleaning, wastematerials includingwashwater, paints, wood, paper, concrete, food containers, and sanitarywastes, fuel, and lubricants. Generally, standard safety precautionsfor handling and storing construction materialscanadequatelyreducethe potential pollution of storm water by thesematerials. These typesof standardprocedurescanbe extendedto non-hazardousstorm water pollutantssuchas sawdust, concretewashout, andother wastes.

Gradingactivitieswoulddisplacesoilsandtemporarilyincreasethe potentialfor soilsto besubject to wind and water erosion. Two generalstrategiesare recommendedto prevent soil materials from entering local storm drains. First, erosioncontrol proceduresshouldbe implementedfor thoseareasthat mustbeexposed, andsecondly, the projectsiteshouldbesecuredto control off- site transportof pollutants. In order to reducethe amountof on-site exposedsoil, gradingwould be limited to the extent feasible, and anygradedareaswould be protectedagainsterosiononce they are brought to final grade. Additionally, the proposedProjectwould be requiredto comply AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page103
with the ConstructionGeneralNationalPollutant DischargeEliminationSystem (NPDES) Permit andthe FMC.

Construction-related erosion effects would be addressedthrough compliancewith the NPDES program’s ConstructionGeneral Permit. Constructionactivity subject to this General Permit includesany constructionor demolition activity, including, but not limited to, clearing, grading, grubbing, or excavation, or any other activity that resultsin a land disturbanceof equal to or greaterthan oneacre. TheProjectwoulddisturbapproximately4.8acresandthereforewouldbe subject to the GeneralPermit. To obtain coverageunder the GeneralPermit, dischargersare required to file with the StateWater ResourcesControlBoard (SWRCB) the Permit Registration Documents (PRDs), which include a Notice of Intent ( NOI) and other compliance-related documents. The GeneralPermit requires developmentand implementation of a Stormwater PollutionPreventionPlan (SWPPP) andmonitoring plan, whichmust includeerosion-control and sediment-control BMPsthat would meet or exceedmeasuresrequiredby the GeneralPermitto control potential construction-related pollutants. Erosion-control BMPsare designedto prevent erosion, whereassedimentcontrolsaredesignedto trap sedimentonceit hasbeenmobilized.

Project constructionactivities would also be required to comply with water quality measures includedin the City of Fullerton’s Water QualityOrdinance (FMCChapter12.18, Water Quality Ordinance). The City’s Water Quality Ordinancerequires compliancewith the OrangeCounty DrainageAreaManagementPlan (DAMP) andanyconditionsandrequirementsestablishedbythe Cityin order to meetFederalandStatewater qualityrequirementsrelatedto storm water runoff.

Theseregulations would require the Project contractor to include BMPsto ensure that the dischargeof pollutants from the site would be effectivelyprohibited and would not causeor contributeto anexceedanceof water qualitystandardsor alter water qualityduringconstruction.

In accordancewith FMCSection12.18.030, Controlof UrbanRunoff, prior to issuanceof grading permits, the planningagencywould be required to review the Projectplansand imposeterms, conditionsandrequirementson the Projectin accordancewith the DAMPandanyconditionsand requirementsestablishedbytheCitythat arereasonablyrelatedto the reductionor eliminationof pollutantsin stormwaterrunoff from the projectsite. Therefore, throughadherenceto theCounty of OrangeDAMP, the NPDESStormwaterProgramandFMCregulations, specifiedunderSCHYD-1 and SCHYD-2, construction-related activitieswould not violate any water quality standardsor otherwisesubstantiallydegradesurfaceor groundwaterquality and impactswould be lessthan significant.

Operations. Theproject site is locatedwithin the jurisdiction of the SantaAna RegionalWater QualityControlBoard (RWQCB) and would be subjectto compliancewith the PhaseI Municipal SeparateStorm SewerSystem (MS4) permit. Under the MS4 permit issuedby the SantaAna RWQCB (WasteDischargeRequirementsfor the Countyof Orange, OrangeCountyFloodControl District and IncorporatedCitiesof OrangeCountywithin the SantaAnaRegionAreawideUrban StormWaterRunoff, OrderNo. R8-2009-0030), co-permittees, includingtheCityof Fullerton, must preparea WQMPandimplementBMPs, wherefeasible, to captureandtreat stormwaterprior to dischargeto their MS4facilities. Priorto buildingpermitissuance, the Applicantwouldberequired to submit a Final WQMP to the City for review and compliancewith the County’s NPDES stormwaterpermit. TheFinalWQMPwould be requiredto specificthe BMPsto be incorporated AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page104
into the final Project designto addresspollutants of concernassociatedwith runoff from the projectsite.

The project site is currently developed with a multi-tenant businesspark and associated improvements, includingsurfaceparkingandornamentallandscaping. Underexistingconditions, the site generallyflows from south to north throughout the property. The existingdrainageis conveyedviasheetflow throughribbonguttersbeforeit isdischargedto CypressWaythroughtwo curb outlets. Thereis no recordof any publicstormwater infrastructureadjacentto the project site. Stormwaterisassumedto becarrieddownstreamof the projectsitein the curbandgutter in CypressWayand conveyednortherly on StateCollegeBoulevardwhere a catchbasinis located approximately1,400feet awaynorthwestof the projectsite.

The PreliminaryWQMPidentifies pollutants of concernassociatedwith the proposedProject, including suspended-solid/sediment, nutrients, pesticides, oil and grease, toxic organic compounds, and trash and debris. Additionally, the PreliminaryWQMPdocumentsthe various BMPsthat would be implementedaspart of the Project, which includebiotreatment, treatment control, non-structuralsourcecontrol, andstructuralsourcecontrolBMPsto addresswater quality conditionsassociatedwith the proposedProject. Proposedhydrologicsourcecontrolsincludeon- lot infiltration andimperviousareareduction; infiltration BMPsincludedrywells; treatmentcontrol BMPsinclude a filter insert for each catch basin/trench drain; proposednon-structural BMPs includeeducation, activityrestrictions, commonarealandscapemanagement, BMPmaintenance, localindustrialpermitcompliance, spillcontingencyplan, hazardousmaterialsdisclosure, common arealitter control, employeetraining, housekeepingof loadingdocks, commonareacatchbasin inspection, andstreetsweepingprivatestreets; andstructuralsourcecontrol BMPsincludestorm drain stencilingand signage, designand constructionof trash and wastestorageareas, efficient irrigationsystemsandlandscapedesign, dockareas, andwashwater control; refer to AppendixG for a detailedlist of proposedBMPs.

The project site is currently 14.1 percent (29,185 squarefeet) perviousarea and 85.9 percent 179,031 squarefeet) imperviousarea. In the proposedcondition, the project site would be 9.2 percent (19,166 squarefeet) perviousareaand 90.8 percent (189,486 squarefeet) impervious area. Therefore, the Projectwouldincreaseperviousareain the proposedcondition.

Asconcludedin the PreliminaryWQMP, infiltration hasbeendeemedfeasiblethrough sampling and testingfrom the GeotechnicalInvestigation. Therefore, the Projectincludesinfiltration BMPs via drywells. The drywells would be sized accordingto the North OrangeCounty Technical GuidanceDocumentto infiltrate the 85thpercentile, 24-hour storm event. Anyoverflow due to largestorm eventsin excessof the designstorm (85th percentile) would be conveyedto Cypress waythroughmeansof curboutletsto replicatethe existingcondition.

Underthe proposedcondition, runoff generatedfrom the site would fall into two main drainage areas. Roofrunoff would be collectedthroughroof drainsand directly connectedto conveyance pipingbelowgrade. Surfacedrainagewould be collectedthroughdrainswith filters beforebeing conveyedto the drywell system. Thedrywell systemis composedof a manholeshaft that would accumulatesedimentand anydebriswhichwould be removedduringthe standardmaintenance of the facilities.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page105
Implementationof standardconditionsand the proposedon-site stormwater systemand Final WQMP, includingwater qualityoperationalBMPs, wouldreducepollutantsof concernassociated with the stormwaterrunoff from the projectsitein compliancewith the County’sMS4Permitand ensurethe proposedProjectwould not violate any water quality standardsor wastedischarge requirementsor otherwisesubstantiallydegradesurfaceor groundwater quality. Impactswould be lessthan significant.
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater rechargesuchthat the projectmay impedesustainablegroundwatermanagementof the basin? Lessthan SignificantImpact. TheCityof Fullertonprovideswater serviceto the City, includingthe project site. Accordingto the Fullerton2020UrbanWater ManagementPlan (2020UWMP), the projectsiteislocatedwithin PressureZone4 in the southeastof the City.60 TheCityisa retail water supplier that receivesits water suppliesfrom a combinationof imported potable water from MetropolitanWaterDistrictof SouthernCalifornia (MWD) andlocalgroundwaterfrom theOrange CountyGroundwaterBasin (OCBasin), which is managedby the OrangeCountyWater District OCWD). TheCity’smainsourceof watersupplyisgroundwaterfrom the OCBasin. Importedwater supplementsthe City’swater supplyportfolio.

TheCity’s Water Utility operates15 reservoirswith a capacityof 67.5 million gallons, 12 booster pumpingstations, 8 activegroundwaterwells, andmanagesa 424-mile water mainssystemwith approximately31,936 serviceconnections. TheFullerton2020 UWMPforecaststhe City’s total retail water demandto be 27,850-acrefeet (AF) by 2045.

TheFullerton2020UWMPindicateswatersupplieswouldmeetthe servicearea’swater demands for normal, singledry, and multiple dry year conditionsthrough 2045. UWMPwater demand forecasts are based in part on adopted General Plans. The Fullerton Plan identifies the developmentcapacityassociatedwith implementationof TheFullertonPlanlandusedesignations.

TheFullerton PlanCommunityDevelopmentPlan (GeneralPlanCommunityDevelopmentand DesignExhibit2) designatesthe project site asIndustrial (I) within the SoutheastIndustrialFocus Area.

TheProject’saveragedailywaterdemandwouldbeapproximately3,196gallonsperday (GPD), an increaseof 344 GPDfrom existingconditions. As discussedunder Threshold4.19b, while the Projectwouldresult in a minor increasefrom existingconditions, the Water DemandAssessment concludedbasedon fire flow testing that the increasewould not significantlyimpact existing infrastructureand would be ableto be servicedby the City (AppendixJ). Further, asdiscussedin Section4.14:, PopulationandHousing, the Projectwouldbe consistentwith the existinglanduse designationand would not result in significantnew unanticipatedemploymentopportunities.

Therefore, the proposedProjectwouldbewithin the populationprojectionsanticipatedbytheCity andthe 2020UWMP. Therefore, the Projectwould not conflict with UWMPdemandprojections and would not substantiallydecreasegroundwatersupplies. Projectimpactswould be lessthan significantandno mitigationisrequired.
60 Arcadis. (June2021). 2020UWMPfor Cityof Fullerton. Availableat:
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/5052/637598829614070000, AccessedJuly15, 2021.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page106
Asnotedabove, Projectimplementationwould decreasethe site’seffectiveimperviousnessfrom approximately86 percentto 91 percent, resultingin a potential increaseof runoff in the post- developmentcondition. However, the increasedrunoff would be offset by the proposeddrywells which would infiltrate at 0.62 cubicfeet per section (cfs), which is greater than the increaseof runoff generated. This would effectively decreasethe amount of runoff generatedunder the proposed condition and increase infiltrating stormwater. Therefore, the Project would not interfere with groundwater rechargenor would groundwater recharge would be impeded.

Therefore, the Project would neither substantiallydeplete groundwatersuppliesnor interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that the project may impede sustainable groundwatermanagementof the basin, anda lessthan significantimpactwouldoccur. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the courseof a streamor river or through the addition of impervioussurfaces, in a mannerwhichwould:
i) Resultin substantialerosionorsiltationon- oroff-site? ii) Substantiallyincreasethe rate or amountof surfacerunoff in a mannerwhichwould resultin flooding on- or offsite?
iii) Createor contributerunoff water whichwould exceedthe capacityof existingor planned stormwaterdrainagesystemsor providesubstantialadditionalsourcesof polluted runoff?
iv) Impedeor redirectflood flows?
Lessthan SignificantImpact. Asnotedin Threshold4.10a, underexistingconditions, runoff onthe project site is conveyedvia sheetflow through ribbon gutters before it is dischargedto Cypress Waythrough two curb outlets. Stormwateris assumedto be carrieddownstreamof the project siteinthecurbandgutterinCypressWayandconveyednorth alongStateCollegeBoulevardwhere a catchbasinislocatedapproximately1,400feet awaynorthwestof the projectsite.

Under proposedconditions, the Project would not result in a significantchangeto the site’s drainagepattern and flows would continue to dischargenorthwest toward CypressWay. As previously addressed, under proposed conditions, the project site is composedof two main drainageareas. DrainageAreaA on the westsideof the propertyandDrainageAreaBon the east andnorth endof the property.

DrainageAreaA is 2.83 acresand approximately57 percentof the buildingroof drainageaswell as56,616squarefeet of pavedand hardscapedrunoff. Theareawouldcontainparkingareasand driveaislesalongwith landscapingandhardscapedwalkways. DrainageAreaA consistsof a sump conditionfor the loadingdocks. Asdescribedabove, the runoff wouldbe conveyedviasheetflow to its respectivecollection device (roof drains, area drains, catch basins) before it would be conveyedvia pipe flow to the drywell. Downstreamof the drywell, a sumppumpwould be used to dischargeexcessrunoff volumes. Thepumpwoulddischargeto acatchbasinto transitionfrom pressureflow to gravityflow beforefinallydischargingthroughthe curboutlet in CypressWay.

DrainageAreaB is 1.96 acresand approximately43 percent of the building runoff and 28,539 squarefeet of pavingandhardscape. Theareawouldcontainparkingareasanddriveaislesalong with landscapingandhardscapedwalkways. Thisareawouldcollectrunoff via thecurbandgutter AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page107
located at the east side of the property and the ribbon gutter to the north. Thisgutter would intermittently interceptflow andconveyrunoff throughconveyancepiping. Theconveyancepiping would conveythe tributary runoff to the drywell locatedat the northeastcornerof the property.

Largerstorm eventswouldoverflowfrom the drywellto anoverflowpipebeforeeventuallybeing conveyedto CypressWaythroughmeansof a curboutlet. Largerstorm eventsthat wouldhaveto utilizethe overflowwoulddischargeviagravity.

Overallsitehydrologyiscomprisedof sheetflowingrunoff by gravitythroughto surfacedrainage featuressuchasareadrainsandcatchbasins. Thesesurfacedrainagefeaturesconnectto on-site conveyancepipingthat would takerunoff to two drywellslocatedin the northwestcornerof the property, one for eachdrainageareaand sizedto be compliantwith the OrangeCountyWater QualityManagementPlan.

The drywell systemis composedof a manholeshaft that would accumulatesedimentand any debriswhich would be removedduringthe standardmaintenanceof the facilities. Any overflow due to largestorm eventsin excessof the designstorm (85thpercentile) would be conveyedto CypressWay through meansof curb outlets to replicatethe existingcondition. Asnoted above, Projectimplementationwoulddecreasethe site’seffectiveimperviousnessfrom approximately86 percent to 91 percent, resulting in potentially an increaseof runoff of the post-development condition. However, the increasedrunoff would be offset by the proposeddrywellswhichwould infiltrate at 0.62 cfs, whichisgreaterthan the increaseof runoff generated. Further, the drywells are designedto retain and store a total of 1,402 CFof water. This additional storagewould decreaseand offset peak flows during largestorm eventsthat may dischargeto CypressWay.

Therefore, effectivelydecreasingthe amountof runoff generatedunderthe proposedcondition.

Overall, the Projectwould not impedeor redirect flood flows, increaserate or amountof runoff suchthat floodingwould occuron or off the site, nor would it exceedthe capacityof existingor planneddrainagesystems.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seichezones, risk releaseof pollutants dueto projectinundation? Lessthan SignificantImpact. Accordingto the FederalEmergencyManagementAgency (FEMA) FloodInsuranceRateMap (FIRM) No. 06059C0132J, the project site is locatedwithin “ZoneX,” which is consideredto be anareaof minimal flood hazardand is not considereda specialflood hazardarea. Accordingly, impactsrelatedto releaseof pollutantsdue to project inundationin a flood hazardzonewouldbelessthan significant.

Tsunamisare seawavesthat are generatedin responseto large-magnitudeearthquakes, which canresultin coastalflooding. Seichesarethe oscillationof largebodiesof standingwater, suchas lakes, that canoccurin responseto groundshaking. Theproject site is approximately14.5 miles eastof the PacificOceanandthere areno largebodiesof standingwater nearthe projectsite. As aresult, tsunamisandseichesdonot posehazardsdueto the projectsite’sinlandlocationandlack of nearbybodiesof standingwater. Asthe project site is not locatedwithin a tsunamior seiche zone, the Projectwouldnot riskof releaseof pollutantsdueto Projectinundation; impactswould belessthan significant.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page108
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwatermanagementplan?
Lessthan SignificantImpact. Refer to Responses4.10(a) regardingwater quality. As noted in Threshold4.10b, the City’s localgroundwaterwater supplyis producedfrom the OrangeCounty GroundwaterBasin (OCBasin). TheOCBasinunderliesthenortherlyhalfof OrangeCountybeneath broad lowlands. TheOCBasin, managedby OCWD, coversan areaof approximately350 square miles, bordered by the Coyoteand ChinoHills to the north, the SantaAna Mountains to the northeast, andthe PacificOceanto the southwest.

In accordancewith the CaliforniaUrbanWater ManagementPlanningAct, the City of Fullerton mustprepareandadoptaUWMPeveryfive years. TheCity’smost recent2020UWMP, whichwas published in 2021, describesthe City’s managementoperations in achieving the maximum practicableconservationandefficientuseof localwater resources.

The2020UWMPestimateda total water demandof 27,850 AFby 2045. Additionally, the City’s populationis expectedto increasefrom 141,648 personsin 2020to 189,687personsby 2045. In caseof a water supplyshortage, the City hasprepareda Water ShortageContingencyPlanto ensureadequateservice. TheWater ShortageContingencyPlanservesasthe operatingmanual detailingprocessesand proceduresto be deployedduring shortageconditions, enablingthe City andwater retail agenciesto identify andefficientlyimplementpre-determinedstepsto mitigatea water shortage.

Further, asdiscussedin Section4.14: Population and Housing, the Projectwould be consistent with the existing land use designationand would not result in significantnew unanticipated employment opportunities. Therefore, the proposed Project would be within the population projectionsanticipatedby the Cityand the 2020UWMP. Further, asnotedaboveand concluded in the Water Demand Assessment, the Project’s average daily water demand would be approximately3,196 GPD, an increaseof 344 GPDfrom existingconditions. Asdiscussed, it was concludedbasedon fire flow testing that the increasewould not significantlyimpact existing infrastructureand the proposedProjectwould be ableto be servicedby the City. Therefore, the Project’s anticipatedwater demandisaccountedfor in the UWMP, andthere wouldbe sufficient water suppliesavailableto servethe Projectdevelopmentduring normal, dry and multiple dry years. Impactsto water supplywould be lessthan significant. Therefore, the Projectwould not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwatermanagementplanandimpactswouldbelessthan significant.

StandardConditionsandRequirements
SCHYD-1 Prior to issuanceof any Grading or Building Permit, and as part of the future development’s compliancewith the NPDESrequirements, a Notice of Intent shall be preparedand submittedto the SantaAna RWQCBprovidingnotification and intent to comply with the State of CaliforniaGeneralConstructionPermit. Also, a Stormwater Pollution PreventionPlan (SWPPP) shall be reviewedand approvedby the Director of Engineeringfor waterqualityconstructionactivitieson-site. Acopyof theSWPPPshallbe availableandimplementedat the constructionsite at all times. TheSWPPPshalloutline the sourcecontrol and/or treatment control BMPsto avoidor mitigate runoff pollutants at the constructionsiteto the “maximumextentpracticable.” Allrecommendationsin the AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page109
Plan shall be implemented during area preparation, grading, and construction. The project applicantshallcomplywith eachof the recommendationsdetailedin the Study, andother suchmeasure(s) astheCitydeemsnecessaryto mitigatepotentialstormwater runoff impacts.

SCHYD-2 Priorto issuanceof anyGradingPermit, future developmentprojectsshallprepare, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering, a Water Quality Management Plan or Stormwater Mitigation Plan, which includes Best Management Practices (BMPs), in accordance with the Orange County Drainage Area Master Plan ( DAMP). All recommendationsin the Planshallbe implementedduringpost construction/operation phase. Theprojectapplicantshallcomplywith eachof the recommendationsdetailedin the Study, and other suchmeasure(s) asthe Citydeemsnecessaryto mitigate potential water qualityimpacts.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page110

4.11 LANDUSEANDPLANNING

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

11. LANDUSEANDPLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physicallydivideanestablishedcommunity? X
b) Causeasignificantenvironmentalimpactdueto aconflict
with any land useplan, policy, or regulationadoptedfor
the purposeof avoidingor mitigatingan environmental
effect?
X
a) Physicallydividean establishedcommunity?
NoImpact. TheApplicantisproposingthedemolitionof theexistingapproximately85,700-square- foot CedarwoodsBusinessParkandthe constructionandoperationof anew110,232-square-foot warehouse/distribution facility with a surface parkinglot and gated truck court. The proposed buildingwould have100,232squarefeet of warehousespaceand 10,000squarefeet of ancillary officespacethat is split evenlybetweenthe groundleveland mezzanine. Thesurroundingareas arezonedM-PandM-G, anddesignatedasIndustrial (I). OrangethorpeAvenueislocatedsouthof the project site. Theproperty locatedsouthof OrangethorpeAvenueis locatedwithin the Cityof AnaheimandzonedIndustrialbytheCityof Anaheim. TheProjectwouldnot involveanyroadways or significantinfrastructure systemsthat would physicallydivide an establishedcommunity or surroundingareas. Developmentof the Projectwould be consistentwith surroundingland uses.

Therefore, the Projectwouldnot divideanestablishedcommunity, andno impactwouldoccur. b) Causea significant environmentalimpact due to a conflict with any land useplan, policy, or regulation adoptedfor the purposeof avoidingor mitigating an environmentaleffect? Lessthan SignificantImpact.

