Agenda Packet — Hercules City Council, September 27, 2022 (part 2 of 7)

earthwork recommendations for site preparation, removal of unsuitable soils, surface and subsurface drainage, bio-filtration facilities, foundations, concrete flatwork, retaining walls, spread and pier footings, pavement areas, utility trenches, project review, and construction monitoring. Additionally, these include recommendations related to structural design, foundation design, foundation systems, slabs, moisture barriers, seismic design, walls, footing excavations, slabs and walkways, concrete design, corrosion, pavement design, as well as lot maintenance, and future plan reviews.

MM GEO-2 Prior to the commencement of earth-disturbing activities, a professional paleontologist shall provide the construction crew with an orientation on significant 202
fossils that could be encountered and the appropriate procedures to follow in the event of a discovery. If any vertebrate remains (i.e., bones, teeth, or unusually abundant and well-preserved invertebrates or plants) be unearthed, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery should be diverted at least 15 feet until a professional paleontologist assesses the find and, if deemed appropriate, salvages it in a timely manner. All recovered fossils shall be deposited in an appropriate repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), where they shall be properly curated and made accessible for future study. 203
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?
Environmental Evaluation
Setting
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are referred to as GHGs. The effect is analogous to the way a greenhouse retains heat. Prominent GHGs that naturally occur in the Earth’s atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), and ozone. 47 Anthropogenic
(human-caused) GHG emissions include releases of these GHGs plus release of human-made gases with high global warming potential (GWP) (ozone-depleting substances such as chlorofluorocarbons [CFCs])
48 and aerosols, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).

Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than significant impact. Both construction and operational activities have the potential to generate GHG emissions. The proposed project would generate GHG emissions during temporary 47 United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.

Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Solomon, S., D.

Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller [eds.]). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. Website: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar4/wg1/. Accessed January 27, 2022. 48 U.S. Department of State. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. Website: https://www.state.gov/key-topicsoffice-of-environmental-quality-and-transboundary-issues/the-montreal-protocol-on-substances-that-deplete-the-ozone-layer/. Accessed March 8, 2022.
204
(short-term) construction activities such as demolition and grading, running of construction equipment engines, movement of on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, hauling materials to and from the project site, asphalt paving, and construction worker, vendor, and haul truck motor vehicle trips.

Long-term, operational GHG emissions would result from project-generated vehicular traffic, on-site combustion of natural gas, operation of any landscaping equipment, off-site generation of electrical power over the life of the proposed project, the energy required to convey water to and wastewater from the project site, and the emissions associated with the hauling, and disposal of solid waste from the project site.

The 2017 BAAQMD Thresholds contain the following for thresholds for GHGs:

For land use development projects (including residential, commercial, industrial, and public land uses and facilities), the threshold is compliance with a qualified GHG Reduction Strategy; or annual emissions less than 1,100 metric tons per year of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e); or 4.6 metric tons CO2e/service population/year (residents + employees).

It should be noted that the BAAQMD’s Thresholds of Significance was established based on meeting the 2020 GHG targets set forth in the AB 32 Scoping Plan. Because the proposed project would be constructed after 2020, the BAAQMD quantitative thresholds of significance listed above was adjusted to become “substantial progress” thresholds that were calculated based on the SB 32 target of 40 percent below 1990 levels (i.e., 60 percent of 1990 levels). The mass emission threshold of significance applied in this analysis is 660 metric tons (MT) CO2e per year (1,100 x 0.60 = 660). To determine significance, the proposed project’s GHG emissions are assessed against the projected 2030 bright line threshold of 660 MT CO2e/year.

It should be noted that while the BAAQMD has recently updated their recommended GHG significance thresholds for land use projects,49 their staff has identified that the Notice of Preparation (NOP) issuance date, or the commencement of analysis if no NOP, defines an appropriate cut-off date for which thresholds to utilize for CEQA projects. As such, because this analysis was already well-underway at the time these new significance thresholds were adopted, the significance thresholds contained in the BAAQMD’s 2017 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines and the industry standard of adjusting that significance threshold to demonstrate substantial progress toward the 2030 legislative reduction target were utilized in this analysis to determine project impact significance.

Global climate change is not confined to a particular project area and is generally accepted as the consequence of global industrialization over the last 200 years. A typical project, even a large one, does not generate enough greenhouse gas emissions on its own to influence global climate change significantly; hence, the issue of global climate change is, by definition, a cumulative environmental impact. Therefore, this section measures the proposed project’s contribution to the cumulative 49 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2022. Justification Report: CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts From Land Use Projects and Plans. April. 205
environmental impact. The following is a discussion of the proposed project’s contribution to GHG emissions during both the construction and operation phases.

Short-term Construction Impacts
The proposed project would emit GHG emissions during construction from the off-road equipment, worker vehicles, and any hauling that may occur. The BAAQMD does not presently provide a construction GHG emission threshold but recommends that construction GHG emissions be quantified and disclosed. The BAAQMD also recommends that lead agencies (in this case, the City of Richmond) determine the level of significance of construction GHG emissions. Total GHG emissions generated throughout construction were combined and are presented in Table 10. In the absence of a construction emission threshold, construction GHG emissions are amortized over the expected lifetime of the proposed project (30 years) and added to the proposed project’s operational GHG emissions in Table 11. These total project emissions were analyzed against the BAAQMD’s bright line threshold, adjusted to demonstrate substantial progress toward the 2030 legislative reduction target. It should be noted that the existing land use’s operational emissions are not included above.

As such, the emissions estimates contained herein represent a conservative assessment of project impacts.

Table 10: Construction GHG Emissions
Construction Phase MT CO2e per year
Demolition 49
Site Preparation (Site-Wide) 12
Grading (Site-Wide) 34
Paving (Roadways and Foundations) 24
Building Construction (Model Homes) 10
Architectural Coating (Pavement and Model
Homes) 2
Building Construction (Pre-Receptors) 93
Architectural Coating (Pre-receptors) 12
Building Construction (Post-Receptors) 80
Architectural Coating (Post-Receptors) 14
Total Construction Emissions 331
Emissions Amortized Over 30 Years1 11
Notes:

MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
Totals may not add up due to rounding. 1 Construction greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are amortized over the 30-year lifetime of the project.

Source: CalEEMod Output (Appendix A).
206
Long-term Operational Impacts
The proposed project would contribute to global climate change through direct and indirect emissions of GHG from mobile sources (e.g., passenger vehicles, trucks), energy (e.g., on-site natural gas consumption and purchased electricity), water use and wastewater generation, and solid waste generation. All modeling parameters utilized in the Air Quality analysis are also utilized for this GHG analysis, including but not limited to trip generation rates, trip distances, building sizes and operations, energy consumption, water consumption, and waste generation. Please refer to Appendix A for modeling results and detailed calculations Operational GHG emissions by source are shown in Table 11. The proposed project was analyzed assuming full buildout in the year 2024. The estimated total annual project-generation emissions, including operational emissions and amortized construction emissions, were compared with the 2030 target threshold of 660 MT CO2e/year calculated from the BAAQMD’s bright line threshold to determine significance at project buildout in the year 2024.

Table 11: Operational GHG Emissions
Emission Source
Year 2024 Total Emissions
(MT CO2e per year)
Area 4
Energy 107
Mobile (Vehicles) 282
Waste 24
Water 6
Amortized Construction Emissions 11
Total Project Emissions 434
Applicable Threshold (MT CO2e/year) 660
Does project exceed threshold? No
Notes:

MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
As shown in Table 11, the proposed project’s generation of approximately 434 MT CO2e per year would not result in a net increase in GHG emissions which would exceed significance thresholds.

Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less than significant impact.

The following discusses project consistency with applicable plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, which include ARB’s Scoping Plan, Metropolitan Transportation 207
Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments (MTC/ABAG) Plan Bay Area 2050, and City of Hercules’ General Plan.

ARB Scoping Plan
The principal State plan and policy for GHG emission reduction targets are set forth in Executive Order S-03-05, AB 32, and the subsequent SB 32. The quantitative goal of AB 32 is to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. AB 32 required the ARB to develop a Scoping Plan that describes California's approach to reduce GHGs to achieve the 2020 emission target. SB 32 then accelerated the GHG emission reduction goals of AB 32. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update, the most recent update to the ARB Scoping Plan, reflects the 2030 target of a 40 percent reduction below 1990 levels as set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. It is applicable to State agencies but is not directly applicable to cities/counties and individual projects (i.e., the Scoping Plan does not require the City to adopt policies, programs, or regulations to reduce GHG emissions). However, new regulations adopted by the State agencies outlined in the Scoping Plan result in GHG emissions reductions at the local level. As a result, local jurisdictions benefit from reductions in transportation emissions rates, increases in water efficiency in the building and landscape codes, and other Statewide actions that affect a local jurisdiction’s emissions inventory from the top down.

Transportation Sector
Passenger Vehicles
Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions from passenger vehicles and the transportation sector in general include the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and changes in the corporate average fuel economy standards (e.g., Pavley I and Pavley California Advanced Clean Cars program).50 The proposed project would include wiring and conduits capable of supporting EV charging consistent with Title 24 standards. As a result, the proposed project would not conflict with State goals for reducing GHG emissions from passenger vehicles.

Energy/Commercial-Residential Sectors
Energy use generated by the project represents the second largest source of emissions after the transportation sector. New buildings under the proposed project would meet the current CALGreen and Building Energy Efficiency standards. The proposed project would include rooftop photovoltaic electricity generation panel arrays compliant with the California Building Code. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the State’s goalsfor reducing residential energy consumption.

Other Sources
Other sources of GHG emissions include solid waste disposal, which is associated with landfilling municipal solid waste. The amount of methane emitted to the atmosphere as a fraction of the total amount of methane generated from the decomposition of accumulated waste has gradually declined over time as more landfills install landfill gas collection and control systems and existing systems are 50 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2015. Low Carbon Fuel Standard Regulation. Website:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2015/lcfs2015/lcfs2015.htm. Accessed February 3, 2022. 208
operated more efficiently as a result of the ARB’s Landfill Methane Control Measure.51 Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the State’s goals for the recycling and waste sector.

Metropolitan Transportation Commission Plan Bay Area
As part of the implementing framework for Plan Bay Area 2050, local governments have identified planned development areas to focus growth. The proposed project site is within the planning area of the Hercules General Plan and consistent with applicable land use designations. Thus, the proposed project would be consistent with the overall goals of Plan Bay Area, which include concentrating new investment in areas that would encourage job growth. In addition, the proposed project would be developed in an area with existing urban infrastructure, such as roads, potable water, and sanitary sewer lines. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the land use concept plan in Plan Bay Area 2050.

The project site is located approximately 3,400 feet west of SR-80 and there are existing sidewalks along the proposed project’s frontage on Skelly that connect to the nearest arterial road. Several bus stops are located within a walking distance of the site, including the San Pablo Avenue and John Street Stop (500 feet or 3-minute walking time to the project site) and San Pablo Avenue and Hercules Stop (2,600 feet or 13-minute walking time to the project site) operated by Western Contra Costa Transit Authority. As such, it is likely that some residents would travel to and from the project site using public transit. Thus, the proposed project would not conflict with the ABAG and MTC’s Plan Bay Area goals to reduce VMT and encourage development in planned development areas.

City of Hercules General Plan
The City of Hercules has not adopted a Climate Action Plan. Therefore, the City’s General Plan would be referenced herein as the local plan adopted for the purposes of reducing GHG emissions. The City adopted its General Plan in 1998 and the City recently updated its Housing Element in 2015.52 In the Housing Element, future jobs and employed residents are estimated and it states that it is important to maintain jobs-and-housing balance with the benefit of improved air quality and reduced fuel consumption. The Housing Element mentions that the City’s works with the utility provider PG&E to offer a range of incentives to encourage energy conservation, including rebates for energy-efficient appliances and home improvements. The Housing Element also states its Goal 6.0: “Promote energy efficiency and conservation throughout Hercules” with the following policies:

Policy 6.1 Promote the use of Green Building techniques in residential development.

Policy 6.2 Ensure all new residential development complies with energy efficiency performance standards of the California Building Standards Code.

Policy 6.3 Utilize site planning techniques to allow passive energy efficiencies through solar access, landscaping and building orientation.
51 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2022. Landfill Methane Regulation. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ourwork/programs/landfill-methane-regulation/about. Accessed March 8, 2022. 52 City of Hercules. Elements of General Plan. Website: https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/government/planning/general-plan. Accessed March 8, 2022.
209
Policy 6.4 Seek opportunities to educate the public about energy conservation.

Policy 6.5 Encourage energy conservation measures and solar systems in existing homes where feasible and cost-effective.

The goal and policies aforementioned are intended to improve energy efficiency. At the same time, they would also reduce the GHG emissions because energy consumption, such as heating and cooling of homes, generates GHG emissions. Additionally, the proposed project would comply with the applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards, which would further improve project structure energy efficiency, reduce water demand, and provide access for EV charging. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the energy conservation goals and policies aimed at reducing GHG emissions in the City’s General Plan.

Senate Bill 32 2017 Scoping Plan Update
The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update addressing the Senate Bill (SB) 32 targets was adopted on December 14, 2017. Table 12 provides an analysis of the proposed project’s consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan Update measures. As shown in Table 12, many of the measures are not applicable to the proposed project, and the proposed project is consistent with strategies that are applicable.

Table 12: Consistency with SB 32 2017 Scoping Plan Update 2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measure Project Consistency SB 350: 50 Percent Renewable Mandate. Utilities
subject to the legislation will be required to
increase their renewable energy mix from 33
percent in 2020 to 50 percent in 2030.

Not applicable. This measure would apply to utilities
and not to individual development projects. The
proposed project would purchase electricity from PG&E
subject to the SB 350 Renewable Mandate.

SB 350 Double Building Energy Efficiency by 2030.

This is equivalent to a 20 percent reduction from
2014 building energy usage compared to current
projected 2030 levels.

Not applicable. This measure applies to existing
buildings. New structures are required to comply with
Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards that are expected
to increase in stringency over time. The proposed
project would comply with the applicable Title 24
Energy Efficiency Standards in effect at the time
building permits are received.

Low Carbon Fuel Standard. This measure requires
fuel providers to meet an 18 percent reduction in
carbon content by 2030.

Not applicable. This is a Statewide measure that cannot be implemented by a project applicant or lead agency.

However, vehicles used by future residents at the
project site would benefit from the standards.

Mobile Source Strategy (Cleaner Technology and
Fuels Scenario). Vehicle manufacturers will be
required to meet existing regulations mandated by
the LEV III and Heavy-Duty Vehicle programs. The
strategy includes a goal of having 4.2 million ZeroEmission Vehicles (ZEVs) on the road by 2030 and increasing numbers of ZEV trucks and buses.

Not applicable. This measure is not applicable to the
proposed project; however, vehicles accessing the
project site would benefit from the increased
availability of cleaner technology and fuels. In addition, as stipulated by the 2019 California Building Code, Title 24, Part 11, Chapter 4, Section 4.106.4.1, new onefamily dwellings, such as the proposed project, would be required to implement the applicable provisions of
Title 24, Part 6, Section 4.106.4 of the 2019 California 210
2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measure Project Consistency Building Code to support future electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE).

Sustainable Freight Action Plan. The plan’s target
is to improve freight system efficiency 25 percent
by increasing the value of goods and services
produced from the freight sector, relative to the
amount of carbon that it produces by 2030. This
would be achieved by deploying over 100,000
freight vehicles and equipment capable of zero
emission operation and maximize near-zero
emission freight vehicles and equipment powered
by renewable energy by 2030.

Not Applicable. The proposed project is residential in
nature and would not have any major freight vehicles
operational.

