Agenda packet — Glendora City Council, January 24, 2023 (part 2 of 7)

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-22 December 2022
construction-related indirect impacts to special-status vegetation communities would be potentially significant. Implementation of MM-BIO-5, which includes demarcation of disturbance limits and biological monitoring during vegetation removal, would reduce indirect impacts to sensitive vegetation communities to a less-than-significant level.

MM-BIO-4: Mitigation for direct impacts to sensitive upland vegetation communities shall be implemented through on-site creation/enhancement of remaining sensitive upland vegetation communities and/or off-site acquisition, program funding, and/or mitigation bank credits. Mitigation acreages shall be implemented as shown in Table

3.4-2 Mitigation for Direct Impacts to Sensitive Vegetation Communities.

Table MM-BIO-4
Mitigation for Direct Impacts to Sensitive
Upland Vegetation Communities
Sensitive Vegetation Community
Direct Impacts
(acres) Mitigation Ratio
Mitigation
(acres)
Coast Live Oak Woodland Alliance* 7.71 3:1 23.13
California Walnut Grove 0.01 3:1 0.03
Disturbed California Sagebrush Scrub 0.91 1:1 0.91
Totals 8.63 — 23.33
* Excludes 1.78 acres of coast live oak woodland associated with jurisdictional waters Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or any earthwork on the Project site, a qualified biologist, subject to the City’s approval, shall prepare a Conceptual Restoration Plan (CRP) that sets forth the requirements for mitigating permanent and temporary impacts to sensitive upland vegetation communities (i.e. coast live oak woodland, California walnut grove woodland, and disturbed California sagebrush scrub) that is outside all jurisdictional water limits. Mitigation for sensitive vegetation communities associated with potential jurisdictional waters is identified in MM BIO-6. Areas of temporarily impacted sensitive vegetation communities on site shall be returned to similar conditions that existed prior to grading and/or ground-disturbing activities. Additional unimpacted areas in the Project site that support California annual non-native grassland may be enhanced to support existing sensitive native vegetation communities. The CRP shall include restoration of the following habitats:
• Upland Woodlands. Impacted areas of upland woodland (i.e. coast live oak woodland and California walnut grove woodland) shall be created/restored within and adjacent to the same on-site areas that the woodland currently existed prior to Project implementation, as well as other areas deemed to have appropriate soils and topography for successful establishment. Prior to vegetation removal activities, native acorns/nuts shall be collected.

Understory areas shall be revegetated with a diversity of locally-collected seeds. Temporary irrigation shall be established and maintained, with irrigation suspensions in times of rainfall. Successful establishment of the woodland shall be determined only after removal of irrigation system and confirmed ability of the woodland to survive in the absence of irrigation.

Item #8. Page 210
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 275

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-23 December 2022
Mitigation for impacts to woodlands shall be implemented at a ratio of no less than 3:1 and shall be accomplished through a combination of on-site replacement and enhancement, on-site preservation, and off-site acquisition and/or mitigation bank credits. If feasible, woodlands would be created/restored at a minimum of 1:1 on-site, with the goal of increasing on-site restoration beyond 1:1.
• Sagebrush Scrub. Impacted areas of California sagebrush scrub shall be created within and adjacent to the same on-site areas that the scrub currently exist, as well as other areas deemed to have appropriate soils and topography for successful establishment. Prior to grading activities, native and locally collected seeds shall be collected be planted on site within the mitigation areas. Irrigation shall be provided, as necessary, to assure establishment of the scrub. Based upon the disturbed, low quality nature of the existing California sagebrush scrub on site, mitigation of scrub shall be implemented at a ratio of no less than 1:1 and shall be accomplished through a combination of on-site replacement and enhancement, on-site preservation, and off-site acquisition and/or mitigation bank credits.

The CRP shall include a monitoring schedule, minimum performance standard of success, estimated costs, and identification of responsible entities. At a minimum, the CRP shall require a one-time restoration effort followed by monitoring and invasive weed removal for a minimum of 5 years following ground-disturbing activities to compensate the direct temporary impacts. The monitoring program shall ensure successful establishment of the mitigation land, and if establishment is not realized within five years, restoration activities and monitoring may continue until minimum ratios as outlined above are established. The CRP shall be submitted to the City for review and shall revised to the satisfaction of the City.

MM-BIO-5: Indirect Impacts to Sensitive Vegetation Communities Flagging Limits. To prevent inadvertent disturbance to sensitive vegetation communities, including jurisdictional waters, outside the limits of work, the construction limits shall be clearly demarcated (e.g., installation of flagging or temporary high visibility construction fence) prior to ground disturbance activities.

All construction activities including equipment staging and maintenance shall be conducted within the marked disturbance limits.

Monitoring. A qualified biologist, subject to the City’s approval, shall be present during initial ground-disturbing activities within the Project site to ensure that Project activities stay within the demarcated limits.

Item #8. Page 211
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 276

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-24 December 2022
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation. A formal jurisdictional delineation of features within the Project site was first conducted at the Project site on July 22, 2014. A second formal jurisdictional delineation was conducted for the project site in 2019 following the above average rainfall in 2018- 2019 rain season. The results of the jurisdictional delineation were incorporated in the BRTR. There are three main drainages and several swale/erosional features present within the Project site.

Drainage A is ephemeral and flows through the Project site, from northwest to southeast. Drainages B, C and D are ephemeral drainages present within the north-central portion of the site. Drainages B and C are tributaries to Drainage D. Lastly, Drainage E is an ephemeral drainage that flows north to south through the Project site.

Per the BRTR, due to the absence of hydric soils and hydrophytic vegetation, there are no wetlands present within the Project site. Evidence of flow and presence of an Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) was documented in Drainages A–E. However, Drainages A-D are isolated linear features which are typically not waters of the U.S., but are waters of the State and CDFW jurisdictional resources. Based upon the data gathered during the site visit, Drainages A–E may be under the jurisdiction of the USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFW. Per the BRTR, three potential jurisdictional waters types are present on-site.

These include 0.45 acres of USACE waters of the United States; 0/47 acres of Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) waters of the state; 2.18 acres of CDFW streambed and bank, with coast live oak woodland; and 0.36 acres of streambed and bank, with non-riparian habitat.

The proposed Project would result in both permanent and temporary direct impacts to jurisdictional waters during the construction the installation of the three debris basins (i.e., west, middle, and east basins) and the removal of the existing concrete channel, which occurs within the eastern portion of the property. The new debris basins and on site buried storm drain pipe system are proposed to be constructed to direct storm water flows south of the tract boundary where it will be released into the existing County Storm Drain system. Construction of the new buried storm drain system would eliminate the need for the concrete channel within the southern portion of Drainage E. Temporary direct impacts would occur due to grading activities associated with the installation of the new debris basins. Table 3.4-2 includes the acres of permanent and temporary impact.

Table 3.4-2
Direct Impacts to Potential Jurisdictional Waters
Jurisdictional Waters Type
Direct Permanent
Impacts (acres)
Direct Temporary
Impacts (acres)
Remaining within the
Property Boundary
(acres)
USACE waters of the United States 0.38 0.07 <0.01
RWQCB waters of the state 0.50 0.11 0.02
CDFW streambed, bank, and riparian
vegetation (coast live oak woodland*)

2.05 — 0.44
Notes:
* Includes 1.77 acres of coast live oak woodland
As shown in Table 3.4-2, above, the proposed Project would result in direct temporary and/or direct permanent impacts to potentially jurisdictional waters. Direct impacts would result from discharge of fill (i.e., grading and construction/reconstruction of structures) into potentially jurisdictional waters, which Item #8. Page 212
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 277

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-25 December 2022
would alter the size, scope, and character of these aquatic resources. Therefore, the proposed Project would result in potentially significant impacts to state or federally protected wetlands. Mitigation measures MM-BIO-5, which requires the demarcation of the disturbance limits for jurisdictional resources, and MM-BIO-6, which requires on-site restoration and/or land acquisition, mitigation program funding, and/or mitigation bank credits, would be implemented to reduce potential permanent and/or temporary impacts to jurisdictional waters to less-than-significant levels. Consultation with, and permit issuance from, USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW may result in higher mitigation ratios and specific criteria for restoration beyond the minimum standards presented in this mitigation.

Potential temporary indirect impacts to jurisdictional waters in the Project site would primarily result from construction activities and would include impacts from the generation of fugitive dust and the introduction of chemical pollutants (including herbicides). Excessive dust can decrease the vigor and productivity of vegetation through effects on light, penetration, photosynthesis, respiration, transpiration, increased penetration of phytotoxic gaseous pollutants, and increased incidence of pests and diseases. Erosion and chemical pollution (releases of fuel, oil, lubricants, paints, release agents, and other construction materials) may affect wetlands/jurisdictional waters. The release of chemical pollutants can reduce the water quality downstream and degrade adjacent habitats.

However, during construction, erosion-control measures would be implemented as part of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the Project. Prior to the start of construction activities, the Contractor is required to file a Permit Registration Document (PRD) with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in order to obtain coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with the Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No 2009-009-DWQ, NPDES No.

CAS000002) or the latest approved general permit. This permit is required for earthwork that result in the disturbance of one acre or more of total land area. The required SWPPP will mandate the implementation of best management practices (BMPs) to reduce or eliminate construction-related pollutants in the runoff, including sediment. Therefore, temporary indirect impacts would be less than significant based on compliance with regulations that would reduce the severity of potential short-term indirect impacts such that jurisdictional waters would be expected to persist and have similar function to existing conditions, in areas adjacent to development. Long-term indirect impacts to jurisdictional waters could result from Project implementation due activities associated with the residential development that includes chemical pollutants; non-native, invasive plant and animal species; increased human activity; and altered fire regime. However, the proposed Project would be subject to the City’s Municipal Code, which includes requirements for stormwater runoff. Further, the Project’s homeowner association (HOA) would be responsible for implementing Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&Rs) that must be reviewed by the City Attorney, which would contain restrictions on the use of chemicals that could pollute waters; ban the use of invasive species that are found on the Cal-IPC Inventory (Cal-IPC 2019); fencing between the development and preserved open space areas to limit human intrusion, and rules regarding fuel modification to limit the threat of fires. Therefore, through compliance with regulations, long-term indirect impacts to jurisdictional waters would be less than significant.

MM-BIO-6: Mitigation for direct impacts to jurisdictional waters shall be implemented through on-site enhancement of remaining jurisdictional waters and/or off-site acquisition, program funding, and/or mitigation bank credits. Mitigation ratios for each type of jurisdictional waters is shown in Table 3.4-4, Mitigation for Direct Impacts to Potential Jurisdictional Waters.

Item #8. Page 213
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 278

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-26 December 2022
Table MM-BIO-6
Mitigation for Direct Impacts to Potential Jurisdictional Waters Jurisdictional Waters Type
Direct Impacts
(acres) Mitigation Ratio Mitigation (acres)
USACE waters of the United States 0.38 1:1 0.38
RWQCB waters of the state 0.50 1:1 0.50
CDFW streambed and bank, with coast live
oak woodland

1.77 3:1 5.31
CDFW streambed and bank, with nonriparian habitat*0.28 1:1 0.28 * Parks and ornamental plantings, disturbed habitat, and developed-concrete channel On-site Mitigation. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or any earthwork on the Project site, the Project Applicant shall prepare a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) for on-site mitigation for temporary and permanent impacts to jurisdictional resources (including coast live oak woodlands associated with the drainages), which shall include habitat enhancement and creation activities. The HMMP shall at a minimum include a feasible implementation structure, salvage/seeding details, invasive species eradication methods, irrigation system and schedule, a monitoring schedule, performance standard of success, estimated costs, and identification of responsible entities.

The HMMP shall include restoration of the following habitats associated with the potential CDFW jurisdictional limits:
• Riparian Coast Live Oak Woodland. Impacted areas of coast live oak woodland within the CDFW jurisdictional limits shall be created/restored within and adjacent to the same on-site areas that the woodland currently existed prior to Project implementation, as well as other areas deemed to have appropriate soils and topography for successful establishment. Prior to vegetation removal activities, native acorns/nuts shall be collected.

At a minimum, the HMMP shall require a one-time restoration effort followed by monitoring and invasive weed removal for a minimum of 5 years following ground-disturbing activities to compensate the direct temporary impacts. The monitoring program shall ensure successful establishment of the mitigation land, and if establishment is not realized within five years, restoration activities and monitoring may continue until minimum ratios as outlined above are established.

On-site land shall be preserved in perpetuity through a deed restriction or conservation easement, and the HMMP shall identify an approach for funding Item #8. Page 214
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 279

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-27 December 2022
assurance for the long-term management of the conserved land. The HMMP shall be submitted to CDFW, USACE, and RWQCB for review and comment, and revised to the satisfaction of the City and the three agencies for their approval.

Off-site Mitigation. If mitigation is implemented off-site, the Project Applicant shall work with the CDFW, USACE, and RWQCB to ensure the purchase of land acquisition, mitigation program funding, and/or mitigation bank credits are appropriate to offset permanent impacts. Mitigation lands shall be comprised of similar or higher quality riparian woodland and preferably located in the vicinity of the site or watershed. Any off-site land acquisition shall be preserved in perpetuity through a deed restriction or conservation easement, and an HMMP shall be prepared that identifies an approach for funding assurance for the longterm management of the purchased land. d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less Than Significant. Per the BRTR, no designated wildlife corridors or habitat linkages occur within the Project site. The existing canyons and proposed drainages within the designated open space areas in the northern portion of the project site may facilitate local north-south wildlife movement through the area; however, the features do not provide a connection to other large open space areas to the south that may be used by wildlife. Therefore, the Project would not result in direct temporary or permanent impacts, nor indirect impacts. Impacts would be less than significant. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Less Than Significant With Mitigation. Per the Appendix B-2, Draft Architectural Landscape Plans and Tree Removals3 it is anticipated that 455 protected trees present on-site would be removed as part of the Project. Section 20.08.130(6) of the City’s Municipal Code requires that all existing living trees meeting the requirements in the Urban Forestry Manual (City of Glendora 2018), be preserved to the extent feasible as per recommendations provided by a certified arborist. If trees are destroyed, the applicant shall replace them with suitable trees in locations determined by the Planning Division before final occupancy is granted to any new resident. Therefore, the Project would result in direct permanent impacts to protected trees. Impacts resulting in conflicts with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance, would be potentially significant.

Implementation of mitigation measure MM-BIO-7, which requires tree replacement, would reduce potential direct impacts to a less-than-significant level.

Further, indirect impacts to trees could result from changes to the site that may cause tree decline, even when the tree is not directly injured. Per the BRTR, site-wide changes affecting trees include diverting runoff and stormwater, creating retention and detention ponds, relocating streams or making improvements to streams, lowering or raising water tables, altering the capacity for soil moisture recharge, removing vegetation, or damming underground water flow. Further, indirect tree impacts 3 Appendix B-2, Draft Architectural Landscape Plans and Tree Removals is a draft document subject to further review and final discretionary approval by the City. The discretionary approval process would include determination of species, location and quantity of trees planted.

Item #8. Page 215
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 280

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-28 December 2022
may potentially occur to trees that are within 25 feet of the proposed Project’s limits of grading.

Therefore, indirect impacts could potentially result in tree mortality adjacent to construction areas.

Therefore, impacts would be potentially significant. Implementation of mitigation measure MM-BIO-8, which requires tree protection and monitoring, would be required to reduce potential indirect impacts to a less-than-significant level.

MM-BIO-7 On-site Mitigation. Mitigation for City protected trees shall consider and overlap with any on-site compensation for special-status vegetation communities (MM-BIO4 and MM-BIO-5) and jurisdictional waters (MM-BIO-6). Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or any earthwork on the Project site, a qualified arborist shall conduct a tree survey to confirm previous tree inventory data points and finalize the tree count for the purposes of replacement and shall prepare a protected Tree Planting and Maintenance Plan. The Plan shall be developed by a qualified arborist or landscape architect, subject to the City’s approval, and it shall identify tree planting locations, planting stock requirements, planting techniques, maintenance standards, tree protection standards, tree survival criteria, monitoring protocols, and reporting standards. Minimum tree replacement to removal ratios shall be no less than the following for each trees diameter at breast height (dbh) in accordance with the City’s 2018 Urban Forestry Manual:

Native 8”-15” dbh 2:1 replacement
Native 16”-36” dbh 3:1 replacement
Native 37”-48” dbh 5:1 replacement
Native 49”-60” dbh 6:1 replacement
Native 61” dbh and up 7:1 replacement
Other 10”-15” dbh 1:1 replacement
Other 16”-36” dbh 1:1 replacement
Other 37”-48” dbh 2:1 replacement
Other 49”-60” dbh 3:1 replacement
Other 61” dbh and up 5:1 replacement
The plan will discuss and provide actions to prevent and minimize the spread of invasive tree diseases, pests, and pathogens including, but not limited to sudden oak death (Phytophthora ramorum), thousand canker fungus (Geosmithia morbida), polyphagous shot hole borer (Euwallacea spp.), and goldspotted oak borer (Agrilus auroguttatus). To avoid the spread of infectious tree pests and diseases, the plan will indicate that infected trees should not be transported from a Project site without first being treated using best available management practices. The plan shall be approved by the City prior to implementation.

Off-site Mitigation. For protected trees that are not replaced on-site, an in-lieu fee for future tree replacement shall be executed per the Condition of Approval and approved by the City Arborist.collected and deposited into a tree replacement fund.

The in-lieu fee is based on the City’s cost to replant and set by City resolution.

MM-BIO-8 During Construction. Prior to issuance of the Project’s grading permit, the Applicant shall coordinate with LACFCD to assess the feasibility of oak tree preservation within the minimal grading/grooming areas and determine whether select trees could be preserved in place while maintaining the health and safety requirements of the LACFCD debris/flood control facility functions. Trees identified as being feasibly preserved and trees within approximately 15 feet of proposed construction activity shall be temporarily fenced with chain link or other material satisfactory to Item #8. Page 216
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 281

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-29 December 2022
City planning staff throughout grading and construction activities. The fencing shall be installed three feet outside of the dripline of each tree (or edge of canopy for cluster of trees), be four-foot-tall, and staked every 6 feet. The fenced area shall be considered the tree protection zone (TPZ) unless proximate construction required temporary removal. An International Society of Arboriculture Certified arborist shall monitor any construction activity taking place within or near to the TPZ and shall submit a Construction Observation letter to the City for approval, prior to final inspection, summarizing the results of the monitoring activity and resulting health of trees designated for preservation on-site.

Post-Construction. For a period of no less than 5 years from the date of final inspection, an International Society of Arboriculture Certified arborist shall submit to the City a monitoring report annually. The report shall show compliance with the tree protection conditions of approval and verification that all trees are in good health.

Further, all trees that have been substantially root pruned (30% or more of their root zone) during construction within the TPZ shall be monitored by an International Society of Arboriculture Certified arborist for the first five years after construction completion. The arborist shall submit an annual report, photograph each tree and compare tree health and condition to the original, pre-construction baseline.

As show in Appendix B-2, Sheet L-2, the Project would be required to mitigate for the proposed removal of 455 protected, on-site trees by either: (1) planting 879 replacement trees; (2) paying in-lieu fees for 879 replacement trees; or (3) a combination thereof. Appendix B-1 shows that the Project would plant a total of 443 replacement trees and submit an in-lieu fee payment in the amount of $593,890 for the remaining balance of 436 City-required replacement trees. In addition, Appendix B-2, Draft Architectural Landscape Plans and Tree Removals, outlines the Project’s protected tree maintenance plan, which includes requirements such as: installation of temporary protective fencing around any existing trees preserved on the Project site; no introduction of supplemental irrigation to the tree base; limiting soil compaction within the drip line4; prohibiting the placement of fill or construction material within the drip line; keeping proposed drainage flow away from the dripline; and requiring that an arborist be present on-site during any excavation taking place near preserved trees to ensure minimum damage to the root system.

Due to (1) the Project’s established tree maintenance plan, (2) mandatory compliance with the Title 20, Section 20.08.130 of the City’s Municipal Code, and Section 21.03.020 of the City’s zoning ordinance (i.e., Title 21, Zoning of the City’s Municipal Code); and (3) with required incorporation of MM-BIO-7 and MM-BIO-8, the Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. As such, Project associated impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact. The Project site is not located within any proposed or approved Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservations Plan (NCCP) (CDFW 2019c). Further, the site is located outside the ANF boundaries (USGS 2018). Therefore, the Project would not conflict with the provisions of an 4 Per the City’s Urban Forestry Manual, the drip line of a tree is the ground area at the outside edge of the tree's branches or canopy (City of Glendora 2018).

Item #8. Page 217
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 282

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-30 December 2022
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, NCCP, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. No impact would occur.

3.5 Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation. A historical resources technical report has been produced which provides a complete discussion of historical resources (Appendix C). On June 28, 2019, Dudek completed a search of the CHRIS at the SCCIC and found that no cultural resources overlapped the proposed Project area of potential effect (APE). A pedestrian survey of the proposed Project APE was conducted on August 1, 2019, for historic age built environment resources. During the survey, all buildings and structures within the proposed Project APE constructed over 45 years ago were surveyed and recorded. All accessible portions of properties were also intensively surveyed for archaeological resources.

The proposed Project APE encompasses approximately 27 acres, northwest of the intersection of W.

Palm Drive and Grand Avenue in the City of Glendora. The survey of the proposed Project APE was positive for 9 structures associated with Rancho Los Alisos (1908-1953), one building associated with Camp Aventura (1953-1973), three USFS and LACFCD crib dams and one channel (1970), and one above ground structure and the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel which are components of a larger water infrastructure system, the MWD Upper Feeder pipeline (c. 1936-1939). These individual components have been categorized as three resources that have been evaluated for historical significance as part of this Project.

All work for this inventory and evaluation report has been conducted as required under the Section 106 regulations (36 CFR Part 800 et seq.) and in accordance with Section 15064.5(a) (2)‐(3) of the CEQA Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Resources Code.

The overall finding for this study is that no historic properties listed in, or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR), or local Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark list will be impacted by the proposed Project.

Cultural Resources Records Search
Item #8. Page 218
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 283

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-31 December 2022
On June 28, 2019, Dudek completed a search of the CHRIS at the SCCIC, located on the campus of California State University, Fullerton of the proposed Project APE and a half (0.5) mile buffer. This search included mapped prehistoric and historic archaeological resources and historic builtenvironment resources; Department of Parks and Recreation site records; technical reports; archival resources; and ethnographic references. Additional consulted sources included historical maps of the proposed Project APE, the NRHP, the CRHR, the California Historic Property Data File, and the lists of California State Historical Landmarks, California Points of Historical Interest, and the Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility.

The SCCIC records indicate that seven previous cultural resources technical investigations have been conducted within 0.5-mile of the proposed Project APE between 1988 and 2019. Of these, one study overlaps a portion of the proposed Project APE: LA-00837.

LA-00837. An Archaeological Survey Conducted on a Parcel of Land North of Palm Drive in the City of Glendora, Los Angeles County, California (Cottrell 1977) was an archaeological survey report conducted on the proposed Project APE parcel in November 1977, prior to grading a portion of the site in anticipation of a residential development project. The results of the field reconnaissance and record search were both negative, owing to a lack of visible resources in the southern portion of the survey area and to the dense vegetation present on the property in the drainage basins. The report does not record any historical features, but noted their presence and association either to the Silent Ranch/Rancho Los Alisos property or to the Girl Scout camp.

The CHRIS records search did not identify any previously recorded historical resources within the proposed Project site. The SCCIC records indicate that two cultural resources have been recorded within 0.5-mile of the proposed Project APE; neither of which overlap or are located adjacent to the proposed Project APE. The two resources include the ANF and the Glendora Ridge Motorway, and are both outside the proposed Project APE.

Significance Evaluations
The following significance evaluations consider NRHP, CRHR, and City significance criteria and integrity requirements. For a property to be listed in or determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, it must be demonstrated to possess integrity and to meet at least one of four criteria. The CRHR was designed to reflect the same criteria and integrity as those identified for the NRHP. Therefore, the NRHP and CRHR significance evaluations are presented together.

Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura Buildings and Structures Rancho Los Alisos/Silent Ranch and Camp Aventura occupy the same address and parcel, and are part of the same chain of ownership. Rancho Los Alisos was purchased in 1907 by Judge Charles Silent and developed beginning in 1908. The original house for Rancho Los Alisos was demolished between 1964 and 1968. The modern house of the project site was built in 1980 by George Deukmejian, who first applied for a demolition permit for the Girl Scout Camp in 1974. Because the modern house was built in 1980, it is therefore not eligible for evaluation. Components of the Rancho Los Alisos grounds, such as the rock-lined structures, constructed rock water features, and Black Bass Pool were constructed between 1908 and 1910 and are associated with the original period of development. Camp Aventura was purchased in 1953 and developed between 1953 and 1958. The camp was abandoned in 1971 and most camp buildings were demolished when it was sold in 1974.

One feature of Camp Aventura remains: a bathroom/washhouse.

Rancho Los Alisos: Rock-lined road and bench feature
Item #8. Page 219
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 284

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-32 December 2022
This road feature is located east and southeast of the 950 Silent Ranch Avenue house, and the bench feature is located southeast of the house. The rock-lined road feature is visible in photographs dating to 1910 and was developed between 1908 and 1910. The roadbed itself is unpaved, compacted dirt, but the rock retaining wall runs the length of the “uphill” side of the road and is constructed of concrete, faced with semi-coursed, locally sourced, dark gray stone. The bench is integrated directly into the wall and is also constructed of concrete and stone. Total bench height is roughly 3 feet, level with the retaining wall height and the bench seat height roughly 2 feet above the road surface. The width of the bench appears to be 3’6”-4’ with flared sides.

Rancho Los Alisos: Black Bass Pool
This pool feature is located northwest of 950 Silent ranch Drive house, long a ridgeline, immediately north of a mature lemon grove. The pool feature is visible in photographs dating to 1910, was featured in a newspaper article from 1911 describing its function and was developed between 1908 and 1910.

The pool feature extends at least ten feet below the rim. The pool rim rises roughly 1’6” above ground level. The pool is circular and has an approximate diameter of 25 feet. In the center of the pool is a burned metal and wood post, capped with a metal hood. The pool is constructed of concrete reinforced with metal mesh, the face of which is badly spalling in some places. Around the rim of the pool is a wood ring, which still contains metal fixtures for the gate feature which has been lost. A metal ladder provides access to the pool interior. The entire feature has been burned and the pool is partially filled with burned debris.

Rancho Los Alisos: Constructed Rock “cave”, wall, steps, and water pool features The constructed rock cave feature, wall, steps, and pools are located immediately northwest of the black bass pool on the ridge above (northwest of) the house. The rock cave is constructed concrete faced with semi-coursed, locally sourced, dark grayish red stone. Over the arch of the entrance to the “cave” the rocks are arranged in an arch, with a keystone, and two 2- to 3-foot-tall rock walls slope away from it. The opening itself is roughly 2 feet wide by 3 feet tall. Downhill of and connected to the cave by a continuous low rock-faced wall are at least two circular shallow rock-lined concrete pools, which produce a cascade effect downhill towards the black bass pool. Uphill of the cave is a 4-foothigh rock faced concrete retaining wall. A set of 10 narrow stairs lead to the uphill area above the wall and are also constructed of concrete and local dark gray-red stone.

Rancho Los Alisos: Constructed Rock Fountain
The constructed rock fountain feature and pools is located northwest of the black bass pool on the ridge above (northwest of) the house, and southeast of the constructed rock cave. The constructed rock fountain is constructed concrete faced with semi-coursed, locally sourced, dark grayish-red stone.

There is a smoothed, concrete, tool formed basin below the upper pour spout, forming the drinking fountain, which is roughly 2 feet x 1 feet 6 inches in diameter and oval shaped. The fountain basin portion is roughly 3 feet above current ground surface and is obscured by brush.

Rancho Los Alisos: Stone Stairs to Dining Pavilion
Stone stair feature is located due north of the 950 Silent Ranch Drive house. The stair feature is visible in photographs dating to 1910, and was developed between 1908 and 1910. The feature consists of a set of windowing, narrow concrete construction, stone-faced steps, approximately 8 inches high, 8 inches tread, and roughly 2 feet wide, with a rock and concrete border to each side. The stair is banked into a steep hillside just north of the house and extends downhill roughly 15 feet below the driveway north of the house.

Item #8. Page 220
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 285

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-33 December 2022
Camp Aventura: Restroom Building
Restroom building is a one-story, Mid-Century Modern-styled building constructed in circa 1955-1956, located northeast and immediately downhill from the 950 N. Silent Ranch Drive property and driveway.

The building is one-story and a simple rectangle in plan, with the east portion enclosed for a three-stall restroom and privacy screen, and the west portion an open-air wash area. The building rests on a concrete slab foundation. It features a flat roof with wide overhang and wide, angled fascia board with open eaves, and is supported by wood posts and the restroom stall enclosed space. The roof is clad with rolled composition roofing and flashed with aluminum-finish metal around the edges. The wall construction of the restroom stalls is wood stud clad with both board-and batten on the south and east elevation, and plywood on the west elevation. Along the north elevation there was a board and batten privacy wall in front of the stall doors, however, doors and privacy wall have been removed. Fixtures are still present at this building including an enameled double sink and three metal pit toilet fixtures.

Along the rear (south) elevation, against the hillside, 2”x4” boards are nailed to the building exterior and support posts to provide pipe and wood board storage.

Identified Alterations
Dudek attained all available permits pertaining to the proposed Project APE through the City of Glendora Building Department’s eTRAKit online permitting system on August 14, 2019. The permits date from 1975 through present and are outlined in Section 5 of the Cultural Report (see Appendix C).

In addition to permits, observed alterations include the demolition of the original Rancho Los Alisos house, circa 1968-1974 and the construction of the crib dams and drainage channel on the property, which would not have received a building permit, for 1969-1970. Other alterations include the piercing of a section of stone-faced retaining wall along the lower road, north of the 950 Silent Ranch Drive house for an unpaved drainage channel for the crib dams.

NRHP/CRHR Statement of Significance
Criterion A/1: That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.

The Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura property has two phases: Rancho Los Alisos extending from 1907 through 1953 and Camp Aventura extending from 1953 through 1974. The Rancho Los Alisos phase is representative of the retirement years of wealthy lawyer, real estate investor and former judge Charles K. Silent. Silent’s property, though private, was opened as a public park for citizens of Glendora from 1907 to Silent’s death in 1918, then for years afterwards operated by the Silent Estate. Major components of this park and private property have been destroyed including most exotic plantings, the original orchards, and the original Greene & Greene designed house. However, some key features of the landscaping remain, including rock lined roads and paths, rock-lined water features, and a fish pool. The park likely made an impression on local Glendora visitors; however, the private home and garden does not appear to be host to a major historical event or influenced the growth of Glendora in any way.

Camp Aventura was one of nearly 40 Girl Scouts of America organizations camps established in Southern California between 1930 and 1970. Only one remaining feature of the original camp, established in 1953 remains: a 3-stall restroom and washroom building. The other buildings were demolished by the Navy Seabees and George Deukmejian between 1973 and 1974. As with Rancho Los Alisos, the camp may have made an impression on its occasional users, but did not particularly influence the growth of Item #8. Page 221
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 286

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-34 December 2022
Glendora, or host any significant historical events. Despite local popularity as a public park and later as a Girl Scout campground, no significant historical associations were found during research. Due to a lack of identified significant associations with events important to history, the Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura property does not appear eligible under NRHP/CRHR Criterion A/1.

Criterion B/2: That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.

Archival research identified a single important person, Judge Charles K. Silent (1842-1918), associated with the rancho Los Alisos/ Camp Avenura property. Silent was an influential lawyer, real estate investor, and former judge at a formative period in the history of Los Angeles, as stated above. He was instrumental in the formation of Redondo Beach and Inglewood via his company the Centinela-Inglewood Land Company (1887). Silent also created the first gated community in Los Angeles (Chester Place), and was influential in his role as City of Los Angeles Parks Commissioner. Despite this association, Silent’s relationship with rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura is after the influential period of his life, after he had retired from his law practice and stopped working as Parks Commissioner. Rancho Los Alisos was not associated with the period of historical influence in Silent’s life; therefore, the Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura property does not appear eligible under NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2.

Criterion C/3: That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction.

The Rancho Los Alisos property was initially built between 1907 and 1910, in a mixed Rustic style and Spanish Colonial Revival style romantically associated with old California ranchos. The grounds around the house were landscaped, and contained horticultural gardens, walks, retaining walls, stone benches, fountains, pools, fish-stocked ponds, orchards and experimental orchards, during the time Charles Silent was alive. The original house was probably designed by master architects Greene & Greene; however, this could not be determined as the house and all associated outbuildings were demolished in the late 1960s. The only remaining features of the original 1907-1910 property are the rock-lined landscaping features, including a pool, fountain, rock retaining walls, rock stairs, and rocklined paths throughout the property. These features have been allowed to deteriorate or were partially demolished as more modern portions of the property were added, such as the partial demolition of a rock retaining wall to allow a channel outlet for the West crib dam (1970) structure. These concrete and rock structures have also been damaged or altered by fires and flood and subsequent repairs.

While interesting in construction, the majority of rock structures, original landscaping, and the original buildings on the property have been lost and the remaining structures lack the integrity to convey significance under this criteria. They cannot be positively identified as the work of a master, as the Greene & Greene house plans from 1907 do not include landscaping or structures aside from the main house. The structures have deteriorated and no longer possess high artistic value, and are not part of a district or entity whose components lack individual distinction.

The later Camp Aventura building has a similar issue. The only remaining building of the original 12 buildings and campgrounds is one Mid-Century Modern-style restroom building, badly deteriorated since its abandonment in the 1970s. Constructed in 1955-1956, the restroom building retains few character-defining features of the style including thin, upright supports and a flat roof with angled fascia board detailing. The original architect was narrowed down to either Paul R. Hunter or Tryon & Foy, neither of which can be considered master architects. The building has no artistic value and while it was originally a component of a larger Girl Scout-related campground, it is the only remaining features and as such does not adequately convey this distinctive association. Therefore, the Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura property does not appear eligible under NRHP/CRHR Criterion C/3.

Item #8. Page 222
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 287

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-35 December 2022
Criterion D/4: That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

The Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura property is not likely to yield information important to understanding prehistory or history. Therefore, the Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura property does not appear eligible under NRHP/CRHR Criterion D/4.

City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark Designation Criteria

1. The proposed preserved features exemplify or reflect special elements of historical, architectural, archaeological, cultural, or aesthetic heritage.

As stated above in Criteria A/1 and C/3, the remaining stone landscaping structures (1907-1910) and remaining restroom building (1955-1956) do not reflect special elements of historical, architectural, archaeological, cultural, or aesthetic heritage of Glendora. Therefore, the crib dams and channel are not eligible as a City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark under Criterion 1.

2. The proposed preserved features are identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.

Archival research identified an association with influential lawyer, real estate developer and former judge Charles K. Silent, who is likely a significant person at the local and possibly State level. However, the Rancho Los Alisos property and Camp Aventura property do not retain an association with the influential period of Silent’s life and are indicative only of his retirement and his posthumous estate transactions. No important person was identified in association with the Girl Scout camp. Therefore, Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura are not eligible as a City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark under Criterion 2.

3. The proposed features embody distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction or are valuable examples of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.

Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura no longer embody the characteristics of their original styles, periods, or methods of construction due to integrity issues and overall loss of the majority of concurrent features (i.e., Rancho Los Alisos has lost the original house, all associated outbuildings, and all original landscaping; Camp Aventura has lost the original 11 other campground buildings and major activity surfaces). Therefore, Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura are not eligible as a City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark under Criterion 3.

4. The proposed preserved features are representative of the notable work of a builder, designer or architect.

Archival research failed to resolve whether the Rancho Los Alisos stone structures were designed by architects Greene & Greene as landscaping plans for the property have not been retained. Archival research also failed to identify if the Camp Aventura restroom is associated with architect Paul R.

Hunter or Tryon & Foy, nor is the building definitively visibly the work of either architect. In both cases, the remaining Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura structures and buildings are not representative of the notable work of a builder, designer, or architect. Therefore, Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura are not eligible as a City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark under Criterion 4.

Integrity Discussion
Item #8. Page 223
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 288

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-36 December 2022
The Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura buildings and structures retain only integrity of location, as they remain in their original locations. These features do not retain integrity of setting as the setting of both Rancho Los Alisos and Camp Aventura have been lost in subsequent fires, residential subdivision development, and flood control structure development. Enough of the Rancho Los Alisos or Camp Aventura settings have been altered, removed, or redeveloped such that integrity of setting is no longer intact. These features also do not retain integrity of design, materials or workmanship as all stone and concrete structures are in advanced states of decay, sometimes with the entire stone facing section missing. The Camp Aventura building has had several material portions removed so discerning original design intent, materials or workmanship was not possible. All features do not retain integrity of feeling as they do not convey the feeling of a mid-century Girl Scout camp with both accessible and remote camp sites nor convey the feeling of an early twentieth century several hundred-acre estate and intermittent park. Finally, no features retain integrity of association as all association with the Silent Estate and with the Los Angeles Girl Scout Council has been lost by the encroaching residential subdivision development.

USFS and LACFCD concrete crib dams and channel structures As discussed above, crib dams and drainage channel on the property would not have received a building permit, for 1969-1970. These features are summarized below and additional details regarding these features are provided in Section 5.2 of the Cultural Report (Appendix C).

The West crib dam (1970) is a concrete crib check dam, built in 1970 located in the westernmost canyon of the property, northwest of the 950 Silent Ranch Drive house. The dam was one of forty such concrete crib check dams constructed after a fire and flooding event in 1968 and 1969 dam is constructed of reinforced concrete beams laid in crib bays with no mortar and metal netting behind which rock and soil may accumulate in a debris cone while allowing water the pass through the dam.

The Center crib dam (1970) is a concrete crib check dam, built in 1970 located in the second-fromwest canyon of the property, northeast of the 950 Silent Ranch Drive house. The dam was one of forty such concrete crib check dams constructed after a fire and flooding event in 1968 and 1969 is constructed of reinforced concrete beams laid in crib bays with no mortar and metal netting behind which rock and soil may accumulate in a debris cone while allowing water the pass through the dam.

The East crib dam (1970) is a concrete crib check dam, built in 1970 located in the east-most canyon of the property, northeast of the 950 Silent Ranch Drive house. The dam was one of forty such concrete crib check dams constructed after a fire and flooding event in 1968 and 1969. The dam is constructed of reinforced concrete beams laid in crib bays with metal netting behind which rock and soil may accumulate in a debris cone while allowing water the pass through the dam. No permits were available from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) for the concrete crib dams or channel. No observed alterations were noted in the course of survey. The crib dams are in fair condition, but heavily overgrown by vegetation and the debris cone behind each dam has completely filled and level to the top of each dam.

NRHP/CRHR Statement of Significance
Criterion A/1: That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.

The three crib dams and channel were constructed in 1970 in response to a 1968 fire and subsequent flooding and mudslides in 1969, in order to prevent further damage to the residential subdivisions of City of Glendora, which had been slowly reaching further and further north into the San Gabriel Mountain foothills. Though the 1968 fire was a substantial fire and brought about positive civil infrastructure changes, the fire and flood are exemplary of many in the history of Glendora, and its Item #8. Page 224
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 289

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-37 December 2022
damages were not particularly exceptional or historic in their proportions. Fire and flood/mudslide patterns were typical to this area and most down-stream communities south the canyon outlets of San Gabriel Mountains. The crib dams were constructed as part of a larger joint USFS and LACFCD infrastructure program which created the larger Hook Canyon debris dam and channel, as well as 40 other concrete crib dams. As such, the dams on the proposed Project APE do not distinguish themselves as particularly important structures that made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local Glendora history. Therefore, the three crib dams and channel do not appear eligible under NRHP/CRHR Criterion A/1.

Criterion B/2: That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.

Archival research failed to identify any associations with significant persons. Due to a lack of identified significant associations with important persons in history, the USFS/LACFCD crib dams do not appear eligible under NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2.

The three dams and channel were constructed in 1970 as a joint project between USFS, LACFCD, with financial aid from the Army Corps of Engineers and the City. They are typically constructed of concrete beams arranged in cribs and built to various heights. Crib dams were not a new, novel, or improved engineering method for dealing with debris floods. The technique of using crib dams to control land erosion and heavy sediment flow originated in Europe and was used in the San Gabriel Mountains by the USFS as early as 1915. Because the dams are meant to slowly backfill, the multiple historical flood events in Los Angeles (1916, 1938) eventually covered and made obsolete earlier crib dams. Multiple crib dam building periods were identified by the USFS as important projects: a concrete arch check dam in Arroyo Seco Canyon (1942); the Coon Canyon Stabilization Project (1950); and the Los Angeles River Watershed Project (1954-1974), however this last did not provide crib dams in Glendora. The three crib dams in the study area are typical in their construction and offer no insight into engineering techniques or identified major projects. Archival research did not indicate an association between the dams and channel and a master engineer. The dams are of utilitarian construction and do not possess artistic value. While the dams and channel are part of an entity of dams built after the 1969 mudslides and flood, they are neither significant nor distinguishable from earlier period crib dams constructed for similar regions throughout the San Gabriel National Forest. Therefore, the crib dams and channel do not appear eligible under NRHP/CRHR Criterion C/3.

Criterion D/4: That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

The crib dams and channel are not likely to yield information important to understanding prehistory or history. Therefore, the crib dams and channel do not appear eligible under NRHP/CRHR Criterion D/4.

City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark Designation Criteria

1. The proposed preserved features exemplify or reflect special elements of historical, architectural, archaeological, cultural, or aesthetic heritage.