TheFullertonPlan’sCommunityDevelopmentPlan (CommunityDevelopmentandDesignExhibit 2) depicts the City’s land use designationsand identifies that the project site is designated Industrial. TheIndustrial (I) land usedesignationis intended to protect and enhancethe City’s major employment areas by providing opportunities for manufacturing, product assembly, researchand development, warehousing, and supportingusesand amenities.61 Therefore, the proposedProjectwouldbeconsistentwith the project site’sIndustrial (I) landusedesignation.

Theprojectsiteislocatedwithin the SoutheastIndustrialFocusArea. TheFocusAreaiscomposed mainlyof largeparcelswith one- andtwo-story buildingsand is characterizedby businessesthat operateduringtraditionalworkinghours, with minimalnighttimeactivity. 61 Cityof Fullerton. (2012). TheFullertonPlan. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/government/departments/community-and-economic- development/planning-zoning/general-plan/the-fullerton-plan-current-version. AccessedSeptember10, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page111
TheSoutheastIndustrialFocusArea’sPlanningObjectivesidentifiedin TheFullertonPlaninclude:

Retainindustrial and employment-generatinguseswhile providingamenitiesand services that will supportthe work force, suchasrecreation, retail, andlimited housingopportunities.

Providefor largeparcelsandflexiblespacesto accommodatea varietyof industriesoverthe longterm while supportingincubatorspacesfor newandemergingtechnologies.

Encouragenew businessesand compatiblenew uses, while discouragingthosethat are in conflict. Specificallyseek to expandand attract industrial usersthat would benefit from freewayaccess, technologyclusters, andindustrialinfrastructure.

Improve appearanceand function through design, including landscaping, pedestrianand transit facilities, andalleywayimprovements.

The proposed warehouseuse is consistent with the objectivesidentified in the Southeast Industrial FocusArea. Additionally, consistentwith the SoutheastIndustrial FocusArea, the Projectproposesa FARof 0.53, whichiswithin the 1.0maximumidentifiedin TheFullertonPlan.

An analysisof the proposedProject’s consistencywith relevant policiesof The FullertonPlan adoptedfor the purposeof avoidingor mitigating an environmentaleffect is providedin Table 23: GeneralPlanPolicyConsistency. TheProjectisconsistentwith TheFullertonPlan.

Table23: GeneralPlanPolicyConsistency
Goal ConsistencyAnalysis
Chapter1: CommunityDevelopmentandDesign
P1.11: Supportprograms, policiesandregulations
to considerthe immediateandsurrounding
contextsof projectsto promote positivedesign
relationshipsandusecompatibilitywith adjacent
built environmentsandlanduses, includingthe
publicrealm
Consistent. Asdiscussedin Section4.1: Aesthetics, the site would besubjectto FMC15.40.040, SiteDevelopment
Standards, whichaddressesbuildingexteriordesign,
screeningof rooftop equipment, landscaperequirements,
buildingheightlimits, setbackrequirements, andfencesand walls, amongstothers. FMCChapter15.47, SitePlanReview,
requiresthat the approvalof the reviewedsiteplanoccurs
only after the proposedProjectisconfirmedto follow
developmentstandardsandnearbyuses. Theproposed
Projectwouldbein alignmentwith this policy.

P1.12: Supportprojects, programs, policiesand
regulationsto encourageenergyandresource
efficient practicesin siteandbuildingdesignfor
privateandpublicprojects.

Consistent. Asdiscussedin Section4.6: Energy, the proposed Projectwould includea varietyof energysavingand
renewableenergyfeatures, includinghigh-efficiencylighting, solarPVsystem, provideelectricvehiclechargingstations,
installlow flow water fixtures, water-efficientirrigation, and droughttolerant landscaping. Therefore, the Projectwould be consistentwith thispolicy.

P2.8: Supportprojects, programs, policiesand
regulationsto respectthe localcontext, including
considerationof culturalandhistoricresources,
existingscaleandcharacteranddevelopment
patternsof the surroundingneighborhoodor
district.

Consistent. Aspreviouslydiscussed, the siteisidentified by the city asIndustrial, andthe siteis zonedasManufacturing Park (M-P). Nearbysitesalsofall into thesetwo clearly
definedcategories. Section4.5: CulturalResourcesstates
that basedon a reviewof the Registerof HistoricPlaces,
NationalHistoricLandmarks, andthe BuiltEnvironment
ResourcesDirectory, a reviewof resourcedatabasesand
repositoriesdid not resultin the identificationof anypresent AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page112
Table23: GeneralPlanPolicyConsistency
Goal ConsistencyAnalysis
culturalresourcesin the project site. Therefore, the Project would beconsistentwith this policy.

Chapter4: Mobility
P5.16: Supportprojects, programs, policiesand
regulationsto encouragethe developmentof
privateand/or publicinfrastructurefacilitatingthe
useof alternativefuel vehicles
Consistent. Asaddressedin Section2.3: Project
Characteristics, the projectproposes4 electricvehicle
chargingstations (EVCS) and13electricvehiclecapablestalls.

Therefore, the proposedprojectisin alignmentwith this
policy.

Chapter6: GrowthManagement
P7.5: Supportprojects, programs, policiesand
regulationsto ensurethat developmentis
appropriatein scaleto current andplanned
infrastructurecapabilities.

Consistent. Asaddressedin Section2.3: Project
Characteristics, the Projectproposesthe demolitionof the existingapproximately85,700-square-foot Cedarwoods
BusinessParkandthe constructionandoperationof anew
110,232square-foot warehouse/distributionfacility. The
proposedProjectisconsistentwith TheFullertonPlanland
usedesignationandzoning. Further, the Projectwould
generatesignificantpopulationgrowth. Therefore, the
proposedProjectwouldnot requirethe constructionof new
or expandedwater supplyor treatment facilities. Theproject sitecurrentlyreceivesthe servicesnecessaryandmaintains
the infrastructurenecessaryto servethe proposedProject.

Therefore, the Projectisconsistentwith this policy.

Chapter7: Noise
P8.6: Supportprojects, programs, policiesand
regulationsto permit useswherethe noiselevelof
the surroundings—after takinginto accountnoise
insulationfeaturesandother controltechniquesof
the use— isnot detrimentalto the use.

Consistent. TheProjectproposesanindustrialuseandwould
not beconsideredasensitivereceptor. Asdiscussedin
Section4.13: Noise, the FMCdoesnot establishnoiselimits for industrialproperties. Thenoiselevelof surroundinguses would not affectthe proposedProjectuse. Therefore, the
Projectwouldbeconsistentwith this policy.

P8.7: Supportprojects, programs, policiesand
regulationsto permit usesand/or activitieswhere
the noisegeneratedby the useand/or activityis
not detrimentalor otherwiseanuisanceto the
surroundings.

Consistent. Referto consistencyanalysisfor P8.6.

Chapter10: PublicSafety
P17.16: Supportprogramsthat foster coordination
betweenthe Cityandlocalschooldistricts, colleges
anduniversitiesto assessandmitigateproject
impactspertainingto on andoff -campus
development.

Consistent. Asaddressedin Section4.15: PublicServices, the Projectwouldnot createa direct demandfor publicschool
servicesasthe projectproposesnon-residentialusesthat
would not generateanyschool-agedchildrenrequiringpublic education. Further, the Projectwouldnot drawa substantial numberof newresidentsto the schooldistrictsandtherefore would not indirectlygenerateschool-agedstudentsrequiring publiceducation. Therefore, the Projectwouldbeconsistent with this policy.

Chapter16: Water
P19.7: Supportprojects, programs, policiesand
regulationsto encouragewater efficient practices
Consistent. TheProjectwould includewater efficientdesign featuresincludinglow flow water fixtures, water-efficient AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page113
Table23: GeneralPlanPolicyConsistency
Goal ConsistencyAnalysis
in siteandbuildingdesignfor privateandpublic
projects.
irrigation, anddroughttolerant landscaping. Therefore, the Projectwouldbeconsistentwith this policy.

P20.6: ConstructionImpacts. Supportprojects,
programs, policiesandregulationsto reduce
impactsto watershedsandurbanrunoff causedby
privateandpublicconstructionprojects.

Consistent. Asdiscussedin Section4.10: Hydrologyand
Water Quality, TheGeneralPermitrequiresdevelopment
andimplementationof a StormwaterPollutionPrevention
Plan (SWPPP) andmonitoringplan, whichmustinclude
erosion-control andsediment-control BMPsthat would meet or exceedmeasuresrequiredby the GeneralPermitto
control potentialconstruction-relatedpollutants. Erosion- control BMPsaredesignedto preventerosion, whereas
sedimentcontrolsaredesignedto trap sedimentonceit has
beenmobilized. Projectconstructionactivitieswould alsobe requiredto complywith water qualitymeasuresincludedin
the Cityof Fullerton’sWaterQualityOrdinance (FMCChapter

12.18, WaterQualityOrdinance). TheCity’sWaterQuality
Ordinancerequirescompliancewith the OrangeCounty
DrainageAreaManagementPlan (DAMP) andanyconditions
andrequirementsestablishedby the Cityin order to meet
FederalandStatewater qualityrequirementsrelatedto
storm water runoff. Theseregulationswould requirethe
Projectcontractorto includeBMPsto ensurethat the
dischargeof pollutantsfrom the sitewould beeffectively
prohibitedandwould not causeor contributeto an
exceedanceof water qualitystandardsor alter water quality duringconstruction. With thesemeasuresin place, the
Projectwouldbeconsistentwith this policy.

P20.7: Supportprojects, programs, policiesand
regulationsto reduceimpactsto watershedsand
urbanrunoff causedby the designor operationof a
siteor use.

Consistent. Asdiscussedin Section4.10: Hydrologyand
Water Quality, the proposedProjectwouldberequiredto
submita FinalWQMPto the Cityfor reviewandcompliance
with the County’sNPDESstormwaterpermit. TheFinal
WQMPwould berequiredto implementBMPsinto the final
Projectdesignto addresspollutantsof concernassociated
with runoff from the project site. TheProjectincorporates variousBMPsaspart of the Project, whichinclude
biotreatment, treatment control, non-structuralsource
control, andstructuralsourcecontrolBMPsto addresswater
qualityconditionsassociatedwith the proposedProject.

Therefore, the Projectwould beconsistentwith this policy.

Chapter17: Air QualityandClimateChange
P21.6: ConstructionImpacts. Supportprojects,
programs, policiesandregulationsto reduce
impactsto air qualitycausedby privateandpublic
constructionprojects.

Consistent. Asdiscussedin Section4.3: Air Quality, Project- relatedconstructionactivitieswould includedemolition,
grading, buildingconstruction, andpaving, architectural coating, andlandscaping. Projectconstructionactivities
would generateshort-term emissionsof criteriaair
pollutants. However, thisshortterm andminor construction would not exceedthe SCAQMD’sdailyemissionthresholdsat
the regionallevel. In addition, the proposedProjectwouldbe subjectto compliancewith SCAQMDRules402, 403, and
1113, whichwould further reducespecificconstruction-
AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page114
Table23: GeneralPlanPolicyConsistency
Goal ConsistencyAnalysis
relatedemissions. Therefore, the Projectwould be consistent with this policy.

Chapter18: IntegratedWasteManagement
P23.7: Supportprojects, programs, policiesand
regulationsto considerproject levelsolidwaste
managementneedsat the siteandbuildingdesign
stages.

Consistent. Asdiscussedin Section4.19: Utilities andService Systems, in accordancewith Statelaw andFMCSection

14.06.010, the Projectwouldberequiredto divert at least65 percentof the nonhazardousconstructionanddemolition
debrisfrom the project siteby recycling, reuse, and/or
salvage. In addition, the Citymeetsits per capitadisposalrate targetthroughdiversionprograms. TheCitywouldcontinue
to implementits diversionprogramsandrequirecompliance
with all federal, Stateandlocalstatutesandregulationsfor solidwaste, includingthoseidentified underthe mostcurrent CALGreenstandardsandin compliancewith AB939andSB
1383. Therefore, the Projectwouldbe consistentwith this policy.

Zoning. TheCity of FullertonZoningMap identifies the zoning classificationon the northern portion of the siteasManufacturingParkwith a 100,000-square-foot minimumlot size (MP-100) and Commercial Manufacturing (CM) over the remaining southern portion of the site.

Additionally, the entiretyof the sitehasanEmergencyShelterOverlay (ES). TheproposedProject would rezone the southern portion of the site to MP-100-ESto allow for the warehouse development. TheFMCChapter15.40, IndustrialZoneClassifications, clarifiesthat M-Pzonesare establishedto allow compatibleindustrial usesin proximity to eachother while protectingthe public health, safety and welfare through development standardsand the site plan review process. It alsostatesthat the M-Pzoneisintendedfor a wide rangeof light industrialactivities, often basedon a multiple-tenant type development. FMCSection15.40.040, SiteDevelopment Standards, providesdevelopmentstandardsthat applyto the M-Pzone.

TheProjectwouldalsobesubjectto FMCSection15.40.040, SiteDevelopmentStandards, which addressesbuildingheight limits, setbackrequirements, and minimum lot area, amongstothers, as well as FMCSection15.40.050, ParkingStandards, which specifiesparking requirements.

Consistentwith the proposedMP-100-ESzoningdistrict, the proposedwarehousewould havea maximum roof line of approximately44 feet in height, 91 passengervehicleparking stalls - including electric vehiclechargingand capablestalls, an approximately21 foot setbackfrom OrangethorpeAvenue, anda total of 19,109squarefeet of landscaping, focusednearparkinglot areas, the warehouse, siteperimeter, anddrivewayentries. Aspart of the City’sSitePlanReview processrequired under FMCChapter15.47, SitePlanReview, the Projectsite plan would be reviewedandonlyapprovedafter findingthe proposeddevelopment, includingtheusesandthe physicaldesignof the developmentis consistentwith the intent and generalpurposesof the chapter, and would not adverselyaffect surroundingdevelopmentin the area. Therefore, the Projectwould not causea significantenvironmentalimpactdue to a conflict with TheFullerton Planor FMC, or anyother landuseplan, policy, or regulationadoptedfor the purposeof avoiding or mitigatinganenvironmentaleffect.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page115

4.12 MINERALRESOURCES

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

12. MINERALRESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resourcethat would be of value to the region and the
residentsof the State?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
generalplan, specificplan, or other landuseplan?
X
a) Resultin the lossof availability of a knownmineralresourcethat wouldbeof valueto the region andtheresidentsoftheState?
NoImpact. TheSurfaceMining andReclamationAct of 1975 (SMARA) requiresthe classification of land into mineralresourcezones (MRZs) accordingto the knownor inferred mineralpotential of thearea. TheFullertonPlanstatesthat theCitydoesnot containanyareasdesignatedasMRZs.62 The Project proposes the demolition of the existing CedarwoodsBusinessPark and the constructionand operation of a warehouse/ distribution facility, which would not establishany useassociatedwith mineralresourceextraction. Therefore, the Projectwouldnot resultin theloss of known mineralresourcesthat would be of valueto the regionand the residentsof the State, andno impactwouldoccur.
b) Resultin the lossof availability of a locally-important mineral resourcerecoverysite delineated ona localgeneralplan, specificplan, orotherlanduseplan? No Impact. Theproject site is not identifiedasa locallyimportant mineralresourcerecoverysite in any localgeneralplan, specificplan, or other land useplan. TheproposedProjectwould not resultin the lossof availabilityof a locallyimportantmineralresourcerecoverysite. Theproposed project site is currentlyurbanized, andno resourcerecoverysitesexist. Therefore, the proposed Projectwouldnot resultin a lossof availabilityof knownmineralresources, andno impactwould occur.
62 Cityof Fullerton. (1997). GeneralPlan. Retrievedfrom:
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/1214/637436205717830000. AccessedJuly9, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page116

4.13 NOISE

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

13. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increasein ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the
project in excessof standardsestablishedin the local
generalplan or noiseordinance, or applicablestandards
of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundbornenoiselevels?
X
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or anairport landuseplanor, where sucha plan
hasnot beenadopted, within two milesof apublicairport
or public use airport, would the project exposepeople
residingor workingin the project areato excessivenoise
levels?
X
Thenoisemodelingis includedin AppendixI: NoiseandVibration Data, andthe resultsaresummarized below.

Background
Theanalysisdescribessoundin termsof amplitude (loudness) andfrequency (pitch). Thestandardunit of soundamplitudemeasurementis the decibel (dB). Thedecibelscaleisa logarithmicscalethat describes the physicalintensity of the pressurevibrationsthat make up any sound. Thepitch of the soundis in relationto the frequencyof the pressurevibration. Sincethe humanearisnot equallysensitiveto agiven soundlevelat all frequencies, the A-weighteddecibelscale (dBA) relatesnoiseto humansensitivity. The A-weighteddecibelscaleprovidesthis compensationby discriminatingagainstfrequenciesin a manner approximatingthe sensitivityof the humanear.

Noise, on the other hand, is unwantedsound. A typicalnoiseenvironmentconsistsof a baseof steady ambientnoisethat isthe sumof manydistantandindistinguishablenoisesources. Superimposedon this backgroundnoiseisthe soundfrom individuallocalsources. Thesecanvaryfrom anoccasionalaircraftor train passingby to virtually continuousnoisefrom traffic on a majorhighway.

Severalratingscalesanalyzetheadverseeffectsof communitynoiseonpeople. Sinceenvironmentalnoise fluctuatesovertime, thesescalesconsiderthat the effect of noiseon peopleislargelydependenton the total acousticalenergycontentof thenoiseaswellasthetime of daywhenthe noiseoccurs. Forexample, the equivalentcontinuoussoundlevel (Leq) is the acousticenergycontent of noisefor a statedperiod; therefore, the Leqof a time-varyingnoiseandthat of a steadynoisearethe sameif they deliverthe same acousticenergyto the earduringexposure. TheDay-NightSoundlevel (Ldn ) isa 24-hour averageLeqwith a 10 dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM to accountfor noise AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page117
sensitivityin the nighttime. TheCommunityNoiseEquivalentLevel (CNEL) isa 24-hour averageLeqwith a 10 dBAweightingadded to noise during the hours of 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM and an additional5-dBA weightingduring the hoursof 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM to accountfor noisesensitivityin the eveningand nighttime.

ExistingSetting
Theproject site is locatedwithin an urbanenvironment, surroundedby commercialand industrialuses.

TheProjectvicinityisimpactedby variousnoisesources. Mobile noisesources, especiallycarsandtrucks traveling alongOrangethorpeAvenueand SouthStateCollegeBoulevard, are the most common and significantsourcesof noisein the Projectvicinity. Theprimarysourcesof stationarynoisenearthe project site are associatedwith the commercialand industrialusesand includeparkinglot activity, mechanical equipment (e.g., heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] units), idlingvehicles, truck deliveries, pedestrians, car radiosand musicplaying, and landscapingequipment. Thenoiseassociatedwith these sourcesmayrepresenta single-eventnoiseoccurrenceor short-term noise.

NoiseMeasurements
Toquantifyexistingambientnoiselevelsin the Projectvicinity, Kimley-Hornconductedthree short-term 10-minute) measurementson July15, 2025; seeAppendixI: NoiseDatafor additionaldetailsregarding how the ambient noisemeasurementswere taken. Thenoisemeasurementsiteswere selectedto be representativeof theexistingambientnoiselevelsat the noise-sensitiveusesin the vicinityof the project site. The10-minutedaytimemeasurementsweretakenbetween8:41AMand9:28AMMeasurementsof Leqare consideredrepresentativeof the noise levels throughout the day. The averagenoise levels measuredat each location are identified in Table 24: ExistingNoise Measurement Locationsand Measurementsandshownon Figure11: NoiseMonitoring LocationsMap.

Table24: ExistingNoiseMeasurementLocationsand Measurements Site Location MeasurementPeriod Duration
DaytimeAverage
dBALeq)
ST-1 Adjacentto 823LarkAvenue, alongSouth
PlacentiaAvenue 8:41AM - 8:51AM 10minutes 73.1
ST-2 Adjacentto InterfaceRehab 8:56AM - 9:06AM 10minutes 71.5 ST-3 Adjacentto DoggiDogiPetSpa 9:18AM - 9:28AM 10minutes 61.3 ST = short-term noisemeasurement
Source: Noisemeasurementstakenby Kimley-HornandAssociates, Inc., July15, 2025. SeeAppendixI for the noisemeasurementresults.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
Not to scale.

Source:

CedarwoodsFullertonProject
Figure11: NoiseMeasurementLocations Map
Source: Nearmaps, 2025Source: Nearmaps, 2025
EOrangethorpeAveE OrangethorpeAve
SPlacentia
Ave
SPlacentia
Ave
CypressWayCypressWay
Bu
rtPl
Bu
rtPl
ProjectSite
Short-TermMeasurement#
11 22
33 7
I
1 m..
3 I N
r
l. ila wh
H‘MHIET- T" I|I| EIT”
3 >.

Mil mini1
S? PE FiR
H _
r -
1111111
T19it
Iaa.

Ill n
I III I 0e
I
3IIII I Ee. irru
E17dlenpnyaasaa 1. Mi • p.
lYs. Ulle=ah I a!$
J:•| -
7a -
33J'ah tae
lhJ3.55
d
ftoinrel
Gi V 74
d .‘. -
2rig)
ul|
Ms
20 t
sIIpps.. fl'
Ill""
Tl
i
J’
Larhre
l
A-
1 -

1..
s .
i‘
n
y—
70!
1= 11
mp* *
I4.

Ii
aa
t "
rs rT
i
Etv. . —
2a.
end
L
I
3 I

7.41h -- 2
Hl
KimleyHorn
lP
ek
W
a
t
2 N
d
I
g
i
s
A
E
G
g
se
x
14 9a
y
r
J.

IIg
lig
y
3-
4 a
7 a
A
t
a
I
a
l'
i -
I
a
4 I -
s,
0 e
7 i
I
rij
ii
9 nL
@
hmwrt
I
I
e
I
rd
5 1
i •
p r
S
flA
s
1I
9 fl
a
f
a
i
H
H
H
iiil
iiilH
I
11 1
ll
Iill
W
H
IJ
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page119
SensitiveReceptors
Noise exposurestandardsand guidelinesfor various types of land uses reflect the varying noise sensitivitiesassociatedwith each of these uses. FMCSection15.90.030, NoiseStandards, definesa sensitivereceptorasanyprivateor publicschool, hospital, or residentialcarefacility for the elderly, and religiousinstitution.63
No sensitivereceptorsin the Cityof Fullertonhavebeenidentified within 1,000 feet of the project site.