Short-Lived Climate Pollutant (SLCP) Reduction
Strategy. The strategy requires the reduction of
SLCPs by 40 percent from 2013 levels by 2030 and
the reduction of black carbon by 50 percent from
2013 levels by 2030.

Consistent. Consistent with BAAQMD Regulation 6,
Rule 3, no wood-burning devices are proposed as part
of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed
project would not include major sources of black
carbon.

SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategies.

Requires Regional Transportation Plans to include a
Sustainable Communities Strategy for reduction of
per capita VMT.

Not applicable. The proposed project does not include
the development of a Regional Transportation Plan.

Post-2020 Cap-and-Trade Program. The Post 2020
Cap-and-Trade Program continues the existing
program for another 10 years. The Cap-and-Trade
Program applies to large industrial sources such as
power plants, refineries, and cement
manufacturers.

Not applicable. The proposed project is not one
targeted by the cap-and-trade system regulations, and,
therefore, this measure does not apply to the proposed
project. However, the post-2020 Cap-and-Trade
Program indirectly affects people and entities who use
the products and services produced by the regulated
industrial sources when increased cost of products or
services (such as electricity and fuel) are transferred to the consumers.

Natural and Working Lands Action Plan. The ARB is
working in coordination with several other
agencies at the federal, State, and local levels,
stakeholders, and with the public, to develop
measures as outlined in the Scoping Plan Update
and the governor’s Executive Order B-30-15 to
reduce GHG emissions and to cultivate net carbon
sequestration potential for California’s natural and
working land.

Not applicable. The proposed project is in a built-up
urban area and would not be considered natural or
working lands.

Source of ARB 2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measures: California Air Resource Board (ARB). 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November. Website: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf.

Accessed March 8, 2022.

As shown in Table 12, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with the reduction measures proposed in SB 32.
211
Summary
The proposed project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and would not conflict with the provisions of SB 32. Therefore, the proposed project does not conflict with any plans to reduce GHG emissions and the impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.
212
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
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?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e) 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?
Environmental Evaluation
Setting
The information in this section is based in part on a Phase I ESA conducted by Brown and Caldwell on January 5, 2022, and is included as Appendix E of this Draft IS/MND. 53 53 Brown and Caldwell. January 5, 2022. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. 213
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than significant impact. A recognized environmental condition (REC) is “the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the property: (1) due to release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. De minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions.”54 The Phase I ESA did not identify any RECs and did not recommend further assessment of the property; therefore, construction of the proposed project is not likely to create a significant hazard to the public.

Construction activities would require the routine use of substances such as solvents, paints, fuel, and other potentially hazardous substances. These materials are commonly used during construction activities and would be used in limited quantities. Heavy construction equipment such as dozers, excavators, and tractors would likely require the use of petroleum-based substances such as diesel fuel, gasoline, oil, and hydraulic fluid, which are considered hazardous if improperly stored or handled. These activities are standard activities at most construction sites, and the risks associated with the proposed project would be similar to the risks associated with other similar construction sites. The handling, use, and storage of hazardous materials is regulated by numerous agencies, including the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA), Caltrans, California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA), and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), in addition to applicable local regulations. All construction projects must comply with the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act administered by the United States Department of Transportation and implemented in California by Caltrans, as well as the applicable State Water Board NPDES Construction General Permit requirements. As part of the Construction General Permit requirements, preparation of a SWPPP would be required, which would include BMPs such as the use of straw bales to prevent the release of any hazardous materials during construction.

Substances that may be used during project operation include cleaning agents, building maintenance chemicals, and pesticides and herbicides used for landscaping and maintenance. The amount of materials required for these activities would not be large enough to create a significant hazard to the public or environment. Although the proposed project would operate as single-family residences with no significant use of heavy chemicals or pollutants, the transport, use, and disposal of these operational substances is controlled and regulated by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); and the federal Clean Air Act. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Compliance with the applicable local, State, and federal standards, policies, and regulations would help ensure that the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials does not create a significant hazard. Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant.
54 Brown and Caldwell. January 5, 2022. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. 214
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? Less than significant impact. During project construction activities, there is always a limited risk of the accidental release of hazardous materials such as gasoline, oil, or fluids from construction equipment. However, use of these materials would be conducted in compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations, policies, and ordinances set forth by the EPA, State Water Board, DTSC, Cal/OSHA, Caltrans, RCRA, Contra Costa Environmental Health Department, and the RodeoHercules Fire Protection District. These include, but are not limited to, the following:
• California Health and Safety Code Sections 25270.7, 25270.8, and 25507; • California Vehicle Code Section 23112.5;
• California Public Utilities Code Section 7673 (PUC General Orders #22-B, 161); • California Government Code Sections 51018 and 8670.25.5(a); • California Water Code Sections 13271 and 13272;
• California Labor Code Section 6409.1(b)10; and
• NPDES Construction General Permit requirements.

Compliance with the provisions of these regulations would help minimize the risk of accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment and that appropriate remediation measures are implemented in the event of an accidental release.

A described above, the Phase I ESA did not identify any RECs and did not recommend further assessment of the project site. However, due to the age of the on-site structures, asbestoscontaining materials (ACMs) or lead-based paints (LBPs) could be present. Because of the potential for ACMs and lead-based paints, the applicant would be required retain a qualified hazardous materials contractor to remove and dispose of ACMs and LBPs in accordance with federal and State regulations. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c) 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. The La Casita Bilingue Montessori School is located within 0.25 mile of the project site. While construction of the proposed project could emit hazardous emissions, these emissions would be temporary and the project applicant is required to comply with all safe transport, handling, and disposal requirements and regulations. Operation of the proposed singlefamily homes would not result in the emission or handling of large quantities of hazardous materials, substances, or waste. Therefore, there would be less than significant impacts related to the possibility of hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste within

0.25 mile of a school.
215
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No impact. The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.55 No impact would occur. 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 closest airport to the project site is the Buchanan Field Airport, located approximately 12 miles east of the project site. The project site is outside of the area affected by federal aviation regulations and the airport influence area and is therefore not subject to the noise and safety regulations pursuant to the Buchanan Field Airport Master Plan.56 Therefore, the proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within an airport influence area or within 2 miles of a public or public use airport; there would be no impact. f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than significant impact. The proposed project is located in Zone 5 in the City’s Emergency Evacuation Routes and would use San Pablo Avenue in case of an evacuation.57 In case of an emergency that requires an evacuation, residents at the proposed project would travel north on San Pablo Avenue to SR-4 and continue out of town by means of I-80 or eastbound SR-4. Construction of the proposed project would not block any the adjacent neighborhood from accessing San Pablo Avenue.58 Furthermore, as described in Section 2.17 Transportation, the proposed project would allow for adequate circulation such that emergency access would be feasible. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
g) 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 located on a relatively flat site within an urbanized and residential area of the City that has not experienced wildfire. The topography of the project site 55 Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Envirostor. 2021 Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List. Website:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp?page=1&cmd=search&business_name=&main_street_name=&city=&zip=&c ounty=&status=ACT%2CBKLG%2CCOM&branch=&site_type=CSITES%2COPEN%2CFUDS%2CCLOSE&npl=&funding=&reporttitle=HAZ ARDOUS+WASTE+AND+SUBSTANCES+SITE+LIST&reporttype=CORTESE&federal_superfund=&state_response=&voluntary_cleanup= &school_cleanup=&operating=&post_closure=&non_operating=&corrective_action=&tiered_permit=&evaluation=&spec_prog=&n ational_priority_list=&senate=&congress=&assembly=&critical_pol=&business_type=&case_type=&searchtype=&hwmp_site_type= &cleanup_type=&ocieerp=&hwmp=False&permitted=&pc_permitted=&inspections=&inspectionsother=&complaints=&censustract =&cesdecile=&school_district=&orderby=upper%28business%5Fname%29. Accessed February 16, 2022. 56 Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Commission. 2000. Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Website:
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/851/Cover-Introduction-and-County-wide-Policies?bidId=. Accessed February 16, 2022. 57 City of Hercules. 2005. Emergency Evacuation Route Zone 5. December. Website:
https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/402/636582802056930000. Accessed March 24, 2022. 58 City of Hercules. Emergency Evacuation Routes.https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/government/police/emergencypreparedness/emergency-evacuation-routes. Accessed February 16, 2022. 216
is relatively flat with a gentle slope near the southeastern corner, and ranges between 9 feet above sea level at the northwestern boundary and 53 feet above sea level near the southeastern boundary.

The structures on the project site were previously damaged in a fire; however, the fire was limited to the on-site structures and was not related in any way to a wildfire. The City is located in a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) in a Non-Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ).59 The site is located in an area that is mostly surrounded by other residential development, which reduces wildfire risks.

Additionally, the proposed project would result in the removal of vegetation across the vacant site, further reducing the risk of wildfires. Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.
59 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2009. Contra Costa County: Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA as Recommended by CAL FIRE. Website: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6660/fhszl_map7.pdf. Accessed February 16, 2022. 217
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or groundwater quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:
(i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site;
(ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or off-site;
(iii) create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff; or
(iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
Environmental Evaluation
Setting
Water Quality
Water quality in the City is affected by a number of pollutants that are carried into surface and ground waters by runoff. New development could introduce point sources of pollution for any pollution source that would not discharge into an established sewer system. These sources would 218
require a NPDES permit. Development of these areas could also increase the load of nutrients, metals, oil, and grease carried in runoff from roadways to surface and ground waters.60 Groundwater
Groundwater underlies the City at relatively shallow depths. Throughout the lower valley, especially west of I-80, where the proposed project is located, the winter water table is typically less than 2–3 feet deep and declines to 5–6 feet during most summer months.61 Hydrology
The City is within three major drainage basins, all of which outfall into San Pablo Bay, and are thus subject to tidal influences. Pinole and Rodeo Creeks drain relatively small portions of the City. Pinole Creek is adjacent to the project site. Pinole Creek was recently improved by the Corps of Engineers and is presently operated and maintained by the Contra Costa County Flood Control District.62 Storm Drainage
Storm drainage is collected by a storm drainage system and transported to Refugio Creek and flows into San Pablo Bay. The City's Stormwater Management Plan contains BMPs that are implemented on a time frame as the City reaches physical buildout. The City seeks to implement storm drainage systems with high aesthetic and recreational value as well as adequate capacity for expected flood flows.63
Erosion
Erosion from runoff and storm waters occurs along unvegetated hillsides and slopes, drainage channels, and other areas of bare ground. Gullying also occurs within Hercules as a result of this type of erosion. Erosion affects water quality and wildlife habitats along with slope stability and damage to property.64
Flooding
Flooding is a recognized hazard in some areas of Hercules. Stormwater flooding of Refugio Valley occurs during periods of heavy rainfall and runoff, coincident with high tides affecting Refugio Creek.

A backwater effect is created that prevents effective flood water discharge to San Pablo Bay.65 Pinole Creek is in a Zone AE Flood Zone, meaning it is an area subject to inundation by a 1 percent annualchance flood event. 66 The project site is not in this flood zone.

Would the project:
60 City of Hercules. 1998. Hercules General Plan. The Open Space/Conservation Element. Website:
https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/12571/636777935669470000. Accessed February 17, 2022. 61 Ibid. 62 Ibid. 63 Ibid. 64 Ibid. 65 Ibid. 66 City of Hercules. 1998. Hercules General Plan. Safety Element. Figure S-3 Floodprone Areas Map. Website:
https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/12569/636770158459630000. Accessed February 17, 2022. 219
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
Less than significant impact. Upon construction of the proposed single-family homes, the impervious areas of the project site would increase to 130,920 square feet. The proposed project may create sources of polluted runoff due to car leaks and exhaust from cars circulating the project site. However, Parcel B would be a 16,957 square feet bioretention area located at the northwest corner of the project site. Any remaining stormwater would connect to existing City stormwater infrastructure and be transported to Refugio Creek before draining into San Pablo Bay. To address potential water contaminants, the proposed project is required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local water quality regulations.

Per General Plan Program 10a.2, for each proposed development project, runoff increase calculations for the parcel at full buildout shall be measured against estimates of existing runoff to ensure that no flooding would result.67
The proposed project would be required to prepare and implement a SWPPP in accordance with applicable federal and State requirements. The SWPPP would identify BMPs that are intended to prevent erosion during construction activity. The proposed drainage and conveyance system is designed in accordance applicable State and local laws and regulations in order to reduce peak runoff volume, prevent inundating downstream waterways, and reduce pollutant loads. These construction and operational features would ensure the proposed project would not violate water quality standards.

Per Section 7-2.304 of the Municipal Code, an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan must be submitted to the City and approved by the City Engineer for development project.68 Per Section 5-8.050 of the Municipal Code, a Stormwater Control Plan that meets the criteria of the most recent version of the Contra Costa Clean Water Program Stormwater C.3 Guidebook must be submitted as part of every application for a development project.69
The proposed project would comply with the aforementioned policies and code requirements, including the installation of landscaping and a bioretention area, to ensure that stormwater runoff would not exceed pre-project conditions and that water quality standards and waste discharge requirements are met. As such, implementation of the proposed project is not expected to substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality. Therefore, impacts to water quality would be less than significant.
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? 67 City of Hercules. 1998. Hercules General Plan. The Open Space/Conservation Element. Website:
https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/12571/636777935669470000. Accessed February 17, 2022. 68 City of Hercules. 2021. Hercules Municipal Code. Chapter 2. Grading, Excavation, and Fills. Website:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Hercules/#!/Hercules07/Hercules072.html. Accessed February 17, 2022. 69 City of Hercules. 2021. Hercules Municipal Code. Chapter 8: Stormwater Management and Discharge Control. Website:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Hercules/#!/Hercules05/Hercules058.html. Accessed February 17, 2022. 220
Less than significant impact. Potable water is currently supplied to the City of Hercules by the EBMUD. EBMUD does not operate water wells in the vicinity of the project area that would deplete local groundwater.70 In addition, although the proposed project would increase impervious surface on-site, the proposed bioretention area would allow for treatment and percolation of water into the underlying soils, which would, in turn, contribute to groundwater recharge. Because the proposed project does not involve an increase in groundwater extraction, and would increase recharge, the proposed project would not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or lowering of the local groundwater table. The impact would be less than significant.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of 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. Grading and site preparation for the proposed project would create new drainage patterns, including surface runoff being directed to the bioretention area and eventually to the City’s existing storm drainage system.

Per Section 7-2.304 of the Municipal Code, an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan must be submitted to the City and approved by the City Engineer for development project.71 Furthermore, the proposed project is subject to NPDES requirements. Areas of 1 acre or more of disturbance are subject to preparing and implementing a SWPPP for the prevention of runoff during construction. Compliance with these policies would ensure that impacts would be less than significant. (ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
Less than significant impact. As described above, Pinole Creek, which is adjacent to the project site is in a Zone AE Flood Zone, meaning it is an area subject to inundation by a 1 percent annual-chance flood event.72 The project site is not within this flood zone.73 Furthermore, the proposed project is subject to NPDES requirements and areas of 1 acre or more of disturbance are subject to preparing and implementing a SWPPP for the prevention of runoff during construction. Therefore, compliance with these policies would ensure that impacts would be less than significant. (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
70 East Bay Municipal Utility District. January 2022. East Bay Plain Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan. 71 City of Hercules. 2021. Hercules Municipal Code. Chapter 2. Grading, Excavation, and Fills. Website:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Hercules/#!/Hercules07/Hercules072.html. Accessed February 17, 2022. 72 City of Hercules. 1998. Hercules General Plan. Safety Element. Figure S-3 Flood Prone Areas Map. Website:
https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/12569/636770158459630000. Accessed February 17, 2022. 73 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2021. FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer (NHFL) Viewer. Website: https://hazardsfema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd. Accessed February 17, 2022. 221
Less than significant impact. As described above, Per Section 5-8.050 of the Municipal Code, a Stormwater Control Plan that meets the criteria of the most recent version of the Contra Costa Clean Water Program Stormwater C.3 Guidebook must be submitted as part of every application for a development project.74
The proposed drainage and conveyance system is designed in accordance applicable State and local laws and regulations in order to reduce peak runoff volume, prevent inundating downstream waterways, and reduce pollutant loads. These construction and operational features would ensure the proposed project would not violate water quality standards.