The three crib dams and the channel are utilitarian in construction and constructed by the USFS and LACFCD in 1970, in response to a flood and mudslide event in 1969. However, in the larger Glendora-area Item #8. Page 225
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 290

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-38 December 2022
history this flood and mudslide event was one of many in Glendora’s history, and resulted in the construction of 40 similar structures. These structures neither exemplify nor reflect special elements of historical, architectural, archaeological, cultural, or aesthetic heritage of Glendora. Therefore, the crib dams and channel are not eligible as a City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark under Criterion 1.

2. The proposed preserved features are identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.

Archival research failed to identify any associations with significant persons at the local, state, or national level. Therefore, the crib dams and channel are not eligible as a City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark under Criterion 2.

3. The proposed features embody distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction or are valuable examples of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.

The three crib dams are 1970s-era concrete crib dams, and typical of the method of construction of crib dams by USFS. They are utilitarian in construction and do not embody a particular style, type, or period. Therefore, the crib dams and channel are not eligible as a City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark under Criterion 3.

4. The proposed preserved features are representative of the notable work of a builder, designer or architect.

Archival research failed to identify any associations with a specific architect, designer, or engineer.

Therefore, the crib dams and channel are not eligible as a City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark under Criterion 4.

Integrity Discussion
All three dams and the channel maintain integrity of location and setting as neither have changed since their construction in 1970. The dams have infilled, however there appear to be no notable alterations, repairs, demolitions, or additions, and therefore the three dams and channel maintain integrity of design, materials and workmanship. The dams and channel still evoke the feeling of utilitarian flood control structures and therefore retain integrity of feeling. Though the dams retain signage by USFS and LACFCD, they appear to not be actively maintained and do not retain integrity of association.

MWD Upper Feeder Pipeline segment (Monrovia No. 1) and Above-ground Structures The Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch structure are components of a larger water conveyance system called the Upper Feeder pipeline, completed in 1939, owned and operated by MWD, and operating today as an active utility. The Upper Feeder was designed and constructed concurrently with the Colorado River Aqueduct as part of the distribution system, which furnished water to participating cities for distribution b local municipal water departments.

MWD Upper Feeder Pipeline segment: Monrovia No. 1 tunnel (1937) The MWD Upper Feeder Pipeline segment: Monrovia No. 1 tunnel is a subterranean structure that transects the proposed Project APE from a point due east of the 950 Silent Ranch Drive main house building to a point northeast of the 950 Silent Ranch Drive main house building, in the eastern section of the proposed Project APE. No portion of the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel was accessible for survey, due Item #8. Page 226
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 291

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-39 December 2022
to it being underground. Historical MWD source document that entirety of the 41.6 miles from Lake Matthews to the east portal of Monrovia No. 1 tunnel was constructed of welded steel and precast concrete pipe. The Monrovia No. 1 tunnel extended 7,868 feet from portal to portal, and was a concrete lined pressure tunnel in rock substrate, and was 10 feet in diameter, with light supper of steel ribs and timber lagging occasionally placed as-needed (Weymouth 1939: 266-269).

Concrete access point hatch 2256-93 (no date)
The concrete access hatch structure and above ground structure is part of the MWD Upper Feeder Pipeline located northeast of the 950 Silent Ranch Drive main house building, at the outlet of a wide gully. The hatch structure consists of a 6-foot diameter, circular concrete access point that rises 1-2 feet above the ground surface, with a rectangular asbestos lid with a crosshatch pattern. Date of construction for the hatch is unknown. The original subsurface section of the MWD Upper Feeder was constructed between 1936 and 1939; however, the asbestos lid does not appear to be of 1930s construction. The hatch structure is labeled with stenciled paint on the top and side with “2256-93.” Identified Alterations
No permits were available from the Metropolitan Water District of the City of GlendoraSouthern California for the infrastructure related to the Upper Feeder. No observed alterations were noted in the course of survey.

NRHP/CRHR Statement of Significance
Criterion A/1: That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.

The section of Upper Feeder pipeline within the study area is subterranean Monrovia No. 1 tunnel with only one visible, above-ground structure: the concrete access hatch. Monrovia No. 1 tunnel is an underground pipeline and critical segment of the MWD Upper Feeder pipeline, the first multi-city municipal water distribution system of its kind in the region. The entire Upper Feeder pipeline system was designed in 1931, contract for the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel was awarded to West Construction Company in 1934, the right-of-way easement was acquired in 1935 through the Silent Ranch Estate, and the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel was completed in 1937. Water first flowed through the distribution system in 1941. No date of construction could be ascertained for this hatch; however, it is assumed that the construction date is concurrent with the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel: 1937. Both Monrovia No.1 tunnel and the access hatch are components of the larger Upper Feeder pipeline and distribution system for the Colorado River Aqueduct. The entire distribution the Upper Feeder pipeline belongs to extends 150-miles and serves participating cities in the greater metropolitan Los Angeles area, the Inland Empire, San Diego County, and other Southern California areas. The Upper Feeder pipeline is the first segment of the distribution system for the MWD Colorado River Aqueduct, extending 60 miles from the Colorado River Aqueduct’s western terminus at Lake Matthews to the San Rafael tunnel between Pasadena and Glendale. The construction of the distribution system and Upper Feeder pipeline made a significant contribution to the board pattern of history as part of the transportation and distribution of Colorado River water, an enabling force for the intensive economic and residential development of Southern California.

The MWD Upper Feeder was instrumental to the transportation and distribution of Colorado River water to participating cities in Southern California. After Colorado River traversed the Mojave Desert from Nevada to Riverside in the Colorado River Aqueduct, the Upper Feeder pipeline was the practical means by which the participating cities accessed Colorado River water. The need for Colorado River Item #8. Page 227
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 292

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-40 December 2022
water was dire in the 1920s, and the 2,200 square miles of coastal plain surrounding the City of Los Angeles was ripe for residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural development. However, prior to receiving Colorado River water, municipalities in the arid region relied on outdated and overtaxed irrigation systems, artesian wells and groundwater, or private water companies to furnish water, or face annexation by City of Los Angeles in order to access the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s Owens River water sources. Most smaller municipalities in the region simply lacked the resources to import water like Los Angeles on their own. After the Colorado River Compact enabled Arizona, California Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming to divert portions of Colorado River water in 1923, MWD was established in 1928, as a result of the Metropolitan Water Act. The Metropolitan Water Act outlined how to the Colorado River Aqueduct and distribution system would be located and constructed. Construction of both distribution system and Colorado River Aqueduct began in 1931. 150 miles of distribution system were completed in 1939 and 242 miles of Colorado River Aqueduct were completed in 1941.

The Upper Feeder was a segment of the distribution system of the MWD Colorado River Aqueduct, and the means by which the participating cities in the greater metropolitan Los Angeles area, the Inland Empire, San Diego County, and other Southern California areas got access to Colorado River water after the completion of the Hoover Dam. The MWD Upper Feeder pipeline, as well as the rest of the distribution system and Colorado River Aqueduct, were major construction programs affording thousands of jobs to Californians during the Great Depression. After both projects were completed, the increased water supply and made it possible for Southern California to enjoy widespread economic development and to be settled so densely.

For linear, water conveyance resources to be found eligible under Criterion A/1, it must be a key piece of the overall system. In this case, the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel is a key portion of the Upper Feeder pipeline, facilitating its portage from the south side of the San Gabriel foothills to the San Gabriel River canyon. Further, the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch maintain their original alignment and location, which is critical to understanding their importance and significance as a historically significant piece of water infrastructure. The Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch also maintain its subterranean setting, situated in the original undeveloped suburban foothill area of Glendora. Finally, the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch continue to function as a water conveyance system operated by MWD. While setting is less important for an underground feature, maintaining the original alignment, association with MWD, and its continued use as a water conveyance structure are important are the character-defining features of the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch.

As such, the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel segment transecting the proposed Project APE and the aboveground access hatch, are recommended eligible for NRHP/CRHR Criterion A/1, as a component of the larger MWD Upper Feeder pipeline for the period 1931-1941, for transportation and distribution of Colorado River water to participating municipalities in Southern California, which was an enabling force for the intensive economic and residential development of Southern California.

Criterion B/2: That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.

Archival research failed to identify any associations with specific significant persons. Due to a lack of identified significant associations with important persons in history, the MWD Upper Feeder and all associated components do not appear eligible under NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2.

Item #8. Page 228
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 293

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-41 December 2022
The entire Upper Feeder pipeline system was designed in 1931, contract for the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel was awarded to West Construction Company in 1934, the right-of-way easement was acquired in 1935 through the Silent Ranch Estate, and the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel was completed in 1937. Water first flowed through the distribution system in 1941. No date of construction could be ascertained for this hatch. However, it is assumed that the construction date is concurrent with the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel:
1937. The MWD Upper Feeder pipeline was designed by Metropolitan Water District engineer R.B.

Diemer and multiple contractors were used to complete the above and below ground sections.

Monrovia No. 1 tunnel was completed by contractor West Construction Company, and the majority of other concrete pipe sections completed by contractor J.F. Shea Company Inc. Like the Colorado River Aqueduct the scale and importance of the distribution system, which totaled over 150 miles and served dozens of cities across Southern California. The Upper Feeder segment between Lake Matthews and Morris Reservoir is 30+ miles long and passes through the proposed Project APE in a series of subterranean tunnels. No portion of the tunnels are visible as above ground features except for a single concrete hatch. As such, this report cannot offer comment on the type or method of construction. Adequate records of the construction of the section through the proposed Project APE are well recorded; however, construction techniques could not be confirmed as the line itself was not visible during the field visit.

Despite the Upper Feeder pipeline’s historical importance and monumental scale, nothing about the original design for the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel was particularly identifiable to a specific historical period or method of construction. Concrete pipelines and tunnel construction are ubiquitous water infrastructure components and the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and MWD Upper Feeder pipeline as a whole do not distinguish themselves other than by its size. The Upper Feeder pipeline as a whole is associated with MWD engineer R.B. Diemer, who despite his later role as chief engineer of MWD for nine years, does not rise to the level of master engineer. The Monrovia No. 1 tunnel is utilitarian infrastructure and does not possess high artistic value. Finally, the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and the concrete hatch are components of a significant and distinguishable work of twentieth century water engineering and a major infrastructure development project, however they are subsurface components and not visible. Therefore, they are not representative of the pipeline as a whole.

Therefore, the MWD Upper Feeder subsurface tunnel segment and associated infrastructure, including the hatch, do not appear eligible under NRHP/CRHR Criterion C/3.

Criterion D/4: That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

The Upper Feeder pipeline is not likely to yield information important to understanding prehistory or history. Therefore, Upper Feeder pipeline does not appear eligible under NRHP/CRHR Criterion D/4.

City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark Designation Criteria

1. The proposed preserved features exemplify or reflect special elements of historical, architectural, archaeological, cultural, or aesthetic heritage.

The Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch, which traverse the proposed Project APE, exemplifies special elements of City of Glendora’s history. The addition of this water to the city existing water system allowed for the continuation of and assurance of water for irrigated crops in Glendora, allowing the Glendora citrus industry to persist until the mid-1960s, when residential and economic development pressure overrode the citrus industry’s land requirements. Therefore, the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch are recommended eligible as a City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark under Criterion 1.

Item #8. Page 229
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 294

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-42 December 2022

2. The proposed preserved features are identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.

Archival research failed to identify any associations with significant persons at the local, state, or national level. Therefore, the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch are not eligible as a City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark under Criterion 2.

3. The proposed features embody distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction or are valuable examples of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.

The Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch are not particularly outstanding or innovative examples of 1930sera monumental-scale water infrastructure. All components of the Upper Feeder tunnel in the APE are underground and Dudek was not able to verify the condition, construction, or alterations to the pipeline. Therefore, the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch are not eligible as a City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark under Criterion 3.

4. The proposed preserved features are representative of the notable work of a builder, designer or architect.

Archival research identified that the MWD Upper Feeder’s engineer is associated with MWD engineer R.B. Diemer, who despite his later role as chief engineer of MWD for nine years, does not rise to the level of master engineer. Therefore, the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch are not eligible as a City of Glendora Historic Resource or Landmark under Criterion 4.

Integrity Discussion
Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. Under NRHP Criterion A and CRHR Criterion 1, a significant water conveyance resource must retain the following physical attributes as they relate to the integrity of location, setting, and association:
• Location: original alignment
• Setting: remains subterranean
• Association: continues to function as a water conveyance system Dudek recommends that the pipeline retains integrity of location as it maintains its original 1930s alignment, as confirmed through map research. The Monrovia No. 1 tunnel segment also retains integrity of its setting, as the pipe is still under the ground surface. Because the pipeline is a subterranean feature, integrity of the aboveground setting is not necessary for the pipeline to convey its significance. The pipeline retains integrity of association with the MWD as the pipeline retains its original ownership and function. Integrity of design, materials, workmanship and feeling are not required for a water conveyance resource to convey its significance under Criterion A/1. Therefore Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch retain the requisite aspects of integrity to convey their significance under Criterion A/1.

Summary of Evaluation Findings
Within the APE, one resource is recommended eligible for the NRHP, CRHR and City of Glendora Historic Resource of Landmark designation: the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch. The Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch are recommended eligible under Criterion A/1/1 as a component of the MWD Upper Feeder pipeline, for the period 1931-1941 for representing a critical component of a larger Item #8. Page 230
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 295

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-43 December 2022
water infrastructure, the MWD Upper Feeder pipeline. The Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch was evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a) (2)‐(3) of the CEQA Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Resources Code, and it appears to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA and a historical property for the purposes of Section 106 of the NHPA (36 CFR Part 800). Dudek recommends this resource be assigned a California Historical Resource Status Code of 3D (appears eligible for NR as a contributor to a NR eligible district through survey evaluation).

The remaining resources located at 950 North Silent Ranch Drive (APN: 8684-045-004): the Rancho Los Alisos Structures, Camp Aventura building, and joint Forest Service and County Flood Control District dams and channel do not appear eligible for the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of Glendora historic resource or landmark due to a lack of significant historical associations and architectural merit.

Therefore, the property is not considered an historical resource for the purposes of CEQA or an historic property for the purposes of Section 106 of the NHPA. No management recommendations are required for cultural resources. These resources have been assigned a California Historical Resource Status Code of 6Z (found ineligible for the NRHP, CRHR, or local designation through survey evaluation).

Under Section 106 of the NHPA, an adverse effect is found when an undertaking may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of a historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the NRHP in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property's location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association. Consideration shall be given to all qualifying characteristics of a historic property, including those that may have been identified subsequent to the original evaluation of the property's eligibility for the NRHP. Adverse effects may include reasonably foreseeable effects caused by the undertaking that may occur later in time, be farther removed in distance or be cumulative (36 CFR Part 800.5(1)).

As stated above, the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch appears eligible for listing in the NRHP Criterion A and CRHR Criterion 1. The proposed Project would develop a residential subdivision, and construction includes grading, fill deposits, utilities trenching, road construction, driveway construction, and construction of residential buildings over the MWD pipeline easement. In July 2019, MWD sent Giron Engineers, Inc. a letter commenting on plans submitted for the proposed Project and requiring the Project proponents to: make accommodations for MWD vehicles and build an MWDaccessible right-of-way in the proposed Project APE; provide protections such as bollards or gates for above ground MWD structures such as manholes or hatches; provide MWD with detailed plans for any protection provisions built for MWD resources as a result of the project; provide plans for landscaping or other improvements within the MWD proposed right-of-way; provide details of any non-potable utilities for MWD review; and to include provisions for loads imposed on the pipeline. The letter further cautions that any facility constructed within the MWD easement is subject to the paramount right of MWD to use the easement for the purpose it was required. MWD reserved the right to remove facilities from the easement and to block access to their right-of-way at any time (MWD 2019). This letter provides for the protection of the structure of the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel segment of the MWD Upper Feeder pipeline which transects the proposed Project site. These restrictions are set forth in MM-GEO2 in Section 3.7, Geology and Soils. With incorporation of MM-GEO-2, potential impacts to the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel segment of the MWD Upper Feeder pipeline and hatch would be less than significant and the historic property would still be able to convey is significance following proposed Project implementation. As a result, the proposed Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5 and impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

Item #8. Page 231
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 296

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-44 December 2022
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Less Than Significant Wwith Mitigation.

CHRIS Record Search. As previously discussed, a CHRIS records search was conducted for the proposed Project APE and a 0.5-mile radius at the SCCIC on June 28, 2019. No cultural resources studies have been previously conducted within the Project site. Additionally, SCCIC records did not identify any previously recorded cultural resources within the proposed Project APE.

NAHC Consultation. As part of the process of identifying cultural resources within or near the proposed Project APE, Dudek contacted the NAHC on June 5, 2018, to request a review of the SLF. The NAHC replied via email on June 8, 2018, stating that the SLF search was completed with negative results.

Because the SLF search does not include an exhaustive list of Native American cultural resources, the NAHC provided a list of six Native American individuals and/or tribal organizations who may have direct knowledge of cultural resources in or near the proposed Project APE. No additional tribal outreach was conducted by Dudek; however, in compliance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52, the City has contacted all NAHC-listed traditionally geographically affiliated tribal representatives that have requested Project notification, which is addressed in Section 3.18, Tribal Cultural Resources.

Cultural Resource Survey. An intensive-level pedestrian survey of the proposed Project APE was conducted on August 1, 2019. The survey focused on all accessible portions of the proposed Project APE. No prehistoric or historic in age archaeological resources were observed during the survey.

No newly or previously recorded archaeological resources were identified within the proposed Project APE as a result of the cultural resources study. Although no archaeological resources were identified within the proposed Project site, there is always the potential to encounter unanticipated cultural resources during the course of construction. In the event that archaeological resources are inadvertently discovered during ground-disturbing activities, MM-CUL-1 would require work to be halted within 100 feet of the discovery until it can be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist.

Construction activities may continue in other areas while the archaeologist inspects the find. If the discovery proves to be significant, additional work, such as data recovery excavation or resource recovery, may be warranted and would be discussed in consultation with the appropriate regulatory agency. Implementation of MM-CUL-1 would ensure that impacts regarding a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource remain less than significant.

MM-CUL-1: In the event that archaeological resources are unearthed during grounddisturbing activities, the construction contractor shall immediately cease all earth-disturbing activities within 100 feet of the discovery and shall retain a qualified archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards. Construction activities may continue in other areas outside of the designated protection zone, which shall be delineated with cones, flagging, or fencing. The archaeologist shall evaluate the significance of the find and determine whether the resource uncovered is a “Tribal Cultural Resources” pursuant to Section 21074 of the California Public Resources Code, or a “unique archaeological resource” pursuant to Section 21083.2(g) of the California Public Resources Code or a “historical resource” pursuant to Section 15064.5(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines.

If the archaeological find is determined to be a resource, the archaeologist shall formulate a Mitigation Plan in consultation with the City of Glendora that satisfy Item #8. Page 232
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 297

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-45 December 2022
the requirements of the above-listed Code Sections. Upon approval of the Mitigation Plan by the City, the Project shall be implemented in compliance with the Plan. If the Archaeologist determines that the resource is not significant, s/he shall record the evaluation and submit the recordation form to the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC). The archaeologist shall prepare a report of the results of any study prepared as part of a testing or Mitigation Plan, following accepted professional practice. The report shall follow guidelines of the California Office of Historic Preservation although format will be dependent on the nature of the archaeological investigation required. Copies of the report shall be submitted to the City and to the CHRIS at the SCCIC. c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Less Than Significant Wwith Mitigation. There is no indication that human remains are present within the boundaries of the Project site. However, in the unlikely event that excavation activities inadvertently discover buried human remains, implementation of MM-CUL-2 would reduce potential impacts to a level considered less than significant. Therefore, impacts to disturbance of any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries, would be less than significant with mitigation.

MM-CUL-2: In accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, if human remains are found, the Los Angeles County Coroner shall be notified within 24 hours of the discovery. No further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall occur until the County Coroner has determined, within two working days of notification of the discovery, the appropriate treatment and disposition of the human remains. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are, or are believed to be, Native American, s/he shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) in Sacramento within 48 hours. In accordance with California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98, the NAHC must immediately notify those persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD shall complete their inspection within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The designated Native American representative would then determine, in consultation with the property owner, the disposition of the human remains.

Item #8. Page 233
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 298

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-46 December 2022

3.6 Energy
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
Less Than Significant Impact. The short-term construction and long-term operation of the proposed Project would require the consumption of energy resources in several forms. Construction energy consumption includes: (1) temporary direct electrical service provided by SCE, which includes construction site lighting; computer equipment; and temporary construction trailer operation; and (2) fossil fuels (diesel and gasoline), which includes off-road construction equipment, diesel-fired electric generators, and worker vehicles, vender trucks, and haul trucks. Operational energy consumption includes: (1) direct electrical service provided by SCE, which includes, building heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC), lighting: interior and exterior facilities, computer, audio and video equipment; and, appliances; (2) indirect energy consumption, which includes supply, distribution, and treatment of water, wastewater; and solid waste; and (3) fossil fuels (diesel and gasoline) from vehicle transportation.

Construction Energy Use
Electricity. Temporary electric power for as-necessary lighting and electronic equipment (such as computers inside temporary construction trailers) would be provided by SCE. The electricity used for such activities would be temporary and would be substantially less than that required for Project operation and would have a negligible contribution to the proposed Project’s overall energy consumption.

Natural Gas. Natural gas is not anticipated to be required during construction of the proposed Project.

Fuels used for construction would primarily consist of diesel and gasoline, which are discussed below under the “petroleum” subsection. Any minor amounts of natural gas that may be consumed as a result of proposed Project construction would be substantially less than that required for operation and would have a negligible contribution to the proposed Project’s overall energy consumption.

Petroleum. Petroleum would be consumed throughout construction. Fuel consumed by construction equipment would be the primary energy resource expended over the course of construction.

Transportation of construction materials and construction workers would also result in petroleum consumption. Heavy-duty construction equipment, vendor trucks, and haul trucks would use diesel fuel. Construction workers would likely travel to and from the project area in gasoline-powered vehicles. Construction was modeled in CalEEMod to require approximately 18 months, beginning in Item #8. Page 234
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 299

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-47 December 2022
2023 and ending in 2024. Once construction activities cease, petroleum use from off-road equipment and construction transportation vehicles would end. All construction activities must be conducted in accordance with applicable regulations related to the recycling of construction and demolition debris.

Because of the short-term nature of construction and relevantly small scale of the proposed Project, impacts would be less than significant.

Operation Energy Use
Electricity. Operation of the proposed Project would require electricity for multiple purposes, including cooling, lighting, appliances, and various equipment. Additionally, the supply, conveyance, treatment, and distribution of water and wastewater would indirectly result in electricity usage. Electricity consumption associated with proposed Project operation is based on CalEEMod outputs presented in Appendix A of this IS/MND.

CalEEMod default values for energy consumption for each land use were applied for the Project analysis. The energy use from non-residential land uses is calculated in CalEEMod based on the California Commercial End-Use Survey database. For parking lots, CalEEMod includes calculation of energy use from lighting, ventilation and elevators in parking lots and structures and is based on the type of parking lot selected by the user. Energy use in the residences (both natural gas and electricity) is divided by the program into end use categories subject to California Building Standards Code (Title 24) requirements (end uses associated with the building envelope, such as the HVAC system, water heating system, and integrated lighting) and those not subject to California Building Standards Code requirements (such as appliances, electronics, and miscellaneous “plug-in” uses).

Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations serves to enhance and regulate California’s building standards. The most recent amendments to Title 24, Part 6, referred to as the 2019 standards, became effective on January 1, 2020. According to energy demand estimates produced in CalEEMod estimations; the proposed Project would consume approximately 95,688 kilowatt-hours per year during operation. For comparison, in 2017 the total residential electricity demand in Los Angeles County was approximately 23 million kilowatt-hours (CEC 2021). For these reasons, the operational electricity consumption of the Project would result in less than significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources.

Natural Gas. Project operation would require natural gas for various purposes, including water heating and natural gas appliances for future residences. Natural gas consumption associated with operation is based on the CalEEMod outputs (provided in Appendix A). According to these estimations, the proposed Project would consume approximately 288,451 kilo-British Thermal Units (kBTUs) per year. For comparison, in 2020 the residential natural gas use within Los Angeles County was 12 billion kBTUs per year (CEC 2021).

Since the proposed Project would comply with applicable Title 24 requirements the proposed Project would not be considered inefficient or wasteful, and impacts would be less than significant.

Petroleum. During operations, the majority of fuel consumption resulting from the proposed Project would involve the use of motor vehicles for residential uses. Petroleum fuel consumption associated with motor vehicles traveling to and from the Project site is a function of the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as a result of proposed Project operation. The annual VMT attributable to the proposed Project is expected to be 543,940 VMT. Similar to the construction worker and vendor trips, fuel consumption from operational trips is estimated by converting the total CO2 emissions from operation of the proposed Project to gallons using the conversion factors for CO2 to gallons of gasoline or diesel. Based on the annual fleet mix provided in CalEEMod, 85% of the fleet range from light-duty to medium-duty vehicles and motorcycles are assumed to run on gasoline. The remaining 15% of vehicles represent medium-heavy duty to heavy-duty vehicles and buses and are assumed to run on diesel. Calculations for annual mobile fuel consumption are provided in Table 3.6-1.

Item #8. Page 235
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 300

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-48 December 2022
Table 3.6-1
Annual Mobile Source Demand (Gasoline and Diesel)
Vehicle MT CO2 kg/CO2/Gallon Gallons
Gasoline: Operations 152.18 8.78 17,332.16
Diesel: Operations 26.35 10.21 2,580.68
Sources: Trips and vehicle CO2 (Appendix A; kg/CO2/Gallon (The Climate Registry 2018).

Notes: MT = metric ton; CO2 = carbon dioxide; kg = kilogram Over the lifetime of the proposed Project, the fuel efficiency of on-road vehicles of residents is expected to increase. As such, the amount of petroleum consumed as a result of vehicular trips to and from the Project site would decrease over time. There are numerous regulations in place that require and encourage increased fuel efficiency. For example, the CARB has adopted an approach to passenger vehicles by combining the control of smog-causing pollutants and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions into a single, coordinated package of standards. The approach also includes efforts to support and accelerate the number of plug-in hybrids and zero-emissions vehicles in California (CARB 2013).

Additionally, in response to Senate Bill (SB) 375, CARB adopted the goal of reducing per-capita GHG emissions from 2005 levels by 8% by 2020, and 18% by 2035 for light-duty passenger vehicles in the planning area for the SCAG. As such, operation of the proposed Project is expected to use decreasing amounts of petroleum over time due to advances in fuel economy.

In summary, although the proposed Project would increase petroleum use during operation as a result of residents commuting to and from the site, the use would be a fraction of the State- and County-wide use and, due to efficiency increases, would diminish over time. Given these considerations, petroleum consumption associated with the proposed Project would not be considered inefficient or wasteful and would result in a less-than-significant impact.

Overall, construction and operation of the proposed Project would result in less than significant environmental impacts regarding wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Less Than Significant Impact. Part 6 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations was established in 1978 and serves to enhance and regulate California’s building standards. Part 6 establishes energy efficiency standards for residential and non-residential buildings constructed in California to reduce energy demand and consumption. Part 6 is updated periodically (every 3 years) to incorporate and consider new energy efficiency technologies and methodologies. Title 24 also includes Part 11, the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen). CALGreen institutes mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground-up, new construction of commercial, low-rise residential, and state-owned buildings, as well as schools and hospitals. The 2019 CALGreen standards became effective on January 1, 2020. The proposed Project would meet Title 24 and CALGreen standards to reduce energy demand and increase energy efficiency.

The City of Glendora developed resource protection and sustainability goals and policies within the Conservation Element of the City’s General Plan. Energy Use is addressed in Goal CON-5, which Item #8. Page 236
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 301

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-49 December 2022
mandates reduced demand for energy resources through the use of conservation techniques.

Relevant CON-5 policies are summarized as follows:

CON-5.1 Investigate and implement opportunities for energy conservation at all Citymaintained facilities.

CON-5.2 Encourage the incorporation of energy conservation features in the design of all new construction and substantial rehabilitation projects and encourage the installation of conservation devices in existing developments.

CON-5.3 Encourage private energy conservation programs that minimize high energy demand and that use alternative energy sources.

CON-5.4 Require all new developments to incorporate energy-efficient lighting, heating, and cooling systems pursuant to the Uniform Building Code.

CON-5.5 Provide education and outreach to residents and businesses on opportunities to decrease energy consumption.

Consistent with the General Plan’s goals for energy use, the proposed Project would follow applicable energy standards and regulations during construction and operations. In addition, the proposed Project would be built and operated in accordance with all existing, applicable regulations at the time of construction. As such, the proposed Project would not conflict with existing energy standards and regulations. Therefore, impacts during construction and operation of the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts. No mitigation is required.

3.7 Geology and Soils
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Item #8. Page 237
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 302

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-50 December 2022
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
The analysis in this section is based on two Preliminary Reports of Geotechnical Investigation conducted for the Project site by G.A. Nicoll and Associates, Inc (G.A. Nicoll). The geotechnical studies are dated for November 2013 for the portion of the Project site that includes the residential development and dated for February 2016 for the northern section of the site and the proposed flood/debris control improvements. These reports are attached to this document as Appendix D-1 (G.A. Nicoll 2013) and D-2 (G.A. Nicoll 2016), respectively. a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

Seismic-, faulting-, and landslide-related impacts would only be considered significant in the event that Project-related construction or operation causes, or exacerbates the potential for faulting/ seismicity/ landslides to occur. Similarly, for a determination of significance of impacts unrelated to seismic hazard zones (e.g., subsidence, expansive soils, collapsible soils), the analysis considers the proposed Project’s buildout with respect to compliance with existing CBC and Los Angeles County Building Code regulations. However, non-seismic related geologic/soils impacts would only be considered significant in the event that Project-related construction or operation causes, or exacerbates the potential for such impacts to occur.

No Impact. As described in Appendix D-1, the closest approach of a known active fault to the Project site is the Sierra Madre Fault. An east-northeast-trending fault segment of the Sierra Madre Fault crosses the Project site through the southeast corner. Additionally, a mapped segment of the Sierra Madre Fault identified in the General Plan’s Safety Element crosses the Project site and an unnamed, east–west trending fault crosses the east side of the Project site (Appendix D-2). The segment of the Sierra Madre Fault zone extending through Glendora is mapped as Quaternary age, indicating that splays of the Sierra Madre Fault within Glendora are not active.

Item #8. Page 238
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 303

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-51 December 2022
For the Geotechnical Investigations, a photographic lineament study was conducted using aerial photographs dated 1928, 1938, and 1953 and an image dated 2006. Four photographic lineaments5 (PL-1 through PL-4) were evaluated and plotted, as identified in Figure 3.7-1, Photo Lineaments. As shown, PL-1 is located along the general alignment of the east-northeast trending fault that crosses the Project site. PL-3 is located along the trend of the fault that cuts the narrow ridge of the Project site. PL2 is located along an old road, and PS-4 lies along the MWD pipeline alignment (Appendix D-1).

During exploratory borings conducted on the Project site, G.A. Nicoll found a number of shears in the area of the two fault segments. However, none of the shears had any striations or grooves indicating a trend of fault movement. Additionally, the borings that encountered older alluvium showed no signs of disturbance within the materials overlying the sheared bedrock, indicating that the latest fault movement is older than the estimated age of the overlying materials (which are estimated to be Pleistocene age).

The segment of the Sierra Madre Fault that crosses the Project site was investigated as part of a previous geotechnical investigation on a neighboring property to the south of the Project site.

Approximately 200 feet of fault trenching showed no indication of faulting, and no fault-related disturbances were found during grading on the neighboring property. Furthermore, the Project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone for active faults. Additionally, no active faults were found during the MWD investigations or construction for the phase of the Monrovia No. 1 Tunnel or pipeline. For these reasons and based on evidence presented in Appendices D-1 and D-2, G.A. Nicoll concluded that there are no active faults on the Project site and that ground rupture along a fault plane is not expected at the Project site. Implementation of the proposed Project would not cause, or exacerbate the potential for fault rupture to occur. Therefore, there would be no impact regarding potential substantial adverse effects including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation. As with all areas in Southern California, the Project site is located in a seismically active region, within which are numerous known earthquake faults. As a result, the proposed Project could be exposed to strong seismically induced ground shaking. As stated in Appendices D-1 and D-2, some areas of the Project site are underlain by deposits of unconsolidated colluvium, loose alluvium, and uncertified fill, which can amplify ground motion during an earthquake. In the event of seismic ground shaking on the Project site, the proposed structures and future residents could be adversely affected. However, the geotechnical reports for the proposed Project set forth a variety of recommendations that would reduce the potential for adverse safety hazards on the Project site associated with strong seismic ground shaking. For example, the geotechnical reports state that the unconsolidated colluvium, loose alluvium, and uncertified fill should be removed from the Project site during grading. Additionally, all buildings, retaining walls, and flood/debris control infrastructure should be designed to resist seismic lateral loads, per the recommendations in the geotechnical reports.

MM-GEO-1 requires that project design and construction adhere to the recommendations from the site-specific geotechnical reports (G.A. Nicoll 2013 and 2016; Appendices D-1 and D-2, respectively), and/or updated site-specific geologic evaluations prior to the approval of the final site plans. Upon implementation of MM-GEO-1, the proposed Project would be designed and constructed in a manner that would minimize seismic hazards to the extent practicable. The new single-family homes, Private Streets, and flood/debris control infrastructure would also be designed and constructed in accordance 5 Lineaments are linear features or geological structures that are visible in the topography of an area, often visible through aerial images or satellite imagery.

Item #8. Page 239
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 304

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-52 December 2022
with the California Building Code, the City Building Code, and County Flood Control Standards which would provide additional safety for people and structures in the event of seismic ground shaking.

Therefore, impacts related to the Project’s potential to cause substantial adverse effects directly or indirectly, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant with mitigation.

MM-GEO-1 At the time of submittal of the first plan check, the Project Applicant shall provide an additional, detailed site-specific geologic evaluation of the Project site, supporting the proposed grading design to the City for review. The recommendations of the projectspecific Preliminary Reports of Geotechnical Investigation prepared by G.A. Nicoll and Associates, Inc. 2013 and 2016 shall be applied to the final Project designs, as applicable, and shall be refined, as necessary. In summary, preliminary recommendations to be incorporated into the Project design may include, but are not limited to: (1) removal of loose younger alluvium, existing fill, colluvium, and soil slumps and over-excavation in areas of transition to bedrock and of large trees to be removed; (2) re-use of rock materials scattered in the fill materials, as appropriate; (3) reworking/compaction of the soils to achieve 85-90% relative compaction; (4) protections of concrete and metal pipes from any high-sulphate bedrock, as appropriate; (5) buttressing of cut slopes and removal of any slump areas, finished with the sufficient added fill to buttress the remaining material; (6) slope stabilization fills and/or keys near the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) pipeline, cut slopes, and small landslide area; (7) addition of fines to the fill mixture and/or geofabric stabilization for fill slopes and buttress fills; (8) a system of subdrains and outlets to address accumulations of subsurface water from rainfall and irrigation; and (9) positive surface gradients and other drainage provisions to replace the natural flow of surface water through the canyons, with mid-slope drain and down drains for slopes of 25 feet or higher.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant With Mitigation. As reported by G.A. Nicoll, the Project site is not located within a mapped liquefaction hazard area, as shown on the seismic hazards map produced by the state. G.A.

Nicoll concluded that liquefaction would not occur on the Project site, since the site is underlain by coarse, granular, alluvial deposits and bedrock, and since no shallow free groundwater is present on the site. For these reasons, substantial adverse effects related to liquefaction are not expected to occur on the Project site.

Seismically induced settlement is another type of seismic-related ground failure. Seismically induced settlement has the potential to occur on the Project site due to the presence of loose colluvium and fill soils. Strong seismic ground shaking can cause settlement by allowing sediment particles to become more tightly packed, thereby reducing the space between particles. Loose colluvium and fill, both of which are found on the site, can be subject to seismically induced settlement. However, as stated in Section 3.6(a)(ii), above, and as required by MM-GEO-1, the existing fill and colluvium would be removed and replaced with compacted fill in the areas of the site where structures would be built.

Soils that are potentially susceptible to seismically induced settlement would, therefore, be removed from areas where potential risks could occur in the event of an earthquake. For these reasons, people and structures on the Project site are not anticipated to be exposed to significant hazards associated with seismic-related ground failure, upon implementation of MM-GEO-1. Therefore, impacts related to the Project’s potential to cause substantial adverse effects directly or indirectly, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, would be less than significant with mitigation.

Item #8. Page 240
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 305

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-53 December 2022
iv) Landslides?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is sloped, and slopes increase in steepness in the northern section of the site. As such, G.A. Nicoll evaluated the potential for landslides to cause substantial adverse effects to people and/or structures on the Project site. According to G.A. Nicoll, the Project site is not located within an area designated as having a high potential for earthquakeinduced landsliding. Furthermore, G.A. Nicoll notes that the Project site and surrounding area have been recently exposed to some of the heaviest periods of rainfall recorded in the Los Angeles area, as well as several powerful earthquakes (e.g., the Northridge and San Fernando earthquakes). Despite these conditions, no landsliding occurred in the hillside areas of the Project site. G.A. Nicoll also conducted slope stability analyses in the hillsides of the Project site. The results showed favorable hillside stability. For these reasons, G.A. Nicoll concluded that the potential for earthquake-induced landsliding on the Project site is low. For the same reasons, and due to implementation of flood control facilities on-site to provide effective protection from potential debris flows and flooding from the hillside areas to the north, the proposed Project is not expected to result in significant mudslides.

Mudflow could occur at the Project site due to the undeveloped hillside areas located north of the proposed residences. However, as described in Section 3.10(c), flood/debris control improvements have been designed for the Project site that would contain debris flow from the hillside areas located north of the proposed residences. The flood/debris control improvements that would be part of the proposed Project are also expected to reduce the risk of inundation from mudflow or debris flow within the neighborhoods to the south of the Project site, which are largely unprotected from potential mudflow or debris flow under current conditions.

G.A. Nicoll also evaluated the potential for rockfall hazards to occur on the Project site. Rockfalls can expose people and structures to risks in the event that a person or structure is in the path of a rockfall or rockslide. A Preliminary Geologic Map produced by the State in 1964 identifies a rockslide on the Project site, within the hillside areas towards the western boundary of the site. However, based on surface mapping in this area of the site, G.A. Nicoll determined that the presence of a rockslide is unlikely. Through detailed mapping of the hillside areas of the site, G.A. Nicoll found no areas of loose rocks or rock outcrops that could cause a rock fall with the potential to adversely affect the Project site. For these reasons, the potential for landslides on the Project site, as well as rockfalls and rockslides, is considered low. Furthermore, the proposed Project is required to comply with the California Building Code and the City’s Building Code, which outline specific design, engineering, and development standards for structures. Compliance with the current regulations would ensure that the project is designed and built to current standards, thereby minimizing impacts associated with landslides, in the unlikely event that one occurs and affects the site. Therefore, impacts related to the Project’s potential to cause substantial adverse effects directly or indirectly, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides would be less than significant. b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact. During construction, soils could temporarily be subject to erosion, particularly during site preparation and grading phases. During these phases, existing vegetation would be removed in the areas of the site that are proposed for development. As such, soils would be exposed and disturbed while the site is graded. Wind and/or storm events during this period could result in potential erosion and/or loss of topsoil on the Project site. However, as described in Section 3-10, Hydrology and Water Quality, erosion-control measures would be implemented during construction as part of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the Project. Prior to the start of construction activities, the Contractor is required to file a Permit Registration Document with the SWRCB in order to obtain coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with the Construction and Land Item #8. Page 241
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 306

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-54 December 2022
Disturbance Activities (Order No 2009-009-DWQ as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006- DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002) or the latest approved general permit. This permit is required for earthwork that result in the disturbance of one acre or more of total land area. The required SWPPP will mandate the implementation of BMPs to reduce or eliminate construction-related pollutants in the runoff, including sediment.

Upon buildout of the proposed Project, the portions of the Project site that would undergo disturbance during construction would be covered with residences, pavement, flood control facilities, and/or landscaping, which would preclude or minimize erosion. As shown in Figure 2-4a, areas adjacent to the proposed debris basins that would be subject to minimal grading/grooming to remove loose surface materials and reduce loose debris from running off into the debris basin facilities, as required by the LACFCD. Upon completion of the Project, the affected slopes would be hydroseeded with native seeds to facilitate the reestablishment of vegetative cover. The stormwater drainage system for the residential development would be designed to capture rainfall from storm events and direct it to the proposed on-site sewer system. The northern portion of the Project site, which would be re-developed with enlarged debris basins, would be designed to capture and retain bulked storm flows during rain events. The proposed Project would not substantially change the potential for soil erosion and/or loss of topsoil to occur in hillside areas of the site when compared with existing conditions. Therefore, with implementation of the erosion control BMPs in the SWPPP during construction, and construction of the debris basin facilities, there would not be substantial loss of topsoil associated with Project implementation, and associated impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Less Than Significant Wwith Mitigation. As described in Sections 3.6(a)(iii) and (iv), liquefaction, landslides, and rockslides are not expected to pose a substantial, adverse effect to people or structures on the Project site. As described in Section 3.6(a)(iii), some of the existing on-site soils may be subject to seismically induced settlement. However, soils that are susceptible to settlement would be removed as part of the proposed Project. As stated in Appendix D and as required by MM-GEO-1, new fill would be placed and compacted to 85-90% relative compaction and moisture content, so that hydroconsolidation would not occur in imported materials. G.A. Nicoll also identified the presence of soil slips and slumps on the Project site. However, these features would be removed or stabilized per the recommendations in the geotechnical reports (MM-GEO-1).