The City of PlacentiaGeneralPlan definesa sensitivereceptor as residentialuses, schools, libraries, hospitals, churches, and parks.64 Thenearestsensitivereceptorsto the project site within the City of Placentiaare residential useslocated approximately765 feet to the southeastand Interface Rehab locatedapproximately975feet to the east.65
Regulations
Stateof CaliforniaNoiseStandards
TheStateof Californiadoesnot havestandardsfor environmentalnoise, but theGovernor’sOfficeof Land UseandClimateInnovation (Governor’sOffice) hasestablishedgeneralplanguidelinesfor evaluatingthe compatibility of variousland uses asa function of community noiseexposure.66 Thepurposeof these guidelinesis to maintainacceptablenoiselevelsin a communitysettingfor different land usetypes. The guidelinesranknoiselandusecompatibilityin termsof “normallyacceptable,” “conditionallyacceptable,” normallyunacceptable,” and “clearlyunacceptable” noiselevelsfor variouslandusetypes.

In addition, CaliforniaGovernmentCodeSection65302(f) mandatesthat the legislativebody of each countyandcity adopta noiseelementaspart of its comprehensivegeneralplan. Thelocalnoiseelement mustrecognizethe landusecompatibilityguidelinesestablishedby the Governor’sOffice.

CaliforniaCodeof Regulations, Title 24
TheCCR, Title 24: Part 1, BuildingStandardsAdministrativeCode, and Part 2, CaliforniaBuildingCode, codifytheState’snoiseinsulationstandards. Thesenoisestandardsapplyto newconstructioninCalifornia for the purposeof interior noisecompatibilityfrom exteriornoisesources.

Theregulationsspecifythat acousticalstudiesmustbepreparedwhennoise-sensitivestructures, suchas residentialbuildings, schools, or hospitals, are located near major transportation noise sources, and wheresuchnoisesourcescreateanexteriornoiselevelof 65 dBACNELor higher. Acousticalstudiesthat accompanybuildingplansmustdemonstratethat the designof the structurewouldlimit interior noisein habitablerooms to acceptablenoiselevels. For new residentialbuildings, schools, and hospitals, the acceptableinterior noiselimit for newconstructionis45dBACNEL. 63 Thenearestsensitivereceptorsarelocatedin the Cityof Placentia. Thedistancewasmeasuredfrom the projectsite property line to the nearestsensitivereceptorproperty line on GoogleEarthImagery (2025). 64 Cityof Placentia. (2019). Cityof PlacentiaGeneralPlan, NoiseElement. https:// www.placentia.org/DocumentCenter/View/8392/8- Noise?bidId=. AccessedSeptember10, 2025.
65 Thenearestsensitivereceptorsarelocatedin the Cityof Placentia. Thedistancewasmeasuredfrom the projectsite property line to the nearestsensitivereceptorproperty line on GoogleEarthImagery (2025). 66 Stateof CaliforniaGovernor’sOfficeof PlanningandResearch. (2017). GeneralPlanGuidelines, AppendixD: NoiseElementGuidelines, page 374. Retrievedfrom: https:// opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_COMPLETE_7.31.17.pdf. AccessedSeptember20, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page120
Cityof Fullerton
TheFullertonPlan
AdoptedMay 1, 2012, Chapter7: Noiseof TheFullertonPlan (FullertonNoiseElement) providesguidance for the control of noiseandestablishesgoalsandpoliciesto protect residents, workers, andvisitorsfrom potentiallyadversenoiseimpacts. Theprimarypurposeof TheFullertonPlanNoiseElementisto preserve an acceptablenoise environment for all types of land uses. The NoiseElementdefers regulation of temporary, point-sourcenoisessuchasconstructionactivitiesto theCity’sMunicipalCode. Thefollowing goalsandpoliciesfrom NoiseElementareapplicableto the Project.

GOAL8: Protectionfrom the adverseeffectsof noise.

P8.3 Considerationof Noise in Land Use DecisionsSupport projects, programs, policiesand regulations which ensure noise-compatible land use planning recognizingthe relative importanceof noisesourcesin orderof communityimpact, the localattitudestowardsthese sources, and the suburbanor urban characteristicsof the environment, while identifying noisesensitiveuses.

P8.4 NoiseReductionMeasuresSupportprojects, programs, policiesand regulationsto control and abatenoisegeneratedby stationarysources.

P8.5 FocusAreaPlanningSupportprojects, programs, policiesandregulationsto evaluatewaysto ensurenoisecompatibleland useplanningas part of community-basedplanningof Focus Areas.

P8.6 NoiseReceptorsSupportprojects, programs, policiesandregulationsto permit useswhere the noiselevel of the surroundings—after takinginto accountnoiseinsulationfeaturesand other control techniquesof the use— isnot detrimentalto the use.

P8.7 NoiseGeneratorsSupportprojects, programs, policiesandregulationsto permit usesand/or activitieswherethe noisegeneratedbytheuseand/or activityisnot detrimentalor otherwise a nuisanceto the surroundings.

The Fullerton Noise Element identifies land use guidelines to reduce future noise and land use incompatibilities. The noise and land use compatibility criteria is provided in Table 25: Land Use Compatibilityfor CommunityNoiseEnvironments.

Table25: LandUseCompatibilityfor CommunityNoiseEnvironments LandUseCategory
CommunityNoiseExposure (CNEL)
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential-LowDensity, Single-Family,
Duplex, Mobile Homes 50 - 60 55 - 70 70 - 75 75 - 85
Residential – Multiple Family 50 - 65 60 - 70 70 - 75 70 - 85 TransientLodging – Motel, Hotels 50 - 65 60 - 70 70 - 80 80 - 85 Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals,
NursingHomes 50 - 70 60 - 70 70 - 80 80 - 85
Auditoriums, ConcertHalls,
Amphitheaters NA 50 - 70 NA 65 - 85
AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page121
Table25: LandUseCompatibilityfor CommunityNoiseEnvironments LandUseCategory
CommunityNoiseExposure (CNEL)
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
SportsArenas, OutdoorSpectator
Sports NA 50 -75 NA 70 - 85
Playgrounds, NeighborhoodParks 50 - 70 NA 67.5 – 77.5 72.5 - 85 GolfCourses, RidingStables, Water
Recreation, Cemeteries 50 - 70 NA 70 - 80 80 - 85
OfficeBuildings, BusinessCommercial
andProfessional 50 - 70 67.5 – 77.5 75 - 85 NA
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities,
Agriculture 50 - 75 70 - 80 75 - 85 NA
CNEL = communitynoiseequivalentlevel; NA = not applicable NormallyAcceptable: Specifiedland useis satisfactory, basedupon the assumptionthat anybuildingsinvolvedare of normal conventional construction, without anyspecialnoiseinsulationrequirements.

ConditionallyAcceptable: New constructionor developmentshould be undertakenonly after a detailed analysisof the noise reduction requirementsis madeand needednoiseinsulationfeatureshave been includedin the design. Conventionalconstruction, but with closed windowsandfreshair supplysystemsor air conditioning, will normallysuffice.

Normally Unacceptable: New constructionor developmentshould be discouraged. If new constructionor developmentdoes proceed, a detailedanalysisof the noisereductionrequirementsmust be madeandneedednoiseinsulationfeaturesmustbeincludedin the design.

ClearlyUnacceptable: Newconstructionor developmentshouldgenerallynot be undertaken.

Source: Officeof PlanningandResearch, California. (2017). GeneralPlanGuidelines; Cityof Fullerton. (2012). Cityof FullertonGeneralPlan, E:

TablesandExhibits; andCityof Placentia. (2019). Cityof PlacentiaGeneralPlan, Chapter8: NoiseElement.

Cityof FullertonMunicipalCode
Thefollowingsectionsof the FMCareapplicableto the proposedProject.

Section15.40.080IndustrialEnvironmentalControls. Vibrationfrom anymachine, operation, or process that cancausenoticeabledisplacementasmeasuredat the property line of the parcelon whichthe use is locatedisprohibited.

Section15.90.030NoiseStandards.

A. The following interior and exterior noise standardpresentedin Table 26: City of Fullerton Noise Standardsapplyto the ResidentialNoiseZone. TheCitydoesnot specifynoiselevellimits for commercial or industrialzones.

Table26: Cityof FullertonNoiseStandards
NoiseArea Allowable NoiseLevel (dBALeq)
7:00AM to 10:00PM 10:00PM to 7:00AM
Interior 55 45
Exterior 55 50
Source: Cityof Fullerton. (N.D.) FullertonMunicipalCodeSection15.90.030: NoiseStandards.

B. A sensitiveuseis definedasany private or publicschool, hospital, or residentialcarefacility for the elderly, andreligiousinstitution. It isprohibitedto createanynoisethat causesthe noiselevelat any sensitiveuse, while the sensitiveuse is in operation to exceedthe noise limits specifiedfor the ResidentialNoiseZone, notwithstandingthesensitiveusemaybelocatedoutsidethe ResidentialNoise Zone.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page122
C. Noisethat is classifiedas beingcontinuous, reoccurring, predictable, or whoseoperation of noise- generatingcapability can be stopped or started at a specifiedtime, or exceedsthe following is prohibited:

Thenoisestandardfor a cumulativeperiodof more than30minutesin anyhour; Thenoisestandardplusfive dBAfor a cumulativeperiod of more than 15 minutesbut less than 30minutesin anyhour;
Thenoisestandardplus10 dBAfor a cumulativeperiod of more than five minutesbut less than 15minutesin anyhour;
Thenoisestandardplus15 dBAfor a cumulativeperiod of more than one minute but less than five minutesin anyhour; and
Thenoisestandardplus20dBAfor a cumulativeperiodof lessthan oneminute in anhour.

D. If the ambient noiselevel exceedsany of the five noiselimit categorieslisted in SubsectionC, the cumulativeperiodapplicableto the categoryshallbeincreasedto reflectthe ambientnoiselevel.

Section15.90.040ActivesExemptfrom Standards. Noisefrom vehiculartrafficonpublicstreetsisexempt from the noiselevelstandardsspecifiedin this chapter.

Section15.90.050 Activities with SpecialProvisions. Thenoise sourcesassociatedwith construction, repair, remodeling, or gradingof property is exempt from the noise levelsstandardsspecificby this chapterbetweenthe hoursof 7:00AM to 8:00PMonanydayexceptSundayor aCity-recognizedholiday.

Air conditioning, refrigeration, andpool equipmentmustbecertifiedwithin the noiselimits of the Code.

Cityof Placentia
Althoughthe project siteis locatedin the Cityof Fullerton, the nearestsensitivereceptorsarelocatedin the Cityof Placentia. Assuch, theCityof Placentianoisegoals, policies, andstandardsareincludedbelow.

Cityof PlacentiaGeneralPlan
Chapter8: NoiseElementof the Cityof PlacentiaGeneralPlan (PlacentiaNoiseElement) identifiesgoals andpoliciesto protect workers, residents, andvisitorsfrom potentiallyadversenoiseimpacts.

GOALN - 1 Reducenoiseimpactsfrom transportation noisesources.

PolicyN - 2.1 Land use planning decisionsshould be guided by the “normally acceptable” and conditionallyacceptable” communitynoiseexposures, as establishedby the Officeof PlanningandResearchandshownon Table5 (refer to Table25, above).

PolicyN - 2.2 Require noise-reduction techniques and mitigation measures in site planning, architectural design, and constructionwhere new projects do not meet the land use compatibilitystandardsin Table5 (refer to Table25, above).

PolicyN - 2.3 Discourageand, if necessary, prohibit the exposureof noisesensitiveland usesto noisy environments. Incorporate noise reduction features during site planning to mitigate anticipatednoiseimpactson affectednoise-sensitivelanduses.

PolicyN - 2.5 Requireproposeddevelopmentand building projectsto demonstratecompliancewith the NoiseElementandNoiseOrdinanceprior to projectapproval. Informbuildingpermit applicantsof the relevantsectionsof the NoiseElementandOrdinance.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page123
GOALN - 3 Minimizenoisespilloverfrom commercialusesinto nearbyresidentialneighborhoods.

PolicyN - 3.1 Requireadherenceto CityandStateexteriornoiserequirements, specifyingexteriorand interior noiselevels.

PolicyN - 3.2 Useincreasedsetbackswherenecessaryto ensurenoisefrom newdevelopmentdoesnot impactadjoiningresidentiallyusedor zonedproperty.

PolicyN - 3.3 Requirethat automobileandtruck accessto commercialpropertieslocatedadjacentto residentialparcelsbe locatedat the maximum practicaldistancefrom the residential parcel.

PolicyN - 3.4 Truck deliveries within the City to commercial and industrial properties abutting residentialusesshallfully complywith the City’sNoiseOrdinance.

PolicyN - 3.5 Limit delivery hours for commercialand industrial useswith loading areas or docks fronting, siding, bordering, or gainingaccesson drivewaysadjacentto noise-sensitive uses.

PolicyN - 3.6 Requireadherenceto CityandStatebuildingcodesthat specifyindoornoiselevels.

PolicyN - 3.7 Incorporate noise considerationsinto the site plan review process, particularly with regardto parkingandloadingareas, ingress/egresspointsandrefusecollectionsareas.

GOALN - 5 Developmeasuresto controlobjectionablenoiseimpacts.

PolicyN - 5.3 Where possible, resolveexistingand potential conflictsbetweenvariousnoisesources andother humanactivities.

PolicyN - 5.4 Requiresoundattenuationdeviceson constructionequipment.

PolicyN - 5.5 Encourageadditionalsoundattenuationmeasuresto reducenoiseimpactsto sensitive uses.

PolicyN - 5.6 Continueto enforceand ensureagencycoordinationof noise abatementand control measures, particularlywithin residentialneighborhoodsandaroundnoisesensitiveland uses.

PolicyN - 5.7 Requireconstructionactivityto complywith CityNoiseOrdinance. Ensureadequatenoise control measuresat all constructionsitesthroughgoodsoundattenuationpractices.

The Placentia Noise Element identifies land use guidelines to reduce future noise and land use incompatibilities. Thenoiseandlandusecompatibilitycriteria isprovidedin Table25, above.

Cityof PlacentiaMunicipalCode
Thefollowingsectionsof the Cityof PlacentiaMunicipalCodeareapplicableto the proposedProject.

Section23.76.050ExteriorNoiseStandards
A. Thenoisestandardpresentedin Table27: Cityof PlacentiaNoiseStandardsapplyto property within the designatednoisezone.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page124
Table27: Cityof PlacentiaNoiseStandards
NoiseZone NoiseLeveldB(A) TimePeriod
1 – AllResidentialProperty 55 7:00AM – 10:00PM
50 10:00PM – 7:00AM
2 – AllCommercialProperty 65 Anytime
3 – AllIndustrialProperty 70 Anytime
Source: Cityof Placentia. (N.D.) Cityof PlacentiaMunicipalCode, Section23.76.050: ExteriorNoiseStandards.

B. Thenoiselevelsshownin Table27 shallbe reducedby 5 dB(A) if the offensivenoiseconsistsentirely of impactnoise, simpletone noise, speech, music, or anycombinationthereof.

Noise that exceedsthe following measuredat any residential, commercia, or industrial property is prohibited:

Thenoisestandardfor a cumulativeperiodof more than30minutesin anyhour; Thenoisestandardplusfive dBAfor a cumulativeperiod of more than 15 minutesbut lessthan 30minutesin anyhour;
Thenoisestandardplus10 dBAfor a cumulativeperiod of more than five minutesbut lessthan 15minutesin anyhour;
Thenoisestandardplus15 dBAfor a cumulativeperiod of more than oneminute but lessthan five minutesin anyhour; and
Thenoisestandardplus20dBAfor a cumulativeperiodof lessthan oneminute in anhour.

C. If the ambient noiselevel exceedsthe first four categories, then the cumulativeperiod for the said categoryshallbe increasedto reflect the ambientnoiselevel. If the ambientnoiselevelexceedsthe fifth category, thenthe maximumallowablenoiselevelundersaidcategoryshallbeincreasedto reflect the maximumambientnoiselevel.

D. If the noisesourceandthe affectedpropertyarewithin different noisezones, thenthe noisestandard applicableto the affectedpropertyshallapply.

Section23.81.170Grading, Construction, andMaintenanceof RealProperty All gradingandinitial constructionof anyrealproperty is permitted only betweenthe hoursof 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM Monday through Friday, and 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM on Saturday. All gradingand initial construction of any real property is prohibited at any time on Sundayand federal holidays, unless approvedby the chiefbuildingofficialor city engineeruponreceiptof evidencethat anemergencyexists whichwouldconstitutea hazardto personsor property.

Thresholdsof Significance
Construction
TheCityof FullertonandCityof Placentiahavenot establishedaquantitativeconstructionnoisestandard.

Forpurposesof this analysis, the FTA’s thresholdof 80 dBA (8-hour Leq) for residentialusesand 85 dBA 8-hour Leq) for commercialusesis usedto evaluateconstructionnoiseimpacts.67 Becausea doublingof 67 FederalTransitAdministration. (2018). TransitNoiseandVibrationImpactAssessmentManual, Table7-3, Page179.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page125
traffic is consideredto causea perceptiblenoiseincreaseof 3-dBAaboveexistingnoiseconditions, the significancefor the off-sitetraffic noiseisassessedbasedon a doublingof existingtraffic conditions.68 Operations
ThenearestsensitivereceptorsarelocatedintheCityof Placentiaandthenearestnon-sensitivereceptors are locatedin the Cityof Fullerton. However, the Cityhasnot establishedstationarynoisestandardsfor non-sensitivereceptors. Therefore, Project-generatedstationarynoiselevelsat sensitivereceptorswould be subjectto the Cityof PlacentiaMunicipalCodeSection23.76.050, ExteriorNoiseStandards; refer to Table27. Becausea changein noiselevelsof at least5-dBAisrequiredbeforeanynoticeablechangein community responsewould be expected, an increaseof 5-dBA is typically considereda substantial increasefor operations.69 Therefore, the compositeoperationalnoisesignificanceis assessedbasedon the Cityof Placentiaexteriornoisestandardsanda noiselevelincreasethresholdof 5-dBAaboveexisting noiseconditions. Becausea doublingof traffic is consideredto causea perceptiblenoiseincreaseof 3- dBAaboveexistingnoiseconditions, the significancefor the off-site traffic noiseis assessedbasedon a doublingof existingtraffic conditions.70
Vibration
TheCityof FullertonandCityof Placentiahavenot establisheda vibrationdamagestandard. Forpurposes of this analysis, the building vibration thresholdfrom the FTATransitNoiseand Vibration Assessment Manualandthe humanannoyancevibrationthresholdfrom the CaliforniaDepartmentof Transportation Caltrans) TransportationandConstructionVibrationManualareusedasthe significancethresholds. The FTAguidancestatethat reinforced-concrete, steel, or timber buildingscanwithstandvibration levelsup to 0.5 inch-per-secondpeakparticle velocity (PPV) and not experiencevibration damage. TheCaltrans guidance identifies the vibration threshold for human annoyancewhen vibrations are considered annoyingby peoplesubjectedto continuousvibrationsas0.2 inch-per-secondPPV.

Methodology
Construction
Constructionnoise levels were based on typical noise levels generatedby constructionequipment publishedbytheFTAandFHWA. Constructionnoiseisassessedin dBALeq. Thisunit isappropriatebecause Leqcanbeusedto describethe noiselevelfrom the operationof eachpieceof equipmentseparately, and thelevelscanbecombinedto representthe noiselevelfrom allequipmentoperatingconcurrentlyduring a givenperiod.

Constructionnoisewasmodeledusingthe FHWARoadwayConstructionNoiseModel (RCNM). Reference noise levels are used to estimate operational noise levels at nearby sensitivereceptors basedon a standard noise attenuation rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance (line-of-sight method of sound attenuation for point sourcesof noise). Noise level estimates do not account for the presenceof interveningstructuresor topography, whichmayreducenoiselevelsat receptorlocations. Therefore, the noise levels presented herein represent a conservative, reasonableworst-case estimate of actual temporaryconstructionnoise.
68 CaliforniaDepartmentof Transportation. (2017). TechnicalNoiseSupplementto the TrafficNoiseAnalysisProtocol 69 Compiledfrom CaliforniaDepartmentof Transportation. (2017). TechnicalNoiseSupplementto the Traffic NoiseAnalysisProtocoland FederalHighwayAdministration. (2017). NoiseFundamentals. 70 CaliforniaDepartmentof Transportation. (2017). TechnicalNoiseSupplementto the TrafficNoiseAnalysisProtocol AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page126
Operations
The analysisof the Project noise environment is basedon noise prediction modeling and empirical observations. Referencenoiseleveldataareusedto estimatethe Projectoperationalnoiseimpactsfrom stationarysources. Noiselevelswerecollectedfrom publishedsourcesfrom similartypesof activitiesand usedto estimatenoiselevelsexpectedwith the Project’s stationarysources. Thereferencenoiselevels are usedto representa worst-casenoiseenvironmentas noiselevel from stationarysourcescanvary throughoutthe day.

Vibration
Ground-borne vibration levelsassociatedwith construction activities for the Project were evaluated utilizingtypicalground-bornevibrationlevelsassociatedwith constructionequipment, obtainedfrom FTA published data for construction equipment. Potential ground-borne vibration impacts related to building/structure damage and interference with existing sensitive operations were evaluated, consideringthe distancefrom constructionactivitiesto nearbylandusesandtypicallyappliedcriteria for structuraldamage.

Constructionvibrationlevelswerecalculatedusingthe followingformula:

PPVequip = PPVrefx (25/D)1.5
where: PPVequip = thepeakparticlevelocityin inch-per-secondof the equipmentadjustedfor the distance PPVref = the referencevibration level in inch-per-secondfrom Table7-4 of the FederalTransit Administration, TransitNoiseandVibrationImpactAssessmentManual, 2018.