Per Section 7-2.304 of the Municipal Code, an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan must be submitted to the City and approved by the City Engineer for development project.75 Per Section 5-8.050 of the Municipal Code, a Stormwater Control Plan that meets the criteria of the most recent version of the Contra Costa Clean Water Program Stormwater C.3 Guidebook must be submitted as part of every application for a development project.76
The proposed project would comply with the aforementioned policies and code requirements, including the installation of landscaping and a bioretention area, to ensure that stormwater runoff would not exceed pre-project conditions, and that water quality standards and waste discharge requirements are met. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. (iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
Less than significant impact. As described above, Pinole Creek, which is adjacent to the project site is in a Zone AE Flood Zone, meaning it is an area subject to inundation by a 1 percent annual-chance flood event.77 The project site does not overlap with this flood zone.78 Furthermore, the proposed project is subject to NPDES requirements. Areas of one acre or more of disturbance are subject to preparing and implementing a SWPPP for the prevention of runoff during construction. Therefore, compliance with these policies would ensure that impacts would be less than significant. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? Less than significant impact. As described above, Pinole Creek, which is adjacent to the project site is in a Zone AE Flood Zone, meaning it is an area subject to inundation by a 1 percent annual-chance flood event.79 However, the project site does not overlap with this flood zone.80 According to the 74 City of Hercules. 2021. Hercules Municipal Code. Chapter 8: Stormwater Management and Discharge Control. Website:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Hercules/#!/Hercules05/Hercules058.html. Accessed February 17, 2022. 75 City of Hercules. 2021. Hercules Municipal Code. Chapter 2. Grading, Excavation, and Fills. Website:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Hercules/#!/Hercules07/Hercules072.html. Accessed February 17, 2022. 76 City of Hercules. 2021. Hercules Municipal Code. Chapter 8: Stormwater Management and Discharge Control. Website:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Hercules/#!/Hercules05/Hercules058.html. Accessed February 17, 2022. 77 City of Hercules. 1998. Hercules General Plan. Safety Element. Figure S-3 Floodprone Areas Map. Website:
https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/12569/636770158459630000. Accessed February 17, 2022. 78 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2021. FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer (NHFL) Viewer. Website: https://hazardsfema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd. Accessed February 17, 2022. 79 City of Hercules. 1998. Hercules General Plan. Safety Element. Figure S-3 Floodprone Areas Map. Website:
https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/12569/636770158459630000. Accessed February 17, 2022. 80 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2021. FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer (NHFL) Viewer. Website: https://hazardsfema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd. Accessed February 17, 2022. 222
California Department of Conservation’s California Tsunami Maps and Data, the project site would not be at risk in the event of a tsunami.
81 Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less than significant impact. Construction and operation of the proposed project would be subject to State and regional requirements related to stormwater runoff. Required compliance with State and local regulations regarding stormwater and dewatering during construction and operation would ensure that the proposed project would not conflict or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. As a result, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.
81 California Department of Conservation. 2021. California Tsunami Maps and Data. Website:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps. Accessed February 17, 2022. 223
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.11 Land Use and Planning
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?
Environmental Evaluation
Setting
The project site is within an established urban and residential area. The proposed project would develop 40 residential lots on the approximately 7.44-acre project site.

As described in Section 1.3.1, Land Use and Zoning, the General Plan and Hercules Zoning Map designate the project site as Residential Single-Family Low Density (RS-L). The General Plan states this land use designation is intended to provide areas with suburban single-family subdivisions.

Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
Less than significant impact. The physical division of an established community typically refers to the construction of a physical feature, such as an interstate highway or railroad tracks, or removal of a means of access, such as a local road or bridge that would impair mobility within an existing community or between a community and outlying area. The project site is in a developed urban and residential area. Surrounding land uses include residential neighborhoods to the north and east; a neighborhood park and Pinole Creek to the west; and railroad tracks, the Pinole Senior Center Building, and commercial businesses to the south.

Development of the proposed project would not disrupt the surrounding land uses or divide the physical arrangement of the established communities to the north, south, east, and west of the project site. The proposed project would have a similar use to adjacent land. Additionally, the proposed project would include an EVA road that would connect to Skelly and circle the project site; thereby improving connectivity and access in the community. Additional pedestrian access would be added to the site via internal sidewalks connecting to existing sidewalks on Skelly and via a pedestrian trail to the south of the project site connecting Skelly to San Pablo Avenue. Therefore, the proposed project would not physically divide an established community and would improve connectivity within the community, and impacts would be less than significant. 224
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? Less than significant impact. As described in Section 1.3.1, Land Use and Zoning, the RS-L designation allows for 2 to 7 units per acre. The proposed project would construct 40 units on 7.44 acres, which is approximately 5.4 units per acre, compliant with the land use designation. The maximum allowable building height is 35 feet. The maximum height of each single-family home would be 26 feet and 9 inches, which is below the maximum allowable building height. The minimum lot size for this land use designation is 6,000 square feet. The proposed project’s lot sizes range from 3,983 to 6,880 square feet. The RS-L land use designation has a minimum required front setback of 20 feet, minimum rear setback of 15 feet, and minimum side setback of 5 feet. The proposed residential units would have front setbacks of at least 20 feet, rear setbacks of at least 27 feet, and minimum side setbacks of 5 feet.

The project applicant is requesting approval for a Planned Development Plan to deviate from the minimum lot size, lot width, lot depth, and corner side yard setbacks requirements for selected lots.

According to Municipal Code Section 13.48, development design may deviate from the standards of a zoning district to the extent that the Planned Development Plan is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Currently, the Municipal Code Section 13.48 only allows zoning standard deviation up to 10 percent when processing a project through a Planned Development Plan. As such, the project applicant is also requesting a Zoning Amendment to change text in Section

13.48 to eliminate the limitations on the amount of a deviation allowed by a Planned Development Plan. With the approval of the Zoning Amendment and Planned Development Plan, the proposed project would be consistent with the land use and zoning of the project site. As such, impacts are considered less than significant.

Noise Land Use Compatibility
For a discussion of the characteristics of noise and further information regarding the applicable noise regulatory framework, refer to the Noise impact discussion in Section 2.13 of this document.

Implementation of the proposed project could introduce new land uses to an existing ambient noise environment that could conflict with the City’s established noise land use compatibility guidelines.

Therefore, a significant impact would occur if the proposed project would result in a conflict with the City’s adopted noise land use compatibility standards in relation to existing ambient noise levels.

The City has established Exterior Noise Exposure Land Use Compatibility Standards for new land use developments in Table 6 of the Noise Element of the General Plan. 82 The land use category in the
table that is applicable to the proposed project is Residential, Hotels and Motels. Under this designation, noise environments with ambient noise levels up to 60 A-weighted decibel (dBA) day/night noise level (Ldn) are considered “Normally Acceptable,” for new residential land use development. Noise environments with ambient noise levels from 60 dBA to 75 dBA Ldn are considered “Conditionally Acceptable” for new residential land use development; however, under this circumstance, new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed 82 City of Hercules. 1998. Hercules General Plan. September 22. Website:
https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/government/planning/general-plan. Accessed March 4, 2022. 225
analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional constructions, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning, would normally suffice. Noise environments with ambient noise levels of 75 dBA to 80 dBA Ldn are considered “Unacceptable” for new residential land use development. Policy 1 of the Noise Element also establishes maximum allowable interior and exterior noise exposure standards for residential land uses within the City. The maximum acceptable noise levels in residential areas is a 24-hour average noise level of 60 dBA Ldn. If the residential land use is near a railroad noise source, then the outdoor noise exposure criterion should be 70 dBA Ldn for future residential development.

Existing traffic noise levels along selected roadway segments in the project vicinity were modeled using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) in order to determine the daily average traffic noise levels on select roadway segments in the project’s immediate vicinity. The daily traffic volumes were obtained from the TIA prepared for the project by TJKM.
83 The traffic volumes described in Table 13 correspond to the existing without project conditions traffic scenario as described in the traffic study prepared for the project. The model inputs and outputs—including the 60 dBA, 65 dBA, and 70 dBA Ldn noise contour distances— are provided in Appendix F. A summary of the modeling results is shown in Table 13.

Table 13: Existing Traffic Noise Model Results Summary
Roadway Segment
Approximate
ADT
Centerline to
70 Ldn
(feet)
Centerline to
65 Ldn (feet)
Centerline to
60 Ldn (feet)
CNEL (dBA) 50
feet from
Centerline of
Outermost
Lane
Skelly–South of Hercules Avenue 290 < 50 < 50 < 50 44.9 Hercules Avenue–Skelly to San Pablo
Avenue 6,000 < 50 < 50 < 50 57.0
San Pablo Avenue–west of Hercules
Avenue 21,200 58 116 246 68.2
Notes:

ADT = Average Daily Traffic
1 Modeling results do not take into account mitigating features such as topography, vegetative screening, fencing, building design, or structure screening. Rather it assumes a worst-case of having a direct line of site on flat terrain.

Source: FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) 2022.

The modeling results in Table 12, above, show that traffic noise levels along Skelly and Hercules Avenue average approximately 45 dBA and 57 dBA Ldn, respectively, as measured at 50 feet from the centerline of the outermost travel lane. These traffic noise levels are within the City’s normally “Normally Acceptable” standards for new residential land use development.

Existing traffic noise levels along San Pablo Avenue average approximately 68 dBA Ldn, as measured at 50 feet from the centerline of the outermost travel lane. The closest proposed residence on the project site would be located over 360 feet from the centerline of San Pablo Avenue. At this distance, 83 TJKM. 2022. Draft Traffic Impact Analysis Report, 215 Skelly Residential Development. February 28. 226
traffic noise levels from San Pablo Avenue would attenuate to below 55 dBA Ldn. These traffic noise levels are within the City’s normally “Normally Acceptable” standards for new residential land use development.

Therefore, traffic noise impacts to the proposed project would not exceed the City’s land use compatibility noise standards for the proposed single-family residential land uses.

However, the project site is also located adjacent to an existing BNSF rail line. According to the latest crossing inventory data,84 this rail line experiences an average of 12 daily train passings. To document existing ambient noise levels, including noise from railroad activity as well as stationary noise sources in the project vicinity, a long-term ambient noise measurement was conducted. The long-term 24-hour noise measurement was taken on March 16 to March 17, 2022, at the southeastern boundary of project site, approximately 50 feet from the railroad tracks. As noted by the noise technician, the dominant noise source at this location was railroad activity. Noise from the senior center facility south of the project site was also audible. The resulting measurement showed that the daytime average noise level was 57.5 dBA the equivalent sound level (Leq) and the nighttime average noise level was 52.4 dBA Leq, with a 24-hour average noise level of 60.6 dBA Ldn. The noise monitoring data sheets are provided in Appendix F.

These documented ambient noise levels meet the City’s exterior noise standard of 70 dBA Ldn for new residential land use development located near railroad noise sources. However, it should be noted that the closest proposed residence on the project site would be located over 130 feet from the centerline of the rail line. At this distance, (and conservatively assuming that the measured noise levels are predominantly from railroad noise sources) noise levels from railroad activity would attenuate to below 53 dBA Ldn. These ambient noise levels are within the City’s “Normally Acceptable” standards for new residential land use development.

These documented ambient noise levels, as measured at the nearest proposed residential units, that include train noise and stationary source noise levels, are within the City’s “Normally Acceptable” range of below 60 dBA Ldn for new residential land use developments, and no additional mitigation would be required. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the City’s adopted land use compatibility for community noise environments standards, and this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.
84 United States Department of Transportation (USDOT). 2022. USDOT Crossing Inventory Form. 227
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.12 Mineral Resources
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?
Environmental Evaluation
Setting
There are four classifications of Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ) to classify existing or potential mineral resource sites within areas of the State and they are described as follows:
• MRZ-1: Areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that there is little likelihood exists for their presence. This zone shall be applied where the likelihood for occurrence of significant mineral deposits is nil or slight.
• MRZ-2: Areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present or where it is judged that there is a high likelihood for their presence exists. This zone shall be applied to known mineral deposits or where the likelihood for occurrence of significant mineral deposits is high.
• MRZ-3: Areas containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data.
• MRZ-4: Areas where available information is inadequate for assignment to any other MRZ zone.

According to the General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element, the City contains areas designated with MRZ-1, MRZ-3, and MRZ-4.85 There are no areas designated as MRZ-2 and there are no significant mineral deposit areas within the City. MRZ-3 zones have been mapped for the hills to the north and south of Highway 4 east of Highway 80 and the high area north of John Muir Parkway to the west of Highway 80.86
85 City of Hercules. 1998. Hercules General Plan – Open Space and Conservation Element. Website:
https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/home/showdocument?id=12571. Accessed February 25, 2022. 86 Ibid. 228
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?
No impact. The State Board of Mining and Geology have adopted regulations to protect lands classified as MRZ-2 (lands where information indicates that significant stone, sand, and/or gravel deposits are present, or where a high likelihood of their presence exist). There are no areas in the City that are designated as MRZ-2 identified by the California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology for the City. However, the City does contain areas designated as MRZ-3. The Hercules General Plan identifies that MRZ-3 zones have been mapped for the hills to the north and south of Highway 4 east of Highway 80 and the high area north of John Muir Parkway to the west of Highway 80. The project site is not located within this area. No impact would occur. 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? No impact. The project area does not support any mineral extraction activities and there are no known mineral deposits within the City. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral recovery site delineated in a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan. No impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures
None required.
229
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.13 Noise
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 groundborne vibration or
groundborne 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?
Environmental Evaluation
Characteristics of Noise
Noise is generally defined as unwanted sound. Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal activities, causes physiological harm or interferes with communication, work, rest, recreation, and sleep. Sound is produced by the vibration of sound pressure waves in the air. Sound pressure levels are used to measure the intensity of sound and are described in terms of decibels.

The decibel (dB) is a logarithmic unit, which expresses the ratio of the sound pressure level being measured to a standard reference level. The 0 point on the dB scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Changes of 3 dB or less are only perceptible in laboratory environments. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 dB or more, as this level has been found to be barely perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. Only audible changes in existing ambient or background noise levels are considered potentially significant.

An increase of 10 dB represents a 10-fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 dB is 100 times more intense, and 30 dB is 1,000 times more intense. Each 10-dB increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness. Sound intensity is normally measured through the A-weighted sound level. dBA approximate the subjective response of the human ear to a broad frequency noise source by discriminating against very low and very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. They are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies that are audible to the human ear. 230
Noise Descriptors
There are many ways to rate noise for various time periods, but an appropriate rating of ambient noise affecting humans also accounts for the annoying effects of sound, including during sensitive times of the day and night. The predominant rating scales in the State of California include the Leq, the CNEL, and the day-night average sound level (Ldn) all of which are based on dBA. The Leq is the total sound energy of time varying noise over a sample period. The CNEL is the time varying noise over a 24-hour period, with a 5 dBA weighting factor applied to the hourly Leq for noises occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. (defined as relaxation hours) and 10 dBA weighting factor applied to noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (defined as sleeping hours). These additions are made to the sound levels at these times because there is a decrease in the ambient noise levels during the evening and nighttime hours, which creates an increased sensitivity to sounds. For this reason, sound is perceived to be louder in the evening and nighttime hours as compared with daytime hours and is weighted accordingly. Many cities rely on the CNEL noise standard to assess transportationrelated impacts on noise-sensitive land uses. The Ldn is similar to the CNEL scale but without the adjustment for events occurring during the evening relaxation hours. CNEL and Ldn measurements are typically within 1 dBA of each other and are normally exchangeable.