Additionally, as shown on Figure 2-4a, the MWD easement is shown as Easement “A”, which traverses from north to south through the Project site and would remain as-is with Project implementation. This easement contains a portion of the MWD Upper Feeder water supply system and consist of a 10-foot diameter pre-cast reinforced concrete pipe that crosses beneath (subterranean) the Project site, ultimately connecting to the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel approximately 60 feet to the north of the Project site. The tunnel and pipeline are a part of the Colorado River Aqueduct System. No habitable structures would be constructed on the MWD easement.

In July 2019, MWD prepared a letter (Appendix C of this IS/MND) commenting on plans submitted for the proposed Project and requiring the Project proponents to: make accommodations for MWD vehicles and build an MWD-accessible right-of-way in the proposed Project APE; provide protections such as bollards or gates for above ground MWD structures such as manholes or hatches; provide MWD with detailed plans for any protection provisions built for MWD resources as a result of the project; provide plans for landscaping or other improvements within the MWD proposed right-of-way; provide details of any non-potable utilities for MWD review; and to include provisions for loads imposed Item #8. Page 242
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 307

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-55 December 2022
on the pipeline. The letter further cautions that any facility constructed within the MWD easement is subject to the paramount right of MWD to use the easement for the purpose it was required. MWD reserved the right to remove facilities from the easement and to block access to their right-of-way at any time (MWD 2019). This letter provides for the protection of the structure of the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel segment of the MWD Upper Feeder pipeline which transects the proposed Project site. These development restrictions are necessary for the protection of the MWD Upper Feeder, but are also important to ensure that the proposed development of the residential lots are developed on stable and suitable soils to prevent instability that could potentially result in collapse. MM-GEO-2 requires that prior to the approval of the Final Plans for the proposed Project, the Project Applicant provide MWD with several documents, including but not limited to, the TTM, soils report and settlement analysis, laboratory testing results, and any other supporting documents related to development within the MWD easement, for MWD’s review and approval. Implementation of MM-GEO-2 would ensure the protection of the MWD Upper Feeder to the satisfaction of the MWD and impacts associated the potential of development on unstable soils, which could potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse, would be less than significant with mitigation. 6 MM-GEO-2 Prior to the approval of the Final Plans for the proposed Project, the Project Applicant shall provide the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) with the following documents: the Tentative Tract Map; soils report and settlement analysis; laboratory testing results; detailed designs of the required secondary containment system for non-potable utilities landscaping plans; and any other supporting documents related to development within the MWD easement, including details of the retaining wall, foundations, and supporting calculations, shall be stamped and signed and submitted for MWD’s review and written approval.

The Tentative Tract Map shall identify the following features and requirements:
• Gates or removable bollards, capable of accommodating MWD’s locks, shall be installed at the location of the driveway approach to the Upper Feeder to prevent unauthorized entry to MWD’s right-of-way;
• Bollards shall be placed on the south side of City of Glendora Flood Control’s maintenance road to protect MWD’s 10-foot-inside-diameter air vent shaft (at Station 2280+51) from damage;
• Building structures of any kind and trees are prohibited within the limits of the MWD easement.
• Any intrusion, modification, or destruction of any aspect of this Monrovia No. 1 tunnel segment of the MWD Upper Feeder pipeline or the hatch are prohibited.

The Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CCRs) of the Homeowner’s Association shall require the written notification of the property owners of Lots 7, 8, and 9 that are located immediately northeast of the Upper Feeder pipeline and right-of-way, that access to the lots may become unavailable at any time, for a period of time, in the event that excavation of the pipeline becomes necessary for maintenance, repair, replacement, or the addition of another pipeline. The CCRs of the Homeowner’s Association shall also 6 Since MWD conducted their preliminary review in July 2019, the Project’s Tentative Tract Map and grading plan have been revised to accommodate changes within the southern portion of the Project area, such as a reduction in width of the Private Roadway, cubic yardage of overexcavation, retinting wall height, and minor changes to specific lot sizes. While these modifications would not be anticipated to impact the initial commentary provided by the MWD in July 2019, incorporation of MM-GEO-2 ensures that the Tentative Tract Map, grading plan, landscaping plan, and any other supporting documents related to development within the MWD easement will be stamped and signed and submitted for MWD’s review and written approval.

Item #8. Page 243
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 308

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-56 December 2022
require that all property owners of land within the MWD easement shall be notified that structures of any kind and trees are prohibited within the limits of the MWD easement. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less Than Significant With Mitigation. Expansive soils are clay-rich soils that shrink when dry and swell when wet. This change in volume can exert substantial pressure on foundations, resulting in structural distress and/or damage. As determined by G.A. Nicoll, the on-site soils are mixtures of mostly sand and gravel-sized rocks, which are considered to range from low expansion potential to no expansion potential. As such, the proposed Project would not be located on expansive soil, such that substantial risks to life or property would result. However, G.A. Nicoll notes that any imported fill material should consist of non-expansive materials, and that the import material should be observed, sampled, and tested prior to delivery at the site, to ensure that expansive materials are not introduced to the site during construction. These recommendations would be required per MM-GEO-1. Project construction would not increase or exacerbate the potential for expansive soils to create substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property. Additionally, the proposed Project would be constructed according to the mandatory seismic and structural design guidelines established in the California Building Code, Chapter 16, Section 1601 et seq.
7 Upon incorporation of the recommendations related to preventing soil expansion at the site (i.e., MM-GEO-1), impacts regarding expansive soils, creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property, would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
No Impact. The proposed Project would construct new on-site sewer infrastructure that would discharge into an existing local sewer line in Palm Drive. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed; therefore, the proposed Project would have no impacts related to soils supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less Than Significant Wwith Mitigation. The proposed Project area lies within the southern foothills at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains within the Transverse Ranges Geomorphic Province (Norris and Webb 1990; California Geological Survey, 2002). This province extends from the Pacific Ocean to the Mojave Desert (California Geological Survey 2002; Morton and Miller 2006). In general, this area is mapped as being underlain by Holocene (<12,000 years ago) Quaternary alluvium (map unit Qa), older Quaternary alluvium (map unit Qog), and middle Miocene (~16–12 million years ago) and Cretaceous (~145–66 million years ago) igneous rocks (Dibblee and Ehrenspeck 1999; Dibblee and Minch 2002).

Igneous rocks have no paleontological sensitivity, and younger, Holocene age alluvial deposits have a low paleontological resource sensitivity. However, older, Pleistocene age alluvial deposits have a moderate to high paleontological resource sensitivity (McLeod 2018).

Past excavation activities in the area surrounding the proposed Project site have encountered paleontological resources in older Quaternary alluvial deposits. Jefferson (1991) reported numerous localities from this part of Los Angeles County that yielded Ice Age fossil amphibians, reptiles, birds, 7 California Building Code, Chapter 16, Section 1601 et seq. – Structural Design.

Item #8. Page 244
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 309

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-57 December 2022
and mammals. According to the records search results received from the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (LACM), the closest fossil locality within older Quaternary alluvial deposits is located southwest of the proposed Project area and north of Dalton Wash, south of the Arrow Highway and east of Irwindale Avenue, (LACM 1807). This locality yielded a fossil specimen of mastodon (Mammut americanum) from a gravel deposit between 115 and 120 feet below the ground surface, or bgs (McLeod 2018). In the northeastern Puente Hills, southeast of the project area and southwest of the intersection of the Riverside Freeway (SR-60) and the Corona Freeway (SR-71), locality LACM 8014 yielded a bison (Bison) at shallow depths. In English Canyon, west of Chino, locality LACM 1728 yielded fossil specimens of horse (Equus), and camel (Camelops), at a depth of 15 to 20 feet bgs.

No paleontological resources were identified within the proposed Project area as a result of the institutional records search and desktop geological review. As such, the proposed Project site is not anticipated to be underlain by unique geologic features. While the proposed Project area is mapped as being underlain by coarse grained deposits, intact paleontological resources may be present within finer grained deposits at depth. Given the proximity of past fossil discoveries in the surrounding area and the potential for intact, undisturbed Pleistocene age deposits at depth, the proposed Project site is moderately to highly sensitive for supporting paleontological resources. In the event that intact paleontological resources are located on the proposed Project site, ground-disturbing activities associated with construction of the proposed Project, such as grading during site preparation, have the potential to destroy a unique paleontological resource or site. Without mitigation, the potential damage to paleontological resources during construction would be a potentially significant impact.

However, upon implementation of MM-GEO-3, impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance. Direct or indirect impacts of the proposed Project to destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated during construction.

MM-GEO-3 Prior to commencement of any grading activity on-site, the Project Applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist per the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) (2010) guidelines, subject to the review and approval of the City’s Building Official, or designee. The paleontologist shall prepare a Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) for the proposed Project. The PRIMP shall be consistent with the guidelines of the SVP and should outline requirements for preconstruction meeting attendance and worker environmental awareness training, where monitoring is required within the project area based on construction plans and/or geotechnical reports, procedures for adequate paleontological monitoring and discoveries treatment, and paleontological methods (including sediment sampling for microvertebrate fossils), reporting, and collections management. The qualified paleontologist shall attend the preconstruction meeting and a paleontological monitor shall be on-site during all rough grading and other significant grounddisturbing activities in previously undisturbed, fine-grained older Quaternary alluvial fan deposits. These deposits may be encountered at depths as shallow as 5-10 feet below ground surface. In the event that paleontological resources (e.g., fossils) are unearthed during grading, the paleontological monitor will temporarily halt and/or divert grading activity to allow recovery of paleontological resources. The area of discovery will be roped off with a 50- foot radius buffer. Once documentation and collection of the find is completed, the monitor will remove the rope and allow grading to recommence in the area of the find.

Item #8. Page 245
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 310

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-58 December 2022

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. Climate change refers to any significant change in measures of climate, such as temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns, lasting for an extended period of time (decades or longer). The Earth’s temperature depends on the balance between energy entering and leaving the planet’s system, and many factors (natural and human) can cause changes in Earth’s energy balance.

The greenhouse effect is the trapping and build-up of heat in the atmosphere near the Earth’s surface (the troposphere). The greenhouse effect is a natural process that contributes to regulating the Earth’s temperature, and it creates a livable environment on Earth. Human activities that emit additional GHGs to the atmosphere increase the amount of infrared radiation that gets absorbed before escaping into space, thus enhancing the greenhouse effect and causing the Earth’s surface temperature to rise.

Global climate change is a cumulative impact; a project contributes to this impact through its incremental contribution combined with the cumulative increase of all other sources of GHGs. Thus, GHG impacts are recognized exclusively as cumulative impacts (CAPCOA 2008).

A GHG is any gas that absorbs infrared radiation in the atmosphere; in other words, GHGs trap heat in the atmosphere. As defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 38505(g) for purposes of administering many of the state’s primary GHG emissions reduction programs, GHGs include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride, and nitrogen trifluoride (see also CEQA Guidelines Section 15364.5). The three GHGs evaluated herein are CO2, CH4, and N2O because these are the only GHG gases would be emitted during project construction and/or operations.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change developed the global warming potential (GWP) concept to compare the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to another gas.

The reference gas used is CO2; therefore, GWP-weighted emissions are measured in metric tons (MT) of CO2 equivalent (CO2e). Consistent with CalEEMod Version 2020.4.0, this GHG emissions analysis assumed the GWP for CH4 is 25 (i.e., emissions of 1 MT of CH4 are equivalent to emissions of 25 MT of CO2), and the GWP for N2O is 298, based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Assessment Report (IPCC 2007).

As discussed in Section 3.3, Air Quality, of this IS/MND, the proposed Project is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the SCAQMD. In October 2008, the SCAQMD proposed recommended Item #8. Page 246
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 311

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-59 December 2022
numeric CEQA significance thresholds for GHG emissions for lead agencies to use in assessing GHG impacts of residential and commercial development projects as presented in its Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold (SCAQMD 2008). This document, which builds on the previous guidance prepared by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, explored various approaches for establishing a significance threshold for GHG emissions. The draft interim CEQA thresholds guidance document was not adopted or approved by the Governing Board. However, in December 2008, the SCAQMD adopted an interim 10,000 MT CO2e peryear screening level threshold for stationary source/industrial projects for which the SCAQMD is the lead agency (see SCAQMD Resolution No. 08-35, December 5, 2008). The 10,000 MT CO2e per-year threshold, which was derived from GHG reduction targets established in Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, was based on the conclusion that the threshold was consistent with achieving an emissions capture rate of 90% of all new or modified stationary source projects.

The SCAQMD formed a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group to work with SCAQMD staff on developing GHG CEQA significance thresholds until statewide significance thresholds or guidelines are established. From December 2008 to September 2010, the SCAQMD hosted working group meetings and revised the draft threshold proposal several times, although it did not officially provide these proposals in a subsequent document. The SCAQMD has continued to consider adoption of significance thresholds for residential and general land use development projects. The most recent proposal issued by SCAQMD, issued in September 2010, uses the following tiered approach to evaluate potential GHG impacts from various uses (SCAQMD 2010):

Tier 1. Determine if CEQA categorical exemptions are applicable. If not, move to Tier 2.

Tier 2. Consider whether or not the proposed Project is consistent with a locally adopted GHG reduction plan that has gone through public hearing and CEQA review, that has an approved inventory, includes monitoring, etc. If not, move to Tier 3.

Tier 3. Consider whether the project generates GHG emissions in excess of screening thresholds for individual land uses. The 10,000 MT CO2e per-year threshold for industrial uses would be recommended for use by all lead agencies. Under option 1, separate screening thresholds are proposed for residential projects (3,500 MT CO2e per year), commercial projects (1,400 MT CO2e per year), and mixed-use projects (3,000 MT CO2e per year). Under option 2, a single numerical screening threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e per year would be used for all non-industrial projects. If the project generates emissions in excess of the applicable screening threshold, move to Tier 4.

Tier 4. Consider whether the project generates GHG emissions in excess of applicable performance standards for the project service population (population plus employment). The efficiency targets were established based on the goal of Assembly Bill (AB) 32 to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The 2020 efficiency targets are 4.8 MT CO2e per-service population for projectlevel analyses and 6.6 MT CO2e per-service population for plan-level analyses. If the project generates emissions in excess of the applicable efficiency targets, move to Tier 5.

Tier 5. Consider the implementation of CEQA mitigation (including the purchase of GHG offsets) to reduce the project efficiency target to Tier 4 levels.

Section 15064.7(c) of the CEQA Guidelines specifies that “[w]hen adopting thresholds of significance, a lead agency may consider thresholds of significance previously adopted or recommended by other public agencies, or recommended by experts, provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence.” The CEQA Guidelines do not prescribe specific methodologies for performing an assessment, establish specific thresholds of significance, or Item #8. Page 247
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 312

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-60 December 2022
mandate specific mitigation measures. Rather, the CEQA Guidelines emphasize the lead agency’s discretion to determine the appropriate methodologies and thresholds of significance that are consistent with the manner in which other impact areas are handled in CEQA (CNRA 2009).

To determine the proposed Project’s potential to generate GHG emissions that would have a significant impact on the environment, the Project’s GHG emissions were compared to the 3,000 MT CO2e threshold for all non-industrial land use types. Per the SCAQMD guidance, construction emissions should be amortized over the operational life of the project, which is assumed to be 30 years (SCAQMD 2008). Thus, this impact analysis compares estimated operational emissions plus amortized construction emissions to the proposed SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e per year.

Construction Emissions. Construction of the proposed Project would result in GHG emissions primarily associated with the use of off-road construction equipment, on-road trucks, and worker vehicles. A depiction of expected construction schedules (including information regarding phasing, equipment used during each phase, truck trips, and worker vehicle trips) assumed for the purposes of emissions estimation is provided in Table 2.3-1, Construction Scenario Assumptions, and in Appendix A.

Table 3.8-1, Estimated Annual Construction GHG Emissions, presents construction GHG emissions for the project from on-site and off-site emissions sources.

Table 3.8-1
Estimated Annual Construction GHG Emissions
Year
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Metric Tons per Year
2023 417.49 0.08 0.01 422.16
2024 221.23 0.04 0.01 223.68
Total 645.84
Amortized Over 30 Years 21.53
Source: See Appendix A for complete results.

Notes: GHG = greenhouse gas; CO2 = carbon dioxide; CH4 = methane; N2O = nitrous oxide; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent.

As shown in Table 3.8-1, the estimated total GHG emissions in 2023 and 2024, as included in the CalEEMod assumptions, would be approximately 422 MT CO2e and 224 MT CO2e, respectively.

Amortized over 30 years, construction GHG emissions would be approximately 22 MT CO2e per year.

In addition, as with Project-generated construction criteria air pollutant emissions, GHG emissions generated during proposed construction activities would be short term, lasting only for the duration of the construction period, and would not represent a long-term source of GHG emissions.

Because there is no separate GHG threshold for construction, the evaluation of significance is discussed in the operational emissions analysis in the following text.

Operational Emissions. Operation of the proposed Project would generate GHG emissions through motor vehicle trips to and from the Project site; landscape maintenance equipment operation; energy use (natural gas and generation of electricity consumed by the project); solid waste disposal; and generation of electricity associated with water supply, treatment, and distribution; and wastewater treatment. CalEEMod was used to calculate the annual GHG emissions. GHG emission estimates were based on the mobile source, area source, and energy (natural gas) operational assumptions described in Section 3.3(b), within the air quality analysis. CalEEMod default values were used to estimate GHG emissions associated with area, mobile, energy consumption, solid waste, and water and wastewater.

Item #8. Page 248
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 313

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-61 December 2022
The estimated operational (2024) Project-generated GHG emissions from area sources, energy usage, motor vehicles, solid waste generation, and water usage and wastewater generation are shown in Table 3.8-2, Estimated Annual Operational GHG Emissions.

Table 3.8-2
Estimated Annual Operational GHG Emissions
Emission Source
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
metric tons per year
Area 2.65 <0.01 <0.01 2.67
Energy 32.36 <0.01 <0.01 32.54
Mobile 176.06 0.01 0.01 178.53
Solid waste 2.83 0.17 0.00 7.01
Water supply and wastewater 3.02 0.03 <0.01 3.86
Total 224.61
Amortized Construction Emissions 21.53
Operation + Amortized Construction Total 246.14
Notes: CO2 = carbon dioxide; CH4 = methane; N2O = nitrous oxide; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent See Appendix A for detailed results.

These emissions reflect operational year 2024. No mitigation measures were assumed.

As shown in Table 3.8-2, estimated annual proposed Project-generated GHG emissions would be approximately 225 MT CO2e per year as a result of Project operations only. Estimated annual Projectgenerated operational emissions (225 MT CO2e per year) plus amortized project construction emissions (22 MT CO2e per year) would be approximately 246 MT CO2e per year, which would not exceed the recommended SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e per year. Therefore, the Project would result in less than significant impacts regarding the generation of GHG emissions that may have a direct or indirect significant impact on the environment. b) Would the project generate conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Less Than Significant Impact. The City addresses GHG-reducing goals in the General Plan. The City has not adopted a comprehensive climate action plan, and there is currently no local guidance that would be applicable to the proposed Project other than the General Plan for GHGs. At this time, no mandatory GHG plans, policies, regulations, or finalized agency guidelines would apply to the proposed Project.

Nonetheless, Project consistency with the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, CARB’s Scoping Plan, and statewide GHG reduction goals for 2030 or 2050 identified in EO S-3-05 and SB 32, is discussed below.

Applicable GHG Policies of the City of Glendora General Plan The City of Glendora’s General Plan, Chapter 5, Air Quality Element, addresses GHG-reducing goals and policies as presented below. However, it should be noted that the following goals and policies are primarily directed at City actions and are not enforceable directives for future residents at the Project site.

Goal AQ-6 Reduced demand for energy resources.

Policies AQ-6.1 Promote energy conservation throughout the City.

Item #8. Page 249
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 314

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-62 December 2022
AQ-6.2 Educate and encourage Glendora residents and business owners on opportunities for reduced energy consumption.

AQ-6.3 Develop new incentives and promote existing incentives that encourage the use of energy conservation strategies by private and public developments.

AQ-6.4 Promote energy-efficient design features, including appropriate site orientation, use of lighter color roofing and building materials, and use of deciduous shade trees and windbreak trees to reduce fuel consumption for heating and cooling.

AQ-6.5 Provide incentives for “green building” programs that go beyond the requirements of Title 24 of the California Administrative Code and encourage energy efficient design elements as appropriate.

AQ-6.6 Utilize all available renewable energy sources to reduce fuel consumption and demand on the power grid.

The Project would be consistent with the City’s General Plan Policies AQ-6.2 and AQ-6.4 because the future custom home development of each residential lot provides opportunities for the City to promote energy efficient design features and educate the residents on opportunities to reduce energy consumption. Although, as stated above, the policies and goals listed are more specifically aimed at municipal actions at the government level, the Project would not conflict with the policies and goals.

Additionally, the proposed Project would not interfere with implementation of the City’s General Plan policies because it would not exceed the SCAQMD’s recommended threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e per year. The residences would be built in accordance with 2019 Title 24 Standards and 2019 CALGreen at a minimum. In addition, the proposed Project does not prevent the City from promoting and utilizing clean forms of transportation to reduce the City’s carbon footprint.

Proposed Project Consistency with SCAG’s 2020-2045 RTP/SCS The SCAG 2020–2045 RTP/SCS is a regional growth management strategy that targets per-capita GHG reduction from passenger vehicles and light trucks in the Southern California region pursuant to SB 375. In addition to demonstrating the region’s ability to attain the GHG emission-reduction targets set forth by CARB, the 2020–2045 RTP/SCS outlines a series of actions and strategies for integrating the transportation network with an overall land use pattern that responds to projected growth, housing needs, changing demographics, and transportation demands. Thus, successful implementation of the 2020–2045 RTP/SCS would result in more complete communities with a variety of transportation and housing choices, while reducing automobile use.

The following strategies are intended to be supportive of implementing the 2020–2045 RTP/SCS and reducing GHGs: focus growth near destinations and mobility options; promote diverse housing choices; leverage technology innovations; support implementation of sustainability policies; and promote a green region. The strategies that pertain to SCAG’s support of local jurisdiction sustainability efforts would not apply to the proposed Project. The proposed Project’s compliance with the remaining applicable strategies is presented below.
• Focus Growth Near Destinations and Mobility Options. The proposed Project’s compliance with this strategy of the 2020–2045 RTP/SCS is demonstrated as discussed in Section 3.17 Transportation the proposed project would have less than significant impacts related to VMT.

Item #8. Page 250
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 315

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-63 December 2022
• Promote Diverse Housing Choices. The proposed Project would provide 12 single family homes within the City. Additionally, the proposed Project would be consistent with the City’s Housing General Plan element and would not prevent the City from providing other housing options within the City. Furthermore, the Project would assist the City in meeting its Regional Housing Need Assessment goals.
• Leverage Technology Innovations. The proposed Project would comply with this strategy of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS since it would be consistent with the City’s General Plan Policies and would be required to comply with the 2019 Title 24 Standards and 2019 CALGreen at a minimum, through energy-efficient design and support low emission technologies for transportation, such as alternative fuel vehicles to reduce per capita GHG emissions. • Promote a Green Region. Another applicable strategy within the 2020–2045 RTP/SCS, for individual developments such as the proposed Project, involves promoting a green region through efforts such as supporting local policies for renewable energy production and promoting more resource efficient development (e.g., reducing energy consumption) to reduce GHG emissions. Landscaping would likely use water-saving native plants.

Based on the analysis above, the proposed Project would be consistent with the SCAG 2020–2045 RTP/SCS.

Proposed Project Consistency with the CARB Scoping Plan, SB 32, and EO S-3-05 The Scoping Plan, approved by CARB on December 12, 2008, provides a framework for actions to reduce California’s GHG emissions and requires CARB and other state agencies to adopt regulations and other initiatives to reduce GHGs. As such, the Scoping Plan is not directly applicable to specific projects. Relatedly, in the Final Statement of Reasons for the Amendments to the CEQA Guidelines, the CNRA observed that “[t]he [Scoping Plan] may not be appropriate for use in determining the significance of individual projects because it is conceptual at this stage and relies on the future development of regulations to implement the strategies identified in the Scoping Plan” (CNRA 2009).

Under the Scoping Plan, however, there are several state regulatory measures aimed at the identification and reduction of GHG emissions. CARB and other state agencies have adopted many of the measures identified in the Scoping Plan. Most of these measures focus on area source emissions (e.g., energy usage, high-GWP GHGs in consumer products) and changes to the vehicle fleet (i.e., hybrid, electric, and more fuel-efficient vehicles) and associated fuels (e.g., Low Carbon Fuel Standard), among others. The Project would comply with all applicable regulations adopted in furtherance of the Scoping Plan to the extent required by law.

Regarding consistency with SB 32 (goal of reducing GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030) and Executive Order (EO) S-3-05 (goal of reducing GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050), there are no established protocols or thresholds of significance for that future-year analysis. However, CARB has expressed optimism with regard to both the 2030 and 2050 goals. It states in the First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan that “California is on track to meet the near-term 2020 GHG emissions limit and is well positioned to maintain and continue reductions beyond 2020 as required by AB 32” (CARB 2014). With regard to the 2050 target for reducing GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels, the First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan states the following (CARB 2014):
“This level of reduction is achievable in California. In fact, if California realizes the expected benefits of existing policy goals (such as 12,000 megawatts of renewable distributed generation by 2020, net zero energy homes after 2020, existing building retrofits under Assembly Bill 758, and others) it could reduce emissions by 2030 to levels squarely in line with those needed in the developed world and to stay on track to reduce emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. Additional measures, Item #8. Page 251
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 316

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-64 December 2022
including locally driven measures and those necessary to meet federal air quality standards in 2032, could lead to even greater emission reductions.” In other words, CARB believes that the State is on a trajectory to meet the 2030 and 2050 GHG reduction targets set forth in AB 32, SB 32, and EO S-3-05. This is confirmed in California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (2017 Scoping Plan), which states, “This Plan draws from the experiences in developing and implementing previous plans to present a path to reaching California’s 2030 GHG reduction target. The Plan is a package of economically viable and technologically feasible actions to not just keep California on track to achieve its 2030 target but stay on track for a low- to zero-carbon economy by involving every part of the state (CARB 2017).” The 2017 Scoping Plan also states that although “the Scoping Plan charts the path to achieving the 2030 GHG emissions reduction target, we also need momentum to propel us to the 2050 statewide GHG target (80% below 1990 levels). In developing this Scoping Plan, we considered what policies are needed to meet our mid-term and long-term goals (CARB 2017).”
The proposed Project would not interfere with implementation of any of the above-described GHG reduction goals for 2030 or 2050 because the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD’s GHG suggested threshold 3,000 MT CO2e per year. Because the proposed Project would not exceed the threshold, this analysis provides support for the conclusion that the Project would not impede the State’s trajectory toward the above-described statewide GHG reduction goals for 2030 or 2050.

Since the specific path to compliance for the State regarding the long-term goals will likely require development of technology or other changes that are not currently known or available, specific additional mitigation measures for the project would be speculative and cannot be identified at this time. With respect to future GHG targets under SB 32 and EO S-3-05, CARB has also made clear its legal interpretation that it has the requisite authority to adopt whatever regulations are necessary, beyond the AB 32 horizon year of 2020, to meet SB 32’s 40% reduction target by 2030 and EO S-3-05’s 80% reduction target by 2050; this legal interpretation by an expert agency provides evidence that future regulations will be adopted to continue the state on its trajectory toward meeting these future GHG targets.

Based on the above considerations, the proposed Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs, and no mitigation is required. This impact would be less than significant.

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Item #8. Page 252
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 317

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-65 December 2022
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within onequarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less Than Significant Impact. Construction would require the use of heavy machinery and equipment during grading and earthwork, including bulldozers, dump trucks, and scrapers. Construction of the homes would also require the use of heavy machinery and equipment, including concrete trucks, as well as materials required for the construction of electrical, plumbing, and HVAC systems. Potentially hazardous materials used during construction may include gasoline, diesel fuel, lubricating oil, grease, adhesive materials, solvents, paints, architectural coatings, and others. In the event that these materials are handled improperly or released to the environment during transport, use, and/or disposal, they could create hazards for the public and/or the environment. However, during construction, materials used would not be in such quantities or stored in such a manner as to pose a significant safety or environmental hazard. Proper use, handling, and storage of materials must be conducted in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications. Activities at the Project site, including those conducted by a contractor, must comply with existing federal, State, and local regulations regarding hazardous material use, storage, disposal, and transport to prevent Project-related risks to public health and safety. All on-site generated waste that meets hazardous criteria shall be stored, manifested, transported, and disposed of in accordance with federal and State requirements, including the Toxic Substances Control Act, SCAQMD’s Rule 1403 (Asbestos Regulations), and the California Code of Regulations, Title 22.
8 Operation of the proposed Project would include use of minor quantities of commercially-available hazardous materials, such as paints, lubricants, pool cleaners/chlorine, cleansers, pesticides, fertilizers, and miscellaneous organics and inorganics that may be used by the residents of the new homes for 8 California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4.5 – Environmental Health Standards for the Management of Hazardous Waste.

Item #8. Page 253
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 318

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-66 December 2022
landscaping, vehicle maintenance, household cleaning, and drainage maintenance activities. In the event that these materials are handled improperly or released to the environment during transport, use, and/or disposal, they can create hazards for the public and/or the environment. However, these materials are not considered acutely hazardous and are used routinely throughout urban environments for operation of commercial businesses. Handling, storage, and disposal of these hazardous materials would comply with all federal, state, and local requirements, including training of operational staff on proper handling.

Furthermore, the City and County have programs in place the encourage safe and proper disposal of such materials. For example, the City has household hazardous waste collections (one-day events hosted by the LACSD and the LACDPW), which allow residents to safely dispose of their hazardous wastes. Athens Services provides Glendora residents with at-home pickup of hazardous materials. At-home pickups take place twice per year on designated Saturdays. Residents are also able to dispose of their hazardous wastes safely at Solvents/Automotive/Flammables/Electronics (S.A.F.E) Collection Centers, which are open every weekend and are operated by the City of Los Angeles Sanitation Department. The closest S.A.F.E Collection Center to the Project site is located at 4600 Colorado Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90039. Through compliance with local, State, and federal regulations, in conjunction with local programs that encourage safe disposal of hazardous materials, implementation of the proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts regarding creation of hazards to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. As described under Section 3.8(a) above, relatively small amounts of commonly used hazardous substances would be used during construction. In the event that these materials are handled improperly or released to the environment during upset or accident conditions, they can create hazards for the public and/or the environment. However, hazardous substances required for construction would be handled, transported, and/or disposed of in accordance with all federal, state, and local laws. Upon required compliance with these existing regulations, upset and accident conditions involving the use of such substances are not reasonably foreseeable.

Residents of future homes that would be developed on the Project site may use hazardous materials such as chemical reagents, solvents, fuels, paints, cleansers, pesticides, fertilizers, and miscellaneous organics and inorganics for landscaping, vehicle maintenance, and household cleaning. In the event that these materials are handled improperly or released to the environment during upset or accident conditions, they can create hazards for the public and/or the environment. However, these substances are not considered acutely hazardous and would be present on the site in relatively small quantities, since they would be for personal use by homeowners or tenants of the homes. Furthermore, as described under Section 3.8(a), regulations are in place at the federal, State, and local level that require hazardous materials to be stored, handled, and transported in a manner that minimizes the potential for their release into the environment. Upon compliance with these regulations, the likelihood of upset or accident conditions involving hazardous materials used during construction and/or operation of the proposed Project would be less than significant.

Item #8. Page 254
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 319

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-67 December 2022
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less Than Significant Impact. Saint Lucy’s Priory High School is located approximately 0.1-mile southwest of the Project site, at 655 West Sierra Madre Avenue (California Department of Education 2014). Project construction activities may involve the use of hazardous materials. These materials may include fuels, oils, mechanical fluids, and other chemicals used during construction. In the event that these materials are handled improperly or released to the environment during upset or accident conditions, they can create hazards for the public and/or the environment, with the potential to affect students, staff, and visitors at the nearby school. However, transportation, storage, use, and disposal of such hazardous materials during construction activities would be conducted in compliance with applicable federal, State, and local statutes and regulations. Compliance with regulatory requirements would ensure that children, teachers, staff, and visitors at the nearby schools are not exposed to hazardous materials.

During operation, small quantities of hazardous materials would be used on site, associated with standard operations of residential land uses. As described in Section 3.8(a), these substances are not considered acutely hazardous and would be present on the Project site in relatively small quantities, since they would be for personal use by homeowners or tenants of the homes. This would minimize the potential for hazardous materials used during project operation to adversely affect people at the nearby school. Additionally, there are federal, State, and local laws in place that regulate the handling of hazardous materials. Through compliance with local, State, and federal regulations, it is unlikely that implementation of the proposed Project would result in the emission of hazardous materials, substances, or wastes that would pose a threat to nearby schools. As such, impacts regarding hazardous emissions within one-quarter mile or an existing or proposed school would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
d) Would the project be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. The Project site is not included on any hazardous waste site lists including the California Department of Toxic Substances Control’s EnviroStor database, the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker site, the Cortese list, the Superfund Site list, or other lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code (CalEPA 2018a, 2018b, 2018c, 2018d; DTSC 2018a, 2018b; SWRCB 2018; U.S. EPA 2018). As such, the proposed Project would not be located on a hazardous materials site such that it would lead to a significant hazard to the public or the environment, and there would be no impact.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The Project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport or within an airport safety zone area. The closest public use airport, Brackett Field Airport, is located approximately

6.15 miles southeast of the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in an airport safety hazard for people working or residing in the project area. No impacts would occur.

Item #8. Page 255
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 320

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-68 December 2022
f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The City has prepared a Multi-Hazard Functional Plan for emergency response within the City. The Multi-Hazard Functional Plan addresses the City’s planned response to emergencies associated with natural disasters and technological incidents (City of Glendora 2008). Key provisions of the plan include identifying critical areas of the City that may be subject to potential hazards, as well as areas of the City that would serve as meeting and staging areas in the event of an emergency. The Multi-Hazard Functional Plan also outlines provisions for communication and evacuation in the event of an emergency. The City’s designated evacuation routes are Foothill Boulevard, from Citrus Avenue in the west to the City’s boundary in the east, and Grand Avenue, from just north of West Sierra Madre Avenue in the north to East Arrow Highway in the south.

The proposed Project would not alter these evacuation routes. The Project site is located just north of the Grand Avenue evacuation route. As such, construction and operation of the proposed Project may result in minor increases in traffic along Grand Avenue.

As described under Section 3.17(c), the internal circulation design of the on-site roadways would be required to allow for adequate turning radii for fire trucks, which are larger than emergency/ambulance vehicles. Further, required implementation of MM-TRAF-1 and MM-TRAF-2 would ensure that any Project associated impacts that could potentially occur within and near to the intersection of Grand Avenue and Palm Drive related to emergency access and other transportation related hazards would be less than significant (see Threshold 3.17[c]).

Therefore, due to the minor to negligible traffic that would be associated with the proposed Project, as well as the unique traffic conditions that would arise in the event of an emergency evacuation, Projectrelated traffic would not significantly affect the use or function of evacuation routes in the event of an emergency with the implementation of MM-TRAF-1 and MM-TRAF-2. The City’s emergency plans would be implemented and would proceed in the same manner with or without Project construction and operation. Therefore, with implementation of MM-TRAF-1 and MM-TRAF-2, the Project would not interfere with implementation of emergency response or evacuation plans. g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, as mapped by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE 2011). Additionally, the proposed Project would involve construction of residential lots and homes along a boundary of neighborhoods and wildlands. Due to the Project’s location within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and the adjacent wildland areas, people and structures at the Project site could be exposed to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.

The City also adopted the California State Model Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance (AB 1881) (see Section 21.03.060 of the City’s zoning ordinance) to promote the values and benefits of Item #8. Page 256
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 321

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-69 December 2022
landscapes, recognizing the need to conserve water and other resources as efficiently as possible, and to establish a structure for designing, installing, and maintaining water-efficient landscapes. The ordinance protects public health and safety within the City’s moderate, high and very high fire hazard zones, per the City’s fire hazard severity zone map. Establishing a landscaping structure protects natural resources, including but not limited to animal and biological resources, and reduces risk of debris flows and fire damage. Accordingly, homeowners within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone are required to obtain a permit before installing, restoring, or altering their landscaping. To obtain a permit, homeowners are required to submit landscaping plans to the City, and the plans are required to show adequate defensible space, proper fire-safe plant and tree selection, sufficient irrigation, and design features to control erosion and drainage (Glendora Municipal Code, Section 21.03.060) (City of Glendora 2014). All landscape plans must be reviewed and stamped by a Licensed Landscape Architect, certifying that the plans meet the guidelines set in ordinance 21.03.060 of the Glendora Municipal Code (City of Glendora 2014). As such, future homeowners at the Project site would be required to install landscaping that is designed to prevent and minimize fire danger in the area, which would help protect future residences and homes on the site.

California law (Public Resources Code 4291) requires a minimum defensible space of 100 feet around residential homes, which must consist of the 0 to 30-foot firebreak that requires removal of flammable vegetation and the 30 to 70- foot reduced fuel zone (or to the property line, whichever is nearer to the structure)9. Additionally, the County of Los Angeles Code of Ordinances, Title 32, Fire Code, requires that a fuel modification plan be submitted and have preliminary approval prior to any subdivision of land; or, have final approval prior to the issuance of a permit for any permanent structure used for habitation; where, such structure, or subdivision is located within areas designated as a Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Every fuel modification plan must be reviewed by the Forestry Division10 of the LACFD for defensible space, fire safety, and compliance with Sections 325.2.1, 325.2.2, 325.10, and 503.2.1 of the County Code, the LACFD’s fuel modification guidelines, and CCR, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, subchapter 2. Before a final fuel modification plan is approved by the Forestry Division of the Fire Department, a signed and notarized copy of the provided covenant and agreement (and/or previously reviewed and approved association CC&R's that include the necessary fuel modification information) must be recorded at the County of Los Angeles Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk's Office and a copy given to the Forestry Division’s Fuel Modification Unit. An on-site inspection must be conducted by the personnel of the Forestry Division of the Fire Department and a final approval of the fuel modification plan issued by the Forestry Division prior to a certificate of occupancy being granted by the building code official.

As shown in Figure 2-5, the proposed Project’s design and preliminary plan has been reviewed, revised, and preliminarily approved by the County of Los Angeles Fire Department, Prevention Services Bureau as of November 2021. In addition, as shown on Figure 2-4a, a 6-foot masonry screening wall would be constructed along the eastern property line between proposed Lots 8-14 and the adjacent property, which would provide further fire protection from the residential property to the east.

Item #8. Page 257
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 322

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-70 December 2022
would provide fire protection services in the event of a fire emergency at the Project site. As such, while the proposed Project could expose people and structures to wildland fire hazards, compliance with local and State regulations would reduce such hazards and impacts would be less than significant.

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable groundwater management
of the basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site;
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on or off site;
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? Less Than Significant Impact. A significant impact would occur if the proposed Project would discharge water that did not meet the water quality standards established by the SWRCB NPDES and waste discharge requirement permit programs, and the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board’s (LARWQCB) Los Angeles Region Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties (Basin Plan; LARWQCB 2019). The proposed Project is not anticipated to violate any water quality standard or waste discharge requirement during construction and operation, for the reasons described below.

Item #8. Page 258
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 323

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-71 December 2022
Construction
Grading for the residential lots, roadways, and the flood control features would disturb a large portion of the Project site. During construction, stormwater runoff could potentially violate applicable water quality standards by introducing pollutants to stormwater runoff. There are two primary ways that construction activities could adversely affect water quality: land disturbances and spills or leaks of pollutants. Land disturbances such as vegetation removal, compaction, grading, and temporary soil stockpiling could potentially increase sediment loads in stormwater runoff by eroding soils that have been loosened or newly exposed by construction activity. Materials that could spill or leak during construction include diesel fuel, gasoline, lubrication oil, cement slurry, hydraulic fluid, antifreeze, transmission fluid, lubricating grease, and construction-related trash and debris. The amount of such materials used during construction would be the minimum necessary to fuel vehicles, power equipment, and complete activities. Improper management of hazardous materials could result in accidental spills or leaks, which could locally contaminate stormwater runoff.

However, the proposed Project would comply with the provisions of the Construction General Permit (CGP), which is NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Associated with Construction Activities (Order No 2009-009-DWQ as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002).

Because the proposed Project is greater than 1 acre in size, the Applicant would be required to submit a Notice of Intent to the SWRCB in order to obtain approval to complete construction activities under the CGP. This permit would include a number of design, management, and monitoring requirements for the protection of water quality and the reduction of construction phase impacts related to stormwater (and some non-stormwater) discharges. Permit requirements would include the preparation of a SWPPP, implementation and monitoring of BMPs, implementation of best available technology for toxic and non-conventional pollutants, implementation of best conventional technology for conventional pollutants, and periodic submittal of performance summaries and reports to the SWRCB. The SWPPP would apply to the Project as a whole and would include reference to the major construction areas, materials staging areas, and haul roads.

Typical BMPs that could be incorporated into the SWPPP include the following:
• Diverting off-site runoff away from the construction site • Vegetating landscaped/vegetated swale areas as soon as feasible following grading activities • Placing perimeter straw wattles to prevent off-site transport of sediment • Using drop inlet protection (filters and sand bags or straw wattles), with sandbag check dams within paved areas
• Regular watering of exposed soils to control dust during demolition and construction • Implementing specifications for demolition/construction waste handling and disposal • Using contained equipment wash-out and vehicle maintenance areas • Maintaining erosion and sedimentation control measures throughout the construction period • Stabilizing construction entrances to avoid trucks from imprinting soil and debris onto City roadways • Training, including for subcontractors, on general site housekeeping Additionally, the proposed Project would comply with the City’s Municipal Code, Chapter 21.03.090, Urban Runoff Pollution, which enhances and protects the water quality of the receiving waters of the United States in a manner that is consistent with the Clean Water Act and applicable implementing regulations; the municipal NPDES permit. It requires that each operator of any construction activity submit evidence to the City that all applicable permits have been obtained, including but not limited to the State Water Board's CGP, and that an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and SWPPP has been Item #8. Page 259
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 324

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-72 December 2022
prepared accordingly. Given the above, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on water quality standards and waste discharge requirements and would not otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality during construction, and no mitigation is required.