D = the distancefrom the equipmentto the receiver
ImpactAnalysis
a) Generationof a substantial temporary or permanent increasein ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excessof standards establishedin the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicablestandardsof other agencies?
LessThan SignificantImpact: On-Site ConstructionNoise. Constructionnoise typically occurs intermittently and variesdependingon the nature or phaseof construction (e.g., land clearing, grading, excavation, paving). Noisegeneratedbyconstructionequipment, includingearthmovers, material handlers, and portable generators, canreachhigh levels. Duringconstruction, exterior noiselevelscouldaffectthe commercialandindustrialreceptorsnearthe constructionsite.

Projectconstructionwould occur over a 13-month period. Projectconstructionactivitieswould includedemolition, sitepreparation, grading, infrastructureimprovements, buildingconstruction, paving, andarchitecturalcoatingapplications.71
Suchactivities may require graders, and tractors/ loaders/ backhoesduring site preparation; graders, dozers, and tractors/loaders/backhoesduring grading; cranes, forklifts, and tractors/ loaders/ backhoesduring building construction; pavers, rollers, mixers, and tractors/ loaders/ backhoesduring paving; and air compressorsduring architecturalcoatingapplications. Typical 71 Although not proposed, the modeled Project construction equipment conservativelyaccountsfor the full-width grind and overlay improvementsalongCypressWay.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page127
operating cyclesfor thesetypes of constructionequipmentmay involve 1 or 2 minutes of full power operation followed by 3 to 4 minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sourcesof acousticaldisturbancewouldberandomincidents, whichwouldlastlessthanoneminute (suchas droppinglargepiecesof equipmentor the hydraulicmovementof machinerylifts).

Thesitepreparationandgradingphasesof Projectconstructiontendto bethe shortestin duration andcreatethehighestconstructionnoiselevelsdueto the operationof heavyequipmentrequired to completethese activities. It shouldbe noted that only a limited amount of equipmentcan operatenear a givenlocationat a particulartime. Typicalnoiselevelsassociatedwith individual constructionequipmentare listed in Table28: TypicalConstructionNoiseLevels. It shouldbe notedthat the noiselevelvaluesshownin Table28are for the equipmentwhenoperatingat full power50 feet from the sensitivereceptor, without takinginto accountanyinterveningstructures or topographythat mayreducenoiselevels.

Table28: TypicalConstructionNoiseLevels
Equipment TypicalNoiseLevel (dBA) at 50feet from Source Air Compressor 80
Backhoe 80
Compactor 82
ConcreteMixer 85
ConcretePump 82
ConcreteVibrator 76
Crane, Mobile 83
Dozer 85
Generator 82
Grader 85
ImpactWrench 85
JackHammer 88
Loader 80
Paver 85
PneumaticTool 85
Pump 77
Roller 85
Saw 76
Scraper 85
Shovel 82
Truck 84
Source: FederalTransitAdministration. (2018). TransitNoiseandVibrationImpactAssessmentManual.

Daytime construction noise is not typically a concern for human health and is a common occurrencewithin theurbanenvironment. Thenearestnon-sensitivereceptorsto the projectsite are commercialuseslocatedadjacentto the west, within the Cityof Fullerton. Pursuantto the City’s MunicipalCodeSection15.90.050, constructionnoiseis permitted betweenthe hoursof 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM any day, exceptfor Sundaysand City-recognizedholidays. The nearest AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page128
sensitivereceptorsto the project site are residentialuseslocatedapproximately765feet to the southeastand InterfaceRehablocated approximately975 feet to the east, within the City of Placentia. The City of Placentia Municipal Code Section 23.81.170 permits grading and constructionbetweenthe hoursof 7:00 AM and 7:00 PMMondaythrough Friday, and 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM on Saturday. However, the Projectdoesnot proposeconstructionin the City of Placentiaandwouldthereforenot besubjectto the allowablehoursof construction. TheCityfor FullertonandCityof Placentiahavenot establishedquantitativeconstructionnoisestandards. As such, this analysisconservativelyusesthe FTA’s thresholdof 80 dBA (8-hour Leq) for residential usesand85 dBA (8-hour Leq) for commercialuses.72
TheFHWA’s RCNMwasusedto calculatenoiselevelsat the nearestcommercialreceptor and sensitivereceptors. Noiselevelsat other receptorssurroundingthe projectsitewouldbelocated further awayandwouldexperiencelower constructionnoiselevelsthanthe modeledreceptors.

Noiselevelswerebasedon the equipmentused, distanceto the nearestreceptor, andacoustical use factor for equipment. When calculatingconstruction noise, the anticipated construction equipmentis assumedto operateat staggereddistancesthroughoutthe constructionarea. This methodologyaccountsfor equipmentoperatingthroughoutthe constructionareaand not at a fixedlocationfor extendedperiodsof time.73 SeeAppendixI for more informationregardingthe constructionassumptionsusedin this analysis.

Thenoiselevelscalculatedin Table29: ProjectConstructionNoiseLevelssummarizestheexterior constructionnoiseattributable to the Projectwithout accountingfor attenuation from existing physicalbarriers. Asindicatedonthe table, maximumconstructionnoiselevelwouldbe 84.0 dBA Leqat thenearestreceptor (commercial), 65.8 dBALeqat the nearestresidentialuse, and63.6 dBA Leqat Interface Rehab. As such, the Project would not exceedthe FTA’s construction noise thresholdsfor residentialor commercialuses. Additionally, TheProjectwouldcomplywith City’s allowablehours of construction, which are required in recognitionthat constructionactivities undertakenduringdaytimehoursarea typicalpart of livingin anurbanenvironmentanddo not causea significantimpact. Therefore, impactsin regardto on-site constructionnoisewould be lessthan significant.
72 FederalTransitAdministration. (2018). TransitNoiseandVibrationImpactAssessmentManual, Table7-3, Page179. 73 Ibid.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page129
Table29: ProjectConstructionNoiseLevels
ConstructionPhase Receptor Direction
Project
Construction
NoiseLevel
dBALeq)1
Noise
Threshold
dBALeq)2 Exceeded?
Individual ConstructionPhase
Demolition3
Commercial West 80.5 85 No
Residential Southeast 61.3 80 No
InterfaceRehab East 59.0 85 No
SitePreparation3
Commercial West 79.4 85 No
Residential Southeast 61.8 80 No
InterfaceRehab East 59.6 85 No
Grading3
Commercial West 80.0 85 No
Residential Southeast 62.0 80 No
InterfaceRehab East 59.7 85 No
Infrastructure
Improvements3
Commercial West 80.5 85 No
Residential Southeast 60.5 80 No
InterfaceRehab East 58.1 85 No
Building
Construction3
Commercial West 81.4 85 No
Residential Southeast 63.8 80 No
InterfaceRehab East 61.6 85 No
Paving3
Commercial West 80.3 85 No
Residential Southeast 61.1 80 No
InterfaceRehab East 58.8 85 No
Architectural
Coating3
Commercial East 70.8 85 No
Residential West 49.2 80 No
InterfaceRehab Southeast 46.8 85 No
Off-site
Improvements4
Commercial South5 83.3 85 No
Residential East 54.8 80 No
InterfaceRehab Southeast 54.5 85 No
OverlappingConstructionPhase
Infrastructure
Improvements +
BuildingConstruction
Commercial West 84.0 85 No
Residential Southeast 65.5 80 No
InterfaceRehab East 63.2 85 No
BuildingConstruction
Paving
Commercial West 84.0 85 No
Residential Southeast 65.7 80 No
InterfaceRehab East 63.4 85 No
1 Theequipmentis assumedto operateat staggereddistancesthroughoutthe constructionarea. 2 Thresholdsarefrom the FTATransitNoiseandVibrationImpactAssessmentManual (2018). 3 Theconstructionareais consideredto be the projectsite. 4 Althoughnot proposed, the off-site improvementsconservativelyaccountfor the full-width grind and overlayimprovementsalong CypressWay.
5 Thenearestcommercialreceptorsto the off-siteCypressWaygrindandoverlayimprovementsare locatedadjacentto the south of CypressWay.

Source: FederalHighwayAdministration. (2006). RoadwayConstructionNoiseModel. Referto AppendixI for noisemodelingresults.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page130
Less Than Significant Impact: Off-Site Mobile Construction Noise. In addition to on-site constructionnoise, the Projectwouldgeneratemobile-sourcenoisefrom haulanddeliverytrucks andconstructionworkerstravelingto andfrom the project site duringProjectconstructionusing OrangethorpeAvenue and South State CollegeBoulevard. Project-generated trips would be temporaryandceasewith the endof construction.

Becauseof the logarithmicnatureof noiselevels, a doublingof the traffic volumeswouldresultin a noiselevelincreaseof 3 dBA, whichisconsideredto bereadilynoticeable.74 Accordingto annual averagedaily traffic (AADT) data providedby ReplicaHQ, OrangethorpeAvenuehasan AADTof 12,869 and South State CollegeBoulevardhas an AADTof 20,553.75 Accordingto modeling assumptionsinSection4.3: Air Quality, the constructionphaseswith the highestassumednumber of truckswouldbe demolition, whenit isassumed, there would beup to 102 dailytrips accessing the project site. As Project construction would not double the existing traffic volumes on OrangethorpeAvenueor SouthStateCollegeBoulevard, the proposedProjectwouldnot generate enoughtraffic to resultin a noticeable3-dBAincreasein ambientnoiselevels.

Largetruckswoulddeliverbuildingmaterials, removewastematerials, anddependingon the final earthworkquantities, import or exportsoilto andfrom off-sitelocations. Theselargetruckswould generate noise from the engine acceleration, braking, and loading and unloading. The State establishesnoise limits for vehicleslicensedto operate on public roads using a pass-by test procedure. Pass-by noiserefersto the noiselevelproducedby an individualvehicleasit travels past a fixed location. Thepass-by proceduremeasuresthe total noisegeneratedby a moving vehiclewith amicrophone. Whenthevehiclereachesthe microphone, the vehicleisat full throttle accelerationat an enginespeedcalculatedfor its displacement. TheStatepass-by standardfor heavytrucksisconsistentwith thefederallimit of 80dB. TheStatepass-bystandardfor light trucks and passengercars (lessthan 4.5 tons grossvehiclerating) is also80 dB at 15 meters from the centerline. Accordingto the FHWA, dump trucks typicallygeneratenoise levelsof 76 dBAand flatbed truckstypicallygeneratenoiselevelsof 74 dBA, at a distanceof 50 feet from the truck.76 As such, noise from truck trips associatedwith the proposedproject would not exceedFTA threshold levelsof 90 dBA (one-hour Leq) or 80 dBA (eight-hour Leq). Impactsassociatedwith Project-generatedmobiletraffic wouldbelessthan significant.

LessThan Significant Impact: On -Site Operational Noise. The major on-site noise sources associatedwith the Projectincludemechanicalequipment (e.g., HVACequipment), loadingdock activities (i.e., slowmovingtruckson the site, maneuveringandidlingtrucks, air brakes, back-up alarms, equipmentnoise), trashandrecyclingcollection, back-upbeepers, parkinglot activity (i.e., car door slamming, car radios, enginestart-up, and car pass-by), and an emergencyfire pump.

Operationalnoiseassociatedwith the Projectwould be similarto existingconditionson-site and at the adjacentuses.

As noted above in the Thresholdsof Significancesection, the nearestsensitivereceptors are locatedin the Cityof Placentiaandthe nearestnon-sensitivereceptorsare locatedin the Cityof Fullerton. However, the Cityof Fullertonhasnot establishedstationarynoisestandardsfor non- 74 Accordingto the CaliforniaDepartmentof Transportation, TechnicalNoiseSupplementto TrafficNoiseAnalysisProtocol (September2013), it takesa doublingof traffic to createa noticeable (i.e., 3-dBA) noiseincrease. 75 ReplicaHQ. (2024). ReplicaAnnualAverageDailyTraffic (AADT) Data. https:// www.replicahq.com/aadt. AccessedJuly3, 2025. 76 FederalHighwayAdministration, RoadwayConstructionNoiseModel, 2006.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page131
sensitivereceptors. Therefore, Project-generatedstationarynoisewasnot analyzedat thenearest non-sensitivereceptors, adjacentto the project site. The following analysisaddressesProject- generatedstationarynoiseat the nearestsensitivereceptorsin the Cityof Placentia.

Mechanical Equipment. Potential stationary noise sourcesrelated to long-term Project operationswouldincludemechanicalequipment (e.g., HVACequipment) locatedon the roof of the proposedbuilding. It is conservativelyassumedthe mechanicalequipmentwould be locatedon the buildingrooftop nearestthe sensitivereceptorandwouldnot be screenedby architectural features. Mechanical equipment typically generates noise levels of approximately52dBAat 50feet.77Thenearestsensitivereceptorsareresidentialuseslocated approximately815 feet to the southeastand InterfaceRehablocatedapproximately1,076 feet to the eastof the mechanicalequipment. Themechanicalequipmentnoiselevelsat the nearestresidentialusewould be 27.8 dBALeqand would not exceedthe City of Placentia residentialdaytime (55dBA) or nighttime (50dBA) noisestandard. Themechanicalequipment noise levelsat InterfaceRehabwould be 25.3 dBALeqand would not exceedthe City of Placentiacommercialnoisestandard (65dBA). Impactswouldbelessthan significant.

Truckand LoadingDockActivities. Duringloadingand unloadingactivities, noisewould be generatedbythe trucks’ dieselengines, exhaustsystems, andbrakesduringlow gearshifting’ braking activities; backing up toward the docks; dropping down the dock ramps; and maneuveringawayfrom the docks. Theloadingdockswould be locatedon the westernside of theproposedwarehousebuilding; refer to Figure7. Typically, heavytruckandloadingdock operationsgenerateanoiselevelof 64.4 dBAat a distanceof 50feet.78 Thenearestsensitive receptorsare InterfaceRehablocatedapproximately1,030 feet to the eastand residential useslocatedapproximately1,273feet to the southeastof the loadingdockarea. Theloading and unloadingnoiselevelsat InterfaceRehabwould be 38.1 dBALeqand would not exceed the City of Placentiacommercialnoisestandard (65 dBA). Theloadingand unloadingnoise levelsat the nearestresidentialusewould be 36.3 dBALeqand would not exceedthe Cityof Placentiaresidentialdaytime (55 dBA) or nighttime (50 dBA) noisestandard. Impactswould belessthan significant.

Back-up Alarms. Medium andheavy-duty trucksreversinginto loadingdockswouldproduce noise from back-up alarms (also known as back-up beepers). Back-up beepersproduce a typicalvolumeof 97dBAat 3.28feetfrom thesource.79Accordingto Table1: TripGeneration in AppendixL, the Projectwould generatethree truck trips to the project site during peak hours. Therefore, this analysisconservativelyassumesthe three truckswouldsimultaneously utilize back-up alarms within the loading dock area. The nearestsensitivereceptorsare InterfaceRehablocatedapproximately1,030 feet to the east and residentialuseslocated approximately1,273feetto thesoutheastof theloadingdockarea. Theback-upbeepernoise levelsat InterfaceRehabwould be 25.3 dBALeqand would not exceedthe City of Placentia commercial noise standard (65 dBA). The back-up beeper noise levels at the nearest 77 ElliottH. Berger, RickNeitzel, andCynthiaA. Kladden. (2010). NoiseNavigatorSoundLevelDatabasewith Over1700MeasurementValues. 78 Loadingdockreferencenoiselevelmeasurementsconductedby Kimley-Horn on December18, 2018. 79 DavidHolzman. (2011). VehicleMotionAlarms: Necessity, NoisePollution, or Both? https:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3018517/. AccessedSeptember10, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page132
residentialusewould be 23.5 dBALeqandwould not exceedthe Cityof Placentiaresidential daytime (55dBA) or nighttime (50dBA) noisestandard. Impactswouldbelessthansignificant.

Parking. Traffic associatedwith parkinglots is typicallynot of sufficient volumeto exceed communitynoisestandards, whicharebasedona time-averagedscalesuchastheLeqor CNEL scale. Theinstantaneousmaximumsoundlevelsgeneratedby a car door slamming, engine startingup, andcarpass-bysrangefrom 53 to 61 dBA.80 Conversationsin parkingareasmay alsobe anannoyanceto adjacentsensitivereceptors. Soundlevelsof speechtypicallyrange from 33dBAat 50feet for normalspeechto 50dBAat 50feetfor veryloudspeech.81It should benoted that parkinglot noisesareinstantaneousnoiselevelscomparedto noisestandards in the hourly Leqor 24-hour CNELmetrics, which are averagedover the entire duration of a time period. As a result, actual noiselevelsover time resulting from parkinglot activities wouldbefar lower than the referencelevelsidentifiedabove.

For the purposeof providinga conservative, quantitative estimateof the noiselevelsthat wouldbegeneratedfrom the vehiclesenteringandexitingthe parkinglot, the methodology recommendedby FTAfor the generalassessmentof stationarytransit noisesourcesis used.

Usingthe methodology, the Project’speakhourlynoiselevelthat wouldbegeneratedby the on-siteparkinglevelswasestimatedusingthe followingFTAequationfor a parkinglot:

Leq(h) = SELref + 10 log (NA/1,000) – 35.6
Where:

Leq(h) = hourlyLeqnoiselevelat 50 feet
SELref = reference noise level for stationary noise source represented in sound exposurelevel (SEL) at 50 feet
NA = numberof automobilesper hour

35.6 isaconstantin the formula, calculatedas10timesthe logarithmof the number of secondsin anhour.

Basedon Table1 in AppendixL, the Projectwould generateapproximately212 daily trips, with 40 peakhourtrips. Usingthe FTA’sreferencenoiselevelof 92 dBASEL82at 50 feetfrom the noisesource, the Project’shighestpeakhour vehicletrips wouldgeneratenoiselevelsof approximately42.4 dBALeqat 50 feet from the parkinglot. Thenearestsensitivereceptors areInterfaceRehablocatedapproximately1,050feet to the eastandresidentialuseslocated approximately1,058feet to the southwestfrom the parkingarea. Theparkingnoiselevelsat InterfaceRehabwouldbe15.9 dBALeqandwouldnot exceedthe Cityof Placentiacommercial noisestandard (65 dBA). Theparkingnoiselevelsat thenearestresidentialusewouldbe16.0 dBALeqandwouldnot exceedthe Cityof Placentiaresidentialdaytime (55 dBA) or nighttime 50 dBA) noisestandard.
80 Kariel, H. G. (1991). Noisein RuralRecreationalEnvironments, CanadianAcoustics19(5), 3-10. 81 ElliottH. Berger, RickNeitzel, andCynthiaA. Kladden. (2015). NoiseNavigatorSoundLevelDatabasewith Over1700MeasurementValues. 82 FederalTransitAdministration. (2018). TransitNoiseandVibrationImpactAssessmentManual.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page133
EmergencyFire Pump. The Project would include an emergencyfire pump locatedin an externalpump housebuildinglocatedalongthe westernproject boundary. Theemergency fire pumpequipmentwould be entirely enclosedwithin the buildingand wouldnot result in anymeasurablenoiselevelswithin the Projectvicinity. Impactswouldbelessthansignificant.

CompositeNoiseLevels. Anevaluationof the Project’scompositenoiselevels, includingall on-site Project-relatednoisesourcesplusthe existingambientnoiselevel, wasconductedto identify the potential maximumProject-related noiselevel increasethat may occurat the nearestsensitive receptors. On-sitenoise-generatingsourcesassociatedwith the Projectwouldincludemechanical equipment, loadingdockactivities, truckback-upalarms, andparkingactivities. It isconservatively assumedthat operationalnoisesourcesat the projectsitewouldoccurin aconstant, simultaneous manner. However, noisesourceswould occurintermittently throughout the day (exceptfor the HVACwhichmayoperatein a steady-statemanner). Thisanalysisconsidersanexceedanceof the noisestandardat asensitivereceptoranda5-dBAincreaseinnoiselevelsovertheexistingambient noiseenvironmentas the significancecriterion. Table30: CompositeNoiseLevelspresentsthe compositenoiselevelfrom the on-siteProject-relatednoisesources.

Table30: CompositeNoiseLevels
NoiseSource
Noise
Levelat
Sensitive
Receptor
dBA)
Daytime/
Nighttime
Noise
Standard
dBA)1
Ambient +
Project
NoiseLevel
dBA)2
Incremental
Increase
dBA)
Incremental
Increase
Threshold3 Significant?4
ResidentialUses
Mechanical
Equipment 27.8 55/50 - - - No
TruckLoading 36.3 55/50 - - - No
Back-up Beeper 23.5 55/50 - - - No
Parking 15.9 55/50 - - - No
Combined5 37.1 55/50 73.1 0. 0 5.0 No
InterfaceRehab
Mechanical
Equipment 25.3 65/65 - - - No
TruckLoading 38.1 65/65 - - - No
Back-up Beeper 25.3 65/65 - - - No
Parking 16.0 65/65 - - - No
Combined5 38.6 65/65 71.5 0. 0 5.0 No
1 As the nearestsensitivereceptorsare locatedin the Cityof Placentia, the noisestandardsfrom the Cityof PlacentiaMunicipal Code, Section23.76.050: ExteriorNoiseStandards, arepresentedin this table. 2 Ambient noisemeasurementswere takenby Kimley-Horn andAssociateson July15, 2025, and are shownin Table1. ST-1 (73.1 dBA) isrepresentativeof the residentialusesandST-2 (71.5 dBA) is representativeof InterfaceRehab. 3 Thisanalysisconsidersan exceedanceof the noisestandardat a sensitivereceptoranda 5-dBAincreasein noiselevelsover the existingambientnoiseenvironmentasthe significancecriterion. 4 Anexceedanceof the noisestandardby the individualoperationalnoisesourcesis consideredto be significant. Anexceedanceof the noisestandardand5-dBAincrementalnoiseincreasebythe combinedoperationalnoisesourcesisconsideredto besignificant. 5 Noise levels for all operational sourceswere logarithmicallyadded together and conservativelyassumedto operate in a simultaneous, constantmanner.

Referto AppendixI for noisemodelingresults.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page134
Asshownin Table30, project-generatedcompositenoiselevelswould not exceedeither the City of Placentianoise standardsor the 5-dBA ambient increasethreshold at the nearestsensitive receptors. Impactswouldbelessthan significant.