Existing Noise Environment
To document existing ambient noise levels in the project vicinity, a long-term ambient noise measurement was conducted. The long-term 24-hour noise measurement was taken on March 16, to March 17, 2022, at the southeastern boundary of project site, approximately 50 feet from the BNSF railroad tracks. As noted by the noise technician, the dominant noise source at this location was railroad activity. Noise from the senior center facility south of the project site was also audible.

The resulting measurement showed that the daytime average noise level was 57.5 dBA Leq and the nighttime average noise level was 52.4 dBA Leq, with a 24-hour average noise level of 60.6 dBA Ldn.

The noise monitoring data sheets are provided in Appendix F.

Regulatory Framework
The project site is located within the City of Hercules in Contra Costa County. The City of Hercules addresses noise in the Public Safety and Noise Element of its General Plan and in its Municipal Code.87,88
City of Hercules General Plan
The City’s General Plan establishes guidelines and policies that address noise. The Noise Element establishes land use compatibility standards for new land development projects, as shown in Table 14:
87 City of Hercules. 1998. Hercules General Plan. September 22. Website:
https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/government/planning/general-plan. Accessed March 4, 2022. 88 City of Hercules. 2021. Hercules Municipal Code. July 27. Website: https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Hercules. Accessed March 4, 2022.
231
Table 14: Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments in the City of Hercules
Land Use Category
Exterior Noise Exposure (dBA CNEL or Ldn)
55 60 65 70 75 80
Residential, Hotels, and Motels
Outdoor Sports and
Recreation, Neighborhood
Parks and Playgrounds
Schools, Libraries, Museums,
Hospitals, Personal Care,
Meeting Halls, Churches
Office Buildings, Business
Commercial, and Professional
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
Amphitheaters
Industrial, Manufacturing,
Utilities, and Agriculture
Key:

Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal convention construction, without any special insulation requirements.

Conditionally Acceptable: Specified land use may be permitted only after detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements and needed noise insulation features are included in the design to mitigate noise to normally acceptable levels.

Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken because mitigation is usually not feasible to comply with noise element policies.

Source: City of Hercules General Plan 1998.

Policy 1 of the Noise Element also establishes maximum allowable interior and exterior noise exposure standards for residential land uses within the City. The maximum acceptable noise levels in residential areas is a 24-hour average noise level of 60 dBA Ldn. If the residential land use is near a railroad noise source, then the outdoor noise exposure criterion should be 70 dBA Ldn for future residential development.
232
Long-term noise impacts generated by traffic from new projects are considered significant if: (1) the noise level increase is 5 dBA Ldn or greater and the future noise level is less than 60 dBA Ldn; or (2) the noise level increase is 3 dBA Ldn or greater and the future noise level is 60 dBA Ldn or greater.

Noise levels from stationary sources associated with new projects are considered significant if they exceed the 50 dBA Leq or 70 dBA Lmax, during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.), or 45 dBA Leq or 65 dBA Lmax during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.).

According to Policy 6 of the Noise Element, the City requires implementation of the following measures to ensure that the level of noise generated by construction would be reduced at noisesensitive land uses:
• For construction near noise-sensitive areas, as determined by the Community and Business Development Department, require that noisy construction activities (including truck traffic) be scheduled for periods, according to construction permit to limit impact on adjacent residents or other sensitive receptors.
• Develop a construction schedule that minimizes potential cumulative construction noise impacts and accommodates particularly noise-sensitive periods for nearby land uses (e.g., for schools, churches, etc.)
• Where feasible, require that holes for driven piles be pre-drilled to reduce the level and duration of noise impacts.
• Where feasible, construct temporary solid noise barriers between source and sensitive receptor(s) to reduce off-site propagation of construction noise. This measure could reduce construction noise by up to 5 decibels.
• Require internal combustion engines used for construction purposes to be equipped with a properly operating muffler of a type recommended by the manufacturer. Also, require impact tools to be shielded per manufacturer’s specifications.

Hercules Municipal Code
The City of Hercules adopted a Zoning Ordinance with applicable noise standards in Section

13.31.300(11): Noise. Many of the ordinances are duplicative of the policies contained in the Noise Element of the City’s General Plan. However, the following additional regulation would also apply to the proposed project.

Where noise levels exceed community noise standards for a proposed land use, one or more of the following techniques may be required to reduce the noise to an acceptable level:

1. Proper site planning to reduce noise impacts should be investigated for a project. By taking advantage of the natural shape and contours of the site, it is often possible to arrange the buildings and other uses in a manner which would reduce and possibly eliminate noise impact. Site planning techniques include:
a. Increasing the distance between the noise sources and the receiver. 233
b. Placing non noise-sensitive structures such as parking lots, maintenance facilities and utility areas between the source and the receiver.
c. Using non noise-sensitive structures such as garages to shield noise-sensitive areas. d. Orienting buildings to shield outdoor spaces from a noise source.

2. Architectural Layout: In many cases, noise reduction requirements can be met by giving attention to layout of noise-sensitive spaces. Bedrooms, for example, would be considerably quieter if placed on the side of the house facing away from the freeway. Similarly, balconies facing freeways should be avoided. Quiet outdoor spaces can be provided next to a noisy highway by creating a U-shaped development which faces away from the highway.

3. Noise Barriers: To be effective, a noise barrier must be massive enough to prevent significant noise transmission through it and high enough to shield the receiver from the noise source.

The minimum acceptable surface weight for a noise barrier is 4 pounds per square foot (equivalent to ¾-inch plywood), and the barrier must be carefully constructed so that there are no cracks or openings. To be effective, a barrier must interrupt the line-of-sight between the noise source and the receiver.
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?
Short-term Construction Impacts
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. A significant impact could occur if construction activities result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels outside of the City’s permissible hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. or if construction activities exceed the maximum sound levels established by the City’s General Plan Noise Element action policies listed above.

Construction-related Traffic Noise
Noise impacts from construction activities associated with the proposed project would be a function of the noise generated by construction equipment, equipment location, sensitivity of nearby land uses, and the timing and duration of the construction activities. One type of short-term noise impacts that could occur during project construction would result from the increase in traffic flow on local streets associated with the transport of workers, equipment, and materials to and from the project site.

The transport of workers and construction equipment and materials to the project site would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site. Because workers and construction equipment would use existing routes, noise from passing trucks would be similar to existing vehicle-generated noise on these local roadways. Typically, a doubling of the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) hourly volumes on a roadway segment is required in order to result in an increase of 3 dBA in traffic noise levels, which, as discussed in the Characteristics of Noise section above, is the lowest change that can be perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. Project-related construction trips would not be expected to double the hourly traffic volumes along any roadway 234
segment in the project vicinity. For this reason, short-term intermittent noise from construction trips would be minor when averaged over a longer time period and would not result in a perceptible increase in hourly or daily average traffic noise levels in the project vicinity. Therefore, short-term construction-related noise impacts associated with the transportation of workers and equipment to the project site would be less than significant.

Construction Equipment Operational Noise
The second type of short-term noise impact is related to noise generated during construction on the project site. Construction is completed in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These various sequential phases would change the character of the noise generated on the site and, therefore, the noise levels surrounding the site as construction progresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction-related noise ranges to be categorized by work phase. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full-power operation followed by 3 or 4 minutes at lower power settings. Impact equipment, such as impact pile drivers, are not expected to be used during construction of this project.

The loudest phase of construction is typically the site preparation and grading phase, as that is when the loudest pieces of heavy construction equipment would operate. For example, the maximum noise level generated by each scraper is assumed to be 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from this equipment.

Each bulldozer would also generate 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. The maximum noise level generated by graders is approximately 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet.

A conservative but reasonable assumption is that this equipment would operate simultaneously and continuously over at least a 1-hour period in the vicinity of the closest existing residential receptors but would move linearly over the project site as they perform their earth moving operations, spending a relatively short amount of time adjacent to any one receptor. A characteristic of sound is that each doubling of sound sources with equal strength increases a sound level by 3 dBA. Assuming that each piece of construction equipment operates at some distance from the other equipment, a reasonable worst-case combined noise level during this phase of construction would be 90 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from the acoustic center of a construction area. The acoustical center reference is used because construction equipment must operate at some distance from one another on a project site and the combined noise level as measured at a point equidistant from the sources (acoustic center) would be the worst-case maximum noise level. These operations would be expected to result in a reasonable worst-case hourly average of 86 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 feet from the acoustic center of a construction area. These reasonable worst-case construction noise levels would only occur during the site preparation phase of development.

The closest sensitive-noise receptor to the project site is the single-family residential land use located west of the project site at the south end of the Rosti cul-de-sac. This closest residence would be located approximately 65 feet from the nearest acoustic center of the construction footprint where the heaviest construction equipment would be operating. At this distance, these residential land uses may be exposed to noise levels ranging up to approximately 83 dBA maximum noise/sound 235
level (Lmax), with a relative worst-case hourly average of 79 equivalent sound level (Leq) when site preparation construction activities occur at the portion of the project site nearest these homes.

Although there could be a relatively high single event noise exposure potential causing an intermittent noise nuisance, the effect of construction activities on longer-term (hourly or daily) ambient noise levels would be small but could result in a temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity that could result in annoyance or sleep disturbance of nearby sensitive receptors. Implementation of General Plan Policy 6 would help reduce potential construction noise impacts. As recommended in this policy, construction activities should comply with restricted hours of operation which would reduce potential impacts that could result in annoyance or sleep disturbances at nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, restricting construction activities to daytime hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, as well as implementing the best management noise reduction techniques and practices outlined in MM NOI-1, would ensure that construction noise would not result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels that would result in annoyance or sleep disturbance of nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, with implementation of MM NOI-1, temporary construction noise impacts would be reduced to less than significant.

Operational/Stationary Source Noise Impacts
Less than significant impact. A significant impact would occur if operational noise levels associated with the proposed project’s stationary noise sources would exceed the City’s maximum noise limits at any of the designated surrounding land uses. According to General Plan Policy 3, noise levels from stationary sources associated with new projects are considered significant if they exceed the 50 dBA Leq or 70 dBA Lmax during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) or 45 dBA Leq or 65 dBA Lmax during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.).

The proposed project would include new stationary noise sources such as mechanical ventilation equipment. Potential noise impacts from these sources are analyzed below.

Mechanical Equipment Operations
At the time of preparation of this analysis, details were not available pertaining to proposed mechanical ventilation systems for the project. Therefore, a reference noise level for typical singlefamily mechanical ventilation systems was used. Noise levels from these types of mechanical ventilation equipment range from 60 dBA to 70 dBA Leq as measured at approximately 3 feet from the operating unit.

Proposed mechanical ventilation systems could be located as close as approximately 40 feet from the nearest off-site receptors. In addition, the proposed project would include solid fencing along adjacent residential land uses which would provide additional shielding. At this distance and with minimal shielding reduction from proposed fencing, noise generated by proposed mechanical ventilation equipment would attenuate to below 45 dBA Leq, as measured at the nearest off-site residential receptor. These noise levels would not exceed the City’s applicable noise performance standards.
236
Therefore, proposed mechanical ventilation system operational noise levels would not result in a substantial permanent increase in noise levels in excess of established standards. The impact of mechanical ventilation equipment operational noise levels on sensitive off-site receptors would be less than significant.

Operational/Mobile Source Noise Impacts
Less than significant impact. A significant impact would occur if implementation of the proposed project would result in a substantial increase in traffic noise levels compared with traffic noise levels existing without the project. According to the City’s adopted policies of the General Plan, noise level increase resulting from project-related traffic would be a significant impact if:
(1) Traffic noise levels would increase by 5 dBA Ldn or greater and the future noise level is less than 60 dBA Ldn;
(2) Or traffic noise levels would increase by 3 dBA Ldn or greater and the future noise level is 60 dBA Ldn or greater.

The FHWA highway traffic noise prediction model (FHWA-RD-77-108) was used to evaluate existing and future traffic noise conditions in the vicinity of the project site. The daily traffic volumes were obtained from the TIA prepared for the project by TJKM. 89 The resultant noise levels were weighed
and summed over a 24-hour period in order to determine the Ldn values. The traffic noise modeling input and output files are included in Appendix F of this document. Table 15 shows a summary of the traffic noise levels for Existing, Existing Plus Project, Cumulative, and Cumulative Plus Project conditions as measured at 50 feet from the centerline of the outermost travel lane.

Table 15: Traffic Noise Model Results Summary
Roadway Segment
Ldn (dBA) 50 feet from Centerline of Outermost Lane
Existing
(dBA) Ldn
Existing Plus
Project
(dBA) Ldn
Increase
Over
Existing
(dBA)
Cumulative
(dBA) Ldn
Cumulative
Plus Project
(dBA) Ldn
Increase
Over
Cumulative
(dBA)
Skelly–South of Hercules
Avenue 44.9 47.9 3.0 45.5 48.8 3.3
Hercules Avenue–Skelly to San
Pablo Avenue 57.0 57.3 0.3 57.7 57.9 0.2
San Pablo Avenue–west of
Hercules Avenue 68.2 68.2 0.0 68.8 68.8 0.0
Notes:
dBA = A-weighted decibel
Ldn = day/night average sound level 1 Modeling results do not take into account mitigating features such as topography, vegetative screening, fencing, building design, or structure screening. Rather it assumes a worst-case of having a direct line-of-sight on flat terrain.

Source: FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS). 2022.
89 TJKM. 2022. Draft Traffic Impact Analysis Report, 215 Skelly Residential Development. February 28. 237
As shown in Table 17 above, the highest traffic noise level increase with implementation of the proposed project would occur along Skelly, south of Hercules Avenue, under Cumulative Plus Project conditions. The modeling results show that traffic noise levels without the proposed project would range up to 48.8 dBA Ldn as measured at 50 feet from the centerline of the outermost travel lane along this roadway segment. Since the future noise levels along this roadway segment are less than 60 dBA Ldn, a 5 dBA or greater increase would be considered a significant increase in traffic noise levels. As shown above, because the project traffic along this roadway segment would result in up to a 3.3 dBA in traffic noise levels compared to traffic noise levels without the proposed project, the increase would be less than significant.

As shown in Table 17, all other modeled roadway segments would experience less than a 1 dBA increase in traffic noise levels compared to traffic noise levels existing without the project.

Therefore, project-related traffic would not result in a substantial permanent increase in noise levels and the impact would be less than significant.

Therefore, project traffic would not result in a substantial increase in ambient noise levels, and project-related traffic noise impacts on off-site receptors would be less than significant. b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than significant impact. A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would generate groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels in excess of established standards. The City of Hercules does not establish a groundborne vibration threshold, so for purposes of this analysis Federal Transit Administration (FTA) standards are used. For determining constructionrelated vibration impacts, the FTA’s Construction Vibration Impact Criteria are utilized. The FTA has established industry accepted standards for vibration impact assessment in its Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, dated September 2018.

Groundborne noise is an effect of groundborne vibration and only exists indoors, since it is produced from noise radiated from the motion of the walls and floors of a room and may also consist of the rattling of windows or dishes on shelves. In general, if groundborne vibration levels do not exceed levels considered to be perceptible, then groundborne noise levels would not be perceptible in most interior environments. Therefore, this analysis focuses on determining exceedances of groundborne vibration levels.