Operations
The proposed Project site produces nonpoint source pollutants associated with stormwater runoff and would continue to do so upon project implementation. The proposed Project would not introduce any industrial discharges and would not, therefore, violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements related to non-stormwater discharges. Any stormwater currently discharged from the Project site is similar in nature to discharges from surrounding open space and residential uses. The main difference between pre-project conditions and post-project conditions would be the development of 12 residential lots and two Private Streets and, subsequently, the development of 12 single-family homes on the new lots. The homes and the Private Streets would be developed in areas of the Project site that are currently naturalized and pervious. As such, the proposed Project would potentially increase stormwater runoff during operation due to the addition of new impervious (i.e. paved) surfaces. Additionally, residential uses can introduce pollutants to stormwater runoff such as trash, fertilizers, cleaning agents, etc.

The design of the proposed Project is required to comply with the City’s BMPs and Low Impact Development (LID) requirements, as well as Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) requirements for allowable peak outflows to the existing public storm drain. A hydrology report was prepared by West Consultants, Inc., to study the hydrology of the site and to develop a site drainage design in compliance with City and LACDPW requirements. West Consultants designed the proposed drainage system so that the peak flow to the public storm drain would be in compliance with limits established by LACDPW (see Appendix E). As described in Appendix E, the overall outflow of stormwater from the Project site would be reduced after implementation of the drainage improvements (i.e. the volume of runoff leaving the Project site is expected to be reduced in quantity relative to existing conditions), as further discussed in Section 3.10(c).

The construction of three flood/debris control structures upstream of the residential lots is protective of water quality in that the structures would remove sediment from the runoff, and if rainfall is of sufficient magnitude to fill the basins, the stormwater that is discharged would be much less turbid than it is under existing conditions (since the existing debris basins no longer function as intended).

Due to the mountainous terrain on the Project site, erosion and sedimentation may occur during storm events. However, upon project buildout, the southern portion of the Project site would be developed with homes and associated landscaping and paved areas, including driveways and Private Streets. As such, the southern portion of the Project site would be covered with structures, hardscape, landscaping, and appropriate drainage infrastructure, which would reduce on-site erosion during operation. However, the northern portions of the site would remain as open space. LACDPW has requirements for erosion control structures and sediment retention structures, to reduce the amount of sediment leaving the Project site in stormwater runoff (Appendix E). As part of the proposed Project, debris containment would be provided via two proposed elevated inlets and a debris basin, which would be installed on site during construction. The final design and construction of the proposed debris containment structures would be conducted in accordance with LACDPW’s Sedimentation Manual.

The capacities of the proposed debris containment structures have been designed to exceed the potential debris production from upstream areas (Appendix E). A description of the proposed capacities of the flood control features is provided in Table 3.10-1, Debris Containment Details, below.

Item #8. Page 260
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 325

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-73 December 2022
Table 3.10-1
Debris Containment Details
Debris Facility
Contributing
Drainage Area
Debris
Protection Type
Drainage Area
Debris
Production
(cubic yards)
Facility Debris
Capacity
(cubic yards)
West Basin (“B”) B1, B2, B3 Elevated Inlet 5,060 5,080
Middle Basin (“C”) C Elevated Inlet 2,250 2,300
East Basin (“D”) D1, D2, D3 Debris Basin 6,280 6,300
Source: Hydrology Study, see Appendix E for complete results.

The three flood control facilities will debulk the off-site debris inflows and convey the flows into a new storm drain system that would terminate near the historic flow outlet point at the southern tract boundary. The flows would be split between direct flow into the existing storm drain system and the remaining flows would be released above ground via a parkway drain or equivalent. As shown in Table

3.10-1, the three debris containment facility capacities exceed the requirements for debris containment, which ensures the containment of debris flows and reduction of turbidity and sediment in stormwater flows. Accordingly, the proposed improvements would improve the protection of downstream residents within the region by eliminating debris flow and reducing overall outflow from the area.

As such, the proposed flood/debris control infrastructure would be sufficient to contain debris flow from the Project site, thereby alleviating sedimentation in stormwater runoff to the extent practicable.

Because the existing on-site debris control structures are at capacity, the proposed Project would reduce debris flow and sedimentation relative to existing conditions. The proposed debris control structures would be transferred to LACFCD for maintenance. LACFCD staff would maintain the debris containment structures per County standards. Proper maintenance of the debris containment structures would ensure that the basins are regularly cleaned out and maintained, which prevents the structures from losing their effectiveness over time.

No separate NPDES permit or waste discharge requirements would be necessary for project operation.

However, the project would be subject to standards and regulations pertaining to stormwater runoff and municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) discharges. Compliance with these standards and regulations would reduce the potential effects of project operation, including water pollutants that are typically generated from residential land uses (trash, fertilizers, cleaning agents, sediments, chemicals from automobile maintenance, etc.). Standards for runoff pollution in the City are codified in Section

21.03.090 of the Glendora Municipal Code (storm water and runoff pollution control ordinance). The intent of Section 21.03.090 is, in part, to ensure consistency with and to implement the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, which is Order No. R4-2012-0175, NPDES No. CAS004001 (Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Storm Water and Urban Runoff Discharges within the County of Los Angeles). Specific sections of the storm water and runoff pollution control ordinance that would address the potential effects of project operation include Section 21.03.090(F), Illegal Disposal/Dumping, and Section 21.03.090(M), Control of Pollutants from New Development and Redevelopment – Low Impact Development (LID). Section 21.03.090(F) precludes people from allowing pollutants to enter the MS4. Such pollutants can include batteries, tires, waste receptacles, yard debris, refuse, rubbish, food waste, chemicals, animal waste, and oil cans.

Item #8. Page 261
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 326

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-74 December 2022
Required compliance with Section 21.03.090(F) would ensure that future residents at the Project site would not intentionally cause water pollutants to enter the MS4. Section 21.03.090(M) requires new development to comply with a variety of design practices for limiting the volume of stormwater runoff and for minimizing pollutants that enter stormwater runoff. Such practices include minimizing pollutant loadings from impervious surfaces such as roof tops, parking lots, and roadways through the use of properly designed, technically appropriate BMPs (including source control BMPs such as good housekeeping practices), LID strategies, and treatment control BMPs; and selecting, designing, and maintaining LID and hydromodification control BMPs to address pollutants that are likely to be generated, reduce changes to pre-development hydrology, assure long-term function, and avoid the breeding of vectors. Specifically for single-family hillside homes, Section 21.03.090(M) requires the following: conservation of natural areas, protection of slopes and channels, providing storm drain system stenciling and signage, diversion of roof runoff to vegetated areas before discharge unless that diversion would cause slope instability, and direction of surface flow to vegetated areas before discharge unless the division would result in slope instability. While the designs of the residences that could be built on the Project site are yet to be determined, they would need to be designed and operated consistent with Section 21.03.090(M). The initial site design complies with Section

21.03.090(M) through conserving the open space area of the site and controlling site drainage in a manner that reduces runoff relative to current conditions.

In summary, compliance with the terms and conditions of the CGP and the current municipal NPDES permit is required by State law, and the Project Applicant and/or its contractor would also be required to further address water quality impacts in compliance with the City regulations described above. For these reasons, impacts regarding the violation of any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or degradations to surface or ground water quality would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan and does not require a General Plan Amendment; therefore, the Project would be consistent with the City’s growth projections anticipated in local and regional planning documents, including the City’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) dated June 2016. As stated in the UWMP (UWMP 2016), the projected populations used in the UWMP for the City’s service area were based on projections obtained from SCAG. The SCAG data incorporates demographic trends, existing land use, general plan land use policies, and input and projections from the Department of Finance and the U.S. Census Bureau.

Development on the Project site would be required to connect to the City’s municipal water system.

No water wells would be constructed on the Project site. Because the project would increase the residential density on a portion of the Project site, it would increase water demand at the site relative to existing conditions. However, future residential structures would be developed in compliance with the California Green Building Code (which implements water efficiency standards for appliances and fixtures) and would constitute a minor portion of the total water used in the City. See Section 3.19(b), which further describes the project’s anticipated water use relative to Citywide demand.

As described in the City’s UWMP, the City’s primary source of water supply is groundwater, which is delivered to the system by eight active wells; Wells 5-E, 8-E, 9-E, and 12-G are located within the Upper San Gabriel Canyon Sub-basin and Wells 2-E, 10-E, 11-E and 13-E are located within the Glendora Sub-basin of the Main San Gabriel Basin (Main Basin). As stated in the UWMP, the Main Basin has been well managed for the full period of its adjudication, resulting in a stable and reliable Item #8. Page 262
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 327

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-75 December 2022
water supply for the City during average, single-dry, and multiple-dry water years (UWMP 2016).

There are no contemplated basin management changes, other than increasing direct use of recycled water and the planned use of recycled water for groundwater replenishment in the Main Basin to reduce the need to import water from other regions. Therefore, the groundwater supplies in the Main Basin are deemed reliable.

To supplement the City’s groundwater supply, the City also has three connections with Three Valleys District to purchase imported treated water from MWD and one connection with Covina Irrigating Company (CIC) to purchase local treated surface water and groundwater. As such, imported water can be utilized as a supplemental source of supplies. The City has been able to meet all historical water demands with the available water supply. However, the City produces the majority of its groundwater supply from the Canyon Basin and the Glendora Basin, both of which have fluctuating groundwater elevations due to drought conditions, despite replenishment efforts. If groundwater elevations in the Canyon Basin and/or the Glendora Basin decrease causing a reduction in the City’s well capacity, the City may rely on purchased water supplies from Three Valleys District to meet water demands.

According to the UWMP, the City does not experience water supply constraints or deficiencies and projects having adequate supply through the planning year 2040. The proposed Project would not include any wells that would directly deplete groundwater supplies, and the City’s UWMP anticipates adequate supply through 2040. As such, the proposed Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin.

As described in Table 3.10-1 above, the three flood control facilities would retain stormwater flows, allowing for infiltration, which does not occur in the existing conditions because the existing undersized facilities are not functional and not able to retain flows. As described below in Threshold

3.10(c), as included in the Hydrology Study (Appendix E), runoff from the proposed Project would not exceed existing conditions for the specified stormwater design events, nor would flow to the existing storm drain exceed the Project-specific LACDPW specified allowable rate. For all storms, the total post-development outflow would be less than or equivalent to that under the existing condition.

Therefore, the addition of new impervious pavement and concrete surface would not substantially decrease groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. Therefore, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact to groundwater supplies and would not interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, and no mitigation is required.
c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site; Less Than Significant Impact. Construction activities at the Project site would result in ground surface disruption during grading and excavation that could create the potential for erosion to occur.

The construction contractor would be required to implement a SWPPP and an Erosion Control Plan, as described under Section 3.10(a), and would also be required to adhere to City regulations requiring implementation of BMPs to reduce pollutants to the maximum extent practicable (Glendora Municipal Code Section 21.03.090). The SWPPP and associated implementation of BMPs would result in minimized on-site and off-site erosion through implementation of devices such as sandbag barriers, dust controls, perimeter controls, drain inlet protection, and proper construction site housekeeping practices. Implementation of these BMPs would minimize the amount of erosion Item #8. Page 263
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 328

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-76 December 2022
and/or siltation that would have the potential to occur during construction and would ensure that significant impacts related to substantial erosion or siltation on or off site would not result from proposed Project construction.

Permanent alterations to site drainage and debris flow patterns across the site would occur as a result of the proposed flood/debris control improvements and the proposed residential development.

However, as described in Section 3.10(a), the proposed debris containment structures have been designed to exceed the anticipated debris flow from the upstream areas. As such, the proposed flood/debris control infrastructure would be sufficient to contain debris flow from the Project site, thereby alleviating stormwater sedimentation to the extent practicable. Because the existing on-site debris control structures are at capacity and not functional, the proposed Project would in fact reduce debris flow and sedimentation relative to existing conditions because existing residential areas surrounding the Project site are not currently being protected by functioning facilities. This reduction would occur by compliance with the Los Angeles County Sedimentation Manual, which minimize the introduction of pollutants into stormwater runoff and also help protect filtration and infiltration facilities. This would be accomplished by implementation of low impact development (LID) during the site design stages, such as minimizing runoff from impervious areas by grading toward landscaped areas, disconnecting downspouts, and using pervious conveyances prior to discharging to the storm drain system (LACDPW 2009). By reducing stormwater volumes and debris flow, the proposed changes in drainage patterns are expected to improve conditions that potentially lead to erosion. Furthermore, the southern portion of the site would be developed with buildings, hardscape, and landscaping, which would preclude on-site erosion and siltation. As stated below, Project design, construction, and operation would be completed in accordance with the LACDPW Low Impact Development (LID) Standards Manual, with the goal of reducing the amount of pollutants in stormwater and urban runoff.

The LID requirements include permanent control measures to reduce the long-term impacts of the Project on water quality and the tributary waterways. Site design and stormwater management facilities are required in order to maintain the site’s pre-development runoff rates and volumes (LACDPW 2014). The goal of LID is to mimic the site’s pre-development hydrology by using design techniques that filter, store, evaporate, and detain runoff close to the source of rainfall. With adherence to the SWPPP and the required drainage features, on- and off-site erosion and siltation would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. No mitigation is required. ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site;
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City has required that the proposed Project adhere to their BMP and LID requirements; as such, the Hydrology Study (see Appendix E) analyzes the pre- and postdevelopment conditions at the Project site. All hydrology and debris calculations were performed and all proposed design elements adhere to the LACDPW Hydrology Manual (2006) and the LACDPW Sedimentation Manual (2006), and the Report was recommended for approval by the Land Development Division, Hydrology Unit of LACDPW.

The existing Project watershed (tributary area) is mostly natural and undeveloped. Steep (>20%) slopes characterize the upper areas of the watershed. Three debris control and channel stabilization Item #8. Page 264
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 329

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-77 December 2022
structures were installed by the United States Forestry Service (USFS) in 1970. They have since been completely filled and are at capacity; therefore, under current conditions no debris or water retention occurs and runoff from the upper watershed spills freely over the structures.

After overtopping the existing structures, storm runoff and debris currently flows southeasterly through the existing watershed to a confluence at Grand Avenue near Palm Drive. Existing flows then split, with some amount draining into the existing 39-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) storm drain pipe along Grand Avenue, but the majority of the runoff flows into the streets. Calculations by LACDPW indicate that the existing storm drain has capacity for flows from the site.

Various levels of flood protection are required for the proposed Project. Specifically, the total routed clear water peak outflow from the developed site must not exceed the existing peak clear water flow for two events: (1) The Urban Flood, which corresponds to the 25-year frequency design storm incident to a saturated watershed, and (2) The Capital Flood, which corresponds to the 50-year frequency design storm incident to a saturated watershed. Additionally, capital flood protection also requires the effects of fires and erosion to be accounted for, so that the burned and bulked flow condition for the 50-year frequency is calculated.

Figure 3.10-1, Existing Conditions Tributary Subareas, depicts the total existing drainage area of 51.5 acres. This 51.5-acre area was calculated to have flows during the 25-year storm event (Q25) of 142 cubic feet per second (cfs); flows during the 50-year storm event (Q50) of 167 cfs; a Q50 with burned factor of 176 cfs; and a Q50 with burned and bulked factor of 342 cfs, resulting in 17,840 cubic yards of cumulative debris volume production in the existing condition. LAPDPW requires that the post-development burned flow entering the storm drain system be limited to 1.74 cfs/acre based on the existing (pre-development) drainage area. Therefore, the total allowable flow from the site to the existing storm drain is Qallowable = (1.74)(51.5) = 89.6 cfs. This requirement was implemented by designing an on-site storm drain system that would direct 89.6 cfs of the debulked off-site flow to the public storm drain. The remaining debulked off-site flow and all the on site flow would outlet to the street system along the historical flow path.

With all the necessary parameters established, as outlined in the Hydrology Report, the routing analysis of the existing conditions was conducted. The analysis predicts that the overall existing condition routed clear water flow is 142 cfs for the 25-year storm and 160 cfs for the 50-year storm.

The LACDPW requires that the corresponding clear water outflow under the proposed condition be less than those under the existing condition.

The proposed post-development drainage conditions are shown in Figure 3.10-2, Post-Development Drainage Conditions. As shown in Figure 3.10-2, a new storm drain system would convey only off-site flows through the Project site. Two elevated inlets (i.e. West Basin and Middle Basin debris facilities) would be constructed according to the LACDPW regulations for elevated inlets. The East Basin is designed as a debris basin located directly northeast of the proposed residential areas. In keeping with LACDPW regulations, a minimum 2 feet of freeboard would be maintained in all three basins for all designed (i.e. Urban Flood and Capital Flood) storm events.

As shown in Figure 3.10-2, flows in the storm drain would be split with a portion conveyed into the public storm drain system. Specifically, the design would divert the Qallowable = 89.6 cfs burned, debulked flow to the public storm drain during the 50-year storm (Capital Flood). The other off-site flows would be conveyed along the historic drainage path by means of a flow return structure. All of the on site flows would be conveyed by the proposed surface streets along the historical path. Under proposed conditions, the overall outflow from the site is reduced, and a large portion (near but less than the Qallowable = 89.6 cfs) would be conveyed into the storm drainage system. The split of the storm drain flow into the main storm drain system flow and flow to the return flow structure would be accomplished utilizing different pipe sizes implemented within a manhole to be located near the Item #8. Page 265
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 330

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-78 December 2022
property line at Palm Drive. Storm drain inflows of 145.1 cfs would enter the manhole via 36-inch storm drain, and 54.9 cfs would exit the manhole through the parkway drain, and 89.6 cfs would exit the manhole to the public storm drain. The parkway drain allows for overland flows via the existing Grand Avenue valley gutter system, as in the current condition. The post-development conditions are shown in Table 3.10-2, Pre- Development and Post-Development Outflow Comparison and Table 3.10- 3, Pre-Development Outflows to the Public Storm Drain, below.

Table 3.10-2
Pre-Development and Post-Development Outflow Comparison Storm Event
Proposed On-Site
Street Flows (cfs)
Proposed On-Site
Storm Drain
Flows (cfs)
Proposed Total
Combined Flows
(cfs)
Existing
Condition Clear
Water Flows (cfs)
25-year Clear (Urban Flood) 29.4 118 142 142
50-year Clear (Capital Flood) 34.5 138 167 167
50-year Burned (Capital Flood) 36.4 145 175 176
Source: Hydrology Study, see Appendix E for complete results.

Table 3.10-2 shows that the post-development flows would not exceed the existing condition flows during either the Urban Flood or Capital Flood conditions.

Table 3.10-3
Pre-Development Outflows to the Public Storm Drain
Storm Event
Total storm Drain Flow
at Split (cfs)
Portion of Outflow to
Public Storm Drain
(cfs)
Portion of Outflow to
Parkway Drain (cfs)
25-year Clear (Urban Flood) 118 73.2 44.9
50-year Clear (Capital Flood) 138 855 52.4
50-year Burned (Capital Flood) 145 89.6 54.9
Ultimate Condition Q50 burned off site + Q25 clearwater on site = 145 + 29 = 174 cfs Source: Hydrology Study, see Appendix E for complete results.

Table 3.10-3 shows that the Q50 with burned factor of 176 cfs in the pre-development existing condition is not exceeded in the post-development “ultimate condition”, which results in 174 cfs.

With incorporation of the proposed storm drain system, including the three proposed flood control facilities, the proposed Project would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on or off site, would not exceed the capacity of the storm drain system, and would not impede or redirect flood flows, and impacts would be less than significant. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is within Zone D of the Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) Floodplain Map. Zone D corresponds to an area where no analysis of flood hazards has been conducted, or “area of undetermined flood hazard” (FEMA 2022). According to LACDPW, the Project site is also within Flood Zone X, which is defined by FEMA as areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain (LACDPW 2022a). Zone X is within a “Moderate-to-Low Risk Area”, which is defined as a non-special flood hazard area, where the risk of being flooded is reduced, but not completely removed. This area is outside of the 1% annual chance floodplain, so flood insurance Item #8. Page 266
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 331

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-79 December 2022
is not required within Zone X (LACDPW 2022b). Currently, the existing on-site debris control structures are at capacity and not functional. Therefore, in the event of a flood event, the existing flood control structures would not be suitable for flood hazard concerns. However, with implementation of the proposed Project, the existing three flood control/debris check dam structures would be removed, and larger flood/debris control facilities would be constructed within generally the same location. This would protect the new residential development from safety hazards associated with flooding and debris flow. Therefore, the Project would not substantially risk release of pollutants due to Project inundation in a flood hazard zone. Impacts related to the release of pollutants due to Project inundation in a flood hazard zone would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

A tsunami is a sea wave generated by an underwater seismic disturbance, such as sudden faulting or landslide activity. The Project site is located approximately 35 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean; as such, it would not be susceptible to tsunami hazards. The Project would have no impact regarding risk of pollutants due to Project inundation in a tsunami zone.

Seiches are earthquake-induced waves in enclosed bodies of water, such as lakes or reservoirs. The Project site is located within the vicinity of several inland bodies of water, including the San Dimas Reservoir, located 5 miles east of the Project site; the Big Dalton Reservoir, located approximately 3 miles northeast of the Project site; Morris Reservoir, located approximately 1.5 miles north of the Project site; and the San Gabriel Reservoir, located approximately 3.5 miles north of the Project site.

The City’s General Plan states that the potential inundation area for the San Dimas Reservoir is located south of the I-210. As such, a seiche within the Big Dalton Reservoir or the San Dimas Reservoir would not be expected to inundate the Project site. Morris Reservoir and San Gabriel Reservoir are located to the north (i.e., uphill) from the Project site. However, in the unlikely event that a seiche or other compromising event were to cause overflow of the Morris and/or San Gabriel Reservoirs, the inundation is expected to extend to the west, away from the Project site (City of Azusa 2010; City of West Covina 2018). As such, the Project site is not expected to be inundated as a result of hazards associated with nearby contained waterbodies, and there would be a less than significant impact.

Overall, impacts related to risk of release of pollutants due to Project inundation in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties is the Water Quality Control Plan (WQMP) for the Los Angeles Region, which includes the City of Glendora. The Basin Plan: (i) identifies beneficial uses for surface and ground waters, (ii) includes the narrative and numerical water quality objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and conform to the State's anti-degradation policy, and (iii) describes implementation programs and other actions that are necessary to achieve the water quality objectives established in the Basin Plan (LARWQCB 2019).The City is within the Upper San Gabriel River Watershed.

The existing, potential or intermittent beneficial uses for the Upper San Gabriel River Tributaries where storm waters from the City are discharged include: domestic water supply (MUN); industrial activities (IND); industrial process dependent upon water quality (PROC); agricultural supply (AGR); groundwater recharge (GWR); Hydropower Generation (POW); warm water ecosystems (WARM); cold water ecosystems (COLD); terrestrial ecosystems (WILD); rare, threatened or endangered species (RARE); Spawning, Reproduction, and Early Development (SPWN); and wetland ecosystems (WET) (LARWQCB 2019).

With compliance with applicable regulations, proposed Project does not include any facilities or land uses that could generate pollutants that could result in substantial water quality impacts. As discussed in Threshold 3.10(a), compliance the City’s Stormwater Management requirements would protect the Item #8. Page 267
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 332

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-80 December 2022
water quality of watercourses in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the Federal Clean Water Act, and pursuant to the NPDES Construction General Permit No. 2009-0009-DWQ. Restrictions in this Ordinance are applicable to both construction activities and operations. Additionally, compliance with General Permit issued by the SWRCB would require implementation of BMPs during construction to address the potential for pollutants from entering downstream waters.

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) is required to prioritize and update California’s groundwater basin prioritization in accordance with the requirements of Sustainable Groundwater Management Act and related laws. The act requires that groundwater resources be managed sustainably for long-term reliability and multiple benefits for current and future beneficial uses. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act applies to all California groundwater basins and requires that high- and medium-priority groundwater basins form Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (DWR 2019). DWR is required to prioritize California’s 517 groundwater basins and subbasins as either high, medium, low, or very low. The San Gabriel Basin Valley, which underlies the City, was determined by DWR to be “Very Low” priority and is therefore not subject to the requirements to prepare form a Groundwater Sustainability Agency to develop a Groundwater Sustainability Plan.

As previously discussed, the SWPPP and LID features would reduce the Project’s impact on water quality in accordance with all applicable federal, State, and local requirements. Additionally, the Project would be consistent with the assumptions set forth in the City of Glendora’s UWMP discussed in Section 3.10(b). As a result, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. Therefore, the Project’s impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

3.11 Land Use and Planning
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? a) Would the project physically divide an established community? No Impact. The Project site is currently developed with one single-family residence and flood/debris control structures. The site is located on the border of a single-family residential neighborhood and open space. The Project site is approximately 0.31-mile southeast of the ANF boundary. As such, the proposed Project is located at the edge of an existing neighborhood and, therefore, would not result in the physical division of an established community; no impacts would occur.

Item #8. Page 268
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 333

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-81 December 2022
b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
No Impact. Land use plans and policies that apply to the Project site include the City’s General Plan and the City’s Zoning Ordinance (Title 21 of the Glendora Municipal Code). Some components of the General Plan and the zoning ordinance contain provisions that help avoid and/or minimize environmental effects in the City. As such, the Project’s consistency with these plans and policies is addressed below.

General Plan
The City’s General Plan was adopted in 2008 and extends to the planning horizon of 2025. The General Plan land use map, updated in 2013, designates the Project site as low density and conservation open space. The portion that is designated as “low density” would be developed with 13 single-family houses upon buildout of the proposed Project. The City’s low density designation allows for 1.1 to 3 dwelling units per acre (City of Glendora 2008). Upon Project buildout, the site would have 13 dwellings on a total of 11 acres, resulting in approximately 1.2 units per acre. The portion of the site that is designated as “conservation open space” would remain open space. Therefore, the development intensity of the proposed Project is allowable based on the General Plan land use designation for the southern section of the Project site. Because the General Plan shows a designation of “low density” for the southern section of the site, local land use planning (including plans for infrastructure development and implementation of policies for environmental protection) takes into account buildout of the southern section of the Project site at a density of 1.1 to 3 dwelling units per acre and the preservation of the northern portion of the Project site as open space. Furthermore, larger regional land use plans, such as the AQMP and the SCAG RTP/SCS, rely on local land use designations for regional infrastructure planning and for setting goals and policies for regional environmental issues, such as air quality, GHGs, transportation, and population growth. As such, the land use that would be developed on the site would be consistent with projections for the area, the planned growth for the City and region, and the environment protection goals and policies established in the General Plan and larger regional plans.

Zoning Ordinance
The southern section of the Project site, which would include 13 single-family houses, is zoned as “single-family estate.” The northern section of the Project site, which would not be developed, is zoned as “open space.” The single-family estate designation allows for single-family residences and accessory buildings, and the zoning ordinance establishes maximum lot sizes, setbacks, heights, and floor areas for houses in the single-family estate zone. The proposed Project would establish lots that are in compliance with the specifications of the zoning ordinance, and houses would be developed on the lots in accordance with the size and height requirements of the zoning ordinance. The maximum FAR in the single-family estate zone is 35% FAR for the first floor. The second floor can be 75% of the area of the first floor. The maximum height is defined as “two stories not to exceed 25 feet.” The purpose of the open space zone, as stated in the zoning ordinance, is to conserve and manage natural resources which may include biological resources, watercourses, hills, canyons, major rock outcroppings, etc.; protect the public health and safety by including areas requiring management due to hazardous or special conditions such as fire, flood and earthquake fault; and provide outdoor recreation including areas of scenic, historic or cultural value. All property that is designated as open space is required to be left in its natural state except for the following uses: riding and hiking trails, picnic and playground areas, flood control structures and facilities, and utility substations and related Item #8. Page 269
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 334

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-82 December 2022
equipment and structures. Under the proposed Project, flood control/debris improvements and access road would occur in the portion of the Project site designated for open space. However, no other development would occur, and the northern section of the Project site would otherwise remain in its natural state. As such, the proposed Project would be consistent with the permitted land uses for the single-family estate and open space zones and would comply with the policies established for these zones, including policies that have been established for environmental protection.

For the reasons described above, the proposed Project would be consistent with applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations that have been established for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. No impacts would occur.

3.12 Mineral Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. According to the California Department of Conservation Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources, there are no oil, gas, geothermal, or other known wells located within the project area (DOGGR 2018). As such, the proposed Project would not have the potential to interfere with extraction of oil, gas, or geothermal resources.

Glendora is located within the San Gabriel Production-Consumption Region for Portland Cement Concrete–grade aggregate resources, as mapped by the Division of Mines and Geology (renamed the California Geological Survey in 2006). The Division of Mines and Geology has mapped the Project site within Mineral Resource Zone 3 for aggregate resources. Mineral Resource Zone 3 is a designation given to areas containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data (Division of Mines and Geology 1982). Currently, the Project site is used for residential purposes, flood and debris control, and open space. No mining operations are present on-site or within the project vicinity. Land uses in the Project vicinity consist of single-family residences, schools, churches, open space areas, and utility and flood control infrastructure.

Due to the existing land uses at the Project site and within its surroundings, as well as the absence of known, significant mineral resources as mapped by the state, project implementation is not anticipated to result in loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region and residents of the state. No impacts would occur.

Item #8. Page 270
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 335

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-83 December 2022
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No Impact. The City’s General Plan does not indicate the presence of mineral resources on the Project site (City of Glendora 2008). Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource that has been delineated on local land use plans. The Project site does not currently support a mineral resource recovery site and has not supported one in the past.

No impacts would occur.

3.13 Noise
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less than Significant With Mitigation. The City’s General Plan Noise Element establishes maximum recommended noise exposure levels on the basis of land use zones. The recommended noise exposure levels use Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), and are applicable to exterior (outside) noise, as opposed to noise levels occurring in interior building spaces. The recommended maximum exterior noise level for single family residences is 60 dBA CNEL. Table 3.13-1 provides the City’s Noise and Land Use Compatibility Criteria.

Item #8. Page 271
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 336

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-84 December 2022
Table 3.13-1
Noise and Land Use Compatibility
Source: City of Glendora General Plan Noise Element.

The City’s Municipal Code Noise Ordinance prescribes the maximum noise levels that may be generated by stationary sources (non-transportation sources) in each land use zone. Table 3.13-2 presents the noise generation limits prescribed in the Noise Ordinance.

Table 3.13-2
Glendora Noise Ordinance Standards
Source: City of Glendora General Plan Noise Element.

Item #8. Page 272
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 337

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-85 December 2022
Section 9.44.110 (Construction of Buildings and Project’s) of the City’s Municipal Code states that it is unlawful for any person within a residential zone or within a radius of five hundred feet therefrom to operate equipment or perform any outside construction or repair work on buildings, structures or projects or to operate any pile driver, power shovel, pneumatic hammer, derrick, power hoist or any other construction type device (between the hours of nine p.m. of one day and seven a.m. of the next day) in such a manner that a reasonable person of normal sensitiveness residing in the area is caused discomfort or annoyance unless beforehand a permit therefore has been duly obtained from the city.

No permit shall be required to perform emergency work as defined in Section 9.44.020(c) (Definitions).

Existing Noise Conditions. Currently, the Project site is developed with a single-family residence in the southwest corner of the property (which will be encompassed within the proposed Lot 1), with the majority of the site currently vacant and undeveloped. Single family residences are aligned along the southern property boundary of the Project site, as well as along the western side of the eastern portion of the site which extends southward. One single family residence exists to the east of the Project site, while open space and minor flood control facilities are located to the north and west of the Project site. The Project site is not in close proximity to any major roadway; Palm Drive is a neighborhood collector street with very low traffic which is adjacent to only one of the proposed home lots.

Dudek conducted noise measurements in the Project vicinity in July 2018 to characterize the existing noise environment. The daytime, short-term (1 hour or less) attended sound level measurements were taken with a SoftdB Piccolo 3 sound-level meter. This sound-level meter meets the current American National Standards Institute standard for a Type 2 general purpose sound-level meter. The calibration of the sound level meter was verified before and after the measurements were taken, and the measurements were conducted with the microphone positioned approximately five feet above the ground.

Dudek selected three noise measurement locations (ST1–ST3) near the Project site to characterize noise levels from important transportation sources in the area, as well as to establish ambient noise levels at sensitive receptors that could be affected by construction or operation of the proposed Project. The measurement locations are shown in Figure 3.13-1, Noise Measurement Locations, and the measured average noise levels and measurement location descriptions are provided in Table 3.13- 3, Ambient Measured Noise Levels. Noise measurement data is also included in Appendix F. The primary noise sources at the measurement locations consisted of traffic along the adjacent roads. As shown in Table 3.13-3, the measured sound levels ranged from approximately 54 dBA equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) at ST3 to approximately 62 dBA Leq at ST1.

Table 3.13-3
Ambient Measured Noise Levels
Site Location Date Time
Sound Level
(dBA Leq)
Sound Level
(dBA Lmax)
ST1 Sierra Madre East
of Grand Ave.

July 31, 2018 10:51 – 11:06 a.m. 61.9 61.9
ST2 Grand Ave South
of Palm Dr.
11:15 – 11:35 a.m. 58.9 58.9
ST3 Palm Dr. West of
Grand Ave.
11:39 – 11:59 a.m. 54.4 54.4
Source: See Appendix F for complete results.

Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; Leq = equivalent continuous sound level. Lmax = maximum noise level Item #8. Page 273
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 338

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-86 December 2022
Sensitive Receptors. Noise- and vibration-sensitive land uses are locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound could adversely affect the use of the land. Residences, schools, hospitals, guest lodging, libraries, and some passive recreation areas would be considered noise- and vibration-sensitive and may warrant unique measures for protection from intruding noise.

Sensitive receptors near the Project site include the single-family residential land uses located immediately south of the Project site, and immediately west of the southerly extension of the Project site. The Church of the Open Door is also located approximately 500 feet southwest of the Project site while St. Lucy’s Priory High School is located approximately 700 feet southwest of the site.

The above sensitive receptors represent the nearest residential land uses with the potential to be impacted by construction of the proposed Project. Additional sensitive receptors are located farther from the Project site in the surrounding community and would be less impacted by noise and vibration levels than the above-listed sensitive receptors.

Construction Noise (Short-Term Impacts). Construction noise and vibration are temporary phenomena.

Construction noise and vibration levels vary from hour to hour and day to day, depending on the equipment in use, the operations being performed, and the distance between the source and receptor.

The construction activities for the proposed Project would include grading and trenching for proposed lots, building construction, paving of the on-site road, and application of architectural coatings. Noise impacts from construction activities associated with the proposed Project’s would be a function of the noise generated by construction equipment, equipment location, and sensitivity of nearby land uses, and the timing and duration of the construction activities. The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are single-family homes located as close as 20 feet west of the southern extension of the Project site. Other residential land uses are also located a little further along the southern boundary of the Project site.

Construction noise is difficult to quantify because of the many variables involved, including the specific equipment types, size of equipment used, percentage of time, condition of each piece of equipment, and number of pieces of equipment that would actually operate on site. The range of maximum noise levels for various types of construction equipment at a distance of 50 feet is depicted in Table 3.13- 4, Construction Equipment Noise Levels. The noise values represent maximum noise generation, or full-power operation of the equipment. As an example, a loader and two dozers, all operating at full power and relatively close together, would generate a maximum sound level of approximately 90 dBA at 50 feet from their operations. As one increases the distance between equipment, and/or the separation of areas with simultaneous construction activity, dispersion and distance attenuation reduce the effects of separate noise sources added together. In addition, typical operating cycles may involve two minutes of full-power operation, followed by three or four minutes at lower levels. The average noise level during construction activity is generally lower since maximum noise generation may only occur up to 50% of the time. Noise levels from construction operations decrease at a rate of approximately 6 dBA per doubling of distance from the source.

Table 3.13-4
Construction Equipment Typical Noise Emission Levels
Equipment Typical Sound Level (dBA) 50 Feet from Source Roller 74
Concrete vibrator 76
Pump 76
Saw 76
Backhoe 80
Item #8. Page 274
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 339

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-87 December 2022
Table 3.13-4
Construction Equipment Typical Noise Emission Levels
Equipment Typical Sound Level (dBA) 50 Feet from Source Air compressor 81
Generator 81
Compactor 82
Concrete pump 82
Crane, mobile 83
Concrete mixer 85
Dozer 85
Grader 85
Impact wrench 85
Loader 85
Pneumatic tool 85
Jackhammer 88
Truck 88
Paver 89
Source: FTA 2006
The nearest point of construction activities to the closest noise-sensitive receivers (single-family residence located to the west of the southern extension of the Project site) would be approximately 20 feet and the furthest would be approximately 210 feet. For construction noise, a concept called the “acoustic center” is useful in describing average noise levels across the entire construction period for adjacent receivers. The acoustic center is the idealized point from which the energy sum of all construction activity noise near and far would originate, and it is derived by taking the square root of the product of the shortest distance multiplied by the furthest distance. For this project construction, the acoustic center is calculated to be 65 feet from the closest receiver. Thus, the distance to the nearest construction activities would be approximately 20 feet, but the distribution of construction activity across the site would typically occur with a center approximately 65 feet or more away from the closest noise-sensitive receivers.

The Federal Highway Administration’s Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) (FHWA 2008) was used to estimate construction noise levels at these noise-sensitive land uses. Although the model was developed by the Federal Highway Administration, RCNM is often used for non-roadway projects, because the same types of construction equipment used for roadway projects are also used to construct other project types. Input variables for RCNM consist of the receiver/land use types, the equipment type and number of each (e.g., two graders, a loader, a tractor), the duty cycle for each piece of equipment (e.g., percentage of each hour the equipment typically works per day), and the distance from the noise-sensitive receiver. No topographical or structural shielding was assumed in the modeling of construction noise (i.e., the receivers are modelled with no obstacles to the travel of sound between the construction activity and receiver location, a worst-case assumption). The noise levels from the proposed construction activities are summarized in Table 3.13-5 (Construction Noise Model Results Summary). The complete set of RCNM input and output data for construction noise is provided in Appendix F. As shown, at the nearest residences, noise levels would range from approximately 90 to 95 dBA Leq when construction is taking place at or near the project boundary.

More typical construction noise levels (represented by the acoustic center distance noise levels) at the adjacent residences would range from approximately 80 to 85 dBA Leq.

Item #8. Page 275
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 340

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-88 December 2022
Table 3.13-5
Construction Noise Model Results Summary
Construction Phase
Construction Noise at Representative Receiver Distances (dBA Leq) Nearest Construction Work
(approximately 20 feet from sensitive
receptors)
Typical Construction Noise Levels
(acoustic center, 65 feet from sensitive
receptors)
Site Preparation 93 83
Grading 95 85
Building Construction 90 80
Paving 90 83
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level
As presented in Table 3.12-3, the highest noise levels are predicted to occur during site preparation activities when noise levels from construction activities would be as high as 95 dBA Leq at the nearest existing residences, approximately 20 feet away. Based upon the acoustic center distance of 65 feet, construction noise would range from approximately 80 to 85 dBA Leq.

The City regulates construction noise by restricting the allowable hours of construction. According to Section 9.44.110 of the Glendora Municipal Code, construction activity is prohibited between the hours of 9:00 PM and 7:00 AM, Monday through Friday, with no work allowed on Saturdays, Sundays, and federal holidays except for interior work unless otherwise permitted by the City Engineer in writing.

In addition to noise ordinance requirements, the City may impose other measures, such as erecting noise barriers, to protect adjacent uses from excessive construction noise. While compliance with Chapter 9.44 of the Glendora Municipal Code would avoid construction noise during the most sensitive overnight period (thus avoiding sleep interruption) construction noise levels would be well above ambient levels, and would likely be a source of annoyance for immediately adjacent residences.

Consequently, short-term construction noise impacts are considered potentially significant. In addition to compliance with the City’s Municipal Code requirements, MM-NOI-1 is required to ensure temporary noise impacts would be less than significant. With implementation of MM-NOI-1, Project impacts from generation of a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance would be less than significant.

MM-NOI-1 Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit construction plans and/or specifications to the City of Glendora Planning Division demonstrating compliance with the following:
• The location and design of a temporary noise barrier between the construction area and the adjacent residences. Given that a retaining wall is proposed between the project access road and the adjoining residential properties, said retaining wall, constructed as part of the proposed Project, shall be erected immediately as the first component of construction, to function as a noise barrier. As necessary, temporary height extensions to the retaining wall to achieve a minimum height of 12 feet from the wall base on the project side to the top of the barrier, shall be added and maintained for the duration of construction. If immediate installation of the boundary retaining wall is not feasible for construction progression, then a temporary barrier shall be installed in the eventual location of the retaining wall.

Item #8. Page 276
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 341

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-89 December 2022
The temporary noise barrier or temporary height extension of the retaining wall to achieve a 12-foot-high noise control barrier shall be constructed with plywood that is at least ½ inch thick or with another material that creates a noise transmission loss of at least 20 dBA.
• All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers. Enforcement shall be accomplished by random field inspections by applicant personnel during construction activities, to the satisfaction of the City.
• Construction noise reduction methods such as shutting off idling equipment, maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas and adjacent residences, and use of electric air compressors and similar power tools, rather than diesel equipment, shall be used where feasible. • During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from or shielded from sensitive receptors. • Construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow surrounding property owners to contact the job superintendent if necessary. In the event the City of Glendora receives a complaint, appropriate corrective actions shall be implemented and a report of the action provided to the reporting party.