LessThanSignificantImpact: Mobile Traffic Noise. Projectimplementationwould result in an increasein traffic trips alongroadwaysnearthe projectsite. In general, a 3-dBAincreasein traffic noiseisbarelyperceptibleto people, while a 5-dBAincreaseisreadilynoticeable. Trafficvolumes on area roadwayswould haveto approximatelydouble for the resulting traffic noise levelsto generatea barelyperceptible3-dBAincrease.83 Accordingto the AADTdata providedby Replica HQ, OrangethorpeAvenuehasanAADTof 12,869 andSouthStateCollegeBoulevardhasanAADT of 20,553.84 BasedonTable1 inAppendixL, Projectimplementationwouldresultina netdecrease of 422 total daily trips, which would reducethe existingtraffic noiselevelsalongOrangethorpe Avenueand SouthStateCollegeBoulevard. However, this analysisconservativelyassumesthe Projectwouldgenerate212newdailytrips (refer to Table1 in AppendixL) alongroadwayswithin vicinity of the project site. AsProjectoperationswould not doublethe existingtraffic volumeson OrangethorpeAvenueor SouthStateCollegeBoulevard, theproposedProjectwouldnot generate enoughtraffic to resultin a noticeable3-dBAincreasein ambientnoiselevels. Impactsassociated with Project-generatedmobiletraffic wouldbelessthan significant.

Asdiscussedabove, theproposedProjectwouldnotgeneratesubstantialtemporaryor permanent increasein ambient noiselevelsin the vicinity of the Projectand a lessthan significantimpact wouldoccur.
b) Generationof excessivegroundbornevibration or groundbornenoiselevels? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: Construction Vibration. Increasesin groundbornevibrationlevelsattributableto the Projectwouldbeprimarilyassociatedwith short- term construction-related activities. Projectconstructionwould have the potential to result in varying degreesof temporary groundbornevibration, dependingon the specificconstruction equipment used and the operations involved. Ground vibration generated by construction equipmentspreadsthroughthe groundanddiminishesin magnitudeasdistancefrom the source increases. Theresultsfrom vibrationcanrangefrom no perceptibleeffectsat the lowestvibration levels, to low rumblingsoundsandperceptiblevibration at moderatelevels, to slightdamageat the highestlevels. Groundbornevibrationsfrom constructionactivitiesrarely reachlevelsthat damagestructures.

TheFTAhaspublishedstandardvibration velocitiesfor constructionequipmentoperations. The typesof constructionvibration impactsincludehumanannoyanceandbuildingdamage. Building damagecanbe cosmeticor structural. Ordinarybuildingsthat are not particularlyfragile would not experienceany cosmeticdamage (e.g., plaster cracks) at distancesbeyond 30 feet. This distancecanvarysubstantiallydependingonthe soilcompositionandtheundergroundgeological layerbetweenthe vibrationsourceandthereceiver. In addition, not all buildingsrespondsimilarly to vibrationgeneratedby constructionequipment. Forexample, for a buildingthat isconstructed 83 Accordingto the CaliforniaDepartmentof Transportation, TechnicalNoiseSupplementto TrafficNoiseAnalysisProtocol (September2013), it takesa doublingof traffic to createa noticeable (i.e., 3-dBA) noiseincrease. 84 ReplicaHQ. (2024). ReplicaAnnualAverageDaily Traffic (AADT) Data. Retrievedfrom: https:// www.replicahq.com/aadt. AccessedJuly3, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page135
withreinforcedconcretewithnoplaster, theFTAguidelinesshowthatavibrationlevelofupto

0.5inch-per-secondisconsideredsafeandwouldnotresultinanyconstructionvibrationdamage.

Humanannoyanceoccurswhenconstructionvibrationrisessignificantlyabovethethresholdof humanperceptionforextendedperiodsoftime. ThisevaluationusestheFTAarchitecturaldamage criterionforcontinuousvibrationsatreinforced-concrete, steel, ortimberbuildingsof0.5inch- per-secondPPVandhumanannoyancecriterionof0.2inch-per-secondPPVinaccordancewith Caltransguidance.85
TheProjectwoulduselargebulldozers, loadedtrucks, smallbulldozers, andvibratoryrollersduring Projectconstruction. Table31: TypicalConstructionEquipmentVibrationLevelsincludes vibrationlevelsatthereferencedistance (25feet), aswellasadistancerangefortypical constructionequipment.

Table31: TypicalConstructionEquipmentVibrationLevels
Equipment
PeakParticleVelocity (inch-per-second)1
25Feet5Feet8feet15feet765feet
VibratoryRoller0.212.3481.1600.4520.001
LargeBulldozer0.0890.9950.4920.1910.001
LoadedTrucks0.0760.8500.4200.1640.000
SmallBulldozer0.0030.0340.0170.0060.000
1Calculatedusingthefollowingformula: PPVequip = PPVrefx (25/D)1. 5, where: PPVequip = thepeakparticlevelocityinin/secofthe equipmentadjustedforthedistance; PPVref = thereferencevibrationlevelin in/secfromTable7-4oftheFederalTransit Administration, TransitNoiseandVibrationImpactAssessmentManual, 2018; D = thedistancefromtheequipmenttothe receiver.

Source: FederalTransitAdministration. (2018). TransitNoiseandVibrationImpactAssessmentManual.

On-siteconstructionactivitiesareanticipatedtooccuruptotheconstructionareaboundary.

Therefore, theneareststructure (i.e., commercialbuilding) wouldbelocatedapproximately5feet tothewestoftheprojectsitepropertyline. AsindicatedinTable31, vibrationvelocitiesfrom typicalheavyconstructionequipmentoperationsthatwouldbeusedduringProjectconstruction rangefrom0.034to2.348inch-per-secondPPVat5feetfromthesourceofactivity. Therefore, Projectconstructiongroundbornevibrationwouldexceedthestructuraldamagecriterionof0.5 inch-per-secondPPVatthenearestbuilding. MitigationMeasure (MM) NOI-1wouldberequired toreducevibrationimpactstoalessthansignificantlevel. MMNOI-1wouldrequireabuffer distancefromheavyequipmentoperationadjacenttotheexistingcommercialbuildingstoensure groundbornevibrationgeneratedbyProjectconstructionactivitieswouldnotexceedthe structuraldamagecriterionof0. 5inch-per-secondPPV.

AlthoughnotproposedbytheApplicant, thisanalysisconservativelyassumestheProjectwould includeoff-siteimprovementsconsistingoffull-widthgrindandoverlayactivitiesalongCypress WayshouldsuchimprovementsberequiredbytheCityasaconditionofapproval. Suchactivities wouldoccuruptothecurbalongCypressWayandascloseas15feetfromtheneareststructures i.e., commercialbuildings). Atthisdistance, groundbornevibrationfromvibratoryrollerscould reach0.452inch-per-secondPPV. Therefore, groundbornevibrationwouldnotexceedthe structuraldamagecriterionof0.5inch-per-secondPPV; refertoTable31. 85CaliforniaDepartmentofTransportation. (2013). TransportationandConstructionVibrationGuidanceManual, Table20.

Ow
ad03/ 76
7ina
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page136
The nearestsensitivereceptor would be located 765 feet to the southeastof the project site property line. As identified in Table 31, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipmentoperationsat 765 feet from the sourceof activity would be lessthan 0.001inch-per- secondPPVand would not exceedthe human annoyancecriterion of 0.2 inch-per-secondPPV.

Impactswouldbelessthan significantwith implementationof MM NOI-1.

Less Than Significant Impact: Operational Vibration. With respect to vibration-generating activities, Project operations would primarily involve truck loading and unloading activities.

Accordingto the FTA’s TransitNoiseand Vibration Impact Assessment, trucks suchas delivery trucks, refusecollectiontrucks, and occasionalmovingtrucksrarely create vibration levelsthat exceed 70 VdB (equivalent to 0.012 inch-per-second PPV) when they are on roadways.86 Furthermore, thesemovementswould generallybe low-speed (i.e., lessthan 15 milesper hour) andwouldoccurovernew, smoothsurfaces.

Forperspective, Caltranshasstudiedthe effectsof propagationof vehiclevibration on sensitive landusesandnotesthat “heavytrucks, andquitefrequentlybuses, generatethe highestearthborn vibrationsof normal traffic.” Caltransfurther notesthat the highesttraffic-generatedvibrations are along freewaysand state routes. Their study finds that “vibrations measuredon freeway shoulders (five metersfrom the centerlineof the nearestlane) haveneverexceeded0.08 in/sec, with the worstcombinationsof heavytrucksandpoorroadwayconditions (whilesuchtruckswere movingat freewayspeeds). Thislevelcoincideswith the maximumrecommendedsafelevel for ruinsandancientmonuments (andhistoricbuildings)”.87
Sincethe truck movementsassociatedwith the Projectwould be at low speed (not at freeway speeds) andwouldbeoversmoothsurfaces (not underpoor roadwayconditions), Project-related vibration associatedwith truck activity would not result in excessivegroundbornevibrations. In addition, there are no sourcesof substantialgroundbornevibration associatedwith the Project, suchas rail or subways. The Project would not create or causeany vibration impacts due to operations. Impactswouldbelessthan significant.
c) Fora projectlocatedwithin the vicinity of a private airstrip or anairport land useplan or, where sucha planhasnot beenadopted, within two milesof a publicairport or publicuseairport, would the project exposepeopleresidingor working in the project areato excessivenoiselevels? NoImpact. Theprojectsiteislocatedapproximately5.0milesto theeastof theFullertonMunicipal Airport. Theprojectsite isnot locatedwithin anairport landuseplan, nor isit locatedwithin two milesof a privateor publicairport, or within the vicinityof a privateairstrip. Therefore, theProject wouldnot exposepeopleworkingat the project site to excessiveairport- or airstrip-relatednoise levels, andno impactwouldoccur.
86 CaliforniaDepartmentof Transportation. (2013). TransportationandConstructionVibrationGuidanceManual, Table20. 87 CaliforniaDepartmentof Transportation. (2013). TechnicalNoiseSupplementto the TrafficNoiseAnalysisProtocol (“TeNS”).

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page137
Mitigation Measures
MM NOI-1 On-SiteConstructionVibration Control. Thefollowingmeasureshallbeincorporatedon all gradingandbuildingplansandspecificationssubjectto approvalof the City’sBuilding andSafetyDivisionprior to issuanceof a gradingpermit:

The developer shall ensure construction equipment will not approach the construction buffer zone adjacent to the commercial building (i.e., 2443 East OrangethorpeAvenue) alongportionsof the Project’swesternprojectsiteboundary.

Thebuffer zoneshallbe tiered basedon distancesestablishedin Table31: Typical ConstructionEquipmentVibration Levels. Loadedtrucksand largebulldozersshall not operatewithin 8 feet of the commercialbuilding, andvibratoryrollersshallnot operatewithin 15 feet of the commercialbuilding.

Thismitigationmeasureonlyappliesto on-siteconstructionactivities.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page138

4.14 POPULATIONANDHOUSING

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

14. POPULATIONANDHOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantialunplanned population growth in an
area, either directly (for example, by proposing new
homesandbusinesses) or indirectly (for example, through extensionof roadsor other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitatingthe construction of replacement
housingelsewhere?
X
a) Inducesubstantial unplannedpopulation growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposingnew homesand businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extensionof roadsor other infrastructure)?
LessThanSignificantImpact. Asdescribedabove, the project site is designatedIndustrial (I) and locatedwithin the SouthwestIndustrialFocusArea. Theproject site is currently developedand surroundedby existingdevelopment. Thesitedoesnot containanyhousing. TheProjectproposes to removethe existing85,700 square-feet of industrialand commercialusesand developa new 110,232 square-foot warehouse/distribution facility, which would be compatible with the Industrial (I) designationandSouthwestIndustrialFocusArea, asdescribedin TheFullertonPlan.

Employmentopportunitieswould be providedboth during the constructionof the Projectand oncetheProjectisoperational. Thenumberof temporaryconstructionjobsthat wouldbecreated is unknown. Forthe purposeof this analysisregardinglong-term employmentopportunities, the proposed Project would employ approximately 113 employees, based on an employment generation factor of one employeeper 979 sf of warehouseuse (110,232sf/979 sf = 112.6, roundedup to 113).88 It is assumedthe new jobs could be filled by localresidentswho already resideinor neartheCity, asemployment-generatingusescurrentlyoccuronthesite. Theproposed Projectis consistentwith the existingIndustrial (I) land usedesignationand therefore would be within the populationprojectionsanticipatedandplannedfor in TheFullertonPlan . Therefore, the Projectwould not inducesubstantialunplannedpopulationgrowth in the area. Additionally, the Projectdoesnot includethe extensionof roadsor other infrastructureto unservedareas, which couldinduceindirectgrowth. Therefore, the proposedProjectwouldnot resultin director indirect substantialunplannedgrowth, anda lessthan significantimpactwouldoccur. 88 NatelsonCompany, Inc. 2001. EmploymentDensityStudySummaryReportPreparedfor SCAG, Table6A.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page139
b) Displacesubstantial numbersof existing people or housing, necessitatingthe construction of replacementhousingelsewhere?
No Impact. The project site does not contain any existinghousing, and no housingwould be removedto accommodatetheProject. Therefore, theproposedProjectwouldnot displaceexisting peopleor housing, andno impactwouldoccur.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page140

4.15 PUBLICSERVICES

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

15. PUBLICSERVICES. Wouldthe project:
a) Resultin substantialadversephysicalimpactsassociated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmentalfacilities, needfor newor physicallyaltered governmentalfacilities, the constructionof which could
cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptableservice ratios, responsetimes or
other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
i) Fireprotection? X
ii) Policeprotection? X
iii) Schools? X
iv) Parks? X
v) Other publicfacilities? X
a) Wouldthe projectresultin substantialadversephysicalimpactsassociatedwith the provisionof new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmentalfacilities, theconstructionofwhichcouldcausesignificantenvironmentalimpacts, in orderto maintainacceptableserviceratios, responsetimesor otherperformanceobjectives for any of the publicservices:
i) Fireprotection?
Lessthan SignificantImpact. The Fullerton Fire Department provides fire protection and emergencymedicalresponseservicesfor the City, inclusiveof the project site whichis currently developedas a businesspark. Additionally, Fullertonis part of a mutual aid agreementwith all OrangeCountyFireagenciesto improve emergencyresponseefforts. Thenearestfire station is FireDepartmentStation #3, locatedat 700SouthAcaciaAvenue, approximately1.0milenorthwest of the project site. TheFireDepartmentoperatesa fleet of five FireEngines, three ReserveFire Engines, one Mobile EOCCommandTrailor, one ReserveFireTruck, oneUtility TaskVehicle, one 2020 BME Type3 Wildland Engineunder OES1313 (Office of EmergencyServices), and one battalion comprisedof one Battalion Chief supervising24 on-duty Firefighters89As described above in Section 4.14: Population and Housing, the Project would not result in permanent population growth and would only incrementallyincreasethe demandfor fire protection and 89 Cityof Fullerton, FireStationLocations & Apparatus, availableat: https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/government/departments/fire/about- us/fire-station-locations-apparatus, accessedJuly30, 2025.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page141
emergencymedicalservicesin the area. Theproposedfacility is estimatedto haveapproximately 113 employees. Theforecastemploymentgrowth and increaseddemandfor serviceswould not exceed projections and anticipated public service needs identified in The Fullerton Plan.

Additionally, the incrementalincreasein populationasa result of the Projectwould not require the constructionof new or the alteration of existing fire protection facilities to maintain an adequatelevelof serviceto thearea. Therefore, nophysicalimpactsassociatedwith fireprotection servicesandfacilitieswouldoccur.

TheFirePreventionDivision (FirePrevention) of the FireDepartmentservesto protect the citizens of Fullertonfrom hazardsof fire or other dangerousconditionsin existingstructuresandpremises, whilealsoprovidingsafetyandassistanceto firefightersbeforeandduringemergencyevents. Fire Preventionis responsiblefor promotingpublicawarenessof fire andlife safetyandenforcingthe CaliforniaFireCode (CFC), the CaliforniaCodeof Regulations (CCR), andthe CaliforniaHealthand SafetyCode. TheFireDepartmentwould reviewand conditionallyapproveproposedproject site plansto ensurefire preventionand suppressionmeasures, fire hydrantsand sprinklersystems, emergencyaccess, andother similarrequirementsaremet. TheproposedProjectwouldadhereto SCPS-1, which requires compliancewith the Fullerton Fire PreventionOrdinanceas per FMC Chapter13, aswell asthe FullertonBuildingCodeasperFMCChapter14, the CaliforniaFireCode, andthe CBC.90
Newdevelopmentswouldalsobe requiredto paypropertytaxesthat wouldgo toward the City’s GeneralFund, which is the Fire Department’s main sourceof funding. As previouslyaddressed, compliancewith the CaliforniaFireCodeandFullertonBuildingCodeandpaymentof taxeswould minimize the Project’s operational impacts to fire protection servicesto the greatest extent practicable. Further, compliancewith SCPS-1 which requires adherenceto the Fullerton Fire PreventionOrdinance, the FullertonBuildingCode, the CaliforniaFireCode, andthe CBC, in regard to designof fire protection facilities, would lessenadversephysicalimpactsassociatedwith the provision of new or physicallyaltered fire facilities. Therefore, the Project would not cause significantenvironmentalimpactsresulting in the need for new or expandedFire Department facilities, or impairserviceratios, responsetimesor other performanceobjectivesfor fire services. ii) Policeprotection?
Lessthan SignificantImpact. TheFullertonPoliceDepartmentprovidespoliceprotectionservices to the City, includingthe project site. ThePoliceDepartmentheadquartersis locatedat 237 W.

CommonwealthAvenue, approximately 3.2 miles northwest of the project site. The Police Departmentis responsiblefor providingpublicsafetyserviceswithin Cityboundaries. ThePolice Department has approximately 180 employees, 125 sworn police officers and 55 civilian employees.91
Fundingfor the operation and maintenanceof existing police servicescomesfrom the City’s GeneralFund. Accordingly, applicantsarerequiredto paypropertytaxesthat areimposedonnew developmentsto fund policeprotectionservices. Theproject site would be adequatelyservedby 90 Cityof Fullerton. (2024). MunicipalCode. https:// codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/fullerton/latest/fullerton_ca/0-0-0- 22940#JD_Chapter13.19. AccessedJuly30, 2025.
91 Cityof Fullerton. (N.d.). FullertonPoliceAboutUs . https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/government/departments/police/about-fpd, Accessed July30, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page142
existingPoliceDepartmentfacilities, equipment, andpersonnelsuchthat newfacilitieswouldnot be required. Althoughsomecallsfor serviceare anticipated, the increasein policeserviceswould not besignificantlyimpacteddueto theconstructionandoperationof the industrialdevelopment.

Additionally, developmentof the sitewouldincreasepropertytaxrevenuesto providea sourceof fundingto offsetanyincreasesin demandfor policeprotectionservicesgeneratedby the Project.

Overall, the proposedProjectwould not resultin substantialadversephysicalimpactsassociated with the provisionof new or physicallyaltered PoliceDepartmentfacilities which could cause significantenvironmentalimpacts, in order to maintainacceptableserviceratios, responsetimes or other performanceobjectivesfor policeservicesanda lessthansignificantimpactwouldoccur. iii) Schools?
Lessthan SignificantImpact. TheCity hastwo schooldistricts: FullertonSchoolDistrict and the Fullerton Joint Union High SchoolDistrict. However, the project site is not located within the boundariesof either district.92 Theprojectislocatedwithin the boundariesof the Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified School District.93 The Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified School District provides educationalservicesfor studentsin kindergartenthrough12th grade.

Thenearestschoolto the projectsiteisCommonwealthElementarySchoollocatedapproximately

0.6milesnorth of the project site within the FullertonSchoolDistrict. Within the Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified SchoolDistrict, the nearest elementary middle school is Melrose Elementary, approximately0.6 milesto the east, the nearestmiddleschoolisValadezMiddle SchoolAcademy, approximately 0.8 miles to the east, and the nearest high school is ValenciaHigh School, approximately1.3milesto the northeast.

TheProjectwould not createa direct demandfor publicschoolservices, asthe Projectproposes non-residentialusesthat would not directly generateany school-agedchildrenrequiring public education. Further, as discussedin Section 4.14: Population and Housing, significant new employmentopportunitieswouldnotbegeneratedandwouldnotresultinanincreasein potential newstudents. Althoughthe Projectwouldnot createa direct demandfor additionalpublic-school services, the Project would be required to comply with SenateBill 50 (GreeneAct), which authorizesschool districts to impose fees against certain development projects to fund the constructionor reconstructionof schoolfacilities. As outlined in SCPS-2, the ProjectApplicant wouldberequiredto submitevidencethat schoolimpactfeeshavebeenpaidprior to theissuance of buildingpermits.

Overall, Project implementation would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associatedwith the provisionof new or physicallyaltered schoolfacilities, the constructionof whichcouldcausesignificantenvironmentalimpacts, inorderto maintainacceptableserviceratios or other performanceobjectives. Additionally, no schoolfacilities exist on the project site and development of the Project would not conflict with existing school structures or require modificationof schoolfacilities. Compliancewith applicablelocalandStateregulationsin addition to SCPS-2 would ensurethat Projectimplementation would not result in substantialadverse physicalimpactsassociatedwith the provisionof new or physicallyaltered schoolfacilities, the 92 Cityof Fullerton. (N.D.). PublicSchools. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/residents/schools/public-schools. AccessedJuly30, 2025. 93 Placentia-YorbaLindaUnifiedSchoolDistrict. (2025). BoundaryMaps. https:// www.pylusd.org/apps/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=206487&type=d&pREC_ID=453794. AccessedJuly30, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page143
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptableserviceratiosfor schoolsanda lessthan significantimpactwouldoccur. iv) Parks?
Lessthan SignificantImpact. Referto Section4.16: Recreation. v) Otherpublicfacilities?
Lessthan SignificantImpact. TheFullertonPublicLibrarySystemservesthe City with two main branches. The nearestlibrary is the Fullerton PublicLibrary (Main Branch), locatedat 353 W.

CommonwealthAvenue, approximately3.4 milesnorthwestof the project site. TheHuntBranch is locatedat 201SBasqueAve, approximately5.3milesnortheastof the project site. TheProject would developa warehousefacility that would not directly generatepopulationand would not causeor contribute to a need to constructnew or physicallyalter library facilities. Therefore, Projectimplementationwould not resultin a substantialadversephysicalimpactassociatedwith the provisionof new or physicallyalteredlibrary facilities, the constructionof whichcouldcause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptableservice ratios or other performanceobjectives, anda lessthansignificantimpactwouldoccur.