In extreme cases, excessive groundborne vibration has the potential to cause structural damage to buildings. Common sources of groundborne vibration include construction activities such as blasting, pile driving and operating heavy earthmoving equipment. However, construction vibration impacts on building structures are generally assessed in terms of peak particle velocity (PPV). For purposes of this analysis, project-related impacts are expressed in terms of PPV.

Short-term Construction Vibration Impacts
A significant impact would occur if existing structures at the project site or in the project vicinity would be exposed to groundborne vibration levels in excess of levels established by the FTA’s Construction Vibration Impact Criteria for the type of structure. 238
Of the variety of equipment used during construction, the small vibratory rollers that are anticipated to be used in the site preparation phase of construction would produce the greatest groundborne vibration levels. Small vibratory rollers produce groundborne vibration levels ranging up to 0.101 inch per second (in/sec) PPV at 25 feet from the operating equipment.

The nearest off-site receptor to the project site is the single-family residence located west of the project site. The façade of this building would be located approximately 45 feet from the nearest construction footprint where the heaviest construction equipment would potentially operate. At this distance, groundborne vibration levels would range up to 0.04 PPV from operation of the types of equipment that would produce the highest vibration levels. This is below the FTA’s Construction Vibration Impact Criteria of 0.2 PPV for buildings of non-engineered timber and masonry.

Therefore, project construction activities would not generate groundborne vibration levels in excess of the FTA’s criteria, and impacts would be considered less than significant as measured at the nearest receiving structures in the project vicinity. Project construction-related groundborne vibration impacts would be less than significant.

Operational Vibration Impacts
A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would generate excessive groundborne vibration levels at sensitive receptors in the project vicinity.

Implementation of the proposed project would not include any permanent sources that would generate groundborne vibration levels that could be noticeable without instruments at the lot line of the project site. Therefore, project operations would not generate permanent excessive groundborne vibration levels or expose proposed uses to excessive groundborne vibration levels, and operational groundborne vibration impacts would be less than significant. 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 project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. The nearest public airport to the project site is the Buchanan Field Airport in Contra Costa County, located approximately 12.4 miles east of the project site. The next closest airport to the project site is the San Rafael Field Airport, located approximately 17 miles west of the project site. Because of the distance from these airports and the orientation of the airport runways, the project site is located outside of the 65 dBA CNEL airport noise contours. No impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures
MM NOI-1 To reduce potential construction noise impacts, the following best management measures shall be implemented during all phases of construction. In addition, all of the following measures shall be printed on the project construction documents prior to issuance of building permits:
239
• The construction contractor shall limit noise producing construction activities, including deliveries and equipment warmup, to the hours between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No noise producing construction activity shall be permitted on Sundays.
• The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment driven by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
• The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited. • The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such market available technology exists. • At all times during project grading and construction, the construction contractor shall ensure that stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable, and a minimum of 50 feet, from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest residential land uses. • Where a solid fence or wall is not already present along the property line of an adjoining residential land use, the construction contractor shall construct temporary, minimum 6-foot-high, solid noise barrier/fence with a minimum surface weight of 4 pounds per square foot, which would be effective to reduce construction noise by up to 5 A-weighted decibel (dBA). • The construction contractor shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and establish reasonable measures necessary to correct the problem. The construction contractor shall visibly post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site.
240
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.14 Population and Housing
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?
Environmental Evaluation
Setting
According to the California Department of Finance (CDF), the City of Hercules’ estimated population as of January 2021 was approximately 25,864. This was a 1.5 percent increase from January 2020s population of 25,494.90
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)?
Less than significant impact. According to the CDF, the average persons per household in the City of Hercules is 3.05. Given that the proposed project would construct 40 units, it can be assumed that the proposed project would generate 122 new residents.
91 This is less than 1 percent of an increase
of the City’s total population in 2021. Additionally, as stated in the City’s Housing Element for 2015- 2023, the City’s population is projected to increase to approximately 31,300 by 2025 and to 39,500 by 2040.
92 The proposed project is also consistent with the General Plan’s land use designation of the project site. Therefore, the population growth of 122 new residents is considered planned growth. The proposed project would also contribute 40 residential units to the future housing need for the 6th Cycle planning period. Therefore, the proposed project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the City, either through new housing or proposing new businesses or indirectly through extension of roads or other infrastructure. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
90 California Department of Finance (CDF). 2021. E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State – January 1, 2020 and 2021. Website: https://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-1/. Accessed March 1, 2022. 91 3.05 persons per residential unit * 40 residential units = 122 persons. 92 City of Hercules. 2015. City of Hercules, Housing Element, 2015-2023. April. 241
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Less than significant impact. The project site currently contains a vacant single-family residence, 58 horse paddocks, a permitted 2,400-square-foot storage building, miscellaneous outbuildings, and a large metal clad shed. Development of the proposed project would involve the removal of some of the existing trees, vegetation, and all existing structures currently on the project site and would develop 40 single-family residential lots. Because the existing single-family residence on-site is vacant, the proposed project would not displace existing people or housing. As a result, the proposed project would have less than significant impacts.

Mitigation Measures
None required.
242
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.15 Public Services
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:
a) Fire protection?
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Other public facilities?
Environmental Evaluation
Setting
Fire protection services for the City are provided by the Rodeo-Hercules Fire District (Fire District), which has two fire stations serving the City. Law enforcement services are provided by the Hercules Police Department (HPD).

The project site is within the West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD). The nearest schools to the project site include:
• Collins Elementary School located approximately 0.45 mile south of the site • Pinole Middle School located approximately 0.9 mile west of the site • Pinole Valley High School located approximately 1 mile south of the site The nearest park facilities within 1 mile of the project site include Fernandez Park, Duck Pond Park, Bayfront Park, and Refugio Valley Park. Library services would be provided by the Contra Costa County Library system.

The information in this section is based, in part, on correspondence with Skelly Residential Project public service providers. Correspondence consisted of an inquiry sent via email on February 24, 2022. Responses were provided to FCS between March 15, 2022, and March 29, 2022, and are included as Appendix G of this document.

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:
243
a) Fire protection?
Less than significant impact. The Fire District provides 24-hour protection to the City as well as the unincorporated areas of Rodeo. A 24-hour dispatch service is provided to the District under contract with the City of Pinole. The Fire District has an automatic response agreement with the Pinole Fire Department. The Fire District has two fire stations. The closest station to the project site is Fire Station No. 76 located 1.37 miles southeast of the site. This station would be the first to respond to calls from the project site, and driving time is estimated at 6 minutes. Additionally, the RodeoHercules Fire Protection District and Fire Inspector would review the project design prior to the issuance of a building permit to ensure incorporation of adequate fire and life safety features in the project.

The City has adopted the California Fire Code (Municipal Code Chapter 15) with modifications for local conditions. The proposed project would comply with the adopted Fire Code and policies related to fire protection. Although the proposed project may increase the need for fire protection service at the project site with an increase in up to 122 new residents, the Fire District could adequately serve and provide fire protection services as the nearest station is approximately 6 minutes away.

On February 24, 2022, FCS sent a letter to the Fire District, inquiring about the department’s ability to serve the proposed project. On March 15, 2022, a reply was received from Fire District, stating that they anticipate being able to accommodate the demand of the proposed project as part of the existing facilities, pending their design review of the proposed project. Furthermore, they stated that the proposed project would be required to pay a residential development fee for major subdivisions, as detailed in the Fire District’s Fee schedule.93
Additionally, General Plan policies ensure that the City regularly reviews HPD staffing levels to ensure the availability of adequate fire manpower and service facilities. General Plan policies would prevent future growth that exceeds the community capability to provide fire service. As a result, impacts would be considered less than significant.
b) Police protection?
Less than significant impact. HPD headquarters are located at 111 Civic Drive, approximately 1.1 miles southeast of the project site and an approximately five-minute drive. The proposed project would result in an increase in the City’s population and therefore could increase demand for police services. In addition, the proposed project would adhere to General Plan policies to further reduce potential impacts on police protection services.

On February 24, 2022, FCS sent a letter to the HPD, inquiring about the department’s ability to serve the proposed project. On March 15, 2022, we received a reply from HPD Chief of Police, stating that the proposed project on its own does not create a need for new or expanded facilities. The HPD would also review project design to ensure it incorporates appropriate safety features to minimize criminal activity.
93 Rodeo-Hercules Fire District. 2017. Engineering/Plan Review – Fee Schedule. Website: https://www.rhfd.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/04/Engineering-and-Plan-Review.pdf. Accessed March 30, 2022. 244
General Plan policies ensure that the City regularly reviews HPD staffing levels to ensure the availability of adequate police manpower and service facilities. General Plan policies would prevent future growth that exceeds the community capability to provide police services. Additionally, all future developments are required to pay police development impact fees pursuant to Sections 10-

18.403 of the Municipal Code prior to the issuance of building permits. Implementation of these policies would ensure that adequate capital improvements are made to accommodate the increased demand for police protection services. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c) Schools?
Less than significant impact. On February 24, 2022, FCS sent a letter to the WCCUSD, inquiring about its ability to serve the proposed project. On March 29, 2022, a response was received from the WCCUSD. The responder stated that the current K-12 enrollment in the School District is 25,992 students, whereas the K-12 district-wide capacity is 29,492 students. The schools expected to serve the project site are Ohlone Elementary School, which has 102 percent utilization, Hercules Middle School, which has 111 percent utilization, and Hercules High School, which has 73 percent utilization.

The responder identified that it would be challenging for Ohlone Elementary School and Hercules Middle School to accommodate additional students, given that they are already beyond 100 percent utilization. However, new residential construction would have a school impact fee of $4.08 per square foot. Furthermore, the WCCUSD is embarking on a student housing study to address the need to balance enrollment, which is a Citywide issue. Potential impacts resulting from the proposed project would be reduced through the payment of development impact fees.94 With the payment of development impact fees, impacts would be less than significant. d) Parks?
Less than significant impact. As discussed in Section 2.16, Recreation, similar to all new development projects in the City, the project applicant would be required to dedicate land or pay fees, pursuant to Section 10-18.203 of the Hercules Municipal Code, prior to the issuance of building permits. Thus, any resulting increase in the need for additional facilities would be offset by the required payment of these development fees. Impacts would be less than significant. e) Other public facilities?
Less than significant impact. The proposed project would result in 122 new residents to the City, which would increase the demand on other public facilities such as libraries. Library services would be provided by the Contra Costa County Library system. The nearest library to the project site is Hercules Library located approximately 1.2 miles southeast of the project site.

Additionally, as described above, the proposed project is consistent with its RS-L land use designation and the population increase of 122 persons is considered planned growth per the General Plan Housing Element. Therefore, it can be assumed that any expansion of library and other 94 City of Hercules. 2021. Hercules Municipal Code. Website:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Hercules/#!/Hercules10/Hercules1018.html. Accessed March 8, 2022. 245
public services required by this population increase is already planned. As such, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.
246
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.16 Recreation
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?
Environmental Evaluation
Setting
The City has one community park, the 55-acre Refugio Valley Park, and approximately nine neighborhood parks throughout the city limits.95 The City also operates the Hercules Swim Center and Hercules Senior Center.

According to the General Plan, the Open Space/Conservation element contain the following minimum standards for parks: 3.25 acres of community parks and 1.75 acres of neighborhood parks per 1,000 residents.96
The closest recreational facilities to the proposed project include the following:
• Fernandez Park is located approximately 100 feet southwest of the site and is within the City of Pinole’s city limits
• Bayfront Park is located approximately 0.39-mile northwest of the site • Duck Pond Park is located approximately 0.4-mile northeast of the site • Refugio Valley Park is located approximately 0.98-mile east of the site 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 proposed project would result in 122 new residents to the City, which would increase the demand on existing neighborhood parks. The proposed project would preserve 20,858 square feet of open space in the southeast corner of the project site. Pinole Creek 95 City of Hercules. 2022. Parks. Website: https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/government/parks-recreation/parks. Accessed March 1, 2022. 96 City of Hercules. 2015. Open Space Conservation Plan Element. April 14. 247
Trail is located along the western boundary of the project site. Although, the proposed project would not develop additional parks on-site, similar to all new development projects in the City, the project applicant would be required to dedicate land or pay fees, pursuant to Section 10-18.203 of the Hercules Municipal Code, prior to the issuance of building permits. Thus, any resulting increase in the need for additional facilities would be offset by the required payment of these development fees.97 With payment of the required fees or dedication of land, impacts would be less than significant.
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? No impact. As discussed above, the project does not propose the construction or expansion of public recreational facilities. The proposed project would result in 122 new residents, which is anticipated in the City’s long-term planning documents, as discussed above. The closest park to the project site is Fernandez Park, located approximately 100 feet west of the site and would most likely serve the new residents. As described above, the proposed project would be subject to pay in lieu fees to the City for park dedication. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in adverse physical impacts associated with such facilities. Thus, no impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures
None required.
97 City of Hercules. 2021. Development Impact Fees. Website: https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/government/finance/impact-fees.

Accessed March 3, 2022.
248
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.17 Transportation
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy of the circulation system, including transit, roadway,
bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b) Would the project 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?
Environmental Evaluation
Setting
The following analysis is based in part on the TIA dated February 28, 2022, prepared by TJKM, which is included as Appendix H.

Changes to the CEQA Guidelines were adopted in December 2018 to implement SB 743. Guideline 15064.3, which describes criteria for evaluating a project's transportation impacts, provides that VMT is generally "the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts," and that except for roadway capacity projects, a project's effect on traffic delays "shall not constitute a significant environmental impact." These provisions went into effect July 1, 2020. While Guideline 15064.3 governs a lead agency's assessment of traffic impacts under CEQA, it does not preclude a discussion of Level of Service (LOS) for informational purposes or other traffic analysis based on general plan or zoning standards, or on other agency policies.

Therefore, findings from the TIA are provided in this report in order to evaluate traffic impacts in support of General Plan consistency.

The City of Hercules General Plan has established performance benchmarks for signalized intersections and roadway segments within its jurisdiction. The City’s policy is to maintain LOS D as the desired level of service on intersections along all Basic Routes, which includes all arterials, collectors, and local roads that are not Regional Routes. There is no specified criteria for determining significant impacts to unsignalized intersections. For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that an unsignalized intersection experiences a significant inconsistency if the LOS falls below LOS D, and the intersection meets the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Peak Hour Signal Warrant during the same peak hour.
249
In the project vicinity, San Pablo Avenue is designated as a Route of Regional Significance. The intersection of San Pablo Avenue and Hercules Avenue is part of the CCTA Congestion Management Program (CMP) and subject to regular monitoring and separate LOS standards. The Congestion Management Program specifies level of service standards for intersections and Route of Regional Significance, but it does not provide specific thresholds of significance. The LOS Standard for the San Pablo Avenue and Hercules Avenue is LOS E.

In the City of Hercules, Skelly is a two-lane, east–west to north–south meandering street with a posted speed of 25 miles per hour (mph), which changes designation at Hercules Avenue. North of Hercules Avenue, Skelly becomes “Zeus,” a local street that provides access to the Olympic Hills Homeowner's Association (HOA). South of Hercules Avenue, Skelly is a local street. On-street parking is permitted south of Hercules Avenue.

Hercules Avenue is a four-lane, north–south collector with a posted speed of 25 mph. Hercules Avenue extends from O’Neill Circle in the north to Village Parkway in the south. Sidewalks are provided on both sides, and on-street parking is generally permitted north of San Pablo Avenue.

San Pablo Avenue is the primary transit spine of the region. It travels through all of the West Contra Costa County cities, and it is the primary reliever route to I-80 during periods of severe freeway congestion. San Pablo Avenue is a four-lane major arterial that runs generally east–west in the immediate project vicinity with a posted speed limit of 25-40 mph. On-street parking is prohibited, and intermittent sidewalks are provided along particular sections of the corridor. This roadway is also designated as a Route of Regional Significance by the Contra Costa County Transportation Authority (CCTA).