On-Site Traffic Noise Exposure. The General Plan Noise Element recommends a maximum exterior noise exposure level of 60 dBA CNEL for single family residences. While the Noise Element does present traffic noise levels associated with major roadways in Glendora, Palm Drive is not one of the streets for which traffic noise is included. Palm Drive currently provides access to 38 single family residences, this number would increase by 12 as a result of the proposed Project. Using a trip generation rate of 9.42 average daily trips (ADTs) per single family home (ITE 2017), Palm Drive would be anticipated to carry 471 ADT, including the completed Project. At a distance of 6 feet from the edge of the roadway, the traffic noise level from 471 ADT would be 55 dBA CNEL (FHWA TNM). Proposed Lot #14 is the closest proposed lot to Palm Drive, and it would be at a distance further than 6 feet from the edge of Palm Drive. Consequently, traffic noise exposure at the future residential lots within the Project site would be less than 55 dBA CNEL. In addition, traffic noise levels from the internal private streets at existing residential properties adjacent to the Project would in all cases be less than this 55 dBA CNEL. This traffic noise exposure level is well below the recommended maximum of 60 dBA CNEL prescribed in the Noise Element, and therefore on-site traffic noise exposure levels would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Off-Site Traffic Noise. The proposed Project would generate traffic along adjacent roadways including Palm Drive, Grand Avenue, and Sierra Madre Avenue. Neither the Noise Element nor Circulation Element of the Glendora General Plan contain traffic volume data for Palm Drive. However, with Palm Drive currently providing access for 38 single family homes, this street should carry approximately 358 ADT under existing conditions. According to the Noise Element, the segment of Grand Avenue south of Sierra Madre currently has a volume of approximately 9,920 ADT; the segment of Sierra Madre west of Live Oak Road currently carries 5,030 ADT. The Project addition of approximately 113 ADT to these roadways would represent an increase ranging from 60% (Palm Drive) to 1% (Grand Avenue). A doubling of ADTs (100% increase) would result in a 3 dBA CNEL increase (Caltrans 2013), which correlates to a just noticeable increase in the traffic noise level. Project-related traffic increases to existing roadway volumes would not approach a 100% increase on any vicinity roadway. Existing plus Project volumes, and buildout volumes, are anticipated to be the same for Palm Avenue, because open space area abuts the project, and future buildout to be served by Palm Avenue above and beyond the Item #8. Page 277
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 342

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-90 December 2022
project is not anticipated. According to the Noise Element, buildout year traffic volumes for the segment of Grand Avenue south of Sierra Madre currently are predicted to be approximately 12,440 ADT; the segment of Sierra Madre west of Live Oak Road is predicted to carry 6,290 ADT under buildout conditions. Project trip generation increases on these roadways would represent a range between 1% (Grand Avenue) and 2% (Sierra Madre Avenue). Consequently, the Project’s added trips to vicinity roadways would result in noise level increases that would not be noticeable to residents. Projectrelated traffic noise would therefore be less than significant and no mitigation is required. b) Would the project result in generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Construction activities that might expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration or ground-borne noise could cause a potentially significant impact. Ground-borne vibration information related to construction activities has been collected by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans 2013). The proposed Project uses (i.e., single family residential uses) are not vibration-generating uses, and thus, the following analysis addresses construction vibration impacts only. Ground-borne vibration information related to construction activities has been collected by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans 2013). The Caltrans maximum vibration level standard is 0.2 inch/second Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) for the prevention of structural damage to typical residential buildings (Caltrans 2013). With regard to the potential for vibration to cause annoyance for residents, the Caltrans vibration standard is 0.1 inch/second PPV for human annoyance. The heavier pieces of construction equipment, such as bulldozers, would generate vibration of approximately 0.089 inch/second PPV or less at a distance of 25 feet (Caltrans 2013).

Ground-borne vibration is typically attenuated over short distances. At the distance from the nearest residence to the construction area (approximately 20 feet) and with the anticipated construction equipment, vibration would be approximately 0.095 inch/second PPV at the nearest residence. This vibration level would be below the Caltrans structural damage threshold of 0.2 inch/second PPV for standard construction buildings, as well as below the threshold of 0.1 inch/second PPV for human annoyance. Construction-related vibration impacts would therefore be less than significant. Impacts related to ground-borne vibration from construction and operation of the Project are therefore considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels from aircraft. The nearest airport is Brackett Field Airport, located approximately

6.15 miles southeast of the Project site, while Ontario International Airport is located approximately 15 miles southeast of the Project site (Airnav 2022). The Project site is located outside of the 65 dBA CNEL noise contours of these airports. As such, there would be no impact regarding Project exposure of people residing or working the Project area to excessive noise levels from private or public airports.

Item #8. Page 278
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 343

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-91 December 2022

3.14 Population and Housing
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less Than Significant Impact. Buildout of the proposed Project is expected to result in approximately 12 new single-family residences. The average persons per household in the City is 3 residents.

However, the residences that would be developed on the Project site are anticipated to have an average of 5 bedrooms. As such, this analysis relies on the conservative assumption that each household would have 4 residents (as opposed to the City-wide average of 3 residents per household).

Therefore, the proposed Project is expected to result in approximately 48 additional residents within the City. According to U.S. Census Bureau estimates, the City’s population in 2020 was 52,558 people (U.S. Census Bureau 2022). The additional 48 residents anticipated to result from the development of the proposed Project would be approximately 0.1% of the current City population.11 SCAG projections indicate that the City’s population may grow to 55,700 people by 2045, which is approximately 20 years after project buildout (SCAG 2020). As such, it is expected that the City’s population will grow by approximately 3,142 residents between the present time and 2040. The proposed Project would contribute to be approximately 1.5% of this anticipated growth.12 As such, the population growth that would be associated with the proposed Project would fall well within the growth that is anticipated for the City. Due to the minor nature of the population growth that could result from the project (0.1% of the current population) and because this growth falls well within the projected population growth for the City, population growth caused by the Project would not be substantial. Therefore, the Project would have less than significant impacts regarding introducing substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly.
11 48 additional residents ÷ 52,558 residents = 0.000913 = 0.1% 12 48 additional residents ÷ 3,142 residents = 0.01528 = 1.5% Item #8. Page 279
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 344

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-92 December 2022
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. No housing would be displaced or removed by the proposed Project. The existing residence on the Project site would remain in place. Therefore, the Project would not displace housing necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact would occur.

3.15 Public Services
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire Protection
Less Than Significant Impact. The City is served by the LACFD, which provides both fire protection services and emergency response services. There are three fire stations within the City: Fire Station 85, located at 650 East Gladstone Avenue; Fire Station 86, located at 520 South Amelia Avenue; and Fire Station 151, located at 231 West Mountain View Avenue. Station 151, located approximately 1.1 mile south of the Project site, is the nearest station to the Project site. Station 151 is generally staffed with one three captains, onethree firefighter specialists, one nine firefighters/paramedics, and two firefighter paramedics. one nurse educator. The station is equipped with one engine and one paramedic squad. The average response time for the LACFD in the City is 4.38 minutes (City of Glendora 2008). If Fire Station 151 cannot meet the immediate needs of a call for services independently or does not have capability to address the full extent of a larger incident, Fire Stations 85 and 86, and other LACFD facilities, could respond or provide support.

Upon Project buildout, it is expected that approximately 48 additional people could potentially reside at the Project site. The Project site is currently occupied with one single-family house, vacant land, and open space. Therefore, development of the proposed Project would contribute incrementally to the demand for additional fire protection services within the City. Additionally, the Project site is located Item #8. Page 280
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 345

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-93 December 2022
along the urban-wildland interface. As such, residences developed on the Project site could potentially be susceptible to wildland fire hazards, as discussed in Section 3.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

However, the homes that would be constructed on the Project site would be subject to current LACFD requirements for fire sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire flow, and equipment and firefighter access. California law (Public Resources Code 4291) requires a minimum defensible space of 100 feet around residential homes, which must consist of the 0 to 30-foot firebreak that requires removal of flammable vegetation and the 30- to 70- foot reduced fuel zone (or to the property line, whichever is nearer to the structure). Per Section 21.03.060, California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, of the City’s zoning ordinance, the homes would also be subject to the City’s requirements for defensible space, proper fire-safe plant and tree selection, sufficient irrigation, and design features to control erosion and drainage. Compliance with requirements for fire prevention, fire flow, emergency access, and protection from wildland fire hazards would reduce the likelihood of a fire emergency at the Project site, thereby reducing potential demand for fire services.

As illustrated in Figure 2-5, Preliminary Fuel Modification Plan, the LACFD has approved the proposed Project’s preliminary fuel modification plan, which includes notes on the relevant Fuel Modification Zones, including the setback zone, irrigated zone, native brush thinning zone, and fire access road zone, as well as required routine maintenance for all zones to aid in ongoing wildfire prevention.

Furthermore, the proposed Project plans would be required to undergo plan check review by the LACFD prior to the issuance of building permits for future homes at the site. Any future plantings within the Project site must be in accordance with LACFD’s Fuel Modification Guidelines and would require LACFD approval prior to installation. Compliance with these standards would be ensured during the plan check process. For these reasons, the proposed Project would not result in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities in order to maintain response times for fire protection services, and impacts would be less than significant.

Police Protection
Less Than Significant Impact. Police protection services in the City are provided by the Glendora Police Department. The Glendora Police Department is located at 150 South Glendora Avenue, which is located approximately 1.4 miles from the Project site. As of 2017, the Glendora Police Department had 54 sworn officers (City of Glendora 2022). The officer to resident ratio is approximately 1 officer per 1,000 residents.13 The City is divided into four policing districts, each of which has an assigned District Commander. The Project site is located within District One (City of Glendora 2022c).

Upon Project buildout, it is expected that approximately 48 additional people could potentially reside at the Project site. The Project site is currently occupied with one single-family house, vacant land, and open space. Therefore, development of the proposed Project would potentially represent an incremental increase in demand for police services within the City. However, the houses that are developed on the Project site would be required to meet all Glendora Police Department requirements as part of construction, including requirements for adequate exterior lighting and defensible space.

Furthermore, the population increase expected to result from the proposed Project represents approximately 0.1% of the current population of the City. As such, the Project would result in a negligible increase in Glendora Police Department service population, and the proposed Project would not require expansion of existing police facilities or construction of new police facilities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
13 The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that the population of the City in 2017 is 52,558 residents. The number of officers per 1,000 residents can be calculated as follows: 1,000 × (54 ÷ 52,558) = 1.00274 officers, which approximately equates to 1 officer per 1,000 residents.

Item #8. Page 281
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 346

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-94 December 2022
Schools
Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the proposed single family residences is anticipated to result in approximately 48 additional residents in the City. According to the California School Board, the average number of students generated per dwelling unit is 0.7 students (California Department of General Services, Office of Public School Construction 2009). Therefore, the proposed Project could result in approximately 8 new students.14
The proposed Project would be served by the Glendora Unified School District (GUSD). Students from the residences at the Project site would likely attend La Fetra Elementary School, Sandburg Middle School, and Glendora High School (GUSD 2018). La Fetra Elementary School is located at 547 West Bennett Avenue, less than one mile from the Project site. Sandburg Middle School is located at 835 West Bennett, less than one mile from the Project site. Glendora High School is located at 1600 East Foothill Boulevard, approximately 2.4 miles from the Project site. The addition of 8 students to the GUSD would be minor, and the students would likely be spread across the three schools (elementary, middle, and high school). As such, the addition of students to each school would be minor to negligible (approximately 2–3 students per school). While the proposed Project may involve a slight increase in student enrollment within GUSD, the increase in students would be minor and would not necessitate the construction or expansion of school facilities. Additionally, the district requires a development impact fee for residential construction, as allowed under Education Code Section 17620. This fee accounts for new students generated by residential development. For these reasons, impacts to schools would be less than significant.

Parks
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is served by the City of Glendora Community Services Department and its parks and recreational facilities. As stated in the General Plan, the City contains

46.8 acres of passive and active recreation parks, 24 acres of special use parks, 12.7 acres of join use facilities, and 938.5 acres of wilderness parks, totaling 1,022 acres of recreational area (City of Glendora 2008). The future residents of the proposed Project could use nearby park facilities. Nearby facilities include the Sandburg Middle School Park (located 0.6 miles south of the Project site) and Finkbiner Park (located 1.2 miles southeast of the Project site). Additionally, the ANF is 0.31 mile north of the Project site, and roads and trails into the ANF can be accessed from other locations in the City and in nearby communities. Project buildout is expected to result in the addition of 12 housing units to the Project site and is expected to result in a population increase in the City of approximately 48 people (see Section 3.14, Population and Housing). The residents of the Project site could use the nearby park facilities. As such, the proposed Project could increase the use of park facilities, especially those located within the vicinity of the Project site. However, the population increase expected to result from the proposed Project represents approximately 0.1% of the current population of the City and falls well within regional growth projections (see Section 3.14, Population and Housing for further details). As such, the proposed Project is not expected to place substantial demands on the City’s park facilities, resulting in the need for new or expanded facilities. Additionally, the proposed Project would incorporate private outdoor areas for use on site (e.g., backyards, front yards, and side yards), which could reduce demands on nearby parks. Furthermore, the Project Applicant would be required to pay development fees that would help support recreational facilities in the City. For these reasons, impacts to park facilities would be less than significant.
14 12 dwelling units × 0.7 students per dwelling unit = 8.4 students Item #8. Page 282
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 347

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-95 December 2022
Other Public Facilities
Less Than Significant Impact. Other public facilities and services provided within the City include library services and City administrative services. Library services are provided by the Glendora Public Library, located at 140 South Glendora Avenue, which is located approximately 1.3 miles from the Project site.

The population increase expected to result from the proposed Project represents approximately 0.1% of the current population of the City. This would result in a negligible increase in the service population for the Glendora Public Library and City administration. This minor increase in population is not anticipated to result in the need for additional library facilities or City administrative facilities. The proposed Project would not require expansion of existing library, City administration, or other public service facilities or construction of new facilities. Therefore, impacts to other public facilities would be less than significant.

3.16 Recreation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is served by the City of Glendora Community Services Department and its parks and recreational facilities. As stated in the General Plan, the City contains

The proposed Project would result in a small increase in housing units and population and would not place substantial added demands on the City’s recreational facilities or result in increased physical deterioration of any facilities. The population increase expected to result from the proposed Project represents approximately 0.1% of the current population of the City and falls well within regional growth projections (see Section 3.14, Population and Housing). As such, the proposed Project is not expected to increase the use of recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or be accelerated. Additionally, the Project Applicant would be subject to a park development Item #8. Page 283
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 348

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-96 December 2022
fee. The purpose of this fee is to provide any needed improvements to the City’s park facilities as a result of developing new residential units. Additionally, the proposed Project would incorporate private outdoor areas for use on site (e.g., backyards, front yards, and side yards), which would reduce demands on nearby parks. For these reasons, the Project would result in less than significant impacts regarding the increase of existing neighborhood and regional parks such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated, and no mitigation is required. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project would include future development of residential backyards, front yards, and side yards in association with the potential new residential lots. The Project would not include the construction of recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, as existing surrounding recreational facilities in the City would adequately accommodate the Project’s anticipated population of 48 persons. Construction of the residences and their associated yard spaces has been analyzed for environmental impacts as part of the proposed Project. As described and substantiated throughout this IS/MND, the environmental impacts of the proposed Project, including those of the residential yard spaces, would not create a significant effect on the environment. Furthermore, as described under Sections 3.14 and 3.15, the proposed Project would not be associated with a substantial increase in population, such that construction or expansion of recreational facilities would be required. For these reasons, impacts to recreational facilities would be less than significant.

3.17 Transportation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. Measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system in the City are established by the City for intersections. The City has established a level of service (LOS) standard of LOS D or better on roads and intersections. The criteria used for determining whether a proposed Project would have a significant impact is based on a project’s effects to an intersection’s Item #8. Page 284
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 349

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-97 December 2022
volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio and resulting reductions in LOS. The City uses thresholds from the Los Angeles County Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines to determine when an increase in v/c ratio is considered to be a significant impact on the circulation system. Measures of effectiveness for selected intersections and freeway segments are also established in the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s 2010 Congestion Management Program. The I-210 freeway and part of the I-210/SR-57 interchange are the only Congestion Management Program routes in the City (Metro 2010). Policies for non-motorized travel are addressed in the City’s General Plan Circulation Element; the project’s consistency with these policies are addressed in Section 2.16(f) below.

Construction. Construction of the proposed Project would generate additional, albeit minimal, vehicle trips in the project vicinity during the temporary construction period. During the most intensive phase of construction, 8 roundtrip truck trips would occur per day and 20 roundtrip worker vehicle trips would occur per day (see Appendix A for CalEEMod Assumptions). Most of these trips would occur outside of the AM and PM peak traffic hours. Increases in traffic in the project area on the order of 20 worker trips and 8 truck trips per day during the most intensive construction phase would be minor and temporary and would not significantly change roadway volumes. As such, construction of the proposed Project would not cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the context of the region, vicinity, and local roadways that provide access to the site. For the reasons described above, temporary increases in vehicle trips during project construction would be minimal, and impacts from the project related to conflicts with applicable programs, plans, ordinances or policies addressing the circulation system would be less than significant during construction.

Operation. Upon project buildout, it is anticipated that 12 new single-family homes would be present on the Project site and would be occupied with residents. Anticipated trip generation for project buildout is shown in Table 3.16-1. As shown, project operation would result in a total of 113 daily trips, 9 AM peak hour trips, and 12 PM peak hour trips. The relatively low vehicle trips generated by the project would not have a measurable impact to the surrounding street network and would not be substantial enough to cause intersection LOS to decline or alter the volume-to-capacity ratios of nearby intersections. For these reasons, the proposed Project is not expected to conflict with applicable plans, ordinances, or policies establishing measures of effectiveness for the long-term operational performance of the circulation system. Impacts would be less than significant.

Notes: Numbers may not total due to rounding.

Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers 2017
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
No Impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), focuses on adopted criteria (VMT) adopted pursuant to SB 743 for determining the significance of transportation impacts. Pursuant to SB 743, the focus of transportation analysis changes from vehicle delay to VMT. The related updates to the CEQA Guidelines required under SB 743 were approved on December 28, 2018. As stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(c), the provisions of Section 15064.3 shall apply prospectively. A Table 3.17-1
Trip Generation
Land Use Units Daily Trips
AM Peak Hour Volumes PM Peak Hour Volumes
In Out Total In Out Total
Single-Family
Detached Housing 12 113 2 7 9 7 4 12
Item #8. Page 285
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 350

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-98 December 2022
lead agency may elect to be governed by the provision of Section 15064.3 immediately. The provisions were required to be implemented statewide by July 1, 2020, and the City has adopted VMT significance thresholds. According to the adopted City VMT Screening and Calculator (Appendix I), due to the small size of the project, it is below the threshold for VMT Screening. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) and no impact would occur.
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less Than Significant With Mitigation.

Construction. Construction of the proposed Project would require a narrowed road section along Grand Avenue, south of Palm Drive, during multiple truck hauling operations for such work as clearing, rough grading, concrete construction, and street grading. Therefore, the proposed Project could result in temporary lane closures along Grand Avenue as a result of construction and would result in an increased use of existing roadways through construction activities such as truck hauling. Therefore, construction of the proposed Project could result in increased roadway hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use. Thus, impacts would be potentially significant and mitigation measure MM-TRAF-1 would be required. With incorporation of MM-TRAF-1, impacts associated with hazards due to a geometric design features or incompatible uses would be less than significant.

Operations. The proposed Project would establish new Private Streets within the Project site, which would have an entrance along the existing Palm Drive, just west of Grand Avenue. As such, the proposed Project would involve a new vehicular ingress/egress along Palm Drive and would also involve internal circulation patterns associated with the Private Streets and the individual driveways that would connect to the Private Streets.

The proposed Project could increase safety hazards if any new roadways were to cause line-of-sight obstructions, substantial queuing, and/or unsafe conditions on the Private Streets or on surrounding residential streets. As such, in July 2020, the City prepared an intersection safety assessment for the Project related to the potential increase in Project related roadway congestion near to and surrounding the intersection of Palm Drive and Grand Avenue (the intersection), where the ingress/egress point to the Private Street would be located (see Appendix H, Intersection Safety Assessment, for further details and exhibits). According to the City’s Site Distance Assessment, the recommended stopping sight distance for 25 miles per hour (mph) (the speed limit within the vicinity of the intersection) is 150 feet.

The intersection approach sight distance for both northbound Grand Avenue and eastbound Palm Drive were determined as a result of the City assessment to meet the applicable sight distance requirements. While eastbound Palm Drive onto southbound Grand Avenue has an existing tree partially obscuring the sight lines at the stop bar, as a vehicle creeps forward, sight distance is clear.

In addition, while there have been two collisions within the vicinity of the Grand Avenue and Palm Drive intersection between 2018 and 2020, only one collision occurred at the intersection.

Upon completion of the Safety assessment, the City provided recommendations to ensure that the Project would not result in any unsafe conditions on the Private Streets or on the surrounding residential communities. Without implementation of these recommendations, operational Project associated impacts would be potentially significant. As such, the City’s recommendations are incorporated into MM-TRAF-2 and include the following: relocation of the existing stop sign and speed limit sign, construction of a 50-foot red curb on the South side of Palm Drive, curb ramp improvements, an upgrade to the existing street light pole on the northwest corner of the intersection and repainting of the existing of stop legend and stop bar and existing red curb along the west side of Grand Avenue.

Item #8. Page 286
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 351

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-99 December 2022
The entrance to the proposed Private Streets would be gated, which would preclude ingress/egress except for residents and visitors who need to access the development. The Private Streets, the entrance to the Private Streets, and all driveways for the individual homes would be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable City intersection, roadway, and driveway design standards.

In addition, the project would also be subject to applicable fire code requirements for access and turning radii. As shown on Figure 2-4a Tentative Tract Map No. 72413, the proposed access road for the flood control facilities also provides for adequate fire truck access and turn-around. Both the City and the LACFD have a plan check review process. During this process, the City and the LACFD would review the details of the private drive and any other internal circulation features to ensure safety, adequate fire access, adequate site distances, etc. For these reasons, and with the incorporation of MM-TRAF-1 and MM-TRAF-2, impacts associated with roadway hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses would be less than significant with mitigation.

MM-TRAF-1: Prior to the start of any Project-related construction, the Applicant shall develop and implement a Project-specific Traffic Control Plan (TCP). The TCP shall be stamped and signed by a licensed Traffic Engineer or Civil Engineer in the State of California. The TCP shall be prepared in accordance with applicable regulations and standards, including the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD), and approved by all regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over the work locations shown in the TCP, including the City of Glendora.

MM-TRAF-2: Prior to completion of any additional habitable structures on any Project site, the Applicant shall complete the following improvements to the Grand Avenue and Palm Drive intersection and immediate vicinity, as provided by the City of Glendora in the 2020 Grand Avenue/Palm Drive Intersection Safety Assessment:
(1) Relocate existing stop sign and street name sign onto a new taller post.

The bottom section of the stop sign is currently 5.5 feet above sidewalk grade. Per the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, the vertical clearance of all signs should be 7 feet minimum. (2) Repaint red curb on the west side of Grand Avenue where the street narrows to 18 feet in width.
(3) Upgrade the existing wood pole streetlight at the intersection to LED. (4) Relocate 25 mph speed limit sign onto the existing streetlight. Currently, the speed limit sign is obscured behind the street light pole. Remove signpost. (5) Ensure sidewalk fronting the development are cleared from trees/debris.

Include curb ramps on the north and south sides of the intersection. (6) Add a 50-foot red curb on the south side of Palm Drive starting at (7) Repaint stop legend and stop bar.
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant With Mitigation. Emergency vehicle access to the Project site would be provided from Palm Drive, via the proposed Private Streets. As described under Section 3.17(c), the internal circulation design would be required to allow for adequate turning radii for fire trucks, which are larger than emergency/ambulance vehicles. Further, required implementation of MM-TRAF-1 and MM-TRAF2 would ensure that any Project associated impacts that could potentially occur within and near to the intersection of Grand Avenue and Palm Drive related to emergency access and other transportation Item #8. Page 287
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 352

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-100 December 2022
related hazards would be less than significant (see Threshold 3.17[c]). While the private drive would be gated, the gate would be equipped with a Knox Box to facilitate rapid entry for emergency personnel.

The proposed design plans would be reviewed by the City and the LACFD for compliance with accessibility requirements and adequacy of emergency vehicle access. For these reasons, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? Less Than Significant Impact. As described under Section 3.5 of this document, a CHRIS records search was conducted for the proposed Project area of potential effects (APE). No previously recorded tribal cultural resources (TCRs) listed in the CRHR or a local register were identified within the proposed Project APE. Further, no TCRs have been identified by California Native American tribes as part of the City’s AB 52 notification and consultation process (see Section 3.17(b)(ii) below for a description of this process).

Item #8. Page 288
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 353

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-101 December 2022
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? Less Than Significant Wwith Mitigation. There are no resources in the proposed Project APE that have been determined by the City to be significant pursuant to the criteria set forth in Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. Further, no TCRs were identified in the proposed Project APE by the Native American tribes as part of the City’s AB 52 notification and consultation process.

In an effort to proactively reach out to tribes with a cultural affiliation to the proposed Project APE, the City sent notification of the proposed Project to California Native American tribal representatives identified by the NAHC as being traditionally or culturally affiliated with the geographic area July 18, 2018. Of the six affiliated or interested tribes that were notified by the City, including the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation, Gabrieleño/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, Gabrieleño/Tongva Nation, Gabrieleño Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council, Gabrieleño-Tongva Tribe, and San Fernando Band of Mission Indian, only the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation (Kizh Nation) responded. The Kizh Nation responded via email on October 30, 2018 stating that the proposed Project APE is located within and around a sacred village, sacred water courses, and major traditional trade routes. This email expressed concern regarding the high potential to impact TCRs and included three computer screenshots of historic map reconstructions and a letter containing requested mitigation language, which includes, in summary:
• Retention of a Native American Monitor/Consultant
• Cease construction activities in the immediate vicinity of and unanticipated discovery of tribal cultural and archaeological resources
• Preservation in place (i.e. avoidance) of unique archaeological resources as preferred per Public Resources Code Sections 21083.2(b) and if not feasible then archaeological data recovery • Procedures for the unanticipated discovery of human remains and associated funerary objects The City responded to the Kizh Nation, requesting clarification regarding some ambiguities in the historic map screenshots. The City request was dated February 14, 2019 and no response was received from the Kizh Nation.

The AB 52 government-to-government consultations initiated by the City have not resulted in the identification of a geographically defined TCR within or near the proposed Project APE. As no specific information regarding TCRs that could be impacted by the proposed Project has been received by the City, the City has determined that no TCRs are present in the proposed Project APE. However, there is still a potential for unknown subsurface TCRs to be impacted by the proposed Project, which could result in a potentially significant impact. Therefore, protocols for the inadvertent discovery of TCRs are included as MM-TCR-1 through MM-TCR-8, which when implemented, would reduce the potentially significant impact to a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

MM-TCR-1 Retain a Native American Monitor/Consultant. The Project Applicant shall be required to retain and compensate for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultant who is both approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is listed under the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the project location. This list is provided by the NAHC.

Item #8. Page 289
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 354

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-102 December 2022
The monitor/consultant will only be present on-site during the construction phases that involve ground disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that may include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor/consultant have indicated that the site has a low potential for impacting Tribal Cultural Resources.

MM-TRC-2 Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural and Archaeological Resources.

Upon discovery of any archaeological resources, cease construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can be assessed. All archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation. If the resources are Native American in origin, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shall coordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe will request reburial or preservation for educational purposes. Work may continue on other parts of the project while evaluation and, if necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5 [f]). If a resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and funding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available. The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f) for historical resources and unique archaeological resources.

MM-TRC-3 Public Resources Code Sections 21083.2(b) for unique archaeological resources. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.

MM-TCR-4 Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects.

Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. Health and Safety Code 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be Item #8. Page 290
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 355

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-103 December 2022
immediately reported to the County Coroner and excavation halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and PRC 5097.98 shall be followed.

MM-TCR-5 Resource Assessment & Continuation of Work Protocol. Upon discovery of human remains and associated funerary objects, the tribal and/or archaeological monitor/consultant(s) will immediately divert work at a minimum of 150 feet and place an exclusion zone around the burial. The monitor/consultant(s) will then notify the Tribe, the qualified lead archaeologist, and the construction manager who will call the coroner. Work will continue to be diverted while the coroner determines whether the remains are Native American. The discovery is to be kept confidential and secure to prevent any further disturbance. If the finds are determined to be Native American, the coroner will notify the NAHC as mandated by state law who will then appoint a Most Likely Descendant (MLD).

MM-TCR-6 Kizh-Gabrieleño Procedures for Burials and Funerary Remains. If the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation is designated MLD, the following treatment measures shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains. These remains are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects.

MM-TCR-7 Treatment Measures. Prior to the continuation of ground disturbing activities, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the Project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to recommend diverting the Project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the Project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed. The Tribe will work closely with the qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be taken which includes at a minimum detailed descriptive notes and sketches. Additional types of documentation shall be approved by the Tribe for data recovery purposes. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure complete recovery of all material. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the location is considered a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be Item #8. Page 291
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 356

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-104 December 2022
created. Once complete, a final report of all activities shall be submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive diagnostics on human remains.

Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within 6 months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the Project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered.

MM-TCR-8 Professional Standards. Archaeological and Native American monitoring and excavation during construction projects will be consistent with current professional standards. All feasible care to avoid any unnecessary disturbance, physical modification, or separation of human remains and associated funerary objects shall be taken. Principal personnel must meet the Secretary of Interior standards for archaeology and have a minimum of 10 years of experience as a principal investigator working with Native American archaeological sites in Southern California. The Qualified Archaeologist shall ensure that all other personnel are appropriately trained and qualified.

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during
normal, dry, and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Item #8. Page 292
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 357

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-105 December 2022
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation.

Water. A Water System Improvements Technical Memorandum was prepared by Stetson Engineers, Inc. for the proposed Project and is included in Appendix G of this MND. The analysis assumes the development of 12 new residential single-family homes and one existing home with an expected home area of up to 6,000 square feet each. The pad elevations of the proposed lots in the new development range from 950 feet to 1090 feet above mean sea level (amsl). In the vicinity of the new development, the City has two existing pressure zones (Zone 5 and Zone 11) that serve the existing community.

The City’s existing Zone 5 covers approximately 87 acres north of Sierra Madre Avenue. Zone 5 operates off of the Hook Canyon Tanks located at an elevation of 1,174.5 feet amsl with a high water elevation of 1,196.5 feet amsl. Zone 11 is located along the northern boundary of Zone 5 at the end of Silent Ranch Drive and covers approximately 3 acres of single family estate land use that require higher pressures than can be supplied by Zone 5. Zone 11 is served by a hydro-pneumatic system that is over 30 years old.

Water from Zone 5 is pumped using two booster pumps (one duty pump and one standby pump) at the Silent Ranch Pump Station to the existing hydro-pneumatic tank to serve Zone 11. The hydropneumatic tank is located at an elevation of approximately 1,115 feet amsl. Each booster pump has a capacity of 180 gallons per minute (gpm) and the hydro-pneumatic tank is set to provide water system pressures between 65 and 90 pounds per square inch (psi).

Domestic Supply. The City’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) details the 2015 Interim Urban Water Use Target of 245 gallons per capita per day (GPCD). This is considered the average domestic water use which is multiplied by a factor of 1.76 to obtain the maximum day demand and the maximum day demand is multiplied by a factor of 1.41 to obtain the peak hour demand. Based on these factors and assuming on average that 4 people live in each home, the calculated peak hour demand for a home is estimated to be 100 gallons per hour (=245 x 4 x 1.76 x 1.41 / 24). In addition, the City’s goal is to supply homes with a minimum pressure of 50 psi at the street meter.

Fire Flows. With regards to fire flows, the 2016 California Building Code (CBC) requires a minimum fire flow residual pressure of 20 psi and fire flow rate of 2,000 gpm for 2 hours (assuming flammable construction materials, i.e. wood framed homes – CBC B.102 and Table B105.1(2)). In addition, since the new development is in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, an additional fire flow of 500 gpm is required (per LA County Code 20.16.060). Therefore, a total fire flow of 2,500 gpm is necessary. In order to ensure that the fire flow requirements and locations of fire hydrants are acceptable to the Los Angeles County Fire Department, MM UTL-1 is required.

Proposed Water Supply Configuration. Water supply for the new development is largely dictated by the topography and elevations of each proposed new home. Zone 5 is able to provide static pressures at or above the City’s minimum house pressure (50 psi) for all the proposed new lots except lots 1, 2, and 3. However, Zone 11 is able to provide over 50 psi to lots 1, 2, and 3. Depending on the configuration of existing Zone 11 piping, it is anticipated that a 1.5-inch diameter pipe will be necessary to convey the domestic water supply for Zone 11 to Lots 1, 2, and 3.

Item #8. Page 293
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 358

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-106 December 2022
Zone 11 does not have the flow capacity to meet the required fire flows. However, Zone 5 has sufficient flow capacity and the Hook Canyon reservoirs have sufficient storage capacity to provide the volume of fire flow required (i.e. 300,000 gal = 2,500 gpm x 120 min). Based on the hydraulic modeling, it was determined that a 10-inch diameter pipeline looped system feeding the new development from the existing 10-inch pipeline in Palm Drive and from the existing 12-inch pipeline adjacent to the existing hydro pneumatic tank would be able to provide maximum day demand and 2,500 gpm fire flow at 39 psi at the top of the cul-de- sac at the Project site. The proposed 10-inch diameter pipeline would have sufficient pressure to also serve the domestic water demands of lots 5 through 14. The looped piping configuration also provides good circulation which promotes good water quality through the new development.

Figure 3.19-1, Proposed Water Pipeline System, depicts a proposed alignment for the new water infrastructure, including the required off-site connection to the existing hydro-pneumatic system. While the proposed 10-inch diameter pipeline would not provide the desired 50 psi for domestic water service to lots 1, 2, and 3, the existing hydro-pneumatic tank system can provide the desired pressure to lots 1, 2, and 3. However, the system is over 30 years old and should be replaced to provide reliable domestic water service to the existing homes and the proposed new homes on lots 1, 2 and 3. The replacement of the hydro-pneumatic tank system would occur separate of the proposed Project. In order to ensure adequate water supply to lots 1, 2, and 3. The City will impose a Condition of Approval on the Tentative Tract Map that these lots, which would be served by the hydro-pneumatic tank system, cannot be occupied prior to completion of this City-sponsored infrastructure improvement. Further, the Project Applicant would be required to provide water rights to serve the proposed Project. Currently, water right fees are approximately $14,000 per acre foot of water (City of Glendora 2019). Additionally, the proposed alignment would require coordination between the City and the Project Applicant to provide easements for the new off-site water supply piping., Therefore MM-UTL-1 is require to ensure adequate domestic water services for lots 1, 2, and 3. In summary, the Water System Improvements Technical Memorandum concluded: (1) adequate flow and pressure for domestic water supply for lots 5 through 14 can be supplied from Zone 5; (2) adequate flow and pressure for domestic water supply for lots 1, 2, and 3 can be supplied from Zone 11; and (3) adequate flow and pressure for fire flows for all lots in Tract 72413 can be supplied from Zone 5 to new fire hydrants. With incorporation of MM-UTL-2, potential impacts related to the construction of new water system infrastructure would be less than significant.

MM-UTL-1 Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the Project Applicant shall provide the City with payment of the Project’s fair-share contribution to the replacement of the Zone 11 hydro-pneumatic system (pumps, tank, and controls) to provide a reliable water delivery system for Zone 11 homes. The replacement facilities shall be fully operational and all required access easements for the construction and long-term maintenance of the offsite water lines shall be in place prior to the occupancy of the Lots 2 and 3.

MM-UTL-2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Project Applicant shall provide the City with documentation that confirms the review and approval of the Project’s fire flow requirements and the locations of new fire hydrants by Los Angeles County Fire Department.

Sewer. A Sanitary Sewer Service Memorandum was prepared by Giron Engineers, Inc. for the proposed Project and is included in Appendix G of this MND. In addition, a Will Serve Letter provided by the LACSD was issued for the project in March 2018 (see Appendix G). Sewage would be delivered into the City’s sewer collection system, which is operated and maintained by the City’s Public Works Department. The LACSD manages, operates, and maintains the larger sewer trunk lines into which the City’s collection system feeds. Wastewater from the Project site would be treated at either the San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) or the Whittier Narrows WRP.

Item #8. Page 294
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 359

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-107 December 2022
Sewer lines in the City convey wastewater to the LACSD Baseline Trunk Sewer Section 3, located in Grand Avenue south of Whitcomb Avenue. This 15-inch diameter trunk line has a capacity of 2.9 million gallons per day (mgd) and conveyed a peak flow of 0.4 mgd when last measured in 2015 (LACSD 2018). The proposed Project is anticipated to generate approximately 3,120 gallons of wastewater per day, based on LACSD’s average wastewater generation factors (LACSD 2018). As a point of comparison, the San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant has a capacity of 100 mgd and currently processes an average recycled flow of 62.7 4.1 mgd (LACSD 2018). As such, the San Jose Creek WRP has a remaining capacity of approximately 35.9 mgd. The proposed Project’s anticipated wastewater generation would be 0.009% of the San Jose Creek WRP’s remaining capacity. The Whittier Narrows WRP has a capacity of 15 mgd and currently produces an average recycled water flow of 7.2 mgd (LACSD 2018). As such, the Whittier Narrows Water Reclamation Plant has a remaining capacity of approximately 7.8 mgd. The proposed Project’s anticipated wastewater generation would be 0.04% of the Whittier Narrows WRP’s remaining capacity.

The LACSD charges a connection fee for increasing the strength or quantity of wastewater discharged from connected facilities. The connection fee is a capital facilities fee that is imposed in an amount sufficient to construct an incremental expansion of the sewage system to accommodate the Project. As such, the anticipated wastewater generation from the proposed Project would be minor and would be accommodated within the wastewater treatment plants that serve the project area. As such, the proposed Project would not result in the construction or expansion of wastewater treatment facilities.

Regarding sewer infrastructure, the proposed Project would construct an 8-inch sewer line beneath the Private Street to serve the new residential lots, which would be owned by the City and maintained by the City’s Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District. The wastewater flow originating from the proposed lots would discharge into an 8-inch existing local sewer line in Palm Drive for conveyance beneath Grand Avenue to the LACSD Baseline Trunk Sewer. The proposed Project’s lot 1 has an existing home, which is connected to the local sewer line in Silent Ranch Drive. In 2015, an approved Sewer Capacity Study was prepared for Tract No. 70622, which is located on the west side of Grand Avenue just south of Sierra Madre Avenue (about 800 ft. south of the proposed development). The sewer line analyzed in that study is the same local line that the proposed Project would connect to. Flow tests for that study were conducted at Grand Avenue and Richardson Lane and it concluded that the post-development Qpeak flow of the line was 0.48 cfs, with an available capacity of 1.93 cfs. Based upon the 2015 Sewer Capacity Study, the local line in Grand Avenue is currently flowing at about 25% of peak flow capacity (half-full).

The addition of 12 new homes would increase the flows within the existing system to 9,750 gallons per day (or 0.02 cfs), resulting in a total of 0.50 cfs post-development Qpeak flow of the line. Therefore, the capacity of the sewer line in the post-Project condition would be approximately 26% of the capacity of the pipe. Per City and County sewer design and capacity requirements, the sewer pipe is considered at full capacity when it is at 50% capacity. Therefore, potential impacts related to the construction of a new sewer system infrastructure would be less than significant.

Stormwater. As previously described in Section 3.10(c), the overall outflow of stormwater from the Project site would be reduced after implementation of the drainage improvements (i.e. the volume of runoff leaving the Project site is expected to be reduced in quantity relative to existing conditions). As previously shown in Figure 3.10-2, Post-Development Drainage Conditions, flows in the storm drain would be split with a portion conveyed into the public storm drain system. Specifically, the storm drain design would divert the Qallowable = 89.6 cfs burned, debulked flow to the public storm drain during the 50-year storm (Capital Flood). The other off-site flows would be conveyed along the historic drainage path by means of a flow return structure. All of the on site flows would be conveyed by the proposed surface streets along the historical path. Under proposed conditions, the overall outflow from the site is reduced, and a large portion (near but less than the Qallowable = 89.6 cfs) would be conveyed into the storm drainage system. The split of the storm drain flow into the main storm drain system flow and flow to the return flow structure would be accomplished utilizing different pipe sizes implemented Item #8. Page 295
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 360

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-108 December 2022
within a manhole to be located near the property line at Palm Drive. Storm drain inflows of 145.1 cfs would enter the manhole via 36-inch storm drain, and 54.9 cfs would exit the manhole through the parkway drain, and 89.6 cfs would exit the manhole to the public storm drain. The parkway drain allows for overland flows via the existing Grand Avenue valley gutter system, as in the current condition. The post-development conditions are shown in Tables 3.10-2 and 3.10-3 in Section 3.10(c). Table 3.10-2 shows that the post-development flows would not exceed the existing condition flows during either the Urban Flood or Capital Flood conditions. Table 3.10-3 shows that the Q50 with burned factor of 176 cfs in the pre-development existing condition is not exceeded in the post-development “ultimate condition”, which results in 174 cfs.

Electricity. Electrical services are provided to the site by SCE. SCE uses a mix of fossil fuel and renewable energy resources to supply electricity to Southern California. SCE services include all required electrical hookups. SCE maintains an easement on the Project site and provides electricity to the property. Near the location of the proposed Private Street, an existing SCE power pole would need to be relocated to allow for the roadway construction and easement.