StandardConditionsandRequirements
SCPS-1 TheApplicantshallcomplywith the FullertonFirePreventionOrdinanceasper Fullerton MunicipalCode (FMC) Chapter13, FullertonBuildingCodeasper FMCChapter14, the CaliforniaFireCode, andthe CBCin regardto designof fire facilities.

SCPS-2 Prior to the issuanceof buildingpermits, the Applicantshallsubmitevidenceto the City of Fullertonthat legallyrequiredschoolimpact feeshavebeenpaid per the mitigation establishedby the applicableschooldistrict.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page144

4.16 RECREATION

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

16. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhoodand regionalparks or other recreational
facilities such that substantialphysicaldeterioration of the facilitywould occuror beaccelerated?
X
b) Doesthe project includerecreationalfacilitiesor require the construction or expansionof recreationalfacilities
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
X
a) Would the project increasethe use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreationalfacilitiessuchthat substantialphysicaldeteriorationof thefacilitywouldoccuror beaccelerated? Or,
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansionof recreationalfacilitieswhichmighthaveanadversephysicaleffectontheenvironment? LessThanSignificantImpact.

Accordingto TheFullertonPlanEIR, thereare640.4 acresof publicparksandrecreationalfacilities in the City; refer to Exhibit5.15-1, PublicParksandRecreationalFacilitiesin TheFullertonPlan.94 Thenearestparksare ChapmanParklocatedat 2515 SanCarlosDrive approximately1.4 miles north of the project siteandByerrumParklocatedat 501North RaymondAvenue, approximately

2.2milesnorthwestof the projectsite, both whicharenorth of the projectsite.95 TheFullerton Planincludesgoalsand policiesrelated to parksand recreation. Specifically, The Fullerton Planestablishesa long-term goal to provide 4 acresof useablepark area per 1,000 residents. Basedon the City’s current population of 143,617 residents, the current parkland demandfor theCityis575acres.96,97 Aspreviouslyaddressed, the Projectwouldnot createadirect demandfor parkfacilitiesbecauseit would not generatesubstantialpopulationgrowth requiring the needfor newor physicallyalteredparkfacilities. TheProjectproposesto demolishanexisting businesspark and constructa new warehousefacility. ThisInitial Studyassumesthat the facility couldemployapproximately113employees. It isanticipatedthat manyof thesepositionswould be filled by local residentsor residentsresiding near the City and thus would not generate substantial population growth that would increase the use of these parks or any existing 94 Cityof Fullerton. (2012). TheFullertonPlan - FinalProgramEIR https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/3696/637470826641900000. AccessedAugust8, 2025. 95 Cityof Fullerton. (2008). Parks. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/government/departments/parks-recreation/parks-trails-and-fields/parks- and-trails/list-of-parks. AccessedJuly30, 2025.
96 143,617residentsx 0.004acres = 574.5 acres
97 U.S. CensusBureau. (2020). FullertonCity, California. https:// data.census.gov/profile/Fullerton_city,_California?g=160XX00US0628000.

AccessedJuly30, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page145
neighborhoodor regionalparksor other recreationalfacilities. Sincethe Projectwouldnot directly generatepopulationgrowth andwouldnot indirectlyintroduceparkgoersto the area, the Project wouldnot causeor contributeto a needto constructnewor physicallyalter parkfacilities.

Becausenoparkfacilitiesexistonthe projectsite, the Projectwouldnot conflictwith existingpark structuresor require modification of park facilities. Overall, Projectimplementationwould not result in substantialadversephysicalimpactsassociatedwith the provisionof new or physically alteredparkfacilities, the constructionof whichcouldcausesignificantenvironmentalimpacts, in order to maintain acceptableserviceratios or other performanceobjectivesand a less than significantimpactwouldoccur.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page146

4.17 TRANSPORTATION

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

17. TRANSPORTATION. Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle, andpedestrianfacilities?
X
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistentwith CEQA Guidelinessection15064.3, subdivision (b)?
X
c) Substantiallyincreasehazardsdue to a geometricdesign feature (e.g., sharpcurvesor dangerousintersections) or incompatibleuses (e.g., farm equipment)?
X
d) Resultin inadequateemergencyaccess? X
Thissectionisbasedin part onthe TransportationAssessmentPoliciesandProcedures (TAPP) Worksheet TAPPWorksheet), preparedby the Cityof Fullerton, datedMay 20, 2025and includedin its entirety as AppendixL: TransportationAssessmentPoliciesandProcedures (TAPP) WorksheetandTripGeneration Table.
a) Conflictwith a program plan, ordinanceor policy addressingthe circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrianfacilities?
Lessthan SignificantImpact. The proposedProject would not conflict with a program plan, ordinanceor policy addressingthe circulation system, includingtransit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrianfacilities.

TransitService
Public transit service in the vicinity of the project site is provided by the Orange County TransportationAuthority (OCTA). BusRoute 30 providesservicefrom Cerritosto Anaheimvia OrangethorpeAvenue; abusstopislocatedat the intersectionof OrangethorpeAvenueandState CollegeBoulevard, approximately600feet westof the projectsite. Anotherstop islocatedat the intersectionof OrangethorpeAvenueandSouthPlacentiaAvenue, approximately850feet eastof the site (OCTA, 2025). BusRoute57providesservicefrom Breato NewportBeachviaStateCollege Boulevard; a bus stop is locatedat the intersectionof OrangethorpeAvenueand StateCollege Boulevard, approximately870feet westof the projectsite.

Projectconstructionwould be temporary in nature and would not result in any road closures.

Public transit service would continue to operate during Project construction. Upon Project implementation, public transit bus service would continue to be provided by the OCTA.

Employment-generatingusescurrently occurwithin the site and havebeen anticipatedby The Fullerton Plan. Significantnew employment opportunities potentially resulting in a significant AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page147
increasein the use of transit would not be generated; refer to Section4.14, Populationand Housing. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with a program plan, ordinance, or policy addressingtransit.

Roadwayfacilities
Theproposedwarehousefacility would continueto providevehicularaccessfrom two driveways on EastOrangethorpeAvenueand one drivewayat the terminusof the CypressWaycul-de-sac.

Passengervehicleswould haveaccessto the project site from all three driveways. Theexisting drivewayoff of CypressWaywouldbea 64-foot-widetruck ingressandegresspoint. Thewestern drivewayalongOrangethorpeAvenuewould be closedand a new drivewaywould be provided approximately110feet to the west. Newcurbandgutter and sidewalkimprovementswould also be constructedat the closeddriveway. Thenew western drivewayalongOrangethorpeAvenue would be 40-foot-wide and allow for truck ingress. The existing eastern driveway along OrangethorpeAvenuewould be 26-foot-wide and would exclusivelyallow for passengerand emergencyvehicleingressandegress. No changesto the existingroadwaynetwork would occur.

All drivewayimprovementswouldbeconstructedpursuantto the City’srequirements. Therefore, the Projectwouldnot conflictwith a plan, ordinance, or policyconcerningroadwayfacilities.

PedestrianandBicycleFacilities
ThereisanexistingsidewalkalongOrangethorpeAvenue, adjacentto the projectsite. Asdiscussed above, theProjectwouldbeaccessiblefrom two drivewaysonOrangethorpeAvenue. Theexisting easterndrivewaywouldbemaintained, andthe westerndrivewaywouldbe closedandnewcurb and gutter would be constructedandsidewalkconnectionwould be provided. TheProjectwould also provide landscapingand trees along the Project frontage. Project construction could temporarilyimpactpedestrianfacilities; however, this would be temporaryandwould not result in a significantimpact.

TheCity of FullertonBicycleMaster Plan (Exhibits3.1 and 5.1) identifiesexistingand proposed bicycle facilities within the City. Accordingto the BicycleMaster Plan, ClassII bike lanes are identifiedasproposedonOrangethorpeAvenue. AClassII bikelaneisdefinedasalanestripedfor one-waytravel. Projectimplementationwouldnot conflictwith the bicyclelanesidentifiedin The FullertonPlan, as no road improvementsare proposed. DuringProjectoperations, the Project includesthe provisionof bicycleparkingin its plan. Assuch, Projectconstructionand operation wouldnot resultin a significantimpactto proposedbicyclefacilities. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistentwith CEQAGuidelinessection15064.3, subdivision b)?
Lessthan SignificantImpact. StateCEQAGuidelinesSection15064.3 codifiesthe changefrom Levelof Serviceto VMTasa metric for transportationimpactanalysis. Pursuantto SB743, VMT analysisis the primarymethodfor determiningCEQAimpacts. Jurisdictionswerenot requiredto adoptVMTasa significantimpactdeterminationuntil July1, 2020. TheCity’sTAPPrequiresaVMT Assessmentfor allprojectsinaccordancewith CEQA. TheCity’sTAPPsetscriteriafor theevaluation of projectsand the preparationof VMTAssessments. TheCityrelieson the North OrangeCounty CollaborativeVMTTrafficStudyScreeningTool, whichassistsinidentifyingprojectsthat meetVMT screeningcriteriaandthereforedo not resultin project-generatedVMTimpacts.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page148
A TAPPWorksheetwaspreparedbythe Cityof FullertonTrafficEngineerfor the proposedProject; refer to AppendixL. VMTScreeningindicatesthe proposedProjectisanticipatedto generateless than 836 VMT. As a result, the Projectpassedthe PrimaryScreeninganalysisand a Secondary Screeninganalysiswas conducted. TheproposedProjectalso passedthe SecondaryScreening criteria. AlthoughadditionalVMTanalysiswasnot required, aVMTAnalysiswasconducted; refer to Table32: VMTAnalysis.

Table32: VMTAnalysis
ProposedProject
EstimatedDailyTrips 225
AverageTripLength 8.9
ServicePopulation 110
VMTper ServicePopulation 18.1
ProposedProjectVMT 2,003
ExistingUseVMTCredit 13,047
Net ProjectVMT - 11,044
TargetVMTper ServicePopulationThreshold 29.6
Percentageabove/below VMTTarget - 38.9%
Source: TAPPWorksheet, AppendixL.

AsindicatedinTable32, theproposedProjectwouldhaveaVMT/ServicePopulationof 18.1, which wouldbeapproximately38.9 percentlower than the TargetVMT/ServicePopulationThresholdof

29.6. Therefore, the proposedProjectwouldnot havea VMTimpactandwouldnot conflictor be inconsistentwith CEQAGuidelinessection15064.3(b), a lessthan significantimpactwould occur andno mitigationisrequired.
c) Substantiallyincreasehazardsduetoageometricdesignfeature (e.g., sharpcurvesordangerous intersections) or incompatibleuses (e.g., farm equipment)? Lessthan SignificantImpact. The Project proposesto remove the existingbusinesspark and developa new warehouseuseconsistentwith the project site’s land useIndustrial (I) land use designationand SouthwestIndustrialFocusArea. Therefore, the Projectwould not introducean incompatibleuseto the site. Internaldrive aisleswould accommodatestandardfire laneturning radiusesandhammerheadturnaroundmaneuversdesignfor emergencyvehiclesandfire services.

Theproject site would continueto be accessedfrom two existingdrivewaysalongOrangethorpe Avenueand onedrivewayat the terminus of the CypressWay cul-de-sac. Theexistingwestern driveway along Orangethorpe Avenue closed and a new driveway would be provided approximately110feet to the west. Newcurbandgutter andsidewalkimprovementswouldalso be constructed at the closed driveway. The proposed driveway and internal circulation improvementswouldbeconstructedpursuantto Cityof FullertonFireDepartmentstandards. The Projectwould not provide any off-site roadwayimprovementsthat could substantiallyincrease hazardsdueto a designfeature.

Aspart of theCity’sSitePlanReviewprocessrequiredunderFMCChapter15.47, SitePlanReview, the site plan would be reviewed and only approvedafter finding the proposeddevelopment conformswith applicablerequirementsandstandardssetforth in the FMC. Therefore, the Project AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page149
would not substantiallyincreasehazardsdue to a geometricdesignfeature (e.g., sharpcurvesor dangerousintersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). As such impacts are consideredlessthan significantandno mitigationisrequired. d) Resultin inadequateemergencyaccess?
Lessthan SignificantImpact. TheproposedProjectdrivewayentrancesand interior drive aisles wouldaccommodatestandardfire laneturningradiusesandhammerheadturnaroundmaneuvers.

Internal drive aisles would be greater than 20 feet wide to accommodatefire apparatus requirementsfor fire truckaccessandturningradius. TheFullertonFireDepartmentwouldreview theProjectandspecifiedaccessrequirementsconcerningminimumroadwaywidth, fire apparatus accessroads, fire lanes, signage, accessdevicesand gates, and accesswalkways, amongother requirements, whichwouldenhanceemergencyaccessto the projectsite. Projectplanswouldbe reviewedby FullertonFireDepartmentfor final approvalprior to issuanceof a building permit.

Compliancewith the Fullerton Fire Department’s requirements would ensure impacts to emergencyaccesswould belessthan significant.

Thereis the potential that one or more traffic laneslocatedimmediatelyadjacentto the project site may be temporarily closed or controlled by construction personnel during construction activities. However, this would be temporary and emergencyaccessto the project site and surroundingareawould be requiredto bemaintainedat all times. All constructionstagingwould occur within the boundariesof the project site and would not interfere with circulation along nearby roadways. The Project would comply with standard condition SCHAZ-1, which would require the preparea TrafficControlPlanfor implementationduring the constructionphase, as deemednecessaryby the CityTrafficEngineer, aswell asSCHAZ-2, in which the CityCommunity and EconomicDevelopmentDepartmentwould consultwith the FullertonPoliceDepartmentto disclosetemporaryclosuresand alternativetravel routes, in order to ensureadequateaccessfor emergencyvehicles. Therefore, the Projectwould not result in inadequateemergencyaccessto the City, anda lessthan significantimpactwouldoccur.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page150

4.18 TRIBALCULTURALRESOURCES

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

18. TRIBALCULTURALRESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Causea substantialadversechangein the significanceof a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
culturallandscapethat is geographicallydefinedin terms
of the sizeand scopeof the landscape, sacredplace, or
objectwith culturalvalueto a CaliforniaNativeAmerican
tribe, and that is: i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
i) Listedor eligiblefor listingin the CaliforniaRegister of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historicalresourcesas defined in PublicResources
Codesection5020.1(k)?
X
ii) A resourcedetermined by the lead agency, in its
discretionandsupportedbysubstantialevidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public ResourcesCode Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public ResourceCode Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significanceof the resourceto a CaliforniaNative
Americantribe?
X
a) Causea substantial adversechangein the significanceof a tribal cultural resource, defined in PublicResourcesCodesection21074as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscapethat is geographicallydefinedin termsof the sizeandscopeof the landscape, sacredplace, or object with culturalvalueto a CaliforniaNativeAmericantribe, andthatis:
i) Listedor eligiblefor listing in the CaliforniaRegisterof HistoricalResources, or in a local registerofhistoricalresourcesasdefinedin PublicResourcesCodesection5020.1(k)? NoImpact. Theprojectsiteis currentlydevelopedwith a five-buildingmulti-tenantbusinesspark that wasconstructedin 1983. Asdiscussedin Section4.5: CulturalResources, theprojectsitedoes not containanyfeaturesmeetingthe historicresourcescriteria anddoesnot meetthe definition of a historicresourceunderCEQA. TheFullertonPlanEIRdoesnot identify anyhistoricresources structureslocatedon the projectsitenor is the projectsite locatedwithin a historicdistrict in the City.98 Therefore, no known historicalresourcespursuant to CEQAGuidelinesSection15064.5 were identified on the project site, and the proposedProjectwould not causea changein the 98 Cityof Fullerton. 2012. TheFullertonPlanFinalProgramEIR – Section5.10CulturalResources. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/3686/637470826615030000. AccessedSeptember2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page151
significanceof a historicalresource. In addition, a requestwassubmittedto the NativeAmerican Heritage Commission (NAHC) to review the SacredLandsFile (SLF) databasefor any sacred landscapeor Tribalresourceswithin or nearthe projectsite. A negativeresponsewasreceivedon September5, 2024, whichindicatedthat no recordedSLFswere on file within or nearthe project site. No impactwouldoccurandno mitigationisrequired.
ii) A resourcedeterminedby the lead agency, in its discretionand supportedby substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public ResourcesCodeSection5024.1. Inapplyingthecriteriasetforthinsubdivision (c) ofPublic ResourceCodeSection5024.1, the lead agencyshallconsiderthe significanceof the resourceto a CaliforniaNativeAmericantribe?
Lessthan SignificantImpact with Mitigation Incorporated. TheProjectis subjectto compliance with AB52, whichrequiresconsiderationof impactsto “tribal culturalresources” (TCRs), defined in Section21074of the PublicResourcesCode, aspartof theCEQAprocess. AB52requirestheCity to notify anygroups (whohaverequestednotification) who aretraditionallyor culturallyaffiliated with the geographicarea of a project for which a negativedeclaration, an MND, or an EIRis requiredpursuantto CEQA. TheTribesareprovided30daysto requestconsultationafter the lead agency notifies the tribe of a project. In compliancewith Public ResourcesCode Section 21080.3.1(b), the City provided formal notification to California Native American tribal representativesBasedon the City’s TribalContactList. NativeAmericangroupsmay know the area’sculturalresourcesandmayhaveconcernsabouta development’s adverseeffectson tribal cultural resources, as defined in Public ResourcesCode Section21074. The City sent AB 52 notificationlettersto the tribal representativeslistedbelowon July25th2025.

GabrielenoBandof MissionIndians – KizhNation – AndrewSalas, Chairperson GabrielenoBandof MissionIndians – KizhNation – ChristinaSwindallMartinez, Secretary Gabrielino/TongvaSanGabrielBandof MissionIndians – AnthonyMorales, Chairperson Gabrielino/TongvaNation – SandonneGoad, Chairperson
GabrielinoTongvaIndiansof CaliforniaTribalCouncil – RobertDorame, Chairperson GabrielinoTongvaIndiansof CaliforniaTribalCouncil – ChristinaConely, CulturalResource Administrator
Gabrielino-TongvaTribe – CharlesAlvarez, Chairperson
Gabrielino-TongvaTribe – SamDunlap, CulturalResourceDirector JuaneñoBand of Mission IndiansAcjachemenNation – Belardes – JoycePerry, Cultural ResourceDirector
JuaneñoBandof MissionIndiansAcjachemenNation84A – HeidiLucero, Chairperson, Tribal HistoricPreservationOfficer
PalaBandof MissionIndians – AlexisWallick, Assistant, TribalHistoricPreservationOfficer TheCity receivedresponsesfrom three tribesregardingthe AB52 letter: the GabrielinoBandof MissionIndians – KizhNation, GabrielinoTongvaIndiansof CaliforniaTribalCouncil, andPalaBand of Mission Indians. The Pala Band of Mission Indians declined AB 52 consultation as they AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page152
determinedthe projectsiteisnot within the boundariesof the recognizedPalaIndianReservation.

Both the GabrielenoBandof MissionIndians – KizhNationandthe GabrielinoTongvaIndiansof Californiarequestedtribal consultationunderAB52.

On August19, 2025, the City respondedto KizhNation to schedulea consultationmeeting. A formal consultationmeeting was scheduledfor October 14, 2025; however, the Kizh Nation representativewasunableto attend dueto a schedulingconflict. In lieu of the meeting, the Tribe submittedwritten commentsand proposedmitigation languageon October21, 2025. Basedon this consultation, the City incorporated the Tribe’s recommended measuresas Mitigation MeasuresMM TCR-1 throughMM TCR-3, with minor modifications. Therevisedmeasureswere providedto KizhNationon October28, 2025. Asof the dateof publication, consultationwith Kizh Nationremainsopen.

TheCityrespondedto GabrielinoTongvaIndiansof Californiarequestfor consultationon August 28, 2025 with the ProjectCulturalResourcesMemorandum, and followed up on September11, 2025 andSeptember25, 2025to requesta meetingtime. Asof the date of publication, the City has not receivedany responsesfrom the GabrielinoTongvaIndiansof Californiato schedule consultation.

No knowntribal culturalresourceshavebeenidentifiedon the project site. Notwithstanding, the potential existsfor the discoveryof unknown buried archaeologicalor tribal cultural resources during ground disturbing activities. To address potential impacts during ground-disturbing activities, the proposedProjectwouldberequiredto complywith MM CUL-1, whichrequiresthat, if cultural resourcesare discoveredduring Project activities, earthwork and ground-disturbing activitieswouldhaltwithin 60feetof thefindandaqualifiedarchaeologistwouldbehiredto assess the find. Shouldthe find be deemedsignificant, a CulturalResourcesMonitoring and Treatment Planwould be created. Additionally, as outlined in MM TCR-1, the Projectapplicantwould be required to retain a Native AmericanMonitor for ground disturbingactivity. If a tribal cultural resourceis identified, all constructionactivitieswithin 50 feet shallceaseuntil the resourcehas been assessed. Kizh Nation shall recover and retain the resourceand determine appropriate treatment. If humanremainsarefound, implementationof MM TCR-2 andMM TCR-3 would be required, which details instructionswhen inadvertent discoveryof human remainsoccursand proceduresfor burialsand funeraryremains. Therefore, with implementationof MM CUL-1 and MM TCR-1 throughMM TCR-3 theProjectwouldresultin a lessthansignificantimpactconcerning a substantialadversechangein the significanceof a tribal culturalresource.

Mitigation Measures
MM TCR-1 Priorto issuanceof a gradingpermit, theapplicantshallretaina NativeAmericanMonitor Prior to Commencementof Ground-DisturbingActivitiesto the extent that soil deeper than 4 feet aredisturbed:

A. Theprojectapplicantshallretain aNativeAmericanMonitor from or approvedbythe GabrieleñoBandof MissionIndians – KizhNation. Themonitor shallberetainedprior to the commencementof any “ground-disturbingactivity” for the subjectproject at all project locations (i.e., both on-site and anyoff-site locationsthat are includedin the project description/definition and/or required in connectionwith the project, such as public improvement work). As the existing project site was previously AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page153
developed, “Ground-disturbingactivity” shallinclude, but is not limited to, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching that disturbed soil deeperthan 4 feet belowgrade.