I-80 is the primary interregional commute corridor through West Contra Costa County and has major regional significance to the Bay Area. I-80 is an 8- to 12-lane freeway with a posted speed limit of 65 mph. The north–south freeway connects Hercules with nearby cities, such as Richmond and Vallejo, and regional destinations, such as San Francisco and Sacramento. It also provides access to the greater freeway network with direct connections to I-580, I-680, I-780, SR-4, SR-29, and SR-37.

Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
Less than significant impact.

General Plan Standards and CCTA CMP
The TIA analyzed project traffic conditions in the Existing Plus Project and Cumulative Plus Projects scenarios to determine the possible adverse effects the proposed project may have on the transportation facilities. To estimate traffic for Existing Plus Project conditions, the net project trips generated by the proposed project were added to background traffic volumes at each intersection movement. TJKM developed estimated project trip generation for the proposed project based on published trip generation rates from the ITE publication Trip Generation (11th Edition). TJKM used 250
published trip rates for the ITE land use Single Family Detached Housing (ITE Code 210) for this project. The proposed project is expected to generate 377 total daily trips, including 28 net new a.m. peak hour trips (7 in, 21 out) and 38 net new p.m. peak hour trips (24 in, 14 out).

Under Existing Plus Project and Cumulative Plus Projects scenarios, both of the study intersections (Hercules Avenue/Skelly, and Hercules Avenue/San Pablo Avenue) would continue to operate within applicable jurisdictional standards during the a.m. peak hour, and both study intersections operate acceptably in the p.m. peak hour. The project would be consistent with level of service standards set forth under the Hercules General Plan and CCTA Congestion Management Program.

Vehicle Access
Primary access to the project site would be provided by a direct connection to Skelly at the location of the existing driveway. Vehicle access to the project site is considered adequate and would not result in any significant impacts to the nearby roadways.

Pedestrian Access
Pedestrian access would be via internal sidewalks connecting to existing sidewalks on Skelly, and via a pedestrian trail to the south of the project site connecting Skelly to San Pablo Avenue. There is one crosswalk at the intersection of Hercules Avenue and Skelly, and there are 4-way signalized crosswalks at the intersection of Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue. Existing pedestrian facilities provide continuous paths to nearby bus stops on San Pablo Avenue and to nearby shopping centers to the southwest of the project site, primarily via trail access.

Existing sidewalk facilities on San Pablo Avenue to the southwest of the project site terminate between the two pedestrian trail outlets to San Pablo Avenue. This disruption separates pedestrians from nearby shopping centers west of Pinole Creek when traveling along San Pablo Avenue and may pose accessibility challenges due to the slope of the trail at some points. A significant impact occurs if the proposed project conflicts with applicable or adopted policies, plans, or programs related to pedestrian facilities or otherwise decreases the performance or safety of pedestrian facilities. The proposed project would not result in any such conflicts. Pedestrian access to the project site is considered adequate and would not result in any significant impacts to the nearby pedestrian facilities.

Bicycle Access
There are existing Class II bike lanes provided on San Pablo Avenue east of Hercules Avenue; an extension of the Class II bike lane is proposed in the Hercules 2018 General Plan Circulation Element.

A multiuse trail is present along Pinole Creek to the west of the project site. An impact to bicyclists occurs if the proposed project disrupts existing bicycle facilities or conflict or create inconsistencies with adopted bicycle system plans, guidelines, and policies. A significant impact occurs if the proposed project conflicts with applicable or adopted policies, plans or programs related to bicycle facilities or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of bicycle facilities. The proposed project would not result in any such conflicts. Bicycle access to the project site is considered adequate and would not result in any significant impacts to the nearby bicycle facilities. 251
Transit
A proposed project is considered to have a significant impact on transit if it conflicts with existing or planned transit facilities or is expected to generate additional transit trips and does not provide adequate facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists to access transit routes and stops. The project site is adequately served by the transit service. Transit stops on San Pablo Avenue are within a 0.5 mile walk from the project site. Spread among multiple bus routes, the existing transit service can accommodate the proposed demand. Therefore, transit access to the project site is considered adequate and would not result in any significant impacts to the nearby transit network On-site Circulation
The street connecting all homes forms a loop, with westward extension in line with the access point from Skelly providing garage access to four homes. The street is 34–45 feet wide throughout, including sidewalks and on-street parking spaces. There is adequate space for vehicles to maneuver into and out of parking spaces and garages. The proposed project would also provide adequate space for trucks and emergency vehicles to access the site and maneuver as needed, with adequate turning radii for truck access. The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable plan or policy governing circulation. The following is noted for informational purposes only:

The TIA noted there are no curb ramps or interior pedestrian crossings within the access loop. In order to ensure accessible pedestrian circulation between all homes and the nearest roadways, at least two curb ramps shall be included on the inner side of the loop opposite new ramps on the outer edge of the loop, and a pair of ramps shall be added near the connection point to Skelly. This is included as a condition of approval.

Impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Less than significant impact. This study evaluates project-related VMT as outlined in the adopted CCTA VMT methodology. The methodology and implementation guidelines were adopted by CCTA in July 2020. The City of Hercules has adopted CCTA VMT procedures and standards.

The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory (December 2018) provides guidance to analysts and local jurisdictions for implementing VMT as a metric for determining the transportation impact for land use projects. The OPR guidelines state that for analysis purposes, “VMT” refers to automobile VMT, specifically passenger vehicles and light trucks. Heavy truck traffic is typically excluded.

The CCTA guidelines include a screening process that describes five scenarios in which a project would be with exempted from a VMT analysis requirement: 1) projects exempt from CEQA analysis, 2) small projects, 3) local serving projects, 4) projects in transit priority areas, and 5) projects in low VMT areas.
252
Using the CCTA methodologies, the proposed project would meet the exemption requirements for a low VMT area. It should be noted that even if a project satisfies one or more of the screening criteria, lead agencies may still require a VMT analysis if there is evidence that the project has characteristics that might lead to a significant amount of VMT.

The following language is from the Project Screening section of the CCTA VMT methodologies and was applied to the proposed project:

2.5: Projects Located in Low VMT Areas.

Residential and employment-generating projects located within a low VMT-generating area can be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. A low VMT area is defined as follows:
• For housing projects: Cities and unincorporated portions within CCTA’s five subregions that have existing home-based VMT per capita that is 85 percent or less of the existing Countywide average.

The proposed project was evaluated using screening criteria adopted by CCTA based on existing VMT generated in the project area. For projects in areas with a similar mix of existing uses, residential projects are screened out if the home-based VMT per resident is at least 15 percent below the countywide average.

The CCTA travel demand model generates simulated daily weekday VMT per capita by traffic analysis zone (TAZ) within Contra Costa County and throughout the Bay Area for commute VMT per employee and residential VMT per capita. The project site is within the boundaries of an existing TAZ (#10236) that contains similar single-family residential subdivisions under existing conditions. The residential VMT per capita generated in this TAZ is 14.45. For the year 2020, the countywide residential VMT per capita generated by the CCTA travel demand model is 19.78. The corresponding threshold to consider a location to have low VMT, 15 percent below the countywide average, is

16.81. There is no apparent evidence that the proposed project would generate more VMT than the surrounding area. Based on the CCTA screening criteria, the proposed project is expected to cause a less than significant impact under CEQA and is exempt from further VMT analysis. The proposed project would not conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b); therefore, impacts related to VMT would be less than significant. c) 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 incorporated. The TIA did not identify any hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses. However, during design review and prior to issuance of grading permits, the proposed grading plans shall be carefully evaluated to ensure that the finished grade and landscaping do not create any visual obstructions for vehicles exiting driveways.

This is included as MM TRANS-1. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
253
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than significant impact. The proposed project is located in Zone 5 in the City’s Emergency Evacuation Routes and would use San Pablo Avenue in case of an evacuation.98 In case of an emergency that requires an evacuation, residents at the proposed project would travel north on San Pablo Avenue to SR-4 and continue out of town by means of I-80 or eastbound SR-4. On-site emergency access would be provided via an internal road with an access point from Skelly providing garage access to four homes. The internal road would be 34–45 feet wide throughout, which would provide adequate space for trucks and emergency vehicles to access the site and maneuver as needed, with adequate turning radii for truck access. Construction of the proposed project would not block any the adjacent neighborhood from accessing San Pablo Avenue.99 Furthermore, as described above, the proposed project would also provide adequate space for trucks and emergency vehicles to access the site and maneuver as needed, with adequate turning radii for truck access.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
MM TRANS-1 During design review and prior to issuance of grading permits, the proposed grading plans shall be carefully evaluated to ensure that the finished grade and landscaping do not create any visual obstructions for vehicles exiting the driveway. Should the finished grade or landscaping create visual obstructions, the proposed landscaping shall be altered such that there would no longer be obstructions. 98 City of Hercules. 2005. Emergency Evacuation Route Zone 5. December. Website:
https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/402/636582802056930000. Accessed March 31, 2022. 99 City of Hercules. Emergency Evacuation Routes.https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/government/police/emergencypreparedness/emergency-evacuation-routes. Accessed March 31, 2022. 254
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.18 Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
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?
Environmental Evaluation
Setting
The proposed project would obtain water from the EBMUD. The proposed project’s wastewater would be collected by sewer lines owned and maintained by the City of Hercules and treated at the Pinole/Hercules Wastewater Treatment Plant, which is operated by the JPA. Stormwater would drain into a detention basin at the northwest corner of the project site. Solid Waste services would be provided by Republic Services.100 Electric power and natural gas would be provided by PG&E.

The information in this section is based, in part, on correspondence with Skelly Residential Project utility service providers. Correspondence consisted of an inquiry sent via email on February 24, 2022. Responses were provided to FCS between March 3, 2022, and March 16, 2022. 100 Republic Services Inc. Republic Services. Website:
https://www.republicservices.com/?utm_source=yext.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=Yext_Profile_Click_Google&ut m_term=3854. Accessed February 23, 2022.
255
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Water
As described above, the City is within the service area of EBMUD. EBMUD obtains its water from the Mokelumne River and East Bay Area watershed runoff. The Mokelumne Aqueducts convey the Mokelumne River supply from Pardee Reservoir, located upstream of Camanche Dam, across the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta (Delta) to local storage and treatment facilities in the East Bay.

After treatment, water is distributed to the incorporated cities and unincorporated communities in Alameda and Contra Costa counties that EBMUD serves.101 The proposed project would connect to existing EBMUD water lines to the northwest, north, northeast, and south of the project site. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant would submit information regarding any new water infrastructure and modifications to the existing water infrastructure. Any construction of water infrastructure would be required to comply with the City’s utility construction BMPs.

EBMUD adopted their 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) in June of 2021.102 The 2020 UWMP predicts there would be adequate water supplies in its jurisdictional area for up to 30 years.

The project site is zoned as RS-L and the proposed project is consistent with that land use designation, meaning the proposed project can be considered planned growth that was accounted for in the 2020 UWMP. Therefore, the proposed project would not increase water demand such that it would, on its own, result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities.

On February 24, 2022, FCS sent a letter to David Rehnstrom at EBMUD inquiring about EBMUD’s ability to service the proposed project. On March 3, 2022, a response was received, stating that EBMUD owns and operated a 24-inch and 36-inch transmission pipeline within EBMUD rights-of-way and property surrounding and adjacent to the north, east, and south property lines. These pipelines provide continuous service to EBMUD customers in the area. Any proposed construction activity in EBMUD rights-of-way and property would be subject to the terms and conditions determined by EBMUD. EBMUD stated that no expansion of EBMUD facilities is anticipated to be needed to serve the project. However, a main extension, at the applicant’s expense, would be required to serve the proposed project. The proposed 8-inch water lines would connect to the existing water line. Impacts related to water services would be less than significant.

Wastewater
As described above, wastewater would be collected by sewer lines owned and maintained by the City of Hercules and treated at the Pinole/Hercules WWTP which is operated by the Pinole-Hercules Wastewater JPA. Both the City of Hercules and Pinole own 50 percent of the WWTP. The applicant 101 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2021. Urban Water Management Plan 2020. Website:
https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan/. Accessed February 23, 2022. 102 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). June 2021. Urban Water Management Plan 2020. Attachment 1. 256
would pay fees for a permit for a sewer connection to the City’s wastewater infrastructure to ensure that the wastewater infrastructure maintains adequate capacity.103 On February 25, 2022, FCS sent a letter to Mike Roberts at the Department of Public Works inquiring about whether there would be adequate sewer capacity to serve the proposed project. It was concluded that prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the proposed project would require a complete sewer analysis to ensure the downstream conveyance system, including the lift station, has adequate capacity. Should the sewer analysis conclude that there is not adequate capacity, the project applicant would be required to enhance the storm drainage capacity as a standard condition of approval. Given this standard condition of approval, it would ensure that adequate stormwater drainage would be provided onsite. Impacts would be less than significant.

Stormwater
Stormwater would drain into a detention basin at the northwest corner of the project site. This is required given the proposed project would involve the creation of more than 10,000 square feet of net new impervious surface. Runoff from proposed impervious surfaces would be directed to the bioretention areas, where a water quality treatment process would begin. Bioretention areas would remove pollutants by filtering runoff slowly through an active layer of soil. In addition, all cities within Contra Costa County are required to implement surface water control standards for projects in compliance with Provision C.3 of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Municipal Regional Storm Water NPDES Permit No. R2-201500049. The Contra Costa County Clean Water Program created a C.3 Guidebook for the implementation of C.3 requirements. As a result of planned drainage treatment features, impacts would be less than significant.

Electricity and Natural Gas
The project site would be serviced by PG&E for electricity and gas. The proposed project would connect to existing electric lines. No off-site construction of utilities would be required. The process of connecting the project to existing infrastructure is expected to be standard for conveying electrical power to new development. Construction would be conducted in compliance with City-approved BMPs for utilities infrastructure improvements and applicable construction-related mitigation measures identified in this Draft IS/MND (e.g., air quality emissions and noise). Impacts would be less than significant.
b) 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 described above, the 2020 UWMP predicts there would be adequate water supplies in its jurisdictional area for up to 30 years, accounting for an extreme drought scenario and a five-year historical dry period scenario. The project site is zoned as RS-L and the proposed project is consistent with that land use designation, meaning the proposed project can be considered planned growth that was accounted for in the 2020 UWMP. As described above, a letter from EBMUD stated that EBMUD would have capacity to serve the proposed project. EBMUD requested that a standard condition of approval be applied that the project sponsor comply with AB 103 City of Hercules. Sanitary Sewer. Website: https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/government/engineering-public-works/sanitary-sewer.

Accessed February 23, 2022.
257
325, “Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance,” (Division 2, Title 23, California Code of regulations, Chapter 2.7, §§ 490–495). Therefore, 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. 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?
Less than significant impact. As described above, wastewater would be collected by sewer lines owned and maintained by the City of Hercules and treated at the Pinole/Hercules WWTP which is operated by the Pinole-Hercules Wastewater JPA. The applicant would pay fees for a permit for a sewer connection to the City’s wastewater infrastructure to ensure that the wastewater infrastructure maintains adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand.104 Furthermore, the wastewater provider would confirm that it has adequate capacity to serve the project prior to project approval. Impacts would be less than significant. 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? Less than significant impact. Significant impacts could occur if the proposed project would exceed the existing permitted landfill capacity or violates federal, State, and local statutes and regulations.