Natural Gas. The Southern California Gas Company provides gas service to the City of Glendora. The serves 18 million people through 5 million gas meters in more than 530 communities. The Southern California Gas Company maintains an easement on the Project site near the corner of Palm Avenue and Grand Avenue (City of Glendora 2008).

Communications Services. Communications services including line and wireless telephone and internet services are available to the Project site through numerous private providers.

For all utilities, separate utility meters would be required for each lot, including Lot 4, which would include common area utilities, such as electricity, telephone, and water for the private streets.

Infrastructure is available to serve the proposed Project with the required improvement discussed above related to relocation of an electrical pole. Construction of utilities for the proposed Project are considered in the impact analyses throughout this IS/MND, and no impacts beyond those discussed in this document would result from construction of utilities to serve the Project site. The proposed Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, that could cause significant environmental effects, and no mitigation is required. b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? Less Than Significant Impact. As previously described in Section 3.10(c), the proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan and does not require a General Plan Amendment; therefore, the Project would be consistent with the City’s growth projections anticipated in local and regional planning documents, including the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) dated June 2021. As stated in the UWMP, the projected populations used in the UWMP for the City’s service area were based on projections obtained from SCAG. The SCAG data incorporates demographic trends, existing land use, general plan land use policies, and input and projections from the Department of Finance and the U.S. Census Bureau and is determined in coordination with local jurisdictions/municipalities, including the City of Glendora.

Item #8. Page 296
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 361

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-109 December 2022
The proposed Project’s water demand is anticipated to be 3,492 gallons of water per day, which would equate to 3.9 acre-feet per year. The volume of water supplied in 2020 within the City of Glendora totaled 9,898 acre feet. In 2025, the City’s projected water supplies are estimated to be 11,090 acre feet and in 2030, and 11,211 acre-feet in 2030 (City of Glendora 2021). The proposed Project’s water demand would be approximately 0.035% of the supplies that are expected to be available when the proposed Project is operational. The proposed Project’s anticipated annual water consumption would be nominal relative to the supplies that are currently available and that are projected to be available after Project buildout, and the increased demand was previously considered and accounted for during the preparation of the UWMP.

According to the UWMP, the City does not experience water supply constraints or deficiencies and projects having adequate supply through the planning year 2045. The proposed Project would not include any wells that would directly deplete groundwater supplies, and the City’s UWMP anticipates adequate supply through 2045. Given the nominal percentage of overall annual water consumption attributable to the proposed Project, the proposed Project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.

Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Less Than Significant Impact. As described above, the proposed Project would construct adequate infrastructure to convey sewer from the proposed residential properties to the LACSD treatment facilities. The service providers are required to treat wastewater in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations. For example, sewage would be treated in accordance with applicable waste discharge requirements prior to being discharged. Both the City and LACSD are subject to compliance with State Water Resources Control Board Order No. 2006-0003-DWQ, Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems, as amended. State Water Resources Control Board Order No. 2006-0003-DWQ establishes performance criteria and effluent limitations to ensure that treated effluent discharges do not violate basin plan objectives for receiving waters. The order ensures that the City and the LACSD properly maintain and manage sewer systems and reduce frequency and severity of sanitary sewer overflows and their potential impacts on public health, safety, and the environment. The regional wastewater treatment plants are subject to their own individual NPDES and waste discharge requirements that set standards and criteria for the quality of the effluent produced. The wastewater generated by the proposed Project would be typical of urban uses, would not include any industrial or concentrated discharges that could negatively affect the LACSD capacity or ability to treat flows from the Project site.

As stated in Section 3.19(a), the proposed Project would be connected to the wastewater line in Palm Drive and be transported to the San Jose Creek WRP or the Whittier Narrows WRP. Both facilities This facility would have capacity to serve the proposed Project, which would generate a nominal amount of wastewater relative to the WRPs treatment capacity. As such, the proposed Project would not exceed current capacities of the wastewater treatment system and would not significantly impact existing wastewater treatment systems such that new facilities would be required.
d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less Than Significant Impact. Waste collection and recycling services are provided by Athens Services. The proposed Project would produce construction debris and would also generate solid waste during operation, attributable to the 12 new residences that are expected to be developed on the Project site. Project operation is expected to produce approximately 7 tons of solid waste per year (Appendix A). The City is Item #8. Page 297
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 362

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-110 December 2022
required to comply with the solid waste diversion mandates established by the California Integrated Waste Management Board under AB 939, which states that all cities in California must divert 50% of their waste stream by 2000 and maintain this diversion rate. As such, it is anticipated that 50% or more of the project’s waste would be diverted from a landfill, thereby reducing the effects of construction and operation on landfill capacity.

Trash collected by Athens is first directed to a Material Recovery Facility (MRF) in the City of Industry where recyclable material is removed and processed for resale to secondary markets. Trash from the MRF is taken to Landfills in San Bernardino County. Green waste from the MRF is taken to Athens’ Victorville compost facility. The Puente Hills Landfill closed in 2013. The operator, LACSD, has a new permitted facility called Mesquite Regional Landfill in Imperial County where solid waste is hauled by rail from the Puente Hills Intermodal Facility Transfer Station. The Mesquite Regional Landfill has a maximum throughput of 20,000 tons per day and as of May 2021, had a remaining capacity of approximately 1,100,000,000 cubic yards. Estimated closure is in year 2139 (CalRecycle 2022).The following landfills are accepting solid waste and have adequate capacity: Puente Hills MRF, Downy Area Recycling and Transfer Station, Scholl Canyon Landfill, and Calabasas Landfill. As such, the solid waste from the proposed Project would be accommodated within a landfill that has sufficient permitted and remaining capacity, well into the future.

The project’s incremental increase in solid waste generation would be negligible relative to the remaining permitted capacity of the Mesquite Regional Landfillat the landfills identified above. The additional solid waste from the project is considered minor, and the facilities mentioned have adequate capacity to accept solid waste from the project. Impacts would be less than significant. e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact. The City has an exclusive franchise agreement with Athens Services for solid waste disposal and recycling throughout the City. The proposed Project’s solid waste disposal needs would be serviced through this franchise. The City enforces compliance with all federal, state, and local regulations related to solid waste for all properties in the City through the franchise agreement and City ordinances. As such, the proposed Project would be in compliance with regulations related to solid waste, and no impact would occur.

3.20 Wildfire
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Item #8. Page 298
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 363

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-111 December 2022
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? a) Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the General Plan EIR, the City maintains an Emergency Operations Center at the Glendora Police Department at 150 South Glendora Avenue and an alternate Emergency Operations Center is located at the Youth Center (159 North Cullen Avenue) to coordinate City services during an emergency and has designated evacuation routes. During an emergency, the centralized command center houses personnel from the City, emergency responders and other appropriate agencies. Grand Avenue, beginning approximately 700 feet south of the Project site (just north of Sierra Madre Avenue) and continuing southward past the I-210 and towards the City of Covina, is a designated evacuation route. Foothill Boulevard is approximately 1.5 miles south of the Project site and is also a designated evacuation route. The City of Glendora’s Multi-Hazard Functional Plan (MHFP) provides the policies and procedures addressing emergency response to air disasters. The MHFP addresses the City’s planned response to emergencies associated with natural disasters and technological incidents. It provides an overview of operational concepts, identifies components of the City’s emergency management organization within the SEMS and describes the overall responsibilities of Federal, State and county entities and the City for protecting life and property and assuring the overall wellbeing of the population.

In the event of a major disaster or emergency, the City’s MHFP would improve the efficiency of the City’s disaster response. The proposed Project would not include the construction of any buildings or infrastructure that would preclude the City’s ability to implement an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No short-term construction street closures are anticipated and there would be no impairment of evacuation roadways. Upon operation of the proposed Project, emergency access would be provided via the Private Streets to all residential properties as well as to the flood control facilities. As such, the proposed Project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, would the project exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Less Than Significant Impact. As described in Section 3.9(g), the Project site is within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, as mapped by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL Item #8. Page 299
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 364

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-112 December 2022
FIRE 2011). Additionally, the proposed Project would involve construction of residential lots and homes along a boundary of neighborhoods and wildlands. Implementation of the Project would remove some areas of vegetated land and replaced with an urban landscape that is irrigated and less combustible than the existing vegetation. However, due to the Project’s location within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and the adjacent wildland areas, and the proposed increase of anthropogenic (i.e., caused by humans) sources of fire that were not previously on the Project site, the proposed Project has the potential to exacerbate wildfire risks. Potential sources of wildfire hazard are associated with the introduction of new and/or more anthropogenic activities adjacent to wildlands, including but not limited to, discarded cigarettes, illegal campfires, fireworks, fallen or sparking electrical power lines, and vehicle and/or landscaping equipment engine sparks.

Portions of the City and surrounding foothill communities have historically been subject to wildfires within the San Gabriel Mountains, including the most recent Colby Fire, which affected Glendora in January 2014 and burned nearly 2,000 acres and destroyed five homes. In an effort to encourage residents to safeguard their private properties, the City prepared the “Landscaping Guidelines for Homes in Fire Hazard Severity Zones”, which provides guidance on how to reduce future risks of damage from wildfires through the maintenance of “defensible space” and use of appropriate landscaping (City of Glendora 2014)
The City of Glendora also adopted the California State Model Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance15 (see Section 21.03.060 of the City’s zoning ordinance) to promote the values and benefits of landscapes, recognizing the need to conserve water and other resources as efficiently as possible, and to establish a structure for designing, installing, and maintaining water-efficient landscapes. The ordinance protects public health and safety within the City’s moderate, high and very high fire hazard zones as identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (City of Glendora 2014). Establishing a landscaping structure protects natural resources, including but not limited to animal and biological resources, and reduces risk of debris flows and fire damage. Accordingly, homeowners within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone are required to obtain a permit before installing, restoring, or altering their landscaping. To obtain a permit, homeowners are required to submit landscaping plans to the City, and the plans are required to show adequate defensible space, proper fire-safe plant and tree selection, sufficient irrigation, and design features to control erosion and drainage (City of Glendora 2014). As such, future homeowners at the Project site would be required to install landscaping that is designed to prevent and minimize fire danger in the area, which would help protect future residences and homes on the site.

Before a final fuel modification plan is approved by the Forestry Division of the LACFD, a signed and notarized copy of the provided covenant and agreement (and/or previously reviewed and approved HOA Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions that include the necessary fuel modification information) must be recorded at the County of Los Angeles Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk's Office and a copy 15 Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 23, Division 2, Chapter 2.7, Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, Section 492.6, Landscape Design Plan. https://asic.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/MWELO.pdf. 16 California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Fire Protection, Subchapter 3, Section 1299, Defensible Space. https://svfra.org/home/svfra/pdf/PRC%20429114%20and%20CA%20ADC%201299.pdf.

Item #8. Page 300
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 365

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-113 December 2022
given to the Forestry Division’s Fuel Modification Unit. An on-site inspection must be conducted by the personnel of the Forestry Division of the LACFD and a final approval of the fuel modification plan issued by the Forestry Division prior to a certificate of occupancy being granted by the building code official.

As shown in Figure 2-5, Preliminary Fuel Modification Plan, the proposed Project’s design and preliminary plan has been reviewed, revised, and preliminarily approved by the LACFD Forestry Division’s Fuel Modification Unit, as of November 2021. Furthermore, as illustrated in Appendix B-2, Draft Architectural Landscape Plans and Tee Removals, all proposed planting of HOA areas would be irrigated with a permanent irrigation system to comply with Section 21.030.060 of the City’s zoning ordinance, and all proposed planting outside of the Fuel Modification Zones, would be irrigated with a temporarily irrigation system for “hydroseed” establishment. This seeding method is a type of planting process that promotes quick germination of grasses, which, due to their fibrous root systems, can increase water infiltration and hold soil in place (Barkley 2006; 2019; USDA 2022). As such, hydroseeding may help treat areas where fires are likely to spread to, and can improve slope stability in previously burned areas, such as the Project site (Barkley 2006). In addition, the northern portion of the Project site would be irrigated with a temporary spray irrigation system until such time that plant materials are established. As shown on Figure 2-4a, Tentative Trace Map No. 72413, a 6-foot masonry screening wall would be constructed along the eastern property line between proposed Lots 8 through14 and the adjacent property, which would provide further fire protection from the residential property to the east. Further, the proposed Project would construct paved, all weather access to higher elevations on the Project site and incorporate fire hydrants which would provide fire protection for the site.

In summary, compliance with mandatory wildfire protection regulations would reduce the potential for people or structures to undergo risk of loss, injury, or death related to wildland fire. Furthermore, as further described in Section 3.15, the Project site is located within proximity to LACFD fire stations, which would provide fire protection services in the event of a fire emergency at the Project site. As such, while the proposed Project could expose people and structures to wildland fire hazards, compliance with local and state regulations would reduce such hazards and impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is currently undeveloped, with the exception of a singlefamily residence, remnant structures from previous uses on the site, and three flood control/debris check dam structures. The existing single-family residence would remain in place, and the three existing flood control structures would be redeveloped as part of the proposed Project, to provide effective protection from potential debris flows and flooding. The flood control facilities require the construction of an access road from the main Private Street to allow for the maintenance of the facilities, including periodic removal of accumulated sediment and debris, as needed. The access road and the maintained debris basins would serve as an additional buffer of defensible space between the residential lots and the hillsides to the north of the Project site. The introduction of larger flood control facilities onto the Project site would not exacerbate fire risks, but rather would provide additional defensible space due to the ongoing maintenance of the facilities, which requires periodic mowing and removal of accumulated vegetation within the structures.

Maintenance of the flood control facilities would require annual mowing and periodic sediment removal, as needed to maintain the design capacity of the structures. This would require the use of landscaping equipment (e.g. mowers, weed-whackers) and possibly small excavators (e.g. bobcats) if large debris flows occurred. As described above under Section 3.20(b), vehicles and landscaping Item #8. Page 301
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 366

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-114 December 2022
equipment has the potential to generate sparks or other fire hazards, and could exacerbate risks.

However, the ongoing maintenance of the flood control structures would be conducted by the County of Los Angeles Flood Control District (LACFCD), which is in charge of maintaining drainage infrastructure throughout the County, including 14 major dams and reservoirs, 483 miles of open channel, 27 spreading grounds, 172 debris basins, 27 sediment placement sites, and an estimated 82,000 catch basins. Many of these facilities are located within wildland interface areas due to the nature of their purpose to protect urban areas from flood hazards. As such, given the expertise and experience of the LACFCD and required protocols for the protection of health and safety, the ongoing maintenance of the proposed Project’s flood control facilities would not result in exacerbated wildfire risks. No other infrastructure would be required within the northern portion of the property designed as open space. Impacts related to the installation and maintenance of infrastructure that could exacerbate fire risks would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. d) Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Less Than Significant Impact. As previously described in Section 3.10(a), the three flood control facilities would debulk the off-site debris inflows and convey the flows into a new storm drain system that would terminate near the historic flow outlet point at the southern tract boundary. As shown in Table 3.10-1, the three debris containment facility capacities exceed the requirements for debris containment, which ensures the containment of debris flows and reduction of turbidity and sediment in stormwater flows. Accordingly, the proposed improvements would improve the protection of downstream residents within the region by eliminating debris flow and reducing overall outflow from the area. Because the existing on-site debris control structures are at capacity, the proposed Project would reduce debris flow and sedimentation relative to existing conditions. The proposed debris control structures would be transferred to LACFCD for maintenance. LACFCD staff would maintain the debris containment structures per County standards. Proper maintenance of the debris containment structures would ensure that the basins are regularly cleaned out and maintained, which prevents the structures from losing their effectiveness over time.

As described in Section 3.7(a), the Project site is sloped, and slopes increase in steepness in the northern section of the site. As such, G.A. Nicoll evaluated the potential for landslides to cause substantial adverse effects to people and/or structures on the Project site. According to G.A. Nicoll, the Project site is not located within an area designated as having a high potential for earthquakeinduced landsliding. Furthermore, G.A. Nicoll notes that the Project site and surrounding area have been recently exposed to some of the heaviest periods of rainfall recorded in the Los Angeles area, as well as several powerful earthquakes (e.g., the Northridge and San Fernando earthquakes). Despite these conditions, no landsliding occurred in the hillside areas of the Project site. G.A. Nicoll also conducted slope stability analyses in the hillsides of the Project site. The results showed favorable hillside stability. For these reasons, G.A. Nicoll concluded that the potential for earthquake-induced landsliding on the Project site is low. In addition, as illustrated in Appendix B-2, Architectural Landscape Plans and Tree Removals, all proposed planting outside of the Fuel Modification Zones, would be irrigated with a temporarily irrigation system for “hydroseed” establishment. Hydroseeding and can improve post-fire slope stability, thereby reducing the probability of a landslide occurring (Barkley 2006; 2019; USDA 2022).

For these reasons, potential impacts associated with the exposure of people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Item #8. Page 302
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 367

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-115 December 2022

3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less Than Significant Wwith Mitigation. As discussed in Section 3.4, Biological Resources, and the BRTR (Appendix B-1) of this IS/MND, while there is no USFWS-designated critical habitat, surveys conducted on the Project site identified six vegetation communities and land covers, three of which are considered “sensitive” under CEQA: California walnut groves, disturbed coastal sage scrub, and coast live oak woodlands. In addition, one special-status wildlife species, yellow warbler, was observed during surveys at the Project site, while three additional species, Southern California legless lizard, coastal whiptail, and hoary bat, have a moderate potential to occur (see Appendix B-1, Biological Resources Technical Report). Potentially significant impacts to vegetation and wildlife communities, including reduction of habitat and direct mortality, could occur as a result of Project associated construction and/or vegetation removal activities. However, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce these impacts to less than significant levels, including MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO8. As such, impacts to biological resources resulting from the proposed Project would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. No further mitigation is required.

As described in Section 3.5, Cultural Resources, and the Historic Resources Technical Report (Appendix C), of this IS/MND, the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel and hatch would be considered an important Item #8. Page 303
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 368

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-116 December 2022
example of California historic water infrastructure, representing the period of 1931 through 1941. The proposed Project includes grading, fill deposits, utilities trenching, road construction, driveway construction, and construction of residential buildings over which could result in a potentially significant impact to this historic resource. However, with incorporation of MM-GEO-2, potential impacts to the Monrovia No. 1 tunnel segment and hatch would be less than significant, and the historic property would still be able to convey is significance following proposed Project implementation. As such, after mitigation, the proposed Project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.

Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. No further mitigation is required. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Less Than Significant Wwith Mitigation. The proposed Project would result in potentially significant project-level impacts involving Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Noise, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, and Utilities and Service Systems. However, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. There are no current or planned projects identified in the area surrounding the Project site. The areas immediately to the south of the Project site are built out with existing residential uses, while the areas to the north, due to existing land use policy and topography, would not be considered suitable for development. Furthermore, future projects in the vicinity would be guided by the policies identified in the City’s 2025 Community Plan, the regulations established in the City’s Municipal Code, and other applicable regional, state, and/or federal requirements regarding the nature, location, and extent of allowable development. Therefore, compliance with applicable land use and environmental regulations would ensure that environmental effects associated with the proposed Project would not combine with effects from reasonably foreseeable future development in the City to cause cumulatively considerable significant impacts. Cumulative impacts would therefore be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. No further mitigation is required. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant Wwith Mitigation. As detailed throughout this IS/MND, the proposed Project would not exceed any significance thresholds or result in significant impacts in the following environmental categories typically associated with indirect or direct effects to human beings: air quality, hazards and hazardous materials, and public services. However, as described in Sections 3.1, Aesthetics, 3.13, Noise, and 3.17, Transportation, the proposed Project could result in potentially significant impacts in the categories of aesthetics, noise, and transportation during construction and/or operation of the proposed Project. However, with implementation of MM-AES-1, MM-NOI-1, MM-TRAF-1, and MM-TRAF-2, these impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. As such, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. No further mitigation is required.

Item #8. Page 304
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 369

GRAND ESTATES PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
3-117 December 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 305
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 370
8375
4-1 December 2022
4 References and Preparers

4.1 References
Airnav. 2022. Airports search. February 24, 2022. http://www.airnav.com/airports/.

Barkley, Y. 2006. After the burn: Assessing and managing your forestland after a wildfire. Accessed March 15, 2022. https://www.fs.usda.gov/rmrs/sites/default/files/documents/ Yvonne%20C.%20Barkley.pdf.

Barkley, Y. Grass Seeding to Control Erosion after a Wildfire. Accessed March 15, 2022. https://survivingwildfire.extension.org/grass-seeding-to-control-erosion-after-a-wildfire/.

Bledsoe Giron (Bledsoe Giron Engineering and Surveying Inc.). 2021, Tentative Tract Map No. 72413, Grand Estates in the City of Glendora, County of Los Angles, State of California.

CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2011. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Responsibility Areas as Recommended by CAL FIRE – Glendora. September 2011. Accessed July 11, 2018. http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/fhsz_maps/FHSZ/los_angeles/Glendora.pdf.

CalEPA (California Environmental Protection Agency). 2018a. Cortese List Data Resources. Accessed August 2, 2018. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.

CalEPA. 2018b. “Site Identified with Waste Constituents above Hazardous Waste Levels Outside the Waste Management Unit.” Accessed August 2, 2018. https://calepa.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/ 62/2016/10/SiteCleanup-CorteseList-CurrentList.pdf.

CalEPA. 2018c. “List of Active Cease and Desist Orders and Cleanup and Abatement Orders.” Prepared by the State Water Resources Control Board. Accessed August 2, 2018. http://www.calepa.ca.gov/ site-cleanup/cortese-list-data-resources/.

CalEPA. 2018d. “List of hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code.” Prepared by DTSC. Accessed August 2, 2018. https://calepa.ca.gov/ sitecleanup/corteselist/section-65962-5a/.

California Code of Regulations, Title 42, Part 6, Subchapter 7- Low-Rise Residential Buildings – Mandatory Features and Devices / Section 150.0 – Mandatory Features and Devices. Accessed December 6, 2019. https://energycodeace.com/site/custom/public/reference-ace-2016/index.html#! Documents/section1500mandatoryfeaturesanddevices.htmhttps://energycodeace.com/site/ custom/public/reference-ace-2016/index.html#!Documents/ section1500mandatoryfeaturesanddevices.htm
California Department of Education. 2014. Earth Layer – California Schools. 2014. Accessed July 5, 2018. http://services.gis.ca.gov/arcgis/rest/services/Society/CaliforniaSchools/MapServer.

California Department of General Services, Office of Public School Construction. 2009. State of California Enrollment Certification/Projection – School Facility Program. Revised May 2009. Accessed August 20, 2018. https://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/opsc/Forms/SAB_50-01.pdf.

California Geological Survey. 2002. California Geomorphic Provinces: Note 36. 4 pp.

Item #8. Page 306
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 371

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
4-2 December 2022
CalRecycle (California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery). 2022. Solid Waste Information System Facility/Site Search. Mesquite Regional Landfill (13-AA-0026). Accessed March 21, 2022. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4197?siteID=609.

Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2011. Caltrans Officially Designated Scenic Highways.

Last updated September 7, 2011. Accessed July 11, 2018. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/ 16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htmhttp://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_hi ghways/index.htm.

Caltrans. 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September 2013.

CAPCOA (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association). 2008. CEQA & Climate Change: Evaluating and Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Project’s Subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. January 2008.

CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2014. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan Building on the Framework Pursuant to AB 32 – The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. May 2014. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2013_update/first_update_climate_change_ scoping_plan.pdf.

CARB. 2016. “Area Designation Maps/State and National.” Last updated May 5, 2016. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm.

CARB. 2017. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update. January 20. Accessed January 2017. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2030sp_pp_final.pdf.

City of Azusa. 2010. Inundation Scenario from Morris Reservoir Failure. October 19, 2010. Accessed July 11, 2018. http://www.ci.azusa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/5208/FloodZoneMap2010?bidId=.

City of Glendora. 2008. Glendora Community Plan 2025. Adopted 2008. Accessed July 6, 2018. http://www.ci.glendora.ca.us/departments-services/planning/applications-documents/general-planspecific-plans/glendora-general-plan.

City of Glendora. 2009. Noise Element. Glendora Community Plan 2025. Adopted 2008. Accessed July 6, 2018. http://www.ci.glendora.ca.us/departments-services/planning/applications-documents/generalplan-specific-plans/glendora-general-plan.

City of Glendora. 2011. Glendora Parks & Trails Master Plan. 2011. Accessed July 13, 2018. http://www.cityofglendora.org/home/showdocument?id=21583.

City of Glendora. 2014. Landscaping Guidelines for Homes in Fire Hazard Severity Zones – Colby Fire FiveYear Plan. Accessed March 10, 2022. https://www.cityofglendora.org/home/ showpublisheddocument/9266/635314295761300000.

City of Glendora. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2021. Accessed March 20, 2022. https://www.cityofglendora.org/home/showdocument?id=27970&t=637611779184347536.

City of Glendora. 2018. City of Glendora Community Services Department Urban Forestry Manual. Accessed March 15, 2022. https://www.cityofglendora.org/home/showpublisheddocument/23006/ 636614535435770000.

Item #8. Page 307
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 372

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
4-3 December 2022
City of Glendora. 2019. Resolution No. PC 2019-XX. Accessed March 22, 2020. http://sirepub.ci.glendora.ca.us/ sirepub/cache/2/oiitwtcvfp13jul15ul3mxea/36150003222020071300931.PDF City of Glendora. 2022a. City of Glendora Public Works Department Memo. Subject: Grand Estates.

February 7, 2022.

City of Glendora. 2022b. Demographics and Statistics. City of Glendora Webpage. Accessed March 19, 2022. http://www.ci.glendora.ca.us/about-glendora/demographics-and-statistics.

City of Glendora. 2018c. District Policing Map. City of Glendora Police Department Webpage. Accessed March 19, 2022. http://www.ci.glendora.ca.us/departments-services/police/district-policing-map.

City of West Covina. 2018. Section 8: Flood in Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan. Accessed July 11, 2018. http://www.westcovina.org/departments/fire-/disaster-preparedness/natural-hazaard-mitigationplan/section-8-flood.

CNPS (California Native Plant Society). 2022. Calscape. Accessed March 15, 2022. https://www.calscape.org/.

CNRA (California Natural Resources Agency). 2009. “Final Statement of Reasons for Regulatory Action:

Amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines Addressing Analysis and Mitigation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Pursuant to SB97.” Sacramento, California: CNRA. December 2009. http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/Final_Statement_ of_Reasons.pdfhttp://resources.ca.gov/ ceqa/docs/Final_Statement_ of_Reasons.pdf.

Dibblee, T.W. and Ehrenspeck, H.E. 1998, Geologic map of the Mt. Wilson and Azusa quadrangles, Los Angeles County, California: Dibblee Geological Foundation, Dibblee Foundation Map DF-67, scale 1:24,000.

Dibblee, T.W. and J.A. Minch, 2002. Geologic map of the Glendora quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California:

Dibblee Geological Foundation, Dibblee Foundation Map DF-89, scale 1:24,000.

Division of Mines and Geology. 1982. Mineral Land Classification Map – Aggregate Resources Only – Glendora Quadrangle. [map]. June 1, 1982. Accessed July 6, 2018. http://www.quake.ca.gov/ gmaps/WH/smaramaps.htm.

DOC (California Department of Conservation). 2022a. California Important Farmland Finder. Accessed March 21, 2022. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/.

DOC. 2022b. Williamson Act Status Report 2020-21. Accessed March 21, 2022. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/ dlrp/wa/Documents/stats_reports/2022%20WA%20Status%20Report.pdf.

DOGGR (California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources). 2018. DOGGR Well Finder. Last updated April 27, 2018. Accessed July 6, 2018. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/ doggr/wellfinder/#close.

DTSC (Department of Toxic Substances Control). 2018a. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese). Accessed August 2, 2018. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search?cmd =search&reporttype=CORTESE&site_type=CSITES,OPEN,FUDS,CLOSE&status=ACT,BKLG,COM,COLU R&reporttitle=HAZARDOUS+WASTE+AND+SUBSTANCES+SITE+LIST+(CORTESE).

Item #8. Page 308
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 373

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
4-4 December 2022
DTSC. 2018b. EnviroStor Database, Search by Map Location. Accessed August 3, 2018. http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/.

DWR (Department of Water Resources). 2018. Best Available Maps. Accessed August 3, 2018, and August 20, 2018. http://gis.bam.water.ca.gov/bam/.

EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2016a. “Area Designations for the 2010 Primary Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard – Round 3.” July 22, 2016. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-07/documents/areadesign.pdf.

EPA. 2016b. “Health and Environmental Effects of Particulate Matter (PM)” Last updated July 1, 2016. https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/health-and-environmental-effects-particulate-matter-pm.

EPA. 2017. EPA Green Book. Last updated September 2017.https://www.epa.gov/green-book.

FEMA. Federal Emergency Management Act. 2022. FEMA Flood Map Service Center: Search by Address.

Search Results—City of Glendora. Last accessed, March 19, 2022. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/ search?AddressQuery=glendora#searchresultsanchor.

Giron Engineers, Inc. 2018.Brief on Sanitary Sewer Service for Tentative Tract Map No. 72413. Prepared for the City of Glendora. March 26, 2018.

GUSD (Glendora Unified School District). 2018. School Locator. Accessed July 12, 2018. https://www.glendora.k12.ca.us/school-locator.

Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2017. Trip Generation Manual–10th Edition. September 2017.

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2007. IPCC Fourth Assessment Synthesis of ScientificTechnical Information Relevant to Interpreting Article 2 of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Jefferson, G.T. 1991. A Catalog of Late Quaternary Vertebrates from California. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Technical Reports 7:1-174. Unpublished revision: 18 May 2012.

LACFD (Los Angeles County Fire Department). 2022. Forestry Fuel Modification. Accessed March 21, 2022. https://fire.lacounty.gov/forestry-fuel-modification/.

LACDPW (Los Angeles County Department of Public Works). 2009. Stormwater Best Management Practice Design and Maintenance Manual: For Publicly Maintained Storm Drain Systems. May 2009. Available:
http://ladpw.org/ldd/lib/pdf/manuals/Stormwater%20BMP%20Design%20and%20Maintenance%20M anual.pdf. Accessed March 22, 2020.

LACDPW. 2017. Low Impact Development Standards Manual. Accessed March 22, 2020. https://dpw.lacounty.gov/ldd/lib/fp/Hydrology/Low%20Impact%20Development%20Standards% 20Manual.pdf.

LACDPW. 2022a. Flood Zone Determination Map. Accessed March 22, 2022. https://apps.gis.lacounty.gov/ dpw/m/?viewer=floodzone.

LACDPW. 2022b. FEMA Flood Zone Definitions. Accessed March 22, 2022. https://pw.lacounty.gov/wmd/ floodzone/docs/FZD_Legend.pdf.

Item #8. Page 309
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 374

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
4-5 December 2022
LACSD (Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County). 2018. Will Serve Letter from Tract Map No. 72413.

April 6, 2018.

McLeod, S.A. 2018. Vertebrate Paleontology Records Check for Paleontological Resources for the Proposed Glendora Hillside Subdivision Project, Dudek Project # 8375, in the City of Glendora, Los Angeles County, Project Area. Unpublished Records Search Results Letter from the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, California.

Metro (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority). 2010. 2010 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County. Accessed August 20, 2018. http://www.metro.net/projects/ congestion_mgmt_pgm/.

Metro. 2018. Glendora to Montclair Work Plan. Foothill Gold Line Webpage. Accessed July 13, 2018. https://foothillgoldline.org/construction_phases/glendora_to_montclair/.

OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines – Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. Accessed February 2015. https://oehha.ca.gov/air/crnr/notice-adoption-air-toxics-hot-spots-programguidance-manual-preparation-health-risk-0 SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). 2016. 2016–2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Adopted April 7, 2016. Accessed March 2017. http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx.

SCAG. 2020. Current Context—Demographics and Growth Forecast. Connect SoCal Technical Report.

Adopted September 2020. Accessed March 16, 2022. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/ file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics-and-growth-forecast.pdf?1606001579 SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District). 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook.

SCAQMD. 2003. White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution. August 2003. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/EnvironmentalJustice/cumulative-impacts-working-group/cumulative-impacts-white-paper.pdf?sfvrsn=2.

SCAQMD. 2005. Rule 403: Fugitive Dust. Adopted May 7, 1976. Amended June 3, 2005.

SCAQMD. 2008. Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold.

October 2008.

SCAQMD. 2009. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. June 2003; revised July 2008; Appendix C “Mass Rate LST Look-up Tables” revised October 2009. http://www.aqmd.gov/ docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/final-lst-methodologydocument.pdf?sfvrsn=2.

SCAQMD. 2010. Greenhouse Gas CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group Meeting #15.

September 28, 2010. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhousegases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/ghg-meeting-15/ghg-meeting-15-mainpresentation.pdf?sfvrsn=2 Item #8. Page 310
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 375

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
4-6 December 2022
SCAQMD. 2017. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. March 16, 2017. Accessed October 2017. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/ 2016-air-quality-management-plan/final-2016-aqmp/final2016aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=15.

SCAQMD. 2019. “SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds.” Originally published in CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Table A9-11-A. Revised April 2019. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2 SVP (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology). 2010. Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources. 11 p. Available; http://vertpaleo.org/PDFS/68/ 68c554bb-86f1-442f-a0dc-25299762d36c.pdf.

SWRCB (California State Water Resources Control Board). 2018. GeoTracker Database, Search by Map Location. Accessed August 2, 2018. http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2018. “QuickFacts—Glendora City, California.” Population Census, April 1, 2020.

Accessed March 16, 2022. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/ glendoracitycalifornia/POP010220
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2018. Superfund Site Search Results (National Priorities List). Last updated June 4, 2018. Accessed August 2, 2018. https://www.epa.gov/ superfund/search-superfund-sites-where-you-live.

USDA (U.S. Department of Agricultural). 2022. Hydroseeding and Hydromulching Fact Sheet. Accessed March 15, 2022. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/wy/technical/ ?cid=nrcs142p2_02726.

Item #8. Page 311
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 376

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
4-7 December 2022

4.2 List of Preparers
Lead Agency
City of Glendora
116 E. Foothill Boulevard
Glendora, California 91741
Mark Carnahan, City Planner
Maryann V. Marks, AICP, Consulting Planner
Dudek
38 North Marengo Avenue
Pasadena, California 91101
Kristin Starbird, Senior Project Manager
Michele Webb, Planner
Samantha Robinson, Planner
Michael Cady, Senior Biologist
Nicholas Lorenzen, Senior Air Quality/GHG Specialist
Samantha Murray, Senior Historian
Linda Kry, Senior Archaeologist
Jonathan Leech, Senior Noise Specialist
Christopher Starbird, GIS Specialist
Item #8. Page 312
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 377

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
4-8 December 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 313
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 378
NG lendora A ve
N Oak Dr
E Bennett Ave
N Bender Ave
Soldano Dr
Crape Myrtle Dr
Old Mill Rd
W Palm Dr
N Wildwood Ave
N Trayer Ave
Rosedale Ave
Viewcre st Dr
Manresa Dr
Rai nbow Dr
N Westridge Ave
Camellia Way
N Valencia St E Comstock Ave E Cypress Ave
Easley Canyon Rd
Gardenia Dr
C lo vervie w r D
N Banna Ave
Lemon Swirl Dr W Laurel Ave
Crestglen Rd
E Laurel Ave
Orange Blossom
Way
E
Milton Dr
N Yucca Ridge Rd
Azusa Veterans Way
E Northridge Ave
W
Donington St
E Virginia Ave
Hicrest Rd
Macneil Dr
W Virginia Ave
Desert Wil low
Rd
Conife r R d
N Easley Canyon Rd
N Barranca Ave
N Vermont Ave
N Wabash Ave
N Minnesota Ave
N Pennsylvania Ave
N Cullen Ave
Gle n coe Hei g hts Dr
E Whitcomb Ave
Vosburg
Dr
E Leadora Ave
N Vista Bonita Ave W Leadora Ave
W Bennett
Ave
E Palm Dr
N Live Oak Ave
NPasadena Ave
N Grand Ave
W Sierra Madre Ave E Sierra Madre Ave
City of Azusa
City of
Glendora
Angeles National Forest
Regional Location and Project Vicinity
Grand Estates Project
SOURCE: Esri, Digital Globe; OpenStreetMap 2019
Date: 2/14/2022 - Last saved by: cstarbird - Path: Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\Fig_Project_Location.mxd 01 750 ,500 n Feet
Project Site BoundaryCity LimitsNational Forest Boundary FIGURE 2-1
Long
Beach
El
Segundo
Walnut
Industry
South El
Monte Malibu West Hollywood
San Dimas
La Verne Agoura
Hills Hidden Hills Arcadia Glendora
Duarte
Glendale
San Fernando
Santa Clarita
Palmdale
Lancaster
Palos Verdes
Estates
Hermosa Beach
Santa Monica
Los Angeles
Kern County
Ventura
County
Los
Angeles
County
Orange County
£¤101
£¤395
ÄÆ48
ÄÆ71
118
ÄÆ
134
ÄÆ
ÄÆ91
138
ÄÆ
ÄÆ39
ÄÆ55
159
ÄÆ
ÄÆ23
ÄÆ73 241
ÄÆ
232
ÄÆ
142
ÄÆ
107
ÄÆ
187
ÄÆ
126
ÄÆ
170
ÄÆ
133
ÄÆ
213
ÄÆ
ÄÆ22
ÄÆ90
ÄÆ34
150
ÄÆ
ÄÆ27
ÄÆ18
ÄÆ1 ÄÆ66
ÄÆ19
ÄÆ60
ÄÆ14
ÄÆ2
138
ÄÆ
§¨¦405
§¨¦10
§¨¦5
§¨¦210
§¨¦5
§¨¦710
§¨¦15
§¨¦605
Project
Site
!(^
Item #8. Page 314
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 379

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
2 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 315
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 380
Existing
Residence
N Grand Ave
N
Silent Ranch
Dr
Cloverview Dr
W Palm Dr
Aerial View and Existing On-Site Features
Grand Estates Project
SOURCE: County of Los Angeles 2018; Bing Maps 2018; NHD 2018 Date: 2/14/2022 - Last saved by: cstarbird - Path: Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\Fig_Onsite_Features.mxd 0 100 200Feet n
Project Site Boundary
Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura
MWD Upper Feeder Hatch
USFS/LACFCD Crib Dam
USFS/LACFCD Flood Control Channel
Rancho Los Alisos/Camp Aventura
FIGURE 2-2
1:2,400
05 25 0
Meters
Item #8. Page 316
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 381

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
4 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 317
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 382
Site Plan
Silent Ranch Hillside Subdivision Project
FIGURE 2-3 SOURCE: Dreamland Investments, LLC., 2017; Giron Engineers Inc., 2017 Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND
Item #8. Page 318
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 383

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
6 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 319
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 384
Tentative Tract Map No. 72413
Grand Estates Project
FIGURE 2-4a SOURCE: City of Glendora Engineering Division, 2021 Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\
Item #8. Page 320
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 385

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
8 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 321
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 386
Cross-Sections of TTM No. 72413
Grand Estates Project
FIGURE 2-4b SOURCE: City of Glendora Engineering Division, 2021 Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\
Item #8. Page 322
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 387

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
10 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 323
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 388
N

PALM DRIVE
UE
LOT 5 LOT 6
LOT 7
LOT 9
LOT 10
LOT 11
LOT 12
LOT 13
LOT 4
"A" STREET
"A" STREET
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL PL
PL
PL
PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL

ZONE -A
LOT 1
(E) POOL HOUSE
(E) RESIDENCE
(E) GAZEBO
(E) GUEST
HOUSE
LOT 3
ASPHALT PAVED RD. ASPHALT PAVED RD.

ASPHALT PAVED RD.
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 ZONE -A

ZONE -A

ZONE -B

ZONE -A

ZONE -B

ZONE -A

ZONE -A ZONE -A

ZONE -A

GRADED PAD

GRADED PAD GRADED PAD

GRADED PAD

ZONE -B

SHEET INDEX

EXISTING TREES DATA

PLANTING PLAN
L-1 FUEL MODIFICATION PLAN
0 NORTH
25' 50' 100'
L-2
L-3
L-4
Phil May Landscape Architecture
2532 Wallace Ave.