B. A copyof the executedmonitoringagreementshallbesubmittedto the leadagency prior to the earlierof the commencementof any “ground-disturbingactivity”, or the issuanceof anypermit necessaryto commencea “ground-disturbingactivity”.

C. Themonitor will completedailymonitoringlogsthat will providedescriptionsof the relevant ground-disturbingactivities, the type of constructionactivitiesperformed, locationsof ground-disturbingactivities, soil types, cultural-related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveriesof significanceto the Tribe.

Monitor logswill identifyanddescribeanydiscoveredTCRs, includingbut not limited to, NativeAmericanculturaland historicalartifacts, remains, placesof significance, etc., (collectively, tribal culturalresources, or “TCR”), aswellasanydiscoveredNative American (ancestral) humanremainsandburialgoods. Copiesof monitor logswill be providedto the projectapplicant/leadagency.

D. On-site tribal monitoring shallconcludeupon the latter of the following (1) written confirmation to the Kizh from a designated point of contact for the project applicant/lead agencythat all ground-disturbing activities and phasesthat may involve ground-disturbingactivities on the project site or in connectionwith the project are complete; or (2) a determinationand written notification by the Kizhto theprojectapplicant/leadagencythat nofuture, plannedconstructionactivityand/or development/constructionphaseat the projectsitepossessesthepotentialto impact KizhTCRs.

E. Upondiscoveryof anyTCRs, all constructionactivitiesin the immediatevicinityof the discoveryshallcease (i.e., not lessthanthesurrounding50feet) andshallnot resume until the discoveredTCRhas been fully assessedby the Kizhmonitor and/or Kizh archaeologist. TheKizhwill recoverandretain all discoveredTCRsin the form and/or manner the Tribe deemsappropriate, in the Tribe’s sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe deems appropriate, including for educational, cultural and/or historicpurposes.

MM TCR-2 Priorto issuanceof gradingpermit, thefollowingnotesshallbelistedonthe gradingplans for the project:

A. NativeAmericanhumanremainsaredefinedin PRC5097.98 (d)(1) asaninhumation or cremation, and in anystateof decompositionor skeletalcompleteness. Funerary objects, calledassociatedgravegoodsin PublicResourcesCode, Section5097.98, are alsoto betreatedaccordingto this statute.

B. If NativeAmericanhumanremainsand/or gravegoodsdiscoveredor recognizedon the project site, then all constructionactivitiesshallimmediatelycease. Healthand SafetyCode, Section7050.5, dictatesthat anydiscoveriesof humanskeletalmaterial shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and all ground-disturbing activities shall immediately halt and shall remain halted until the coroner has determinedthe natureof the remains. If the coronerrecognizesthe humanremains to be thoseof a NativeAmericanor hasreasonto believethey areNativeAmerican, AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page154
he or sheshallcontact, by telephonewithin 24 hours, the NativeAmericanHeritage Commission, andPublicResourcesCode, Section5097.98, shallbefollowed.

C. Humanremainsand grave/burial goodsshall be treated alike per CaliforniaPublic ResourcesCodesection5097. 98(d)(1) and (2).

D. Constructionactivitiesmayresumein other partsof the projectsiteat a minimumof 200 feet away from discoveredhuman remains and/or burial goods, if the Kizh determinesin its solediscretionthat resumingconstructionactivitiesat that distance is acceptable and provides the project manager express consent of that determination (alongwith any other mitigation measuresthe Kizhmonitor and/or archaeologistdeemsnecessary). (CEQAGuidelinesSection15064.5(f).) E. Preservationin place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discoveredhumanremainsand/or burialgoods.

F. Any discoveryof humanremains/burial goodsshallbe kept confidentialto prevent further disturbance.

MM TCR-3 Priorto issuanceof gradingpermit, the followingnotesshallbelistedonthe gradingplans for the project:

A. As the Most Likely Descendant (“MLD”), the Koo-nas-gna Burial Policy shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompassesmore than humanbones. Inancientaswell ashistorictimes, TribalTraditionsincluded, but were not limited to, the preparationof thesoilfor burial, the burialof funeraryobjectswith the deceased, andthe ceremonialburningof humanremains.

B. If the discoveryof human remainsincludesfour or more burials, the discovery location shall be treated as a cemetery and a separatetreatment plan shall be created.

C. Thepreparedsoilandcremationsoilsareto betreated in the samemannerasbone fragmentsthat remainintact. Associatedfuneraryobjectsareobjectsthat, aspart of the deathrite or ceremonyof a culture, arereasonablybelievedto havebeenplaced with individualhumanremainseither at the time of deathor later; other itemsmade exclusivelyfor burial purposesor to containhumanremainscanalsobe considered asassociatedfuneraryobjects. Cremationswill eitherberemovedinbulkor bymeans asnecessaryto ensurecompleterecoveryof all sacredmaterials.

D. In the case where discoveredhuman remains cannot be fully documentedand recoveredonthe sameday, theremainswill becoveredwith muslinclothandasteel platethat canbemovedby heavyequipmentplacedover the excavationopeningto protectthe remains. If thistype of steelplateisnot available, a24-hourguardshould be postedoutsideof workinghours. TheTribewill makeeveryeffort to recommend diverting the project and keepingthe remainsin situ and protected. If the project cannotbediverted, it maybedeterminedthat burialswill beremoved.

E. In the event preservationin placeis not possibledespitegood faith efforts by the project applicant/developerand/or landowner, before ground-disturbingactivities may resume on the project site, the landowner shall arrange a designatedsite locationwithin the footprint of the project for the respectfulreburialof the human remainsand/or ceremonialobjects.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page155
F. Eachoccurrenceof human remainsand associatedfunerary objectswill be stored usingopaquecloth bags. All humanremains, funerary objects, sacredobjectsand objectsof culturalpatrimonywill beremovedto asecurecontaineronsiteif possible.

Theseitemsshouldberetainedandreburiedwithin sixmonthsof recovery. Thesite of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreedupon betweenthe Tribeandthe landownerat a site to be protectedin perpetuity. There shallbeno publicityregardinganyculturalmaterialsrecovered.

G. TheTribewill work closelywith the project’s qualifiedarchaeologistto ensurethat the excavationis treated carefully, ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approvedby the Tribe, documentationshall be prepared and shall include (at a minimum) detaileddescriptivenotesandsketches. All data recoverydata recovery- relatedformsof documentationshallbeapprovedinadvancebythe Tribe. If anydata recoveryis performed, oncecomplete, a final report shallbe submittedto the Tribe andthe NAHC. TheTribedoesnot authorizeanyscientificstudyor the utilization of anyinvasiveand/or destructivediagnosticson humanremains.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page156

4.19 UTILITIESANDSERVICESYSTEMS

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

19. UTILITIESANDSERVICESYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Requireor resultin the relocationor constructionof new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm
water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocationof whichcouldcausesignificantenvironmental
effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonablyforeseeablefuture development
duringnormal, dry, andmultipledry years?
X
c) Resultin a determinationby the wastewatertreatment
providerwhichservesor mayservethe projectthat it has
adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
d) Generatesolidwastein excessof Stateor localstandards, or in excessof the capacityof local infrastructure, or
otherwiseimpairthe attainmentof solidwastereduction
goals?
X
e) Complywith federal, State, and local managementand
reductionstatutesandregulationsrelatedto solidwaste?
X
a) Requireor result in the relocation or construction of new or expandedwater, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electricpower, natural gas, or telecommunicationsfacilities, theconstructionorrelocationofwhichcouldcausesignificantenvironmentaleffects? LessthanSignificantImpact. The following discussesthe Project’s potential impactson water, wastewater (conveyanceand treatment), storm water drainage, electric power infrastructure, naturalgasfacilities, andtelecommunicationsfacilitiesandinfrastructure.

Water
TheCityof Fullertonwouldcontinueto providewater serviceto the projectsitevia connectionto anexisting12-inchwatermainin OrangethorpeAvenueandan 8-inchwatermainin CypressWay.

The Project proposeswater connectionsfor domestic water, fire protection, and landscape irrigation. TheProjectalsoincludesrelocationof the existingon-site water loop to alignwith the proposedsiteconfiguration.

AO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page157
TheCityof FullertonPublicWorksDepartmentWater Divisionoverseesthe City’s water system, includingupgradesand repair to infrastructure, water conservation, and water quality. The2020 Urban Water ManagementPlan (2020 UWMP) is a comprehensivedocumentthat evaluatesa water supplier’s reliability over a long-term (20 to 25 year) horizon. UWMP water demand forecastsare basedon adopted generalplans. The 2020 UWMPforecastswater demand for commercialland useswithin the Cityto increasefrom 4,478AFin 2025to 4,987AFby 2045. The proposed Project’s water demand would account for less than one percent of the overall anticipatedwater demandfor commerciallandusesfrom 2025through2045. TheProject’swater demandis shownin Table33: ProjectWater Demand.

Table33: ProjectWater Demand
Condition Total Water Demand (gpd) Total Water Demand (gpm) ExistingConditions 2,852 1.98
ProposedProject 3,196 2.22
NetChange + 344 (increase) + 0.24 (increase)
Source: AppendixJ: WaterDemandAssessment
AlthoughtheproposedProjectwouldincreasewaterdemandoverexistingconditions, theWater DemandAssessmentconcludedthe proposedwater demand increasewould not impact the existing infrastructure and the City would be able to serve the Project. The 2020 UWMP forecastedtotal water demandto be 25,655AFin 2025.99 TheproposedProjectwould demand upto 3,196gallonsperdayor 3.58AF.100Projectimplementationwouldaccountfor lessthanone percentof current water demandof 25,655 AFin 2025. Further, it is not anticipatedthat the Projectwouldgeneratesignificantpopulationgrowth. Therefore, the proposedProjectwouldnot requirethe constructionof newor expandedwater supplyor treatment facilities. Impactswould belessthan significantandno mitigationisrequired.

Wastewater
The City of Fullerton would also continue to provide sewer service to the project site via connectionto an existing8-inch sanitarysewermain in CypressWay. In addition, a secondary point of connectionmaybeextendedto anexistingCityof Placentiasewermainin Orangethorpe Avenue. Compliancewith the City of Placentia applicable requirements for the proposed connectionwouldbeconfirmedthroughthe City’sreviewprocessprior to permit issuance.

The Sewer Capacity Analysisprepared for the Project (Appendix K) assumedall sewage generationwould for the Projectwould utilize the existingCityof Fullertonowned sewermain line in CypressWay. However, the Projectproposesthat approximately2,104 gallonsper day GPD) of the total wastewaterflow, correspondingto the southernhalf of the warehouse, would be directed to the City of Placentiaowned sewermain in OrangethorpeAvenue. As such, the analysis presented for the City of Fullerton in the Sewer CapacityAnalysisrepresents a conservativeevaluationof availablesewercapacity.
99 Arcadis. August2025. 2020 Urban Water ManagementPlanTable4-4 Retail: Total Water Use (Potableand Non-Potable), Availableat:
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/5052/637598829614070000, AccessedAugust11, 2025. 100 1 AFequalsabout892AFper year
AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page158
Theprojectsiteiswithin the City’sSewerMaintenanceDistrict2 andservedbyanexisting8-inch sanitary sewer main and manholeat station 7+94 in CypressWay. Theexistingbuildingsare connectedto anexistingsewermainthat connectseastof themanhole. TheCityof Fullerton2009 SewerMaster Planidentified systemdeficienciesconcerningcapacityand structural condition, anddevelopeda20-yearCapitalImprovementProgram (CIP), whichaddressesthesedeficiencies.

Theproposedsewagegenerationfor the Projecthasbeenestimatedusingthe sewagegeneration factorsfrom TableF229of theSewerCapacityAnalysis; seeAppendixK: SewerCapacityAnalysis.

Projectedsewagegenerationfor the Projectcomparedto existingconditionsisprovidedin Table 34: ProjectSewerDemand. TheProjectwouldresultinanet total decreaseof 52gpdoverexisting conditions.

Table34: ProjectSewerDemand
Description FacilityDescription Size (SF)
SewageGeneration
Factorin Gallonsper
Day (GPD) Total
OfficeSpace Office 10,000 120/1,000grossSF 1,200GPD
WarehouseSpace Warehouse 100,232 30/1,000grossSF 3,007GPD ProjectTotal TotalGPD 4,207GPD
ExistingDevelopment TotalGPD 4,259GPD
Net ProjectDifference - 52GPD
decrease)
Source: PacificConsultingGroup, Inc. (July2025). CedarwoodsFullertonSewerCapacityAnalysis.

Asindicatedin Table34, the Projectwould resultin a net total decreaseof 52 GPDcomparedto existingconditions; therefore, the Projectwould not contribute to any existingsewer capacity deficiencies. Therefore, theProjectapplicantwouldnot berequiredto contributeafair-sharecost to the Cityfor the SewerMaster Planimprovementprojectsfor sewercapacity. Additionally, the maximumflow capacity (assuming50 percentfull flow) of the 8-inchsewermainin CypressWay is 17.15 GPM, whichexceedsthe Project’s sewagegenerationestimate. Basedon the findingsin SewerCapacityAnalysis, the proposedsewagegenerationfrom the Projectwould not haveany impactontheexistingsewerinfrastructure. Asnotedabove, thisisaconservativeanalysisas2,104 GPDof the total 4,207GPDwouldbeservicedbyalateralconnectionto anexistingCityof Placentia ownedsewermainline in OrangethorpeAvenue.

Theproposedsewerconnectionin OrangethorpeAvenuehasbeencoordinatedwith the City of Placentiastaff, who hasconfirmed its feasibility. In addition, Placentiastaff hasconfirmed the existing sewer-main in Orangethorpe Avenue has sufficient capacity to accommodate the estimated2,104 GPDassociatedwith the proposedProject.101 Theadditional sewergeneration wouldnot resultin asignificantincrease, suchthat it wouldexceedthecapacityof theexistingline.

TheProjectwould be requiredto complywith applicablerequirementsoutlined Cityof Placentia MunicipalCodeChapter16.12, SewerConnection, whichwould be confirmedthroughthe Cityof Placentia’s standard review processprior to sewer connection permit issuance. Therefore, following compliancewith the establishedregulatory framework describedabove, the Project 101 Basedon phoneconversationwith Cityof Placentia, DeputyDirectorof PublicWorks, GabrielGuerrero-Gabany (714) 993-8250, on October 29, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page159
would not result in new or expandedwastewater facilities which could causea significant environmentaleffect. A lessthan significantimpactwouldoccurandno mitigationisrequired.

StormWater DrainageFacilities
SeeThreshold4.10cconcerningdrainagepatternsandstormwaterdrainagesystems. Asdiscussed in Threshold4.10c, the Project proposeson-site drainageimprovements. No off-site drainage improvementsareproposedor required. Theenvironmentalimpactsassociatedwith the proposed drainageimprovementsare analyzedasa part of the overallProjectanalysisin this Initial Study.

Asconcludedin thisInitial Study, followingcompliancewith the establishedregulatoryframework, the proposeddrainageimprovements’ environmentaleffectswouldbelessthansignificantandno mitigation isrequired.

ElectricPower, Natural Gas, andTelecommunicationsFacilities ElectricalpowerisprovidedbySouthernCaliforniaEdson (SCE). SeeSection4.6: Energyfor further discussionsconcerning electricity. The Project’s anticipated electricity demand would be approximately0.830 GWh per year, which would represent less than 0.01 percent of SCE’s projectedsaleswhen then Projectis operational. TheproposedProjectwould not connectto or utilize natural gas. Telecommunicationsservicesare providedby Spectrum, Frontier, and AT&T.

The project site is served by existing telecommunication infrastructure. The various telecommunicationproviderswouldcontinueto provideservicecoverageto the proposedProject.

TheProjectproposesto connectto existingelectricalandtelecommunicationsinfrastructureand nooff-siteimprovementsareproposedor required. Theenvironmentaleffectsassociatedwith the necessaryon-site electricalandtelecommunicationsimprovementsare analyzedasa part of the overallProjectanalysisin this Initial Study. Asconcludedin thisInitial Study, followingcompliance with the establishedregulatory framework, the proposedutility improvements’ environmental effectswouldbelessthan significantandno mitigationisrequired. b) Would the project havesufficient water suppliesavailableto servethe Projectand reasonably foreseeablefuture developmentduring normal, dry andmultiple dryyears? LessThanSignificantImpact. TheCity of Fullertonis a retail water supplierand supplieswater currently providewater to the businesspark on the project site. The2020UWMPindicatesthat water supplieswould meet the water demandsfor normal, single-dry, and multiple dry-year conditionsthrough 2045. Populationgrowth forecastswithin adoptedgeneralplansare factored into UWMPwater demandforecasts
The City meets all of its water demand through a combination of imported water and local groundwater. TheCityworkstogetherwith two primaryagencies, theMetropolitanWaterDistrict of SouthernCalifornia (MWD) and the OrangeCountyWater District (OCWD), to ensurewater supplyreliability. Groundwaterfrom the OrangeCountyGroundwaterBasin (Basin) accountsfor approximately79 percentof the City’s overallsupply, followedby imported water at 21 percent.

It is projectedthat by 2045, the water supplyportfolio will changeto approximately85 percent groundwaterand 15 percentimported water. If the Cityexceedstheir groundwaterallocation, a purchaseagreementis in placewith METthat allowspurchaseof supplementalimported water.

TheCitymaintainssevenimportedwater connectionsto METandsixemergencyinterconnections with other utilities.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page160
TheOCBasinis not adjudicatedand assuch, pumpingfrom the OCBasinis managedthrough a processthat usesfinancialincentivesto encouragegroundwaterproducersto pumpa sustainable amount of water. Theframeworkfor the financialincentivesis basedon establishingthe Basin ProductionPercentage (BPP), the percentageof eachProducer’s total water supplythat comes from groundwaterpumpedfrom the OCBasin. TheBPPis set basedon groundwaterconditions, availabilityof imported water supplies, andOCBasinmanagementobjectives. OCWDhasa policy to managethe groundwaterbasinwithin a sustainablerangeto avoidadverseimpactsto the OC Basin.

The2020 UWMPforecastedits total water demandto be 27,850 AFby 2045. Additionally, the populationis expectedto increasefrom 141,648 personsin 2020to 189,687personsby 2045. In the caseof a water supplyshortage, the CityhaspreparedaWater ShortageContingencyPlanto ensureadequateservice. Further, the Projectproposesto removethe existingon-sitestructures anddevelopanewwarehousingbuilding, consistentwith the projectsite’slanduse (I) designation and SouthwestIndustrial FocusArea. Significantnew employmentopportunities would not be generatedand would not requirea significantincreasein water demand. Further, development, as proposed, would result in a FARof 0.53, which is lessthan the 1.0 projecteddevelopment intensity for the SoutheastIndustrial FocusArea, and, therefore, less than the development capacityassumptionsidentified in TheFullertonPlan. Therefore, the Project’s anticipatedwater demandisaccountedfor in the 2020UWMP. The2020UWMPindicatesadequatewater supplies would be availableto servefuture water demandsduring normal, dry andmultiple years, which includeswater demandassociatedwith the existingsite. Therefore, impactsto water supplies wouldbelessthan significant.
c) Would the project resultin a determinationby the wastewater treatment providerwhich serves or may servethe project that it hasadequatecapacityto servethe project’s projecteddemand in addition to the provider’sexistingcommitments?
LessThanSignificantImpact. City-ownedwastewatercollectionfacilitiesthat servethe City are operatedand maintainedby the City of Fullerton PublicWorks EngineeringDivision. TheCity’s current wastewater system includes 330 miles of pipeline and 6,850 manholes. The City’s wastewatersystemdischargesto severalof the OrangeCountySanitationDistrict’s (OCSD) trunk lines. TheCity of Placentiawastewatercollectionsystemalsoconveysuntreatedwastewaterto OrangeCountySanitationDistrict’s (OCSD) trunksewersystem. OCSDcollects, treats, anddisposes of and/or reclaimswastewatergeneratedbyresidentsinnorthwesternandcentralOrangeCounty.

OCSDhastwo operatingfacilities, ReclamationPlantNo. 1 andTreatmentPlantNo. 2, locatedin the cities of FountainValleyand HuntingtonBeach, respectively. Throughthesefacilities, OCSD collects, conveys, treats, and/or reclaims more than approximately 170 million gallons of wastewatergenerateddailyin its servicearea.102
Wastewater is collected and treated at Treatment Plant No. 2. The estimated daily flow of wastewaterreceivedat PlantNo. 2 is 68 million gallons (mgd). Thisfacility currentlyhasa total primary treatment capacityof 168 mgd, with an averagedaily treatment of approximately127 mgd. Therefore, thereisapproximately41mgdof excessprimarytreatmentcapacityat OCSDPlant 102 OrangeCountySanitationDistrict. (OCSAN). RegionalSewerService. https:// www.ocsan.gov/regional-sewer-service/#waterreclamation.

AccessedAugust11, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page161
No. 2. Asdiscussedabove, the proposedProjectwould result in a total decreasein wastewater generatedof 52 gpd. Thisrepresentsa nominal decreasein wastewatertreatment demandat Treatment Plant No. 2. Existingwastewater treatment capacityis sufficient to meet Project demand and Project implementation would not require or result in the constructionof new wastewatertreatment facilitiesor expansionof existingfacilities. A lessthan significantimpact would occurandno mitigationisrequired.
d) Would the project generatesolidwastein excessof Stateor local standards, or in excessof the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Or,
e) Wouldtheprojectcomplywithfederal, State, andlocalmanagementandreductionstatutesand regulationsrelated to solidwaste?
LessThan Significant Impact. The Project is anticipated to generate solid waste during the temporary, short-term construction phase, as well as the operational phase, but it is not anticipatedto result in inadequatelandfill capacity. TheCitycontractswith RepublicServicesto provide solid wasteand recyclingservices. Themajority of solid wastegeneratedin the City is disposedof at the Olinda Alpha Landfill located at 1942 ValenciaAvenuein the City of Brea.