The proposed project consists of a car wash facility. As described above, Republic Services is the solid waste services provider for the project site. Republic Services takes solid waste to Golden Bear Transfer Facility in the City of Richmond and subsequently to Keller Canyon Landfill, which is located at 901 Bailey Road in the City of Pittsburg. Keller Canyon Landfill has a daily permitted throughput, of 3,500 tons per day. As of 2004, the remaining capacity was 63,408,410 cubic yards.105 The maximum permitted capacity of the facility is 75,018,280 cubic yards. The landfill is expected to cease operation in the year 2050.

According to CalRecycle, single-family homes generate approximately 10 pounds per dwelling unit per day of solid waste.106 As such, the proposed project would generate approximately 400 pounds, or 0.2 tons per day. This is less than 0.0001 percent of the daily permitted throughout at Keller Canyon Landfill. Therefore, there would be sufficient capacity to dispose of waste generated from the proposed project.

On February 24, 2022, FCS sent a letter to Janna Coverston at Republic Services, inquiring about the Republic Services’ ability to serve the proposed project. On March 16, 2022, FCS received a response, stating that that Republic Services and its local affiliate facilities currently have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed project. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 104 City of Hercules. Sanitary Sewer. Website: https://www.ci.hercules.ca.us/government/engineering-public-works/sanitary-sewer.

Access February 23, 2022. 105 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2004. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details. Keller Canyon Landfill. Website: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4407?siteID=228. Accessed February 23, 2022. 106 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2019. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. Website:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates. Accessed February 23, 2022. 258
e) Comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less than significant. AB 939 requires local jurisdictions to achieve at least a 50 percent solid waste diversion rate. The City of Hercules is a member of the West Contra Costa County Integrated Waste Management Authority, which is a JPA that aims to implement AB 939. Per Section Per Section 5-

2.07 of the Municipal Code, it would be the responsibility of the owner of each premises in the City to subscribe and pay for solid waste collection service. Therefore, it would be up to the occupant to comply with local regulations related to solid waste. Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.
259
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.19 Wildfire
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?
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?
Environmental Evaluation
Setting
According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map for Contra Costa County, the City of Hercules is located within an LRA and is not classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone.107,108 The City is not within a State Responsibility Area (SRA). The nearest fire hazard zone is located in the City of Pinole, approximately 1 mile southwest of the project site.

Would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than significant impact. The proposed project would not interfere with any adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, including the Hercules Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP).
109 As previously mentioned, the proposed project is located in Zone 5 in the City’s 107 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2007. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA – Contra Costa County.

Website: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6662/fhszs_map7.pdf. Accessed March 1, 2022. 108 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2009. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA – Contra Costa County.

Website: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6660/fhszl_map7.pdf. Accessed March 1, 2022. 109 City of Hercules. 2020. Hercules Hazard Mitigation Plan. October 19. 260
Emergency Evacuation Routes and would use San Pablo Avenue in case of an evacuation. In case of an emergency that requires an evacuation, residents at the proposed project would travel north on San Pablo Avenue to SR-4 and continue out of town by means of I-80 or eastbound SR-4.

Incorporated in the project design, there would be a private street and EVA road that connects to Skelly and circles the project site. The EVA road would vary in width in different places, ranging from 34-feet wide to 45-feet wide. In addition, the Fire District would review the project plans to ensure there is appropriate fire access to the project area. As such, impacts would be less than significant. 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?
Less than significant impact. The project site is located in a LRA and is not located in a high fire hazard severity zone according to the Hercules LHMP. Although the project site is located 1 mile north of a fire hazard zone, the proposed project is not located in the urban-wildland interface area and is relatively flat and located in a residential area. Thus, the project site does not have features that would exacerbate wildfire.

According to CalFire, defensible space is a buffer between a building and the grass, trees, shrubs, or any wildland area that surround it. This space is needed to slow or stop the spread of wildfire and provide firefighters a safe area to work in.
110 As shown in Exhibit 5, the typical planting plan would include trees and vegetation but would allow firefighters to have access to individual lots and unimpeded access to the buildings from the road. While prevailing winds would not change from the existing conditions as a result of the proposed project, the proposed landscaping plan would reduce wildfire hazards on the project site as compared to the existing conditions. As discussed in the Arborist Report, existing fire hazards on the project site include dead trees, bark debris, species, low branches, dead branches, dead trunks, and entire trees, with many trees posing minimal fire hazards, as well as branch, trunk, and root failures that are likely to occur in the coming year.111 The proposed project would include vegetation management and removal of hazardous trees, which would reduce fire hazards as compared to the existing conditions. 112 Furthermore, there are no
wildland areas surrounding the project site. The proposed project is located within a highly urbanized, residential area that is not prone to wildfire. In addition, the proposed project would comply with the California Fire Code and 2019 CBC to reduce potential impacts regarding wildfire.

Additionally, the applicant must submit to the Fire District, subject to District review and approval, a Fire Protection Plan that details strategies and mitigation which reduce the potential for loss from wildfire exposure. As a result, impacts would be less than significant. 110 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2022. Defensible Space. Website:
https://www.fire.ca.gov/programs/communications/defensible-space-prc-4291/. Accessed April 21, 2022. 111 Trees, Bugs, Dirt Landscape Consulting and Training. 2022. Arborist Report, 215 Skelly – Hercules, CA. March. 112 Grijalva, R. 2022. Memorandum: Analysis of State Fire Marshal Property Loss Data, from the California Building Industry Association.

January. Website: https://blog.aklandlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/282/2022/04/D-5.pdf. Accessed April 21, 2022. 261
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? Less than significant impact. The proposed project would include an EVA road that would connect to Skelly and circle the project site. The existing transmission lines located along publicly accessible roads would continue to be maintained by PG&E. As part of the building permit process, the applicant is required to prepare a Fire Prevention Plan for construction and ongoing operations, which includes provisions for EVA and turn-around, vegetation management, defensible space, and fire break maintenance around all structures. During project construction and operation, the use of powered equipment for installation, maintenance, and improvements could temporarily increase fire risk on the project site. However, compliance with all applicable fire protection design and operational standards including emergency water supply, temporary emergency access, and fuel reduction, must meet or exceed Fire District wildland-urban interface requirements and California Fire Code Sections 4906 and 4907. The proposed project would not require the installation of any associated infrastructure or utilities outside of the existing site footprint. Compliance with the Fire Prevention Plan would reduce the temporary impacts to a less than significant level. 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? Less than significant impact. The project site is located within an urbanized and residential area of the City that has not experienced wildfire. Additionally, the project site is not located near unmanaged open space or dense natural vegetation prone to wildfires. Further, the proposed project would comply with all applicable fire protection design and operational standards including emergency water supply, temporary emergency access, and fuel reduction, meet or exceed Fire District wildland-urban interface requirements and California Fire Code Sections 4906 and 4907.

Therefore, impacts related would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures
None required.
262
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2.20 Mandatory Findings of Significance
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?
Environmental Evaluation
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 impact with mitigation incorporated. The proposed project would demolish existing structures on the project site and construct 40 single-family residences. Although the existing structures are over 45 years old, as described above, they sustained significant damage due to a man-made fire and do not represent important examples of California history. As related to the proposed project, as described previously in Section 2.4, Biological Resources, the proposed project would not result in significant environmental impacts to wildlife or plant species with mitigation incorporated. The analysis provides for mitigation in the event any nesting birds, roosting bats, or overwintering monarch butterflies are encountered. Other biological resources mitigations include avoidance and minimization measures for on-site aquatic features and protection of mature trees via a tree inventory and replacement plan.

Additionally, the proposed project includes mitigation and avoidance measures to reduce construction-related impacts related to historical and archaeological resources as well as the 263
accidental discovery or recognition of human remains. Mitigation to reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources include providing the construction crew with an orientation on significant fossils that could be encountered and the appropriate procedures to follow. Based on the discussion provided above, with implementation of the above-listed mitigation measures, 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.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with implementation of MM BIO-1, MM BIO-2, MM BIO-3, MM CUL-1, MM CUL-2, and MM GEO-2.
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 impact with mitigation incorporated. The combined effects of past, current, and future projects in the project area in combination with the proposed project in an urban area of Contra Costa County would not result in significant cumulative impacts. The project is proposed in an established urban area and there are no planned or proposed developments in the immediate site vicinity that could contribute to cumulative environmental items discussed below.

The proposed project could result in potentially significant impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, geology and soils, paleontological resources, noise, and transportation. These impacts would primarily be related to construction period activities, would be temporary in nature, and would not substantially contribute to any potential cumulative impacts associated with these topics. Specifically, since the proposed project would not exceed BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance related to air quality, the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of construction emissions (with the implementation of MM AIR-1), operational emissions, or TACs. As discussed more fully in Section 2.8 of this Draft IS/MND, GHG emissions-related impacts are inherently cumulative in nature. The proposed project also would not conflict with any applicable GHG plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. As such, the proposed plan, in conjunction with other existing, planned, and probable foreseeable projects, would not results in a significant cumulative impact related to GHG emissions generation. As for transportation and traffic impacts, mitigation measures are provided to ensure accessible pedestrian circulation and reduce visual obstructions for vehicles.

These impacts are also specific to the proposed project and would not contribute to a cumulative transportation impact.

Therefore, with implementation of the foregoing mitigation measures, the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts at a project- or cumulative-level. 264
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Based on the information provided in the Project Description and the responses to Sections 2.1 through 2.19 of this Draft IS/MND, the proposed project would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, because the project’s potential impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level. With implementation of all mitigation measures discussed herein, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse effects on human beings. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measures
Implementation of all mitigation measures discussed in this Draft IS/MND. 265
SECTION 3: LIST OF PREPARERS
FirstCarbon Solutions
1350 Treat Boulevard, Suite 380
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
Phone: 925.357.2562
Fax: 925.357.2572
Project Director .......................................................................................................................Mary Bean Project Manager............................................................................................................................. Tsui Li Assistant Project Manager................................................................................................. Maddie Dolan Senior Noise Specialist................................................................................................. Phil Ault, LEED AP Air Quality Specialist................................................................................................................Lance Park Air Quality Analyst........................................................................................................................... Ji Luo Senior Biologist......................................................................................................... Bernhard Warzecha Biologist..............................................................................................................................Robert Carroll Senior Cultural Resources Specialist................................................................. Dana DePietro, PhD, RPA Archaeologist ................................................................................................................... Natalie Adame Publications Manager............................................................................................................ Susie Harris Word Processor ..............................................................................................................Melissa Ramirez Graphics....................................................................................................................... Karlee McCracken TJKM—Transportation Analysis Technical Subconsultant
4305 Hacienda Drive, Suite 550
Pleasanton, CA 94588
Phone 925.463.0611
266

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
267
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy Supporting Information
268

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
269
Appendix A: Air Quality, GHG Emissions, and Energy
Supporting Information
Table of Contents
Project CalEEMod Notes.......................................................................................................... 1 Project Development Phasing Schedule................................................................................... 4 CalEEMod Modeling for Purposes of Air Dispersion Modeling ................................................ 6 Architectural Coating Building Surface Area Adjustments ....................................................... 8 Demolition Calculations .......................................................................................................... 9 Project Construction Emissions.............................................................................................. 10 Project Operational Emissions Summary ............................................................................... 11 Project Operational GHG Emissions Summary ...................................................................... 12 Construction and Operational CalEEMod Outputs ................................................................ 13 Project Construction Trailer CalEEMod Outputs .................................................................... 94 Construction DPM Emissions................................................................................................110 Existing Stationary Sources ..................................................................................................114 Health Risk Assessment Health Risk Results .........................................................................115 Roadway Screening Analysis Calculator ...............................................................................119 AERMOD Output Files ..........................................................................................................120 Project Energy Calculations ..................................................................................................208 270
Hercules Skelly Road Residential Project CalEEMod Notes Note 1. Land uses and sizes associated with development of the proposed project are drawn from correspondence with the Project Applicant as well as the following site plans:
 Cbg, LOTTING PLAN, dated November 2021
 Cbg, PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, dated January 2022 The following land uses represent the described project features:

Parking > Parking Lot > 62.32 x 1000sqft = Proposed interior streets on Parcels A and C.

Recreational > City Park > 0.51 x acre = Proposed landscaping on Parcels B and D. As provided by the Project Applicant, 25 percent of Parcel D would be graded while only 12.5 percent would be landscaped. Therefore, the project’s construction models reflect a total City Park land use of 0.51 acre while the project’s operational models reflect a total City Park land use of 0.45 acre.

Parking > Other Non‐Asphalt Surfaces > 0.09 x acre = Proposed grading and resurfacing of Parcel G within the public utility easement. As provided by the Project Applicant, Parcel F would also involve grading activities but would not involve any landscaping or resurfacing.

Therefore, the project’s construction models reflect a total Other Non‐Asphalt Surfaces land use of 0.09 acre while the project’s operational models reflect a total Other Non‐Asphalt Surfaces land use of 0.08 acre.

Residential > Single Family Housing > 40 x Dwelling Unit = Proposed housing development, adjusted to reflect a gross building square footage of 74,740 square feet and lot acreage of

4.86 acres. As provided by the Project Applicant, the proposed project would be constructed in several phases. Please refer to the Construction Phasing and Schedule sheet contained in this appendix for more information for how the 40 proposed homes are assigned to their respective construction phases.

Note 2. According to information provided by the Project Applicant, the proposed project is anticipated to be constructed in 5 phases starting in October 2023. Each phase is anticipated to occur for 4 to 4.5 months, and each phase is anticipated to begin 1 month after the previous phase begins. Construction activity dates and durations were adjusted to reflect the phasing information provided by the Project Applicant. Where applicable, construction equipment was also adjusted in the model to reflect applicant‐provided information. As the Project Applicant has provided, the equipment utilized in the modeling will be shared across all construction phases. Therefore, the CalEEMod construction phases were consolidated to avoid erroneously duplicating the use of construction equipment. Please refer to the Construction Phasing and Schedule sheet contained in this appendix for more information.

Note 3. According to information provided by the Project Applicant, cut and fill grading activities will balance on‐site and no soil will need to be imported or exported. In addition, according to aerial imagery of the project site utilizing Google Earth, approximately 40,000 square feet of existing pavement and approximately 17,000 square feet of building space would be removed during demolition activities. As such, an estimated 2,266 cubic yards of demolition 271
debris would be removed from the project site during demolition activities. Please refer to the Demolition Calculations sheet contained in this appendix for more information.

Note 4. Because project construction needed to be separated into two separate models (one representing construction activity occurring before the introduction of on‐site receptors and one representing construction activity occurring after the introduction of on‐site receptors) for purposes of use in the air dispersion modeling for the construction health risk assessment, the architectural coating surface square footage associated “Residential Interior” and “Residential Exterior” were adjusted to match the proportional coating activity occurring within each model and within each construction phase. Please refer to the Architectural Coating Building Surface Area Adjustments sheet in this appendix for a more detail on how surface area square footage was broken down between the two models.

Note 5. For all construction models, all operational emission factors were reduced to zero to isolate the construction emission results in the modeling output files. For the operational models, all construction details were reduced to zero to isolate the operational emissions in the modeling output files.

Note 6. BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation Measures Recommended For All Proposed Projects were applied the model, which would be required under MM AIR‐1 to ensure that the proposed project would result in a less‐than‐significant impact related to fugitive dust emissions during construction. To represent this in the modeling, the model was adjusted to include watering of exposed areas at minimum twice per day and limiting construction vehicle speeds to 15 miles per hour on unpaved roads.

Note 7. [Removed]
Note 8. The TIA estimated that the proposed project would generate 9.43 trips per dwelling unit for a total of 377 daily weekday vehicle trips during project operation.1 As such, the model was adjusted to ensure that the proposed project would generate 9.43 vehicle trips per unit and at least 377 vehicle trips per day.

Note 9. In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with BAAQMD District Regulation 6, Rule 3, which prohibits any person or builder from installing a wood‐burning device in new building construction. Therefore, no wood‐burning hearths are included in the project modeling.