Fullerton, CA 92831
909-373-1959

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

CONSULTANTS

DREAMLAND INVESTMENT

INVESTMENT LLC
626.236.7388

OWNER / DEVELOPER
GIRON ENGINEERS INC.
654 S. GLENDORA AVE.
626.335.8782

CIVIL ENGINEER
L-5 PLANTING PLAN
L-6 PLANTING PLAN
L-7 PLANTING PLAN
L-8 PLANTING PLAN
1 11/30/2021
7292
Preliminary Fuel Modification Plan
Grand Estates Project
FIGURE 2-5 SOURCE: Phil May Landscape Architecture, 2021 Path: Z:\Projects\
Item #8. Page 324
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 389

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
12 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 325
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 390
Hillside Slope and Areas of Cut/Fill
Grand Estates Project
FIGURE 2-6 SOURCE: City of Glendora Engineering Division, 2021 Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\
Item #8. Page 326
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 391

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
14 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 327
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 392
View A - Existing Conditions
View A - Proposed Conditions
View Simulation A
Grand Estates Project
FIGURE 3-1a SOURCE: Dreamland Investments LLC, 2022
Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\
Item #8. Page 328
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 393

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
16 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 329
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 394
View B - Existing Conditions
View B - Proposed ConditionsView B - X-Ray View
View Simulation B
Grand Estates Project
FIGURE 3-1b SOURCE: Dreamland Investments LLC, 2022
Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\
Item #8. Page 330
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 395

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
18 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 331
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 396
View C - Existing Conditions
View C - Proposed ConditionsView C - X-Ray View
View Simulation C
Grand Estates Project
FIGURE 3-1c SOURCE: Dreamland Investments LLC, 2022
Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\
Item #8. Page 332
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 397

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
20 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 333
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 398
View D - Existing Conditions
View D - Proposed Conditions
View Simulation D
Grand Estates Project
FIGURE 3-1d SOURCE: Dreamland Investments LLC, 2022
Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\
Item #8. Page 334
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 399

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
22 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 335
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 400
Photo Lineament
Grand Estates Project
FIGURE 3.7-1 SOURCE: G. A. Nicoll & Associates, Inc 2021 Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\
Item #8. Page 336
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 401

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
24 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 337
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 402
;
ΣQ25 = 31.3cfsΣQ50 = 36.6cfs
ΣQ50 Burn = 38.1cfs
ΣQ50 BB = 76.2cfs
ΣDPV = 3450yd³
ΣArea = 9.2 ac
ΣQ25 = 21.7cfsΣQ50 = 25.1cfs
ΣQ50 Burn = 26cfs
ΣQ50 BB = 52cfs
ΣDPV = 2100yd³
ΣQ25 = 42.1cfsΣQ50 = 49.5cfs
ΣQ50 Burn = 51.8cfs
ΣQ50 BB = 104cfs
ΣDPV = 5230yd³
ΣArea = 13.9 ac
ΣQ25 = 42.8cfsΣQ50 = 49.8cfs
ΣQ50 Burn = 51.7cfs
ΣQ50 BB = 103cfs
ΣDPV = 4430yd³
ΣArea = 11.8 ac
ΣQ25 = 58.1cfs
ΣQ50 = 68cfs
ΣQ50 Burn = 70.8cfs
ΣQ50 BB = 142cfs
ΣDPV = 6530yd³
ΣArea = 17.4 ac ΣQ25 = 23.6cfs ΣQ50 = 27.4cfs
ΣQ50 Burn = 28.3cfs
ΣQ50 BB = 56.6cfs
ΣDPV = 2290yd³
ΣQ25 = 18.6cfsΣQ50 = 21.5cfs
ΣQ50 Burn = 22.3cfs
ΣQ50 BB = 44.6fs
ΣDPV = 1800yd³
ΣQ25 = 61.3cfsΣQ50 = 71.6cfs
ΣQ50 Burn = 74.8cfs
ΣQ50 BB = 150cfs
ΣDPV = 7090yd³
ΣArea = 18.9 ac
ΣQ25 = 142cfsΣQ50 = 167cfs
ΣQ50 Burn = 176cfs
ΣQ50 BB = 342cfs
ΣDPV = 17840yd³
ΣQ25 = 80.8cfs
ΣQ50 = 96cfs
ΣQ50 Burn = 101cfs
ΣQ50 BB = 197cfs
ΣDPV = 10610yd³
ΣArea = 29.5 ac
L (ft) =388
L
(ft
)
=5
21 L (ft) =592
L (ft) =611
L (ft) =617
L (ft) =640
L (ft) =659
L
(ft)
=711
L (ft) =757
L (ft) =806
L (ft) =812
L (ft) =886
L (ft) =971
1545
1862
1884
1248
1500
1435
1100
1095
1278
1108
1028
996
1084
1013
A5

4.7 AC
A8-2

5.1 AC
A6

6.1 AC
A1

5.6 AC
A7

5.6 AC
A4
7 AC
A3

3.6 AC
A2

4.8 AC
A10-1

1.7 AC
A9

1.5 AC
Lot 1b

0.5 AC
A8-1

3.9 AC
A10-2

1.4 AC
¯ Hydrology Study for TR 72413 Watershed Map Existing Conditions W Palm Dr.

Grand Ave.

Legend
Subarea Concentration PointDPA Zone BoundaryTravel Time Flowpath10 ft ContourProperty BoundarySubarea BoundaryParcel Boundaries 1" = 100'
0 100 200 300 400 50
Feet
Cloverview Dr.

DPA Zone 1
DPA Zone 7
)2
&3
([5&36'
&3
([LVWLQJFRQGLWLRQK\GURORJLFGHVLJQGDWDDQGGHEULVSURGXFWLRQ

HYDROLOGY STUDY
CITY OF _____________________________

RECOMMENDED FOR CITY APPROVAL
CHECKED BY:______________________RCE NO._________DATE___________ APPROVED BY:_____________________________________DATE___________

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
88200
2/27/20192/27/2019

GLENDORA

MMENDED FO
_____________________
_______________________

HYDROLOGY STUDY
APPROVED BY CITY OF ________________
APPROVED BY: RCE NO._________DATE___________

GLENDORA
Existing Conditions Tributary Subareas
Grand Estates Project
FIGURE 3.10-1 SOURCE: Dreamland Investments LLC, 2021
Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\
Item #8. Page 338
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 403

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
26 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 339
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 404
Post-Development Drainage Conditions
Grand Estates Project
FIGURE 3.10-2 SOURCE: Dreamland Investments LLC, 2021
Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\
Item #8. Page 340
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 405

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
28 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 341
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 406
"J
"J
"J
N Trayer Ave
P
a
rkbrook Ln
N Barranca Ave
N Vermont Ave
N Pennsylvania Ave
Fernpark Dr
N Brown Sage Dr
La Crosse St
Pennsylvania Ln
W Palm Dr
Bubbling WellD
r
W Northridge Ave
Rainbow Dr
N
W
e
s
t
r
d
i
g
e
Av
e
CloverviewDr
Ben Lomond Av e N Glendora Ave
W Sierra Madre Ave NGrand Ave
ST1
ST2
ST3
Noise Measurement Locations
Grand Estates Project
SOURCE: County of Los Angeles 2018; ESRI World Imagery
Date: 2/14/2022 - Last saved by: cstarbird - Path: Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\Fig_Noise_Measurements.mxd 0 250 500 n Feet
Project Site Boundary
"J Noise Measurement Locations
FIGURE 3.13-1
Item #8. Page 342
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 407

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
30 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 343
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 408

EXISTING HYDRO

PNEUMATIC TANK
PROPOSED NEW 1.5-INCHDOMESTIC WATER LINE(ZONE 11)
Proposed Water Pipeline System
Grand Estates Project
FIGURE 3.19-1 SOURCE: Dreamland Investments LLC, 2021
Z:\Projects\j837501\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\
Item #8. Page 344
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 409

GRAND ESTATES RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8375
32 June 2022

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item #8. Page 345
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 410
Appendix A
CalEEMod Modeling Data Sheets
Item #8. Page 346
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 411
Item #8. Page 347
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 412
Glendora Hillside Subdivision
South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer
Project Characteristics - Operational year 2024Land Use - Lot acreage and building square footage based on project site plan.Construction Phase - Construction scheduel information was provided by the project applicant.Trips and VMT - Water trucks were added as vendor trucks and haul truck data is based on information provided by the project applicant.Grading - CalEEMod defaults.

Architectural Coating - CalEEMod defaults.

Vehicle Trips - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Asphalt Surfaces 127.00 1000sqft 2.92 127,000.00 0 Single Family Housing 12.00 Dwelling Unit 9.12 54,000.00 34

1.2 Other Project CharacteristicsUrbanizationClimate Zone Rural3
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data1.0 Project CharacteristicsUtility Company Southern California Edison Operational Year 2024
CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
390.98 0.033 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 348
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 413
Woodstoves - In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 455 no woodstoves or fireplaces were included.

Area Coating - CalEEMod defaults.

Energy Use - CalEEMod defaults.Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - In compliance with SCAQMD Ruel 403 2x watering and limiting vehicle speed to 15 mph was included the modeling.Fleet Mix - CalEEMod defaults.Road Dust - CalEEmod defaults.On-road Fugitive Dust - CalEEMod defaults.

2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 23.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 300.00 305.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 30.00 20.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 23.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 12.00 tblFireplaces NumberWood 0.60 0.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 2,300.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 21,600.00 54,000.00tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.90 9.12 tblProjectCharacteristics UrbanizationLevel Urban Rural tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 227.00 270.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 15.00 16.00 tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 0.60 0.00tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 0.60 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 349
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 414

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 18.2867 36.4360 34.5431 0.0737 19.9719 1.4399 21.2409 10.1870 1.3252 11.3545 0.0000 7,258.417 1 7,258.417
1 2.0016 0.1598 7,356.064
6 2024 1.7057 14.4676 18.9594 0.0388 1.0342 0.6232 1.6575 0.2779 0.5862 0.8641 0.0000 3,784.065 6 3,784.065
6 0.6357 0.0851 3,825.321
0 Maximum 18.2867 36.4360 34.5431 0.0737 19.9719 1.4399 21.2409 10.1870 1.3252 11.3545 0.0000 7,258.417 1 7,258.417
1 2.0016 0.1598 7,356.064
6 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 18.2867 36.4360 34.5431 0.0737 9.1606 1.4399 10.4295 4.6306 1.3252 5.7981 0.0000 7,258.417 1 7,258.417
1 2.0016 0.1598 7,356.064
5 2024 1.7057 14.4676 18.9594 0.0388 1.0342 0.6232 1.6575 0.2779 0.5862 0.8641 0.0000 3,784.065 6 3,784.065
6 0.6357 0.0851 3,825.321
0 Maximum 18.2867 36.4360 34.5431 0.0737 9.1606 1.4399 10.4295 4.6306 1.3252 5.7981 0.0000 7,258.417 1 7,258.417
1 2.0016 0.1598 7,356.064
5 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 350
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 415
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.47 0.00 47.21 53.10 0.00 45.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 351
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 416

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Energy 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Mobile 0.4117 0.4844 4.6714 0.0111 1.1723 7.6700e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,131.752 9 1,131.752 9 0.0638 0.0438 1,146.386 0 Total 1.6874 0.7380 5.7770 0.0127 1.1723 0.0328 1.2050 0.3124 0.0322 0.3446 0.0000 1,442.536 9 1,442.536
9 0.0715 0.0494 1,459.050
7 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Energy 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Mobile 0.4117 0.4844 4.6714 0.0111 1.1723 7.6700e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,131.752 9 1,131.752 9 0.0638 0.0438 1,146.386 0 Total 1.6874 0.7380 5.7770 0.0127 1.1723 0.0328 1.2050 0.3124 0.0322 0.3446 0.0000 1,442.536 9 1,442.536
9 0.0715 0.0494 1,459.050
7 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 352
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 417

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/16/2023 1/31/2023 5 12 2 Grading Grading 2/1/2023 2/28/2023 5 203 Building Construction Building Construction 5/1/2023 6/28/2024 5 305 4 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 5/1/2023 5/31/2023 5 23 5 Paving Paving 8/1/2023 8/31/2023 5 23
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 109,350; Residential Outdoor: 36,450; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 7,620 (Architectural Coating – sqft)Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 18 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 60Acres of Paving: 2.92 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 353
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 418

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed AreaReduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved RoadsGrading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 6.00 0.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTGrading 8 20.00 6.00 270.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTBuilding Construction 9 58.00 22.00 0.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 12.00 0.00 0.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 16.00 0.00 0.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 354
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 419

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.6570 0.0000 19.6570 10.1025 0.0000 10.1025 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 19.6570 1.2660 20.9230 10.1025 1.1647 11.2672 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 7.0200e003 0.2395 0.0901 1.2400e- 003 0.0440 1.4500e- 003 0.0454 0.0127 1.3800e- 003 0.0140 133.2656 133.2656 4.4800e- 003 0.0193 139.1207 Worker 0.0694 0.0492 0.8233 2.3600e003 0.2709 1.4900e- 003 0.2724 0.0719 1.3700e- 003 0.0732 238.7269 238.7269 5.1400e- 003 5.1300e- 003 240.3830 Total 0.0765 0.2887 0.9134 3.6000e003 0.3149 2.9400e- 003 0.3178 0.0845 2.7500e- 003 0.0873 371.9926 371.9926 9.6200e- 003 0.0244 379.5037 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 355
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 420

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 8.8457 0.0000 8.8457 4.5461 0.0000 4.5461 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 0.0000 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 8.8457 1.2660 10.1117 4.5461 1.1647 5.7108 0.0000 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 7.0200e003 0.2395 0.0901 1.2400e- 003 0.0440 1.4500e- 003 0.0454 0.0127 1.3800e- 003 0.0140 133.2656 133.2656 4.4800e- 003 0.0193 139.1207 Worker 0.0694 0.0492 0.8233 2.3600e003 0.2709 1.4900e- 003 0.2724 0.0719 1.3700e- 003 0.0732 238.7269 238.7269 5.1400e- 003 5.1300e- 003 240.3830 Total 0.0765 0.2887 0.9134 3.6000e003 0.3149 2.9400e- 003 0.3178 0.0845 2.7500e- 003 0.0873 371.9926 371.9926 9.6200e- 003 0.0244 379.5037 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 356
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 421

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.2036 0.0000 9.2036 3.6538 0.0000 3.6538 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 1.4245 1.4245 1.3105 1.3105 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Total 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 9.2036 1.4245 10.6281 3.6538 1.3105 4.9643 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0291 1.6262 0.4573 7.7100e003 0.2361 0.0123 0.2485 0.0647 0.0118 0.0765 848.4216 848.4216 0.0472 0.1348 889.7681 Vendor 7.0200e003 0.2395 0.0901 1.2400e- 003 0.0440 1.4500e- 003 0.0454 0.0127 1.3800e- 003 0.0140 133.2656 133.2656 4.4800e- 003 0.0193 139.1207 Worker 0.0772 0.0547 0.9148 2.6200e003 0.3010 1.6600e- 003 0.3027 0.0798 1.5300e- 003 0.0814 265.2522 265.2522 5.7100e- 003 5.7000e- 003 267.0922 Total 0.1133 1.9204 1.4622 0.0116 0.5811 0.0154 0.5966 0.1572 0.0147 0.1719 1,246.939 4 1,246.939
4 0.0574 0.1598 1,295.981
0 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 357
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 422

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 4.1416 0.0000 4.1416 1.6442 0.0000 1.6442 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 1.4245 1.4245 1.3105 1.3105 0.0000 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Total 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 4.1416 1.4245 5.5661 1.6442 1.3105 2.9547 0.0000 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0291 1.6262 0.4573 7.7100e003 0.2361 0.0123 0.2485 0.0647 0.0118 0.0765 848.4216 848.4216 0.0472 0.1348 889.7681 Vendor 7.0200e003 0.2395 0.0901 1.2400e- 003 0.0440 1.4500e- 003 0.0454 0.0127 1.3800e- 003 0.0140 133.2656 133.2656 4.4800e- 003 0.0193 139.1207 Worker 0.0772 0.0547 0.9148 2.6200e003 0.3010 1.6600e- 003 0.3027 0.0798 1.5300e- 003 0.0814 265.2522 265.2522 5.7100e- 003 5.7000e- 003 267.0922 Total 0.1133 1.9204 1.4622 0.0116 0.5811 0.0154 0.5966 0.1572 0.0147 0.1719 1,246.939 4 1,246.939
4 0.0574 0.1598 1,295.981
0 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 358
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 423

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0257 0.8782 0.3303 4.5400e003 0.1612 5.3000e- 003 0.1665 0.0464 5.0700e- 003 0.0515 488.6406 488.6406 0.0164 0.0707 510.1092 Worker 0.2237 0.1586 2.6528 7.6100e003 0.8730 4.8100e- 003 0.8778 0.2315 4.4300e- 003 0.2359 769.2312 769.2312 0.0166 0.0165 774.5675 Total 0.2495 1.0368 2.9831 0.0122 1.0342 0.0101 1.0443 0.2779 9.5000e003 0.2874 1,257.871 8 1,257.871 8 0.0330 0.0872 1,284.676 7 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 359
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 424

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0257 0.8782 0.3303 4.5400e003 0.1612 5.3000e- 003 0.1665 0.0464 5.0700e- 003 0.0515 488.6406 488.6406 0.0164 0.0707 510.1092 Worker 0.2237 0.1586 2.6528 7.6100e003 0.8730 4.8100e- 003 0.8778 0.2315 4.4300e- 003 0.2359 769.2312 769.2312 0.0166 0.0165 774.5675 Total 0.2495 1.0368 2.9831 0.0122 1.0342 0.0101 1.0443 0.2779 9.5000e003 0.2874 1,257.871 8 1,257.871 8 0.0330 0.0872 1,284.676 7 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 360
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 425

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0251 0.8825 0.3248 4.4700e003 0.1612 5.3200e- 003 0.1665 0.0464 5.0900e- 003 0.0515 481.6144 481.6144 0.0164 0.0698 502.8112 Worker 0.2090 0.1414 2.4678 7.3900e003 0.8730 4.6000e- 003 0.8776 0.2315 4.2300e- 003 0.2357 746.7523 746.7523 0.0150 0.0154 751.7022 Total 0.2341 1.0239 2.7926 0.0119 1.0342 9.9200e003 1.0442 0.2779 9.3200e- 003 0.2872 1,228.366 7 1,228.366 7 0.0314 0.0851 1,254.513 3 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 361
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 426

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0251 0.8825 0.3248 4.4700e003 0.1612 5.3200e- 003 0.1665 0.0464 5.0900e- 003 0.0515 481.6144 481.6144 0.0164 0.0698 502.8112 Worker 0.2090 0.1414 2.4678 7.3900e003 0.8730 4.6000e- 003 0.8776 0.2315 4.2300e- 003 0.2357 746.7523 746.7523 0.0150 0.0154 751.7022 Total 0.2341 1.0239 2.7926 0.0119 1.0342 9.9200e003 1.0442 0.2779 9.3200e- 003 0.2872 1,228.366 7 1,228.366 7 0.0314 0.0851 1,254.513 3 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 362
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 427

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 16.2265 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 16.4182 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0463 0.0328 0.5489 1.5700e003 0.1806 9.9000e- 004 0.1816 0.0479 9.2000e- 004 0.0488 159.1513 159.1513 3.4300e- 003 3.4200e- 003 160.2553 Total 0.0463 0.0328 0.5489 1.5700e003 0.1806 9.9000e- 004 0.1816 0.0479 9.2000e- 004 0.0488 159.1513 159.1513 3.4300e- 003 3.4200e- 003 160.2553 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 363
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 428

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 16.2265 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 16.4182 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0463 0.0328 0.5489 1.5700e003 0.1806 9.9000e- 004 0.1816 0.0479 9.2000e- 004 0.0488 159.1513 159.1513 3.4300e- 003 3.4200e- 003 160.2553 Total 0.0463 0.0328 0.5489 1.5700e003 0.1806 9.9000e- 004 0.1816 0.0479 9.2000e- 004 0.0488 159.1513 159.1513 3.4300e- 003 3.4200e- 003 160.2553 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 364
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 429

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.3326 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3654 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0617 0.0437 0.7318 2.1000e003 0.2408 1.3300e- 003 0.2422 0.0639 1.2200e- 003 0.0651 212.2017 212.2017 4.5700e- 003 4.5600e- 003 213.6738 Total 0.0617 0.0437 0.7318 2.1000e003 0.2408 1.3300e- 003 0.2422 0.0639 1.2200e- 003 0.0651 212.2017 212.2017 4.5700e- 003 4.5600e- 003 213.6738 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 365
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 430

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.3326 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3654 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0617 0.0437 0.7318 2.1000e003 0.2408 1.3300e- 003 0.2422 0.0639 1.2200e- 003 0.0651 212.2017 212.2017 4.5700e- 003 4.5600e- 003 213.6738 Total 0.0617 0.0437 0.7318 2.1000e003 0.2408 1.3300e- 003 0.2422 0.0639 1.2200e- 003 0.0651 212.2017 212.2017 4.5700e- 003 4.5600e- 003 213.6738 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 366
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 431

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 0.4117 0.4844 4.6714 0.0111 1.1723 7.6700e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,131.752 9 1,131.752 9 0.0638 0.0438 1,146.386 0 Unmitigated 0.4117 0.4844 4.6714 0.0111 1.1723 7.6700e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,131.752 9 1,131.752 9 0.0638 0.0438 1,146.386 0

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile4.2 Trip Summary Information4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
Single Family Housing 113.28 114.48 102.60 543,940 543,940 Total 113.28 114.48 102.60 543,940 543,940
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Asphalt Surfaces 18.50 10.10 7.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Single Family Housing 19.80 9.60 12.90 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3

4.4 Fleet Mix
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 367
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 432
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.542450 0.061470 0.185138 0.129299 0.023799 0.006448 0.011958 0.009209 0.000810 0.000503 0.024446 0.000751 0.003721 Single Family Housing 0.542450 0.061470 0.185138 0.129299 0.023799 0.006448 0.011958 0.009209 0.000810 0.000503 0.024446 0.000751 0.003721

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated

8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 NaturalGasUnmitigated

8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 368
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 433

6.0 Area Detail

0.790276 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Total 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 369
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 434

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Unmitigated 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 370
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 435

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

0.1023 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

1.1142 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0198 0.1692 0.0720 1.0800e003 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0000 216.0000 216.0000 4.1400e- 003 3.9600e- 003 217.2836 Landscaping 0.0310 0.0115 1.0025 5.0000e005 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 1.8104 1.8104 1.7800e- 003 1.8550 Total 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 371
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 436

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

0.1023 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

1.1142 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0198 0.1692 0.0720 1.0800e003 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0000 216.0000 216.0000 4.1400e- 003 3.9600e- 003 217.2836 Landscaping 0.0310 0.0115 1.0025 5.0000e005 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 1.8104 1.8104 1.7800e- 003 1.8550 Total 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 372
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 437

11.0 Vegetation

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste8.0 Waste Detail9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:45 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 373
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 438
Glendora Hillside Subdivision
South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter
Project Characteristics - Operational year 2024Land Use - Lot acreage and building square footage based on project site plan.Construction Phase - Construction scheduel information was provided by the project applicant.Trips and VMT - Water trucks were added as vendor trucks and haul truck data is based on information provided by the project applicant.Grading - CalEEMod defaults.

Architectural Coating - CalEEMod defaults.

Vehicle Trips - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Asphalt Surfaces 127.00 1000sqft 2.92 127,000.00 0 Single Family Housing 12.00 Dwelling Unit 9.12 54,000.00 34

1.2 Other Project CharacteristicsUrbanizationClimate Zone Rural3
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data1.0 Project CharacteristicsUtility Company Southern California Edison Operational Year 2024
CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
390.98 0.033 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 374
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 439
Woodstoves - In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 455 no woodstoves or fireplaces were included.

Area Coating - CalEEMod defaults.

2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 23.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 300.00 305.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 30.00 20.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 23.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 12.00 tblFireplaces NumberWood 0.60 0.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 2,300.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 21,600.00 54,000.00tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.90 9.12 tblProjectCharacteristics UrbanizationLevel Urban Rural tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 227.00 270.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 15.00 16.00 tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 0.60 0.00tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 0.60 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 375
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 440

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 18.3050 36.5303 34.2002 0.0735 19.9719 1.4400 21.2409 10.1870 1.3253 11.3545 0.0000 7,244.131 5 7,244.131
5 2.0014 0.1603 7,341.938
4 2024 1.7204 14.5241 18.7122 0.0384 1.0342 0.6233 1.6575 0.2779 0.5862 0.8642 0.0000 3,741.369 2 3,741.369
2 0.6356 0.0862 3,782.948
1 Maximum 18.3050 36.5303 34.2002 0.0735 19.9719 1.4400 21.2409 10.1870 1.3253 11.3545 0.0000 7,244.131 5 7,244.131
5 2.0014 0.1603 7,341.938
4 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 18.3050 36.5303 34.2002 0.0735 9.1606 1.4400 10.4295 4.6306 1.3253 5.7981 0.0000 7,244.131 5 7,244.131
5 2.0014 0.1603 7,341.938
4 2024 1.7204 14.5241 18.7122 0.0384 1.0342 0.6233 1.6575 0.2779 0.5862 0.8642 0.0000 3,741.369 2 3,741.369
2 0.6356 0.0862 3,782.948
1 Maximum 18.3050 36.5303 34.2002 0.0735 9.1606 1.4400 10.4295 4.6306 1.3253 5.7981 0.0000 7,244.131 5 7,244.131
5 2.0014 0.1603 7,341.938
4 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 376
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 441
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.47 0.00 47.21 53.10 0.00 45.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 377
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 442

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Energy 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Mobile 0.4000 0.5204 4.4578 0.0106 1.1723 7.6800e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,078.929 3 1,078.929 3 0.0650 0.0454 1,094.087 9 Total 1.6757 0.7740 5.5634 0.0122 1.1723 0.0328 1.2050 0.3124 0.0322 0.3446 0.0000 1,389.713 3 1,389.713
3 0.0727 0.0511 1,406.752
5 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Energy 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Mobile 0.4000 0.5204 4.4578 0.0106 1.1723 7.6800e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,078.929 3 1,078.929 3 0.0650 0.0454 1,094.087 9 Total 1.6757 0.7740 5.5634 0.0122 1.1723 0.0328 1.2050 0.3124 0.0322 0.3446 0.0000 1,389.713 3 1,389.713
3 0.0727 0.0511 1,406.752
5 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 378
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 443

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 109,350; Residential Outdoor: 36,450; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 7,620 (Architectural Coating – sqft)Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 18 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 60Acres of Paving: 2.92 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 379
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 444

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed AreaReduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved RoadsGrading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 6.00 0.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTGrading 8 20.00 6.00 270.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTBuilding Construction 9 58.00 22.00 0.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 12.00 0.00 0.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 16.00 0.00 0.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 380
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 445

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.6570 0.0000 19.6570 10.1025 0.0000 10.1025 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 19.6570 1.2660 20.9230 10.1025 1.1647 11.2672 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 6.7500e003 0.2512 0.0928 1.2400e- 003 0.0440 1.4500e- 003 0.0454 0.0127 1.3900e- 003 0.0141 133.4782 133.4782 4.4600e- 003 0.0193 139.3468 Worker 0.0744 0.0538 0.7374 2.2200e003 0.2709 1.4900e- 003 0.2724 0.0719 1.3700e- 003 0.0732 224.8184 224.8184 5.1200e- 003 5.4400e- 003 226.5669 Total 0.0811 0.3051 0.8302 3.4600e003 0.3149 2.9400e- 003 0.3179 0.0845 2.7600e- 003 0.0873 358.2966 358.2966 9.5800e- 003 0.0248 365.9137 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 381
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 446

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 8.8457 0.0000 8.8457 4.5461 0.0000 4.5461 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 0.0000 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 8.8457 1.2660 10.1117 4.5461 1.1647 5.7108 0.0000 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 6.7500e003 0.2512 0.0928 1.2400e- 003 0.0440 1.4500e- 003 0.0454 0.0127 1.3900e- 003 0.0141 133.4782 133.4782 4.4600e- 003 0.0193 139.3468 Worker 0.0744 0.0538 0.7374 2.2200e003 0.2709 1.4900e- 003 0.2724 0.0719 1.3700e- 003 0.0732 224.8184 224.8184 5.1200e- 003 5.4400e- 003 226.5669 Total 0.0811 0.3051 0.8302 3.4600e003 0.3149 2.9400e- 003 0.3179 0.0845 2.7600e- 003 0.0873 358.2966 358.2966 9.5800e- 003 0.0248 365.9137 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 382
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 447

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.2036 0.0000 9.2036 3.6538 0.0000 3.6538 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 1.4245 1.4245 1.3105 1.3105 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Total 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 9.2036 1.4245 10.6281 3.6538 1.3105 4.9643 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0272 1.7037 0.4640 7.7200e003 0.2361 0.0124 0.2485 0.0647 0.0118 0.0765 849.3773 849.3773 0.0471 0.1349 890.7670 Vendor 6.7500e003 0.2512 0.0928 1.2400e- 003 0.0440 1.4500e- 003 0.0454 0.0127 1.3900e- 003 0.0141 133.4782 133.4782 4.4600e- 003 0.0193 139.3468 Worker 0.0827 0.0598 0.8194 2.4700e003 0.3010 1.6600e- 003 0.3027 0.0798 1.5300e- 003 0.0814 249.7982 249.7982 5.6900e- 003 6.0400e- 003 251.7410 Total 0.1166 2.0147 1.3762 0.0114 0.5811 0.0155 0.5966 0.1572 0.0147 0.1720 1,232.653 7 1,232.653
7 0.0572 0.1603 1,281.854
8 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 383
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 448

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 4.1416 0.0000 4.1416 1.6442 0.0000 1.6442 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 1.4245 1.4245 1.3105 1.3105 0.0000 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Total 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 4.1416 1.4245 5.5661 1.6442 1.3105 2.9547 0.0000 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0272 1.7037 0.4640 7.7200e003 0.2361 0.0124 0.2485 0.0647 0.0118 0.0765 849.3773 849.3773 0.0471 0.1349 890.7670 Vendor 6.7500e003 0.2512 0.0928 1.2400e- 003 0.0440 1.4500e- 003 0.0454 0.0127 1.3900e- 003 0.0141 133.4782 133.4782 4.4600e- 003 0.0193 139.3468 Worker 0.0827 0.0598 0.8194 2.4700e003 0.3010 1.6600e- 003 0.3027 0.0798 1.5300e- 003 0.0814 249.7982 249.7982 5.6900e- 003 6.0400e- 003 251.7410 Total 0.1166 2.0147 1.3762 0.0114 0.5811 0.0155 0.5966 0.1572 0.0147 0.1720 1,232.653 7 1,232.653
7 0.0572 0.1603 1,281.854
8 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 384
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 449

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0248 0.9212 0.3404 4.5400e003 0.1612 5.3300e- 003 0.1665 0.0464 5.1000e- 003 0.0515 489.4201 489.4201 0.0164 0.0708 510.9384 Worker 0.2397 0.1735 2.3761 7.1700e003 0.8730 4.8100e- 003 0.8778 0.2315 4.4300e- 003 0.2359 724.4148 724.4148 0.0165 0.0175 730.0489 Total 0.2644 1.0947 2.7165 0.0117 1.0342 0.0101 1.0444 0.2779 9.5300e003 0.2874 1,213.834 9 1,213.834 9 0.0329 0.0884 1,240.987 3 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 385
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 450

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0248 0.9212 0.3404 4.5400e003 0.1612 5.3300e- 003 0.1665 0.0464 5.1000e- 003 0.0515 489.4201 489.4201 0.0164 0.0708 510.9384 Worker 0.2397 0.1735 2.3761 7.1700e003 0.8730 4.8100e- 003 0.8778 0.2315 4.4300e- 003 0.2359 724.4148 724.4148 0.0165 0.0175 730.0489 Total 0.2644 1.0947 2.7165 0.0117 1.0342 0.0101 1.0444 0.2779 9.5300e003 0.2874 1,213.834 9 1,213.834 9 0.0329 0.0884 1,240.987 3 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 386
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 451

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0241 0.9257 0.3347 4.4800e003 0.1612 5.3400e- 003 0.1665 0.0464 5.1100e- 003 0.0515 482.3954 482.3954 0.0164 0.0699 503.6404 Worker 0.2247 0.1546 2.2107 6.9600e003 0.8730 4.6000e- 003 0.8776 0.2315 4.2300e- 003 0.2357 703.2750 703.2750 0.0149 0.0163 708.5000 Total 0.2488 1.0803 2.5454 0.0114 1.0342 9.9400e003 1.0442 0.2779 9.3400e- 003 0.2873 1,185.670 3 1,185.670 3 0.0313 0.0862 1,212.140 4 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 387
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 452

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0241 0.9257 0.3347 4.4800e003 0.1612 5.3400e- 003 0.1665 0.0464 5.1100e- 003 0.0515 482.3954 482.3954 0.0164 0.0699 503.6404 Worker 0.2247 0.1546 2.2107 6.9600e003 0.8730 4.6000e- 003 0.8776 0.2315 4.2300e- 003 0.2357 703.2750 703.2750 0.0149 0.0163 708.5000 Total 0.2488 1.0803 2.5454 0.0114 1.0342 9.9400e003 1.0442 0.2779 9.3400e- 003 0.2873 1,185.670 3 1,185.670 3 0.0313 0.0862 1,212.140 4 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 388
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 453

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 16.2265 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 16.4182 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0496 0.0359 0.4916 1.4800e003 0.1806 9.9000e- 004 0.1816 0.0479 9.2000e- 004 0.0488 149.8789 149.8789 3.4200e- 003 3.6300e- 003 151.0446 Total 0.0496 0.0359 0.4916 1.4800e003 0.1806 9.9000e- 004 0.1816 0.0479 9.2000e- 004 0.0488 149.8789 149.8789 3.4200e- 003 3.6300e- 003 151.0446 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 389
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 454

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 16.2265 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 16.4182 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0496 0.0359 0.4916 1.4800e003 0.1806 9.9000e- 004 0.1816 0.0479 9.2000e- 004 0.0488 149.8789 149.8789 3.4200e- 003 3.6300e- 003 151.0446 Total 0.0496 0.0359 0.4916 1.4800e003 0.1806 9.9000e- 004 0.1816 0.0479 9.2000e- 004 0.0488 149.8789 149.8789 3.4200e- 003 3.6300e- 003 151.0446 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 390
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 455

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.3326 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3654 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0661 0.0479 0.6555 1.9800e003 0.2408 1.3300e- 003 0.2422 0.0639 1.2200e- 003 0.0651 199.8386 199.8386 4.5500e- 003 4.8300e- 003 201.3928 Total 0.0661 0.0479 0.6555 1.9800e003 0.2408 1.3300e- 003 0.2422 0.0639 1.2200e- 003 0.0651 199.8386 199.8386 4.5500e- 003 4.8300e- 003 201.3928 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 391
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 456

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.3326 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3654 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0661 0.0479 0.6555 1.9800e003 0.2408 1.3300e- 003 0.2422 0.0639 1.2200e- 003 0.0651 199.8386 199.8386 4.5500e- 003 4.8300e- 003 201.3928 Total 0.0661 0.0479 0.6555 1.9800e003 0.2408 1.3300e- 003 0.2422 0.0639 1.2200e- 003 0.0651 199.8386 199.8386 4.5500e- 003 4.8300e- 003 201.3928 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 392
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 457

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 0.4000 0.5204 4.4578 0.0106 1.1723 7.6800e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,078.929 3 1,078.929 3 0.0650 0.0454 1,094.087 9 Unmitigated 0.4000 0.5204 4.4578 0.0106 1.1723 7.6800e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,078.929 3 1,078.929 3 0.0650 0.0454 1,094.087 9

4.4 Fleet Mix
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 393
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 458
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.542450 0.061470 0.185138 0.129299 0.023799 0.006448 0.011958 0.009209 0.000810 0.000503 0.024446 0.000751 0.003721 Single Family Housing 0.542450 0.061470 0.185138 0.129299 0.023799 0.006448 0.011958 0.009209 0.000810 0.000503 0.024446 0.000751 0.003721

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated

8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 NaturalGasUnmitigated

8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 394
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 459

6.0 Area Detail

0.790276 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Total 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 395
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 460

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Unmitigated 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 396
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 461

0.1023 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

1.1142 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0198 0.1692 0.0720 1.0800e003 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0000 216.0000 216.0000 4.1400e- 003 3.9600e- 003 217.2836 Landscaping 0.0310 0.0115 1.0025 5.0000e005 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 1.8104 1.8104 1.7800e- 003 1.8550 Total 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 397
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 462

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

0.1023 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

1.1142 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0198 0.1692 0.0720 1.0800e003 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0000 216.0000 216.0000 4.1400e- 003 3.9600e- 003 217.2836 Landscaping 0.0310 0.0115 1.0025 5.0000e005 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 1.8104 1.8104 1.7800e- 003 1.8550 Total 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 398
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 463

11.0 Vegetation

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste8.0 Waste Detail9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 26 Date: 3/18/2022 5:53 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 399
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 464
Glendora Hillside Subdivision
South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual
Project Characteristics - Operational year 2024Land Use - Lot acreage and building square footage based on project site plan.Construction Phase - Construction scheduel information was provided by the project applicant.Trips and VMT - Water trucks were added as vendor trucks and haul truck data is based on information provided by the project applicant.Grading - CalEEMod defaults.

Architectural Coating - CalEEMod defaults.

Vehicle Trips - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Asphalt Surfaces 127.00 1000sqft 2.92 127,000.00 0 Single Family Housing 12.00 Dwelling Unit 9.12 54,000.00 34

1.2 Other Project CharacteristicsUrbanizationClimate Zone Rural3
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data1.0 Project CharacteristicsUtility Company Southern California Edison Operational Year 2024
CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
390.98 0.033 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 400
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 465
Woodstoves - In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 455 no woodstoves or fireplaces were included.

Area Coating - CalEEMod defaults.