Accordingto CalRecycle, the maximumpermittedthroughputfor the landfillis8,000tons/dayand the maximum permitted capacityis 148,800,000CY. The remainingcapacityis approximately 17,500,000CY.103
TheFullertonPlanEIRidentifiesa solidwastegenerationrate of 6.0poundsper 1000squarefeet per day for businessparks, offices, and commercialuses. Given the 110,232square feet of proposedwarehouseand ancillaryoffice spacethe anticipatedsolid wastegenerationfrom the Project according to this generation factor is approximately 661.40 pounds per day (0.33 tons/day)104. Thesolidwastevolumewouldbelessthanoneton perdayandthereforeconsidered a nominalamountof the dailycapacityof anyof the landfillsservingthe City.

Regulationsspecificallyapplicableto the proposedProjectincludethe CaliforniaIntegratedWaste ManagementActof 1989 (AB939), andCalGreenCodeSection4.408, andAB341. TheIntegrated WasteManagementAct, which requireseverycity and county in the Stateto preparea Source ReductionandRecyclingElement (SRRE) to its SolidWasteManagementPlan, identifieshow each jurisdictionwill meet the State’s mandatorywastediversiongoal of 50 percentby and after the year2000. AB341requiresthat atleast75 percentof wastegeneratedfrom constructionactivities be divertedto recyclingcenters.

The2025CalGreenCodeSection4.408requirespreparationof aConstructionWasteManagement Planthat outlineswaysin whichthe contractorwouldrecycleand/or salvagefor reuseaminimum of 65 percentof the nonhazardousconstructionand demolition debris. Duringthe construction phase, the Projectwouldberequiredto complywith the CalGreenCodethroughtherecyclingand reuseof at least65 percentof the nonhazardousconstructionand demolition debris from the projectsite.
103 CalRecycle. (2025). Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) Facility Details – Olinda Alpha Landfill (30-AB-0035). Retrieved from https:// www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2757?siteID=2093. Accessedon August11, 2025. 104 110,232SFx 6.0lbsper day/1000SF = 661.40lbs/day
AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page162
Constructionand operationalactivitieswould be required to complywith all applicablefederal, State, andlocalstatutesandregulationsfor solidwaste, includingthoseidentifiedunderthe most recentCALGreenCode. Thereissufficientlandfill capacityto servethe proposedProject, andthe proposedProjectwould not conflictwith solidwastereductiongoals. TheProjectwould result in a lessthan significantimpactconcerningsolidwasteandnomitigationisrequired.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page163

4.20 WILDFIRE

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

20. WILDFIRE. If located in or near State responsibility areasor lands classifiedas very high fire hazard severityzones, would the project:
a) Substantiallyimpairanadoptedemergencyresponseplan
or emergencyevacuationplan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbatewildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupantsto, pollutant concentrationsfrom a wildfire or the uncontrolledspreadof a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or maintenanceof associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbatefire risk or that may result in temporary or
ongoingimpactsto the environment?
X
d) Exposepeopleor structuresto significantrisks, including downslope or downstreamflooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
X
a) If locatedin or near Stateresponsibilityareasor landsclassifiedasvery high fire hazardseverity zones, would the projectsubstantiallyimpair anadoptedemergencyresponseplan or emergency evacuationplan?
No Impact. Accordingto CALFIRE’sFireHazardSeverityZonesMap for the City, the project siteis not locatedin or near a StateResponsibilityArea (SRA) nor VeryHighFireHazardSeverityZone VHFHSZ)105. Asillustratedin theFullerton2021-2029SafetyElementExhibit5: FireHazardSeverity Zonesin Fullertonthe projectsiteislocatedin aLocalResponsibilityArea (LRA).106Asshownin CAL FIRE’sFHSZViewer, theclosestVHFHZto theprojectsiteislocatedapproximately4 milesnorthwest of the site, borderingBeachBoulevardandthe northernboundaryof theCity.107 Theprojectsiteis borderedto the southby OrangethorpeAve, whichisidentifiedasa potentialevacuationroute.108 Therefore, the proposedProjectwould not substantiallyimpair an adoptedemergencyresponse planor emergencyevacuationplandueto a wildfire, andno impactwouldoccur. 105 CALFIRE. (2024). FireHazardSeverityZonesViewer. https:// egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. Accessedon July9, 2025. 106 Cityof Fullerton. (2024). SafetyElementSupplement, Exhibit5 FireHazardSeverityZonesin Fullerton.:
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/8834/638586480019470000. AccessedJuly9, 2025. 107 CALFIRE. (2024). FireHazardSeverityZonesViewer. Retrievedfrom: https:// egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. AccessedonJuly9, 2025. 108 Cityof Fullerton. (2024). SafetyElementSupplement, Exhibit1: PotentialEvacuationRoutesin Fullerton. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/8834/638586480019470000. AccessedJuly9, 2025.

AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page164
b) If locatedin or nearStateresponsibilityareasor landsclassifiedasvery high fire hazardseverity zones, wouldthe projectdueto slope, prevailingwinds, andotherfactors, exacerbatewildfire risks, and thereby exposeproject occupantsto, pollutant concentrationsfrom a wildfire or the uncontrolledspreadof awildfire?
NoImpact. Asnotedin Threshold4.20(a) above, the project siteis not locatedin or nearan SRA andtheprojectsitedoesnot containlandsclassifiedasVHFHSZs. TheProjectwouldnot exacerbate wildfire risksor exposeProjectoccupantsto pollutant concentrations, or the uncontrolledspread of a wildfire andno impactwouldoccur.
c) If locatedin or nearStateresponsibilityareasor landsclassifiedasvery high fire hazardseverity zones, would the project require the installation or maintenanceof associatedinfrastructure suchasroads, fuelbreaks, emergencywatersources, powerlinesor otherutilities) that may exacerbatefire risk or that may resultin temporary or ongoingimpactsto the environment? No Impact. Asnotedin Threshold4.20(a) above, the project siteis not locatedin or nearan SRA and doesnot contain landsclassifiedas VHFHSZs. TheProjectwould includeconstructionand operationof a warehouse/distribution facility and would connectto the existingsanitarysewer, water, and fire water infrastructureavailablein CypressWay; see Figure10. Constructionand operation of the Project would not increase the risk of fire, nor would it require the installation/maintenanceof infrastructurethat would exacerbatefire risk, and no impact would occur.
d) If locatedin or nearStateresponsibilityareasor landsclassifiedasvery high fire hazardseverity zones, would the project exposepeopleor structuresto significantrisks, includingdownslopeor downstreamfloodingor landslides, asa resultof runoff, post-fireslopeinstability, or drainage changes?
No Impact. Asnotedin Threshold (a) above, the project site is not locatedin or nearan SRAand doesnot containlandsclassifiedasVHFHSZs. Further, becausethe project site and surrounding areaisrelativelyflat andlocatedwithin anurbanizedarea, it wouldnot exposepeopleor structures to significantrisksas a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainagechangesand no impactwouldoccur.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page165

4.21 MANDATORYFINDINGSOFSIGNIFICANCE

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
Potentially
Significant
Issues
LessThan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

21. MANDATORYFINDINGSOFSIGNIFICANCE. Doesthe project:
a) Havethe potentialto substantiallydegradethe qualityof the environment, substantiallyreducethehabitatof afish
or wildlife species, causea fish or wildlife populationto drop below self-sustaininglevels, threaten to eliminatea plant or animal community, substantially reduce the
numberor restricttherangeof arareor endangeredplant
or animalor eliminateimportant examplesof the major
periodsof Californiahistoryor prehistory?
X
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" meansthat the incrementaleffects of a
project areconsiderablewhenviewedin connectionwith
the effects of past projects, the effectsof other current projects, andthe effectsof probablefuture projects)?
X
c) Doesthe project haveenvironmentaleffects which will
causesubstantialadverseeffectsonhumanbeings, either
directlyor indirectly?
X
a) Havethe potential to substantiallydegradethe quality of the environment, substantiallyreduce the habitatof a fishor wildlifespecies, causea fishor wildlifepopulationto dropbelowself- sustaininglevels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantiallyreducethe numberor restrictthe rangeof a rareor endangeredplantor animalor eliminateimportant examplesof themajorperiodsof Californiahistoryorprehistory? LessthanSignificantImpact. AsdiscussedthroughoutthisInitial Study, the proposedProjectdoes nothavethepotentialto significantlydegradethequalityof theenvironmentor resultinsignificant impactsto the environmentthat cannotbe reducedto lessthan significantfollowingcompliance with the establishedregulatory framework (i.e., local, State, and federal regulations) and the recommendedmitigationmeasures.

Asconcludedin Section4.4: BiologicalResources, the Projectwould not substantiallyreducethe habitatof afishor wildlife species, causea fishor wildlife populationto dropbelowself-sustaining levels, threatenor eliminatea plant or animalcommunity, or substantiallyreducethe numberor restrict the rangeof a rareor endangeredplant or animal.

As concludedin Section4.5: CulturalResources, the Project would not eliminate important examplesof the majorperiodsof Californiahistoryor prehistory. SCCICrecordssearchandhistoric aerialimageryreviewdid not indicateanyhistoricalbuildingsor resourceswithin the projectsite.

Theprojectsite’sexistingcommercialretail buildingsandstructuresdoesnot meetthe criteria of AOO
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 4
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page166
architecturallysignificant” or a “historicresource” underCEQA. Therefore, the proposedProject wouldnot causea changein the significanceof a historicalresource. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? Cumulativelyconsiderable" meansthat the incrementaleffectsof a project are considerable whenviewedinconnectionwiththeeffectsofpastprojects, theeffectsofothercurrentprojects, and the effectsof probablefuture projects)?
LessThanSignificantImpact. TheProjectdoesnot haveimpactsthat are individuallylimited but cumulatively considerable. Incremental impacts resulting from Project construction and operationsand other cumulativeprojects that would be under constructionincludebiological resources, culturalresources, geologyandsoils, andtribal resources. Theanalysisconcludedthat these incremental impactsare each less than significantor can be mitigated to a less than significantlevel. Whenviewedin connectionwith the effectsof pastprojects, the effectsof other current projects, and the effectsof probablefuture projects, theseimpactsare not cumulatively considerable. Therewouldbenocumulativeimpactsin connectionwith thisor other projects. The project complieswith long-term regionalair quality plans, andregionalpopulationforecasts, and is within the servicecapabilitiesof utility purveyors. There would be no significantadverse environmentalimpacts. Theanalysiscontainedin this Initial Studyevaluatedexistingconditions, potential impactsassociatedwith project development, and possibleenvironmentalcumulative impacts. TheProjectdoesnot haveany impact on projectedgrowth or plannedprojectsfor the Cityor neighboringjurisdictionsknownasof the dateof this analysis. c) Doesthe project have environmental effects which will causesubstantial adverseeffects on humanbeings, either directly or indirectly?
LessThan SignificantImpact. Asdiscussedin this Initial Study, there are no known substantial adverse effects on human beings that would be caused by the proposed Project. The environmentalevaluationhasconcludedthat no significantenvironmentalimpactswould result from theproposedProject. Therefore, impactsconcerningadverseeffectsonhumanbeingswould be lessthan significant.

AOO
Jurore”
o" UL
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page167

5.0 REFERENCES
Arcadis. 2021. 2020UrbanWaterManagementPlanTable4-4Retail: TotalWaterUse (PotableandNon- Potable), Availableat:
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/5052/637598829614070000, AccessedAugust11, 2025.

CALFIRE. 2024. FireHazardSeverityZonesViewer. https:// egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. Accessedon July9, 2025.

CaliforniaAir ResourcesBoard. (N.D.). MobileSourceEmissionsInventory (MSEI) Documentation – DrayageTrucks, AppendixB: EmissionsEstimationMethodologyfor On-RoadDiesel-Fueled Heavy-DutyDrayageTrucksat CaliforniaPortsandIntermodalRailYards. Retrievedfrom:
https:// ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/mobile-source-emissions-inventory/msei- documentation-road-heavy-duty-diesel. AccessedSeptember9, 2025. 2022. EMFAC2021, EmissionsInventory. https:// arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions- inventory/cd60f29daaedd924a75a9316202d7f56a9b573e5. AccessedSeptember8, 2025. 2008. ClimateChangeScopingPlan.
2024. CurrentCaliforniaGHGEmissionsInventoryData. https:// ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory- data. AccessedSeptember11, 2025.
2022. 2022ScopingPlanfor AchievingCarbonNeutrality, AppendixD: LocalActions, Page21 N.D. SB375RegionalTargets. https:// ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/sustainable- communities-program/sb-375-regional-targets. AccessedSeptember9, 2025.

CaliforniaDepartmentof Conservation. N.D.. CaliforniaImportantFarmlandFinder. https:// maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/. AccessedJuly9, 2025.

N.D.. ImportantFarmlandCategories.
https:// www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Important-Farmland-Categories.aspx.

AccessedJuly9, 2025.

N.D.. CaliforniaWilliamsonActEnrollmentFinderMap.
https:// maps.conservation.ca.gov/agriculture/. AccessedJuly9, 2025.

CaliforniaDepartmentof Transportation. 2019. CaliforniaStateScenicHighwayMap. https:// caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e805 7116f1aacaa. Accessedon September10, 2025.
2013. TechnicalNoiseSupplementto theTrafficNoiseAnalysisProtocol (“TeNS”). 2013. TransportationandConstructionVibrationGuidanceManual, Table20.

CaliforniaEnergyCommission. 2025. ElectricityConsumption. https:// www.energy.ca.gov/data- reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/california-energy-consumption-dashboards-

0. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

O
Jurore”
2 CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page168
2023. CEDU2022BaselineForecast- SCE, Form1.1.b: ElectricitySalesbySector. https:// www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/2022- integrated-energy-policy-report-update-2. AccessedSeptember8, 2025. 2023. CEDU2022BaselineForecast – SCE. https:// www.energy.ca.gov/data- reports/reports/2022-integrated-energy-policy-report-update/2022-iepr-workshops-notices- and-2. AccessedSeptember11, 2025.

CaliforniaPublicUtilitiesCommission. 2025. RenewablePortfolioStandard (RPS) Program. https:// www.cpuc.ca.gov/rps/. AccessedSeptember2025.

CalRecycle. 2025. SolidWasteInformationSystem (SWIS) FacilityDetails – OlindaAlphaLandfill (30-AB- 0035). https:// www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2757?siteID=2093.

Accessedon August11, 2025.

Cityof Fullerton. 2012. TheFullertonPlan - FinalProgramEIR, Section5.3 AestheticsandLight/Glare. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/3700/637470826653170000.

AccessedSeptember10, 2025
2012. TheFullertonPlan.
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/government/departments/community-and-economic- development/planning-zoning/general-plan/the-fullerton-plan-current-version. Accessed September10, 2025
2025. Fullerton - GoZoneGISWebtool. Availableat:
https:// gis.cityoffullerton.com/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=38a7db5f8a8748b181 8bc31269bfa3b0
2024. FullertonMunicipalCode, Chapter15.47.
https:// codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/fullerton/latest/fullerton_ca/0-0-0-1. Accessed September10, 2025.
2023. Cityof FullertonZoningMap Atlas.
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/1542/637449029859970000.

AccessedJuly9, 2025.
2012. TheFullertonPlanFinalProgramEIR – Section5.10CulturalResources. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/3686/637470826615030000.

AccessedSeptember2025.
2024. SafetyElementSupplement, Exhibit1: PotentialEvacuationRoutesin Fullerton. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/8834/638586480019470000.

AccessedJuly9, 2025.
2024. SafetyElementSupplement, Exhibit5 FireHazardSeverityZonesin Fullerton. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/8834/638586480019470000.

AccessedJuly9, 2025.
2012. TheFullertonPlan.
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/government/departments/community-and-economic- O
Jurore”
2 CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page169
development/planning-zoning/general-plan/the-fullerton-plan-current-version. Accessed September10, 2025
N.D. FireStationLocations & Apparatus.
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/government/departments/fire/about-us/fire-station- locations-apparatus, AccessedJuly30, 2025.
2024. MunicipalCode. https:// codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/fullerton/latest/fullerton_ca/0-0- 0-22940#JD_Chapter13.19. AccessedJuly30, 2025.

N.D. FullertonPoliceAboutUs.
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/government/departments/police/about-fpd, AccessedJuly30, 2025.

N.D. PublicSchools. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/residents/schools/public-schools.

AccessedJuly30, 2025.
2012. TheFullertonPlan - FinalProgramEIR.
https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/3696/637470826641900000.

AccessedAugust8, 2025.
2008. Parks. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/government/departments/parks- recreation/parks-trails-and-fields/parks-and-trails/list-of-parks. AccessedJuly30, 2025. 2024. LandslideInventory (Beta). https:// maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/lsi/app/, AccessedJuly 11, 2025.
2024. SafetyElementSupplement, Exhibit1: PotentialEvacuationRoutesin Fullerton. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/8834/638586480019470000.

AccessedJuly9, 2025.
2024. SafetyElementSupplement, Exhibit5 FireHazardSeverityZonesin Fullerton. https:// www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/8834/638586480019470000.

AccessedJuly9, 2025.

Cityof Placentia. 2019. Cityof PlacentiaGeneralPlan, NoiseElement. https:// www.placentia.org/DocumentCenter/View/8392/8-Noise?bidId=. AccessedSeptember 10, 2025.

Compiledfrom CaliforniaDepartmentof Transportation. 2017. TechnicalNoiseSupplementto the Traffic NoiseAnalysisProtocolandFederalHighwayAdministration. (2017). NoiseFundamentals.

DavidHolzman. 2011. VehicleMotion Alarms: Necessity, NoisePollution, or Both? https:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3018517/. AccessedSeptember10, 2025.

Departmentof ConservationCaliforniaGeologicalSurvey. N.D.. CaliforniaEarthquakeHazardsZone Application. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/. Accessed July11, 2025.

Departmentof ToxicSubstanceControl. 2025. EnvirostorDatabase. https:// www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/.

O
Jurore”
eFUL,O.. 2$
O2
CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page170
Elliott H. Berger, RickNeitzel, andCynthiaA. Kladden. 2010. NoiseNavigatorSoundLevelDatabasewith Over1700MeasurementValues.
2015. NoiseNavigatorSoundLevelDatabasewith Over1700MeasurementValues.

FederalHighwayAdministration, RoadwayConstructionNoiseModel, 2006. 2018. TransitNoiseandVibrationImpactAssessmentManual, Table7-3, Page179.

Kariel, H. G. (1991). Noisein RuralRecreationalEnvironments, CanadianAcoustics19(5), 3-10.

NatelsonCompany, Inc. 2001. EmploymentDensityStudySummaryReportPreparedfor SCAG, Table6A.

OrangeCountySanitationDistrict. (OCSAN). RegionalSewerService. https:// www.ocsan.gov/regional- sewer-service/#waterreclamation. AccessedAugust11, 2025.

OrangeCountyTransportationAuthority (OCTA). 2025. OCBusSystemMap. https:// www.octa.net/getting-around/bus/oc-bus/routes-and-schedules/system-map/.

AccessedSeptember12, 2025.

Placentia-YorbaLindaUnifiedSchoolDistrict. (2025). BoundaryMaps. https:// www.pylusd.org/apps/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=206487&type=d&pREC_ID=453794.

AccessedJuly30, 2025
ReplicaHQ. 2024. ReplicaAnnualAverageDailyTraffic (AADT) Data. https:// www.replicahq.com/aadt.

AccessedJuly3, 2025.

SouthCoastAir QualityManagementDistrict. (1993). CEQAAirQualityHandbook. 2008. FinalLocalizedSignificanceThresholdMethodology. https:// www.aqmd.gov/home/rules- compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/localized-significance-thresholds. Accessed August27, 2025.
2003. Air QualityManagementPlan, AppendixV, ModelingandAttainmentDemonstrations. https:// www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/air-quality-management-plans/air-quality-mgt- plan/2003-aqmp. AccessedAugust27, 2025.
1993. CEQAAir QualityHandbook.

N.D. LocalizedSignificanceThresholds. http:// www.aqmd.gov/home/rules- compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/localized-significance-thresholds. Accessed September8, 2025.
2005. SampleConstructionScenariosfor ProjectsLessthan FiveAcresin Size. https:// www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance- thresholds/final-sample-construction-scenario-report.pdf?sfvrsn=2. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.
2008. StaffReport: InterimCEQAGHGSignificanceThresholdfor StationarySources, Rulesand PlansandAttachmentE: Draft GuidanceDocument – InterimCEQAGreenhouseGas (GHG) SignificanceThreshold, page3-2.

O
Jurore”
2 CedarwoodsFullertonProject
InitialStudy/MitigatedNegativeDeclaration
Page171
SouthernCaliforniaAssociationof Governments. 2024. ConnectSoCal (2024 – 2050Regional TransportationPlan/SustainableCommunitiesStrategy).

SouthernCaliforniaEdison. N.D. Bythe Numbers: WhoWeServe. https:// www.sce.com/about-us/who- we-are. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

N.D. 2023PowerContentLabel, SouthernCaliforniaEdisonCompany. https:// www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/7362. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

Stateof CaliforniaGovernor’sOfficeof PlanningandResearch. 2017. GeneralPlanGuidelines, Appendix D: NoiseElementGuidelines, page374. https:// opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_COMPLETE_7.31.17.pdf.

AccessedSeptember20, 2025.

StateWater ResourcesControlBoard. 2025. GeoTracker. https:// geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/.

U.S. CensusBureau. 2020. FullertonCity, California.
https:// data.census.gov/profile/Fullerton_city,_California?g=160XX00US0628000. AccessedJuly 30, 2025.

U.S. EnergyInformationAdministration. 2025. CaliforniaStateProfileandEnergyEstimates, California EnergyConsumptionby End-UseSector. https:// www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2. Accessed September8, 2025.
2025. CaliforniaStateEnergyConsumptionProfile.
https:// www.eia.gov/state/print.php?sid=CA. AccessedSeptember8, 2025.

U.S. FishandWildlifeService. N.D. NationalWetlandsInventory. https:// fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper. AccessedSeptember2025.

WSP. 2017. RCTCTruckStudyandRegionalLogisticsMitigation Fee, TechnicalMemorandum1: Exiting and FutureConditions, Warehouse-RelatedLandUseData & TruckTravelPatterns.

O
Jurore”
2 ThisPageIntentionally LeftBlank

City Council - Successor Agency - Housing AuthorityFebruary 3, 2026

City Council - Successor Agency - Housing Authority
February 3, 2026