Note 10. According to information provided by the Project Applicant, the proposed project would include rooftop solar, as required by the 2019 California Building Code (CBC). It should be noted that the solar requirement contained in the CBC pertain only to residential buildings containing three habitable stories or less. Therefore, all the proposed single‐family houses in the proposed project would be subject to the rooftop solar requirements in the CBC.

According to the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6, Subchapter 8 – Low‐Rise Residential Building – Performance and Prescriptive Compliance Approaches, Section 150.1(c)14, “[a]ll low‐rise residential buildings shall have a photovoltaic (PV) system meeting the minimum qualification requirements as specified in Joint Appendix JA11, with annual 1 Ibid.
272
electrical output equal or greater than the dwelling’s annual electrical usage as determined by Equation 150.1‐C:”
Equation 150.1‐C Annual Photovoltaic Electrical Output
kWPV = (CFA x A)/1,000 + (NDwell x B)
Where:
kWPV = kWdc size of the PV system
CFA = conditioned floor area
NDwell = number of dwelling units
A = Adjustment factor from Table 150.1‐C
B = Dwelling adjustment factor from Table 150.1‐C
The proposed project is located in climate zone 3,2 and the total conditioned floor area of the proposed project is 74,740 square feet. As identified in Table 150.1‐C of the above referenced section, the appropriate A adjustment factor is 0.628 and B adjustment factor is as 1.12.

Therefore:
kWPV = (74,740 x 0.628)/1,000 + (40 x 1.12) = 91.7 kWPV While this accounts for the entire project’s kW PV system, it does not provide the annual production rate that would be generated by this size of system. Since there are 40 dwelling units within the proposed project, the averaged PV output is 2.3 kW per dwelling unit.

According to TheEcoExperts.com, a 2 kW PV system has an average annual production rate of 1,700 kWh/year.3 The below equation applies the same average annual production rate to the calculated 2.3 kW system.
(2.3/2) * 1,700 kWh/year = 1,955 kWh/year
Therefore, the proposed project is expected to result in an average on‐site electricity generation rate of 1,955 kWh per year per dwelling unit, which equates to 78,200 kWh per year given there are 40 dwelling units.
2 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2018. California Building Climate Zones. Website: https://cecgis‐ caenergy.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/549017ee96e341d2bbb3dd0c291a9112_0/explore?location=37.79092 2%2C‐121.947109%2C9.21. Accessed March 10, 2022. 3 TheEcoExperts. 2020. Solar Panel Output. Website: http://www.theecoexperts.com/solar‐panel‐output/.

Accessed March 8, 2022.
273
Construction Activity Phase Start Date Phase End Date
Working Days per
Week
Total Number of
Working Days
Demolition 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 82
Lot No. Lot SF Bldg SF Phase Site Preparation (Site‐Wide) 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 82 3 4,592 1,583 ‐ Grading (Site‐Wide) 10/11/2023 12/6/2023 5 41 4 4,000         ‐ 1,859 Building Construction (Model Homes Only) 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 10 Model Home Totals 8,592 3,442 Paving (Interior Roadways & Foundations) 12/1/2023 2/1/2024 5 45 Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes) 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 10 Lot No. Lot SF Bldg SF Phase Construction Activity Phase Start Date Phase End Date Working Days per
Week
Total Number of
Working Days
27 6,399 1,583 1 Building Construction 2/2/2024 6/5/2024 5 8928 6,565 1,859 1 Architectural Coating 2/16/2024 6/5/2024 5 79 29 6,387 1,583 1
30 6,391 2,311 1
25 5,375 1,583 1
26 5,720 1,859 1
31 3,915 1,859 1
32 5,033 2,311 1
Phase 1 Totals 45,785 14,948
Lot No. Lot SF Bldg SF Phase Construction Activity Phase Start Date Phase End Date Working Days per
Week
Total Number of
Working Days
22 5,375 1,859 2 Building Construction 3/2/2024 7/1/2024 5 8623 5,375 1,583 2 Architectural Coating 3/16/2024 7/1/2024 5 76 24 5,375 1,859 2
33 3,836 1,859 2
18 5,375 1,859 2
19 5,375 1,583 2
20 5,375 1,859 2
21 5,375 1,583 2
Phase 2 Totals 41,461 14,044
Model Homes
Single‐Family Home Development Phasing Schedule
Construction Phasing
Phase 2 ConstructionPhase 1 Construction
274
Lot No. Lot SF Bldg SF Phase Construction Activity Phase Start Date Phase End Date Working Days per
Week
Total Number of
Working Days
15 6,806 1,583 3 Building Construction 4/2/2024 8/11/2024 5 94 16 6,705 2,311 3 Architectural Coating 4/17/2024 8/11/2024 5 83 17 5,375 1,583 3
34 4,806 1,859 3
13 4,005 1,583 3
14 4,519 1,859 3
35 4,352 1,583 3
36 4,352 1,859 3
Phase 3 Totals 40,920 14,220
Lot No. Lot SF Bldg SF Phase Construction Activity Phase Start Date Phase End Date Working Days per
Week
Total Number of
Working Days
10 5,040 1,583 4 Building Construction 5/2/2024 9/1/2024 5 8711 5,040 2,311 4 Architectural Coating 5/16/2024 9/1/2024 5 77 12 6,882 2,311 4
37 4,861 1,583 4
8 4,388 1,859 49 5,797 2,311 4
38 3,939 1,583 4
39 4,538 1,859 4
Totals 40,485 15,400
Lot No. Lot SF Bldg SF Phase Construction Activity Phase Start Date Phase End Date Working Days per
Week
Total Number of
Working Days
5 5,000 2,311 5 Building Construction 6/2/2024 10/30/2024 5 108 6 5,625 1,859 5 Architectural Coating 6/19/2024 10/30/2024 5 96 7 5,163 1,583 5
40 6,421 2,311 5
1 6,877 2,311 52 5,422 2,311 5
Totals 34,508 12,686
Phase 3 ConstructionPhase 4 ConstructionPhase 5 Construction 275
Lot No. Lot SF Bldg SF Phase Construction Activity Phase Start Date Phase End Date Working Days per
Week
Total Number of
Working Days
3 4,592 1,583 ‐ Demolition 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 824 4,000         ‐ 1,859 Site Preparation (Site‐Wide) 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 82 27 6,399 1,583 1 Grading (Site‐Wide) 10/11/2023 12/6/2023 5 4128 6,565 1,859 1 Building Construction (Model Homes Only) 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 1029 6,387 1,583 1 Paving (Interior Roadways & Foundations) 12/1/2023 2/1/2024 5 45 30 6,391 2,311 1 Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes) 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 1025 5,375 1,583 1 Building Construction (Phase 1) 2/2/2024 6/5/2024 5 8926 5,720 1,859 1 Architectural Coating (Phase 1) 2/16/2024 6/5/2024 5 79 31 3,915 1,859 1 Building Construction (Phase 2) 3/2/2024 6/5/2024 5 6832 5,033 2,311 1 Architectural Coating (Phase 2) 3/16/2024 6/5/2024 5 58 22 5,375 1,859 2 Building Construction (Phase 3) 4/2/2024 6/5/2024 5 4723 5,375 1,583 2 Architectural Coating (Phase 3) 4/17/2024 6/5/2024 5 36 24 5,375 1,859 2 Building Construction (Phase 4) 5/2/2024 6/5/2024 5 2533 3,836 1,859 2 Architectural Coating (Phase 4) 5/16/2024 6/5/2024 5 15 18 5,375 1,859 2 Building Construction (Phase 5) 6/2/2024 6/5/2024 5 3 19 5,375 1,583 2
20 5,375 1,859 2 Demolition 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 82
21 5,375 1,583 2 Site Preparation (Site‐Wide) 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 8215 6,806 1,583 3 Grading (Site‐Wide) 10/11/2023 12/6/2023 5 4116 6,705 2,311 3 Building Construction (Model Homes) 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 10 17 5,375 1,583 3 Paving (Interior Roadways & Foundations) 12/1/2023 2/1/2024 5 45 34 4,806 1,859 3 Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes) 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 1013 4,005 1,583 3 Building Construction (Pre‐Receptors) 2/2/2024 6/5/2024 5 89 14 4,519 1,859 3 Architectural Coating (Pre‐Receptors) 2/16/2024 6/5/2024 5 79 35 4,352 1,583 3
36 4,352 1,859 3
10 5,040 1,583 4
11 5,040 2,311 412 6,882 2,311 4
37 4,861 1,583 4
8 4,388 1,859 49 5,797 2,311 4
38 3,939 1,583 4
39 4,538 1,859 4
5 5,000 2,311 5
6 5,625 1,859 57 5,163 1,583 5
40 6,421 2,311 5
1 6,877 2,311 52 5,422 2,311 5
Totals 211,751 74,740
CalEEMod Modeling Breakdown for Purposes of Air Dispersion Modeling As Modeled in CalEEMod (Equipment is Shared Across Phases) Pre‐Sensitive Receptor Development
(First introduction of sensitive receptors upon completion of Phase 1 on 6/5/2024) 276
Lot No. Lot SF Bldg SF Phase Construction Activity Phase Start Date Phase End Date Working Days per
Week
Total Number of
Working Days
22 5,375 1,859 2 Building Construction (Phase 2) 6/6/2024 7/1/2024 5 1823 5,375 1,583 2 Architectural Coating (Phase 2) 6/6/2024 7/1/2024 5 1824 5,375 1,859 2 Building Construction (Phase 3) 6/6/2024 8/11/2024 5 47 33 3,836 1,859 2 Architectural Coating (Phase 3) 6/6/2024 8/11/2024 5 47 18 5,375 1,859 2 Building Construction (Phase 4) 6/6/2024 9/1/2024 5 6219 5,375 1,583 2 Architectural Coating (Phase 4) 6/6/2024 9/1/2024 5 6220 5,375 1,859 2 Building Construction (Phase 5) 6/6/2024 10/30/2024 5 105 21 5,375 1,583 2 Architectural Coating (Phase 5) 6/19/2024 10/30/2024 5 96 15 6,806 1,583 3
16 6,705 2,311 3 Building Construction (Post‐Receptors) 6/6/2024 10/30/2024 5 105 17 5,375 1,583 3 Architectural Coating (Post‐Receptors) 6/6/2024 10/30/2024 5 105 34 4,806 1,859 3
13 4,005 1,583 3
14 4,519 1,859 3
35 4,352 1,583 3
36 4,352 1,859 3
10 5,040 1,583 4
11 5,040 2,311 412 6,882 2,311 4
37 4,861 1,583 4
8 4,388 1,859 49 5,797 2,311 4
38 3,939 1,583 4
39 4,538 1,859 4
5 5,000 2,311 5
6 5,625 1,859 57 5,163 1,583 5
40 6,421 2,311 5
1 6,877 2,311 52 5,422 2,311 5
Totals 157,374 56,350
As Modeled in CalEEMod (Equipment is Shared Across Phases) Post‐Sensitive Receptor Development
(All development occurring after 6/5/2024)
277
Total Building
Area (SF)
Proportional
Share
3,442 5%
14,948 20%
14,044 19%14,220 19%15,400 21%12,686 17%74,740 100%
Before Receptors After Receptors Before Receptors After Receptors 10 0 10 100% 0%79 0 79 100% 0%58 18 76 76% 24%
36 47 83 43% 57%
15 62 77 19% 81%
096 96 0% 100%
Before Receptors After Receptors Before Receptors After Receptors 151,349 50,450                 ‐                    6,970                 ‐                    2,323 151,349 50,450               ‐                    30,270 10,090 ‐                   151,349 50,450 21,704 6,736 7,235 2,245 151,349 50,450 12,490 16,306 4,163 5,435151,349 50,450 6,075 25,110 2,025 8,370151,349 50,450 ‐               ‐                    25,689 8,563 Totals 151,349 50,450 77,508 73,841 25,836 24,614
Architectural Coating (Phase 1)
Construction Activity
Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes)
Architectural Coating (Phase 1)Architectural Coating (Phase 2)Architectural Coating (Phase 3)Architectural Coating (Phase 4)Architectural Coating (Phase 5)TotalArchitectural Coating (Phase 2)Architectural Coating (Phase 3) Number of Working Days Proportional Share
Construction ActivityConstruction Activity
Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes)
Architectural Coating (Phase 1)Architectural Coating (Phase 2)Architectural Coating (Phase 3)Architectural Coating (Phase 4) Proportional Exterior Area (SF)
Architectural Coating (Phase 4)Architectural Coating (Phase 5) Proportional Interior Area (SF)
Total Working
Days
Total Residential
Interior (SF)
Total Residential
Exterior (SF)
Architectural Coating Building Surface Area Adjustments Architectural Coating (Phase 5)Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes) 278
Demolition Debris Calculations
1 building sq ft 10 cf building volume
1 cf building volume 0.25 cf waste volume
1 cf 0.037 cy
1 cy waste volume 0.5 ton waste weight
1 sf 0.04625 ton waste material
Description square feet2 height/ depth (ft)3 density (lbs/cf)4 Demolition Weight (pounds) Demolition Weight (tons) Buildings 17,000 ‐‐ ‐ 786.25Pavement 40,000 0.5 148 2,960,000 1,480.00 Totals 57,000 ‐‐ ‐ 2,266
Notes:cy = cubic yard
gsf = gross square feet
sf = square feetcf = cubic feet
1 Source: California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2017. Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.2 Source: Google Earth Aerial Imagery. Accessed March 23, 2022.3 Source: DC Construction Services. 2017. How Thick Is Parking Lot Asphalt? Website: https://dccpaving.com/how‐thick‐is‐parking‐lot‐asphalt/. Accessed March 23, 2022.4 Source: SFGate. 2021. How to Calculate Asphalt Weight Per Yard. Website: https://homeguides.sfgate.com/calculate‐asphalt‐weight‐per‐yard‐81825.html. Accessed March 23, 2022.

Parameters1
279
Construction Activity ROG NOX
PM10
(Exhaust)
PM2.5
(Exhaust)
Metric ROG NOX
PM10
(Exhaust)
PM2.5
(Exhaust)
on site 0.02112 0.16570 0.00808 0.00783 Total Emissions (tons) 0.72 1.59 0.07 0.07 off site 0.00076 0.01542 0.00014 0.00012 Total Emissions (lbs) 1,432.96 3,184.76 139.40 131.80 Demolition 0.02188 0.18112 0.00822 0.00795 Average Daily Emissions (lbs/workday) 5.19 11.54 0.51 0.48 on site 0.00612 0.06190 0.00300 0.00275 Significance Thresholds (lbs/day) 54.00 54.00 82.00 54.00 off site 0.00032 0.00022 0.00000 0.00000
Site Preparation (Site‐Wide) 0.00644 0.06212 0.00300 0.00275 on site 0.02500 0.27300 0.01120 0.01030 Construction Phase Workdays off site 0.00043 0.00029 0.00001 0.00001 Demolition 82
Grading (Site‐Wide) 0.02543 0.27329 0.01121 0.01031 Site Preparation (Site‐Wide) 82 on site 0.00398 0.03880 0.00174 0.00164 Grading (Site‐Wide) 41 off site 0.00074 0.00466 0.00004 0.00003 Building Construction (Model Homes) 10 Building Construction (Model Homes) 0.00472 0.04346 0.00178 0.00167 Paving (Roadways & Model Homes) 45 on site 0.01322 0.11070 0.00549 0.00505 Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes) 10 off site 0.00045 0.00030 0.00000 0.00000 Building Construction (Pre‐Receptors) 89 Paving (Roadways & Model Homes) 0.01367 0.11100 0.00549 0.00505 Architectural Coating (Pre‐