2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 23.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 300.00 305.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 30.00 20.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 23.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 12.00 tblFireplaces NumberWood 0.60 0.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 2,300.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 21,600.00 54,000.00tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.90 9.12 tblProjectCharacteristics UrbanizationLevel Urban Rural tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 227.00 270.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 15.00 16.00 tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 0.60 0.00tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 0.60 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 401
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 466

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.4156 2.0205 2.2760 4.7100e003 0.3112 0.0908 0.4020 0.1244 0.0849 0.2093 0.0000 417.4862 417.4862 0.0833 8.7100e- 003 422.1645 2024 0.1107 0.9444 1.2203 2.5000e003 0.0660 0.0405 0.1065 0.0178 0.0381 0.0559 0.0000 221.2272 221.2272 0.0375 5.1000e- 003 223.6831 Maximum 0.4156 2.0205 2.2760 4.7100e003 0.3112 0.0908 0.4020 0.1244 0.0849 0.2093 0.0000 417.4862 417.4862 0.0833 8.7100e- 003 422.1645 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.4156 2.0205 2.2760 4.7100e003 0.1957 0.0908 0.2865 0.0710 0.0849 0.1559 0.0000 417.4858 417.4858 0.0833 8.7100e- 003 422.1641 2024 0.1107 0.9444 1.2203 2.5000e003 0.0660 0.0405 0.1065 0.0178 0.0381 0.0559 0.0000 221.2270 221.2270 0.0375 5.1000e- 003 223.6829 Maximum 0.4156 2.0205 2.2760 4.7100e003 0.1957 0.0908 0.2865 0.0710 0.0849 0.1559 0.0000 417.4858 417.4858 0.0833 8.7100e- 003 422.1641 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 402
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 467
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.62 0.00 22.71 37.59 0.00 20.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 17 1-1-2023 3-31-2023 0.5744 0.574418 4-1-2023 6-30-2023 0.5727 0.572719 7-1-2023 9-30-2023 0.6957 0.695720 10-1-2023 12-31-2023 0.5690 0.569021 1-1-2024 3-31-2024 0.5279 0.527922 4-1-2024 6-30-2024 0.5141 0.5141 Highest 0.6957 0.6957
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 403
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 468

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.2261 3.5500e003 0.1262 2.0000e- 005 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.6547 2.6547 2.5000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.6743 Energy 1.5600e003 0.0133 5.6600e- 003 8.0000e- 005 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 0.0000 32.3626 32.3626 1.7300e- 003 4.6000e- 004 32.5416 Mobile 0.0704 0.0940 0.8043 1.9000e003 0.2048 1.3600e- 003 0.2061 0.0547 1.2700e- 003 0.0559 0.0000 176.0625 176.0625 0.0105 7.3900e- 003 178.5251 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.8297 0.0000 2.8297 0.1672 0.0000 7.0105 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.2480 2.7766 3.0247 0.0257 6.3000e004 3.8552 Total 0.2981 0.1108 0.9362 2.0000e003 0.2048 3.2900e- 003 0.2081 0.0547 3.2000e- 003 0.0579 3.0777 213.8565 216.9342 0.2054 8.5200e- 003 224.6066 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 404
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 469

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 405
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 470
4 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 5/1/2023 5/31/2023 5 23 5 Paving Paving 8/1/2023 8/31/2023 5 23
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Trips and VMT
Residential Indoor: 109,350; Residential Outdoor: 36,450; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 7,620 (Architectural Coating – sqft)Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 18 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 60Acres of Paving: 2.92 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 406
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 471

3.1 Mitigation Measures ConstructionWater Exposed AreaReduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 6.00 0.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTGrading 8 20.00 6.00 270.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTBuilding Construction 9 58.00 22.00 0.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 12.00 0.00 0.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 16.00 0.00 0.00 19.80 7.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 407
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 472

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 4.0000e005 1.5100e- 003 5.5000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.7000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7259 0.7259 2.0000e- 005 1.1000e- 004 0.7578 Worker 4.1000e004 3.3000e- 004 4.5600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 003 4.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.2425 1.2425 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 1.2522 Total 4.5000e004 1.8400e- 003 5.1100e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.8600e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.8700e- 003 4.9000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 5.1000e- 004 0.0000 1.9684 1.9684 5.0000e- 005 1.4000e- 004 2.0100 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0531 0.0000 0.0531 0.0273 0.0000 0.0273 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0160 0.1651 0.1095 2.3000e004 7.6000e- 003 7.6000e- 003 6.9900e- 003 6.9900e- 003 0.0000 20.0704 20.0704 6.4900e- 003 0.0000 20.2327 Total 0.0160 0.1651 0.1095 2.3000e004 0.0531 7.6000e- 003 0.0607 0.0273 6.9900e- 003 0.0343 0.0000 20.0704 20.0704 6.4900e- 003 0.0000 20.2327 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 408
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 473

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 4.0000e005 1.5100e- 003 5.5000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.7000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7259 0.7259 2.0000e- 005 1.1000e- 004 0.7578 Worker 4.1000e004 3.3000e- 004 4.5600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 003 4.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.2425 1.2425 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 1.2522 Total 4.5000e004 1.8400e- 003 5.1100e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.8600e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.8700e- 003 4.9000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 5.1000e- 004 0.0000 1.9684 1.9684 5.0000e- 005 1.4000e- 004 2.0100 Mitigated Construction Off-Site3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0920 0.0000 0.0920 0.0365 0.0000 0.0365 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0332 0.3452 0.2805 6.2000e004 0.0142 0.0142 0.0131 0.0131 0.0000 54.5352 54.5352 0.0176 0.0000 54.9762 Total 0.0332 0.3452 0.2805 6.2000e004 0.0920 0.0142 0.1063 0.0365 0.0131 0.0497 0.0000 54.5352 54.5352 0.0176 0.0000 54.9762 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 409
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 474

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 2.8000e004 0.0171 4.6000e- 003 8.0000e- 005 2.3200e- 003 1.2000e- 004 2.4500e- 003 6.4000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 7.6000e- 004 0.0000 7.7004 7.7004 4.3000e- 004 1.2200e- 003 8.0757 Vendor 7.0000e005 2.5200e- 003 9.1000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.5000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 1.2098 1.2098 4.0000e- 005 1.8000e- 004 1.2630 Worker 7.6000e004 6.1000e- 004 8.4400e- 003 3.0000e- 005 2.9500e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.9700e- 003 7.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 004 0.0000 2.3010 2.3010 5.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 2.3189 Total 1.1100e003 0.0203 0.0140 1.2000e- 004 5.7000e- 003 1.5000e- 004 5.8700e- 003 1.5400e- 003 1.5000e- 004 1.7000e- 003 0.0000 11.2111 11.2111 5.2000e- 004 1.4600e- 003 11.6575 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0414 0.0000 0.0414 0.0164 0.0000 0.0164 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0332 0.3452 0.2805 6.2000e004 0.0142 0.0142 0.0131 0.0131 0.0000 54.5351 54.5351 0.0176 0.0000 54.9761 Total 0.0332 0.3452 0.2805 6.2000e004 0.0414 0.0142 0.0557 0.0164 0.0131 0.0296 0.0000 54.5351 54.5351 0.0176 0.0000 54.9761 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 410
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 475

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 2.8000e004 0.0171 4.6000e- 003 8.0000e- 005 2.3200e- 003 1.2000e- 004 2.4500e- 003 6.4000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 7.6000e- 004 0.0000 7.7004 7.7004 4.3000e- 004 1.2200e- 003 8.0757 Vendor 7.0000e005 2.5200e- 003 9.1000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.5000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.4000e- 004 0.0000 1.2098 1.2098 4.0000e- 005 1.8000e- 004 1.2630 Worker 7.6000e004 6.1000e- 004 8.4400e- 003 3.0000e- 005 2.9500e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.9700e- 003 7.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 004 0.0000 2.3010 2.3010 5.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 2.3189 Total 1.1100e003 0.0203 0.0140 1.2000e- 004 5.7000e- 003 1.5000e- 004 5.8700e- 003 1.5400e- 003 1.5000e- 004 1.7000e- 003 0.0000 11.2111 11.2111 5.2000e- 004 1.4600e- 003 11.6575 Mitigated Construction Off-Site3.4 Building Construction - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1376 1.2587 1.4214 2.3600e003 0.0612 0.0612 0.0576 0.0576 0.0000 202.8292 202.8292 0.0483 0.0000 204.0354 Total 0.1376 1.2587 1.4214 2.3600e003 0.0612 0.0612 0.0576 0.0576 0.0000 202.8292 202.8292 0.0483 0.0000 204.0354 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 411
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 476

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 2.2000e003 0.0807 0.0293 4.0000e- 004 0.0139 4.7000e- 004 0.0144 4.0100e- 003 4.4000e- 004 4.4500e- 003 0.0000 38.8137 38.8137 1.3000e- 003 5.6200e- 003 40.5203 Worker 0.0193 0.0156 0.2142 6.4000e004 0.0750 4.2000e- 004 0.0754 0.0199 3.9000e- 004 0.0203 0.0000 58.3866 58.3866 1.3200e- 003 1.4200e- 003 58.8413 Total 0.0215 0.0963 0.2435 1.0400e003 0.0889 8.9000e- 004 0.0898 0.0239 8.3000e- 004 0.0248 0.0000 97.2003 97.2003 2.6200e- 003 7.0400e- 003 99.3616 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1376 1.2587 1.4214 2.3600e003 0.0612 0.0612 0.0576 0.0576 0.0000 202.8289 202.8289 0.0483 0.0000 204.0352 Total 0.1376 1.2587 1.4214 2.3600e003 0.0612 0.0612 0.0576 0.0576 0.0000 202.8289 202.8289 0.0483 0.0000 204.0352 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 412
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 477

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 2.2000e003 0.0807 0.0293 4.0000e- 004 0.0139 4.7000e- 004 0.0144 4.0100e- 003 4.4000e- 004 4.4500e- 003 0.0000 38.8137 38.8137 1.3000e- 003 5.6200e- 003 40.5203 Worker 0.0193 0.0156 0.2142 6.4000e004 0.0750 4.2000e- 004 0.0754 0.0199 3.9000e- 004 0.0203 0.0000 58.3866 58.3866 1.3200e- 003 1.4200e- 003 58.8413 Total 0.0215 0.0963 0.2435 1.0400e003 0.0889 8.9000e- 004 0.0898 0.0239 8.3000e- 004 0.0248 0.0000 97.2003 97.2003 2.6200e- 003 7.0400e- 003 99.3616 Mitigated Construction Off-Site3.4 Building Construction - 2024 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0957 0.8739 1.0508 1.7500e003 0.0399 0.0399 0.0375 0.0375 0.0000 150.7019 150.7019 0.0356 0.0000 151.5928 Total 0.0957 0.8739 1.0508 1.7500e003 0.0399 0.0399 0.0375 0.0375 0.0000 150.7019 150.7019 0.0356 0.0000 151.5928 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 413
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 478

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.6000e003 0.0603 0.0214 2.9000e- 004 0.0103 3.5000e- 004 0.0107 2.9800e- 003 3.3000e- 004 3.3100e- 003 0.0000 28.4187 28.4187 9.7000e- 004 4.1200e- 003 29.6704 Worker 0.0134 0.0103 0.1481 4.6000e004 0.0557 3.0000e- 004 0.0560 0.0148 2.8000e- 004 0.0151 0.0000 42.1066 42.1066 8.8000e- 004 9.8000e- 004 42.4198 Total 0.0150 0.0705 0.1695 7.5000e004 0.0660 6.5000e- 004 0.0667 0.0178 6.1000e- 004 0.0184 0.0000 70.5253 70.5253 1.8500e- 003 5.1000e- 003 72.0902 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0957 0.8738 1.0508 1.7500e003 0.0399 0.0399 0.0375 0.0375 0.0000 150.7017 150.7017 0.0356 0.0000 151.5927 Total 0.0957 0.8738 1.0508 1.7500e003 0.0399 0.0399 0.0375 0.0375 0.0000 150.7017 150.7017 0.0356 0.0000 151.5927 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 414
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 479

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.6000e003 0.0603 0.0214 2.9000e- 004 0.0103 3.5000e- 004 0.0107 2.9800e- 003 3.3000e- 004 3.3100e- 003 0.0000 28.4187 28.4187 9.7000e- 004 4.1200e- 003 29.6704 Worker 0.0134 0.0103 0.1481 4.6000e004 0.0557 3.0000e- 004 0.0560 0.0148 2.8000e- 004 0.0151 0.0000 42.1066 42.1066 8.8000e- 004 9.8000e- 004 42.4198 Total 0.0150 0.0705 0.1695 7.5000e004 0.0660 6.5000e- 004 0.0667 0.0178 6.1000e- 004 0.0184 0.0000 70.5253 70.5253 1.8500e- 003 5.1000e- 003 72.0902 Mitigated Construction Off-Site3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.1866 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.2000e003 0.0150 0.0208 3.0000e- 005 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e- 004 0.0000 2.9362 2.9362 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 2.9406 Total 0.1888 0.0150 0.0208 3.0000e005 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e- 004 0.0000 2.9362 2.9362 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 2.9406 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 415
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 480

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 5.2000e004 4.2000e- 004 5.8200e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.0400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 2.0500e- 003 5.4000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 5.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.5877 1.5877 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.6000 Total 5.2000e004 4.2000e- 004 5.8200e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.0400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 2.0500e- 003 5.4000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 5.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.5877 1.5877 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.6000 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.1866 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.2000e003 0.0150 0.0208 3.0000e- 005 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e- 004 0.0000 2.9362 2.9362 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 2.9406 Total 0.1888 0.0150 0.0208 3.0000e005 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e- 004 0.0000 2.9362 2.9362 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 2.9406 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 416
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 481

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 5.2000e004 4.2000e- 004 5.8200e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.0400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 2.0500e- 003 5.4000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 5.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.5877 1.5877 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.6000 Total 5.2000e004 4.2000e- 004 5.8200e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.0400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 2.0500e- 003 5.4000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 5.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.5877 1.5877 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.6000 Mitigated Construction Off-Site3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0119 0.1172 0.1677 2.6000e004 5.8700e- 003 5.8700e- 003 5.4000e- 003 5.4000e- 003 0.0000 23.0309 23.0309 7.4500e- 003 0.0000 23.2171 Paving 3.8300e003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0157 0.1172 0.1677 2.6000e004 5.8700e- 003 5.8700e- 003 5.4000e- 003 5.4000e- 003 0.0000 23.0309 23.0309 7.4500e- 003 0.0000 23.2171 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 417
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 482

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 7.0000e004 5.6000e- 004 7.7700e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.7200e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.7300e- 003 7.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 7.4000e- 004 0.0000 2.1169 2.1169 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 2.1334 Total 7.0000e004 5.6000e- 004 7.7700e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.7200e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.7300e- 003 7.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 7.4000e- 004 0.0000 2.1169 2.1169 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 2.1334 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0119 0.1172 0.1677 2.6000e004 5.8700e- 003 5.8700e- 003 5.4000e- 003 5.4000e- 003 0.0000 23.0309 23.0309 7.4500e- 003 0.0000 23.2171 Paving 3.8300e003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0157 0.1172 0.1677 2.6000e004 5.8700e- 003 5.8700e- 003 5.4000e- 003 5.4000e- 003 0.0000 23.0309 23.0309 7.4500e- 003 0.0000 23.2171 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 418
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 483

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 419
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 484
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0704 0.0940 0.8043 1.9000e003 0.2048 1.3600e- 003 0.2061 0.0547 1.2700e- 003 0.0559 0.0000 176.0625 176.0625 0.0105 7.3900e- 003 178.5251 Unmitigated 0.0704 0.0940 0.8043 1.9000e003 0.2048 1.3600e- 003 0.2061 0.0547 1.2700e- 003 0.0559 0.0000 176.0625 176.0625 0.0105 7.3900e- 003 178.5251

4.2 Trip Summary Information4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
Single Family Housing 113.28 114.48 102.60 543,940 543,940 Total 113.28 114.48 102.60 543,940 543,940
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Other Asphalt Surfaces 18.50 10.10 7.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Single Family Housing 19.80 9.60 12.90 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.542450 0.061470 0.185138 0.129299 0.023799 0.006448 0.011958 0.009209 0.000810 0.000503 0.024446 0.000751 0.003721 Single Family Housing 0.542450 0.061470 0.185138 0.129299 0.023799 0.006448 0.011958 0.009209 0.000810 0.000503 0.024446 0.000751 0.003721

5.0 Energy Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 420
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 485
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 16.9698 16.9698 1.4300e003 1.7000e- 004 17.0573 Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 16.9698 16.9698 1.4300e003 1.7000e- 004 17.0573 NaturalGas
Mitigated

1.5600e003 0.0133 5.6600e- 003 8.0000e- 005 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 0.0000 15.3928 15.3928 3.0000e- 004 2.8000e- 004 15.4843 NaturalGasUnmitigated

1.5600e003 0.0133 5.6600e- 003 8.0000e- 005 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 0.0000 15.3928 15.3928 3.0000e- 004 2.8000e- 004 15.4843

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 421
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 486

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Single Family
Housing
288451 1.5600e003 0.0133 5.6600e- 003 8.0000e- 005 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 0.0000 15.3928 15.3928 3.0000e- 004 2.8000e- 004 15.4843 Total 1.5600e003 0.0133 5.6600e- 003 8.0000e- 005 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 0.0000 15.3928 15.3928 3.0000e- 004 2.8000e- 004 15.4843 Unmitigated
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Single Family
Housing
288451 1.5600e003 0.0133 5.6600e- 003 8.0000e- 005 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 0.0000 15.3928 15.3928 3.0000e- 004 2.8000e- 004 15.4843 Total 1.5600e003 0.0133 5.6600e- 003 8.0000e- 005 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 0.0000 15.3928 15.3928 3.0000e- 004 2.8000e- 004 15.4843 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 422
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 487

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing
95687.5 16.9698 1.4300e003 1.7000e- 004 17.0573
Total 16.9698 1.4300e003 1.7000e- 004 17.0573
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing
95687.5 16.9698 1.4300e003 1.7000e- 004 17.0573
Total 16.9698 1.4300e003 1.7000e- 004 17.0573
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 423
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 488

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.2261 3.5500e003 0.1262 2.0000e- 005 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.6547 2.6547 2.5000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.6743 Unmitigated 0.2261 3.5500e003 0.1262 2.0000e- 005 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.6547 2.6547 2.5000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.6743 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 424
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 489

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

0.0187 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.2033 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 2.5000e004 2.1100e- 003 9.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.7000e- 004 1.7000e- 004 1.7000e- 004 1.7000e- 004 0.0000 2.4494 2.4494 5.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 2.4640 Landscaping 3.8700e003 1.4400e- 003 0.1253 1.0000e- 005 6.9000e- 004 6.9000e- 004 6.9000e- 004 6.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.2053 0.2053 2.0000e- 004 0.0000 0.2104 Total 0.2261 3.5500e003 0.1262 2.0000e- 005 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.6547 2.6547 2.5000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.6743 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 425
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 490

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

0.0187 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.2033 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 2.5000e004 2.1100e- 003 9.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.7000e- 004 1.7000e- 004 1.7000e- 004 1.7000e- 004 0.0000 2.4494 2.4494 5.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 2.4640 Landscaping 3.8700e003 1.4400e- 003 0.1253 1.0000e- 005 6.9000e- 004 6.9000e- 004 6.9000e- 004 6.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.2053 0.2053 2.0000e- 004 0.0000 0.2104 Total 0.2261 3.5500e003 0.1262 2.0000e- 005 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.6547 2.6547 2.5000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.6743 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 426
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 491
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 3.0247 0.0257 6.3000e004 3.8552
Unmitigated 3.0247 0.0257 6.3000e004 3.8552

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing

0.781848 /

0.492904

3.0247 0.0257 6.3000e004 3.8552
Total 3.0247 0.0257 6.3000e004 3.8552
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 427
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 492

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing

0.781848 /

0.492904

3.0247 0.0257 6.3000e004 3.8552
Total 3.0247 0.0257 6.3000e004 3.8552
Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste8.0 Waste Detail
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 2.8297 0.1672 0.0000 7.0105
Unmitigated 2.8297 0.1672 0.0000 7.0105
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 428
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 493

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing

13.94 2.8297 0.1672 0.0000 7.0105
Total 2.8297 0.1672 0.0000 7.0105
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing

13.94 2.8297 0.1672 0.0000 7.0105
Total 2.8297 0.1672 0.0000 7.0105
Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 429
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 494

11.0 Vegetation
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 31 Date: 3/18/2022 5:55 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - South Coast AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 430
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 495
Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST
South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer
Project Characteristics - Operational year 2024.Land Use - Acreage and building square footage for single family homes based on site plan.Construction Phase - Schedule based on schedule provided by project applicant.Trips and VMT - Trip distances were reduced to zero for the LST analysis.Grading - CalEEMod defaults.

Architectural Coating - CalEEMod defaults.

Vehicle Trips - CalEEmod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Asphalt Surfaces 127.00 1000sqft 2.92 127,000.00 0 Single Family Housing 12.00 Dwelling Unit 9.12 54,000.00 34

1.2 Other Project CharacteristicsUrbanizationClimate Zone Rural3
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data1.0 Project CharacteristicsUtility Company Southern California Edison Operational Year 2024
CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
390.98 0.033 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 431
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 496
Woodstoves - Per SCAQMD Rule 445 No woodstoves or fireplaces were included.

Area Coating - CalEEMod defaults.

Energy Use - CalEEMod defaults.Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - In compliance with SCAQMD rule 403, 2x daily watering and unpaved vehicle road speeds were limited to 15 mph.

Fleet Mix - CalEEMod defaults.Off-road Equipment - CalEEmod defaults.

Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 3.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 4.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 9.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 23.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 300.00 305.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 30.00 20.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 23.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 12.00 tblFireplaces NumberWood 0.60 0.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 2,300.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 21,600.00 54,000.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 432
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 497

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.90 9.12
tblProjectCharacteristics UrbanizationLevel Urban Rural tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 0.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 0.00tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 0.00tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 0.00tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 0.00tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 227.00 270.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.90 0.00
tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.90 0.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.90 0.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.90 0.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.90 0.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 19.80 0.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 19.80 0.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 19.80 0.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 19.80 0.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 19.80 0.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 15.00 16.00 tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 0.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 0.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 433
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 498

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 18.0948 34.8379 31.3550 0.0626 19.6574 1.4248 20.9235 10.1026 1.3108 11.2674 0.0000 6,063.240 2 6,063.240
2 1.9478 9.8400e003 6,114.534 7
2024 1.5545 13.7158 16.6121 0.0274 1.1500e003 0.6137 0.6149 4.6000e- 004 0.5773 0.5777 0.0000 2,601.347 8 2,601.347 8 0.6114 8.6900e- 003 2,619.219 9 Maximum 18.0948 34.8379 31.3550 0.0626 19.6574 1.4248 20.9235 10.1026 1.3108 11.2674 0.0000 6,063.240 2 6,063.240
2 1.9478 9.8400e003 6,114.534 7
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 18.0948 34.8379 31.3550 0.0626 7.6666 1.4248 8.9327 3.9401 1.3108 5.1049 0.0000 6,063.240 2 6,063.240
2 1.9478 9.8400e003 6,114.534 7
2024 1.5545 13.7158 16.6121 0.0274 1.1500e003 0.6137 0.6149 4.6000e- 004 0.5773 0.5777 0.0000 2,601.347 8 2,601.347 8 0.6114 8.6900e- 003 2,619.219 9 Maximum 18.0948 34.8379 31.3550 0.0626 7.6666 1.4248 8.9327 3.9401 1.3108 5.1049 0.0000 6,063.240 2 6,063.240
2 1.9478 9.8400e003 6,114.534 7
Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 434
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 499
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 61.00 0.00 55.67 61.00 0.00 52.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 435
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 500

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Energy 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Mobile 0.4117 0.4844 4.6714 0.0111 1.1723 7.6700e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,131.752 9 1,131.752 9 0.0638 0.0438 1,146.386 0 Total 1.6874 0.7380 5.7770 0.0127 1.1723 0.0328 1.2050 0.3124 0.0322 0.3446 0.0000 1,442.536 9 1,442.536
9 0.0715 0.0494 1,459.050
7 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Energy 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Mobile 0.4117 0.4844 4.6714 0.0111 1.1723 7.6700e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,131.752 9 1,131.752 9 0.0638 0.0438 1,146.386 0 Total 1.6874 0.7380 5.7770 0.0127 1.1723 0.0328 1.2050 0.3124 0.0322 0.3446 0.0000 1,442.536 9 1,442.536
9 0.0715 0.0494 1,459.050
7 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 436
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 501

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 109,350; Residential Outdoor: 36,450; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 7,620 (Architectural Coating – sqft)Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 18 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 60Acres of Paving: 2.92 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 437
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 502

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed AreaReduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved RoadsGrading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTGrading 8 20.00 6.00 270.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTBuilding Construction 9 58.00 22.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 12.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 16.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 438
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 503

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.6570 0.0000 19.6570 10.1025 0.0000 10.1025 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 19.6570 1.2660 20.9230 10.1025 1.1647 11.2672 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.9900e003 0.0680 0.0558 9.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 9.6538 9.6538 3.4000e- 004 1.5400e- 003 10.1208 Worker 0.0230 7.8700e003 0.0784 3.0000e- 005 1.8000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 005 1.5000e- 004 3.4553 3.4553 1.9500e- 003 1.0200e- 003 3.8080 Total 0.0270 0.0759 0.1342 1.2000e004 3.4000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 4.6000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 13.1091 13.1091 2.2900e- 003 2.5600e- 003 13.9287 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 439
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 504

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.6662 0.0000 7.6662 3.9400 0.0000 3.9400 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 0.0000 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 7.6662 1.2660 8.9323 3.9400 1.1647 5.1047 0.0000 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.9900e003 0.0680 0.0558 9.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 9.6538 9.6538 3.4000e- 004 1.5400e- 003 10.1208 Worker 0.0230 7.8700e003 0.0784 3.0000e- 005 1.8000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 005 1.5000e- 004 3.4553 3.4553 1.9500e- 003 1.0200e- 003 3.8080 Total 0.0270 0.0759 0.1342 1.2000e004 3.4000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 4.6000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 13.1091 13.1091 2.2900e- 003 2.5600e- 003 13.9287 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 440
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 505

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.2036 0.0000 9.2036 3.6538 0.0000 3.6538 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 1.4245 1.4245 1.3105 1.3105 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Total 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 9.2036 1.4245 10.6281 3.6538 1.3105 4.9643 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0149 0.2456 0.2061 3.5000e004 2.9000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 4.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 38.2695 38.2695 1.1000e- 003 6.0500e- 003 40.0993 Vendor 3.9900e003 0.0680 0.0558 9.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 9.6538 9.6538 3.4000e- 004 1.5400e- 003 10.1208 Worker 0.0255 8.7500e003 0.0871 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 9.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 3.8392 3.8392 2.1700e- 003 1.1300e- 003 4.2311 Total 0.0444 0.3223 0.3489 4.8000e004 6.5000e- 004 2.7000e- 004 9.2000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 5.0000e- 004 51.7625 51.7625 3.6100e- 003 8.7200e- 003 54.4511 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 441
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 506

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 3.5894 0.0000 3.5894 1.4250 0.0000 1.4250 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 1.4245 1.4245 1.3105 1.3105 0.0000 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Total 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 3.5894 1.4245 5.0139 1.4250 1.3105 2.7355 0.0000 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0149 0.2456 0.2061 3.5000e004 2.9000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 4.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 38.2695 38.2695 1.1000e- 003 6.0500e- 003 40.0993 Vendor 3.9900e003 0.0680 0.0558 9.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 9.6538 9.6538 3.4000e- 004 1.5400e- 003 10.1208 Worker 0.0255 8.7500e003 0.0871 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 9.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 3.8392 3.8392 2.1700e- 003 1.1300e- 003 4.2311 Total 0.0444 0.3223 0.3489 4.8000e004 6.5000e- 004 2.7000e- 004 9.2000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 5.0000e- 004 51.7625 51.7625 3.6100e- 003 8.7200e- 003 54.4511 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 442
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 507

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0146 0.2493 0.2045 3.3000e004 5.8000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 7.2000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 35.3973 35.3973 1.2500e- 003 5.6400e- 003 37.1094 Worker 0.0740 0.0254 0.2526 1.1000e004 5.7000e- 004 2.7000e- 004 8.4000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 4.8000e- 004 11.1337 11.1337 6.2900e- 003 3.2900e- 003 12.2701 Total 0.0886 0.2747 0.4571 4.4000e004 1.1500e- 003 4.1000e- 004 1.5600e- 003 4.6000e- 004 3.8000e- 004 8.4000e- 004 46.5309 46.5309 7.5400e- 003 8.9300e- 003 49.3795 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 443
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 508

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0146 0.2493 0.2045 3.3000e004 5.8000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 7.2000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 35.3973 35.3973 1.2500e- 003 5.6400e- 003 37.1094 Worker 0.0740 0.0254 0.2526 1.1000e004 5.7000e- 004 2.7000e- 004 8.4000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 4.8000e- 004 11.1337 11.1337 6.2900e- 003 3.2900e- 003 12.2701 Total 0.0886 0.2747 0.4571 4.4000e004 1.1500e- 003 4.1000e- 004 1.5600e- 003 4.6000e- 004 3.8000e- 004 8.4000e- 004 46.5309 46.5309 7.5400e- 003 8.9300e- 003 49.3795 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 444
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 509

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0145 0.2485 0.2022 3.2000e004 5.8000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 7.1000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 34.8652 34.8652 1.2400e- 003 5.5600e- 003 36.5519 Worker 0.0685 0.0235 0.2431 1.1000e004 5.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 8.3000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 4.6000e- 004 10.7837 10.7837 5.8000e- 003 3.1300e- 003 11.8603 Total 0.0829 0.2720 0.4453 4.3000e004 1.1500e- 003 4.0000e- 004 1.5400e- 003 4.6000e- 004 3.7000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 45.6489 45.6489 7.0400e- 003 8.6900e- 003 48.4122 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 445
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 510

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0145 0.2485 0.2022 3.2000e004 5.8000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 7.1000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 34.8652 34.8652 1.2400e- 003 5.5600e- 003 36.5519 Worker 0.0685 0.0235 0.2431 1.1000e004 5.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 8.3000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 4.6000e- 004 10.7837 10.7837 5.8000e- 003 3.1300e- 003 11.8603 Total 0.0829 0.2720 0.4453 4.3000e004 1.1500e- 003 4.0000e- 004 1.5400e- 003 4.6000e- 004 3.7000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 45.6489 45.6489 7.0400e- 003 8.6900e- 003 48.4122 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 446
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 511

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 16.2265 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 16.4182 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0153 5.2500e003 0.0523 2.0000e- 005 1.2000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 1.7000e- 004 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 2.3035 2.3035 1.3000e- 003 6.8000e- 004 2.5386 Total 0.0153 5.2500e003 0.0523 2.0000e- 005 1.2000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 1.7000e- 004 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 2.3035 2.3035 1.3000e- 003 6.8000e- 004 2.5386 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 447
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 512

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 16.2265 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 16.4182 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0153 5.2500e003 0.0523 2.0000e- 005 1.2000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 1.7000e- 004 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 2.3035 2.3035 1.3000e- 003 6.8000e- 004 2.5386 Total 0.0153 5.2500e003 0.0523 2.0000e- 005 1.2000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 1.7000e- 004 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 2.3035 2.3035 1.3000e- 003 6.8000e- 004 2.5386 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 448
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 513

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.3326 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3654 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0204 7.0000e003 0.0697 3.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 1.3000e- 004 3.0714 3.0714 1.7400e- 003 9.1000e- 004 3.3848 Total 0.0204 7.0000e003 0.0697 3.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 1.3000e- 004 3.0714 3.0714 1.7400e- 003 9.1000e- 004 3.3848 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 449
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 514

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.3326 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3654 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0204 7.0000e003 0.0697 3.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 1.3000e- 004 3.0714 3.0714 1.7400e- 003 9.1000e- 004 3.3848 Total 0.0204 7.0000e003 0.0697 3.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 1.3000e- 004 3.0714 3.0714 1.7400e- 003 9.1000e- 004 3.3848 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 450
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 515

4.4 Fleet Mix
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 451
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 516
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.542450 0.061470 0.185138 0.129299 0.023799 0.006448 0.011958 0.009209 0.000810 0.000503 0.024446 0.000751 0.003721 Single Family Housing 0.542450 0.061470 0.185138 0.129299 0.023799 0.006448 0.011958 0.009209 0.000810 0.000503 0.024446 0.000751 0.003721

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated

8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 NaturalGasUnmitigated

8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 452
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 517

6.0 Area Detail

0.790276 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Total 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 453
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 518

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Unmitigated 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 454
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 519

0.1023 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

1.1142 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0198 0.1692 0.0720 1.0800e003 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0000 216.0000 216.0000 4.1400e- 003 3.9600e- 003 217.2836 Landscaping 0.0310 0.0115 1.0025 5.0000e005 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 1.8104 1.8104 1.7800e- 003 1.8550 Total 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 455
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 520

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

0.1023 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

1.1142 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0198 0.1692 0.0720 1.0800e003 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0137 0.0000 216.0000 216.0000 4.1400e- 003 3.9600e- 003 217.2836 Landscaping 0.0310 0.0115 1.0025 5.0000e005 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 5.5300e- 003 1.8104 1.8104 1.7800e- 003 1.8550 Total 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 456
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 521

11.0 Vegetation

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste8.0 Waste Detail9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:51 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 457
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 522
Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST
South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter
Project Characteristics - Operational year 2024.Land Use - Acreage and building square footage for single family homes based on site plan.Construction Phase - Schedule based on schedule provided by project applicant.Trips and VMT - Trip distances were reduced to zero for the LST analysis.Grading - CalEEMod defaults.

Architectural Coating - CalEEMod defaults.

Vehicle Trips - CalEEmod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.Vehicle Emission Factors - CalEEMod defaults.

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Asphalt Surfaces 127.00 1000sqft 2.92 127,000.00 0 Single Family Housing 12.00 Dwelling Unit 9.12 54,000.00 34

1.2 Other Project CharacteristicsUrbanizationClimate Zone Rural3
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data1.0 Project CharacteristicsUtility Company Southern California Edison Operational Year 2024
CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
390.98 0.033 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 458
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 523
Woodstoves - Per SCAQMD Rule 445 No woodstoves or fireplaces were included.

Area Coating - CalEEMod defaults.

Energy Use - CalEEMod defaults.Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - In compliance with SCAQMD rule 403, 2x daily watering and unpaved vehicle road speeds were limited to 15 mph.

Fleet Mix - CalEEMod defaults.Off-road Equipment - CalEEmod defaults.

Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 3.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 4.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 9.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 23.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 300.00 305.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 30.00 20.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 23.00tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 12.00 tblFireplaces NumberWood 0.60 0.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 2,300.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 21,600.00 54,000.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 459
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 524

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.90 9.12
tblProjectCharacteristics UrbanizationLevel Urban Rural tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 0.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 0.00tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 0.00tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 0.00tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 0.00tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 227.00 270.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.90 0.00
tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.90 0.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.90 0.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.90 0.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripLength 7.90 0.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 19.80 0.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 19.80 0.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 19.80 0.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 19.80 0.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripLength 19.80 0.00tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 15.00 16.00 tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 0.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 0.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 460
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 525

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 18.0862 34.8621 31.4257 0.0626 19.6574 1.4248 20.9235 10.1026 1.3108 11.2674 0.0000 6,064.363 1 6,064.363
1 1.9480 0.0102 6,115.737
9 2024 1.5473 13.7341 16.6678 0.0274 1.1500e003 0.6137 0.6149 4.6000e- 004 0.5773 0.5777 0.0000 2,601.998 2 2,601.998 2 0.6121 9.0000e- 003 2,619.983 9 Maximum 18.0862 34.8621 31.4257 0.0626 19.6574 1.4248 20.9235 10.1026 1.3108 11.2674 0.0000 6,064.363 1 6,064.363
1 1.9480 0.0102 6,115.737
9 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 18.0862 34.8621 31.4257 0.0626 7.6666 1.4248 8.9327 3.9401 1.3108 5.1049 0.0000 6,064.363 1 6,064.363
1 1.9480 0.0102 6,115.737
9 2024 1.5473 13.7341 16.6678 0.0274 1.1500e003 0.6137 0.6149 4.6000e- 004 0.5773 0.5777 0.0000 2,601.998 2 2,601.998 2 0.6121 9.0000e- 003 2,619.983 9 Maximum 18.0862 34.8621 31.4257 0.0626 7.6666 1.4248 8.9327 3.9401 1.3108 5.1049 0.0000 6,064.363 1 6,064.363
1 1.9480 0.0102 6,115.737
9 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 461
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 526
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 61.00 0.00 55.67 61.00 0.00 52.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 462
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 527

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Energy 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Mobile 0.4000 0.5204 4.4578 0.0106 1.1723 7.6800e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,078.929 3 1,078.929 3 0.0650 0.0454 1,094.087 9 Total 1.6757 0.7740 5.5634 0.0122 1.1723 0.0328 1.2050 0.3124 0.0322 0.3446 0.0000 1,389.713 3 1,389.713
3 0.0727 0.0511 1,406.752
5 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 1.2672 0.1807 1.0745 1.1300e003 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0192 0.0000 217.8104 217.8104 5.9200e- 003 3.9600e- 003 219.1386 Energy 8.5200e003 0.0728 0.0310 4.6000e- 004 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 5.8900e- 003 92.9736 92.9736 1.7800e- 003 1.7000e- 003 93.5261 Mobile 0.4000 0.5204 4.4578 0.0106 1.1723 7.6800e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,078.929 3 1,078.929 3 0.0650 0.0454 1,094.087 9 Total 1.6757 0.7740 5.5634 0.0122 1.1723 0.0328 1.2050 0.3124 0.0322 0.3446 0.0000 1,389.713 3 1,389.713
3 0.0727 0.0511 1,406.752
5 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 463
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 528

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 109,350; Residential Outdoor: 36,450; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 7,620 (Architectural Coating – sqft)Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 18 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 60Acres of Paving: 2.92 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 464
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 529

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed AreaReduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved RoadsGrading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTGrading 8 20.00 6.00 270.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTBuilding Construction 9 58.00 22.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 12.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 16.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 465
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 530

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.6570 0.0000 19.6570 10.1025 0.0000 10.1025 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 19.6570 1.2660 20.9230 10.1025 1.1647 11.2672 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.5900e003 0.0724 0.0588 9.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 9.8669 9.8669 3.2000e- 004 1.5700e- 003 10.3441 Worker 0.0211 8.5600e003 0.0929 3.0000e- 005 1.8000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 005 1.5000e- 004 3.4136 3.4136 2.2200e- 003 1.0800e- 003 3.7913 Total 0.0247 0.0810 0.1517 1.2000e004 3.4000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 4.6000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 13.2804 13.2804 2.5400e- 003 2.6500e- 003 14.1354 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 466
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 531

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.6662 0.0000 7.6662 3.9400 0.0000 3.9400 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 0.0000 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 7.6662 1.2660 8.9323 3.9400 1.1647 5.1047 0.0000 3,687.308 1 3,687.308
1 1.1926 3,717.121
9 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.5900e003 0.0724 0.0588 9.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 9.8669 9.8669 3.2000e- 004 1.5700e- 003 10.3441 Worker 0.0211 8.5600e003 0.0929 3.0000e- 005 1.8000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 2.6000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 005 1.5000e- 004 3.4136 3.4136 2.2200e- 003 1.0800e- 003 3.7913 Total 0.0247 0.0810 0.1517 1.2000e004 3.4000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 4.6000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 13.2804 13.2804 2.5400e- 003 2.6500e- 003 14.1354 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 467
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 532

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.2036 0.0000 9.2036 3.6538 0.0000 3.6538 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 1.4245 1.4245 1.3105 1.3105 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Total 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 9.2036 1.4245 10.6281 3.6538 1.3105 4.9643 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0130 0.2646 0.2131 3.6000e004 2.9000e- 004 1.7000e- 004 4.5000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.6000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 39.2257 39.2257 9.9000e- 004 6.2000e- 003 41.0977 Vendor 3.5900e003 0.0724 0.0588 9.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 9.8669 9.8669 3.2000e- 004 1.5700e- 003 10.3441 Worker 0.0234 9.5200e003 0.1033 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 9.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 3.7928 3.7928 2.4700e- 003 1.2000e- 003 4.2126 Total 0.0400 0.3465 0.3751 4.9000e004 6.5000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 9.4000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 2.9000e- 004 5.2000e- 004 52.8854 52.8854 3.7800e- 003 8.9700e- 003 55.6543 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 468
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 533

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 3.5894 0.0000 3.5894 1.4250 0.0000 1.4250 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 1.4245 1.4245 1.3105 1.3105 0.0000 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Total 3.3217 34.5156 28.0512 0.0621 3.5894 1.4245 5.0139 1.4250 1.3105 2.7355 0.0000 6,011.477 7 6,011.477
7 1.9442 6,060.083
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0130 0.2646 0.2131 3.6000e004 2.9000e- 004 1.7000e- 004 4.5000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.6000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 39.2257 39.2257 9.9000e- 004 6.2000e- 003 41.0977 Vendor 3.5900e003 0.0724 0.0588 9.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 9.8669 9.8669 3.2000e- 004 1.5700e- 003 10.3441 Worker 0.0234 9.5200e003 0.1033 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 9.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 3.7928 3.7928 2.4700e- 003 1.2000e- 003 4.2126 Total 0.0400 0.3465 0.3751 4.9000e004 6.5000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 9.4000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 2.9000e- 004 5.2000e- 004 52.8854 52.8854 3.7800e- 003 8.9700e- 003 55.6543 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 469
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 534

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0132 0.2655 0.2155 3.4000e004 5.8000e- 004 1.6000e- 004 7.4000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.6000e- 004 3.8000e- 004 36.1785 36.1785 1.1900e- 003 5.7700e- 003 37.9283 Worker 0.0680 0.0276 0.2994 1.1000e004 5.7000e- 004 2.7000e- 004 8.4000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 4.8000e- 004 10.9993 10.9993 7.1700e- 003 3.4800e- 003 12.2164 Total 0.0811 0.2931 0.5149 4.5000e004 1.1500e- 003 4.3000e- 004 1.5800e- 003 4.6000e- 004 4.1000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 47.1778 47.1778 8.3600e- 003 9.2500e- 003 50.1447 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 470
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 535

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0132 0.2655 0.2155 3.4000e004 5.8000e- 004 1.6000e- 004 7.4000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.6000e- 004 3.8000e- 004 36.1785 36.1785 1.1900e- 003 5.7700e- 003 37.9283 Worker 0.0680 0.0276 0.2994 1.1000e004 5.7000e- 004 2.7000e- 004 8.4000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 4.8000e- 004 10.9993 10.9993 7.1700e- 003 3.4800e- 003 12.2164 Total 0.0811 0.2931 0.5149 4.5000e004 1.1500e- 003 4.3000e- 004 1.5800e- 003 4.6000e- 004 4.1000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 47.1778 47.1778 8.3600e- 003 9.2500e- 003 50.1447 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 471
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 536

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0130 0.2648 0.2129 3.3000e004 5.8000e- 004 1.6000e- 004 7.4000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.5000e- 004 3.8000e- 004 35.6476 35.6476 1.1700e- 003 5.6900e- 003 37.3720 Worker 0.0627 0.0256 0.2880 1.1000e004 5.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 8.3000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 4.6000e- 004 10.6516 10.6516 6.6000e- 003 3.3100e- 003 11.8043 Total 0.0757 0.2903 0.5009 4.4000e004 1.1500e- 003 4.2000e- 004 1.5700e- 003 4.6000e- 004 3.9000e- 004 8.4000e- 004 46.2993 46.2993 7.7700e- 003 9.0000e- 003 49.1762 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 472
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 537

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0130 0.2648 0.2129 3.3000e004 5.8000e- 004 1.6000e- 004 7.4000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 1.5000e- 004 3.8000e- 004 35.6476 35.6476 1.1700e- 003 5.6900e- 003 37.3720 Worker 0.0627 0.0256 0.2880 1.1000e004 5.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 8.3000e- 004 2.3000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 4.6000e- 004 10.6516 10.6516 6.6000e- 003 3.3100e- 003 11.8043 Total 0.0757 0.2903 0.5009 4.4000e004 1.1500e- 003 4.2000e- 004 1.5700e- 003 4.6000e- 004 3.9000e- 004 8.4000e- 004 46.2993 46.2993 7.7700e- 003 9.0000e- 003 49.1762 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 473
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 538

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 16.2265 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 16.4182 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0141 5.7100e003 0.0620 2.0000e- 005 1.2000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 1.7000e- 004 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 2.2757 2.2757 1.4800e- 003 7.2000e- 004 2.5275 Total 0.0141 5.7100e003 0.0620 2.0000e- 005 1.2000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 1.7000e- 004 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 2.2757 2.2757 1.4800e- 003 7.2000e- 004 2.5275 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 474
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 539

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 16.2265 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 16.4182 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0141 5.7100e003 0.0620 2.0000e- 005 1.2000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 1.7000e- 004 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 2.2757 2.2757 1.4800e- 003 7.2000e- 004 2.5275 Total 0.0141 5.7100e003 0.0620 2.0000e- 005 1.2000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 1.7000e- 004 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 2.2757 2.2757 1.4800e- 003 7.2000e- 004 2.5275 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 475
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 540

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.3326 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3654 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0188 7.6100e003 0.0826 3.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 1.3000e- 004 3.0343 3.0343 1.9800e- 003 9.6000e- 004 3.3700 Total 0.0188 7.6100e003 0.0826 3.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 1.3000e- 004 3.0343 3.0343 1.9800e- 003 9.6000e- 004 3.3700 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 476
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 541

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.3326 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.3654 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker 0.0188 7.6100e003 0.0826 3.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 1.3000e- 004 3.0343 3.0343 1.9800e- 003 9.6000e- 004 3.3700 Total 0.0188 7.6100e003 0.0826 3.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 1.3000e- 004 3.0343 3.0343 1.9800e- 003 9.6000e- 004 3.3700 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 477
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 542

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 0.4000 0.5204 4.4578 0.0106 1.1723 7.6800e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,078.929 3 1,078.929 3 0.0650 0.0454 1,094.087 9 Unmitigated 0.4000 0.5204 4.4578 0.0106 1.1723 7.6800e003 1.1799 0.3124 7.1400e- 003 0.3195 1,078.929 3 1,078.929 3 0.0650 0.0454 1,094.087 9

4.4 Fleet Mix
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 27 Date: 3/18/2022 4:49 PM Glendora Hillside Subdivision - LST - South Coast AQMD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Item #8. Page 478
Meeting Date: 1/24/2023 / Packet Page #: 543
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.542450 0.061470 0.185138 0.129299 0.023799 0.006448 0.011958 0.009209 0.000810 0.000503 0.024446 0.000751 0.003721 Single Family Housing 0.542450 0.061470 0.185138 0.129299 0.023799 0.006448 0.011958 0.009209 0.000810 0.000503 0.024446 0.000751 0.003721

Glendora City CouncilJanuary 24, 2023

Glendora City Council
January 24, 2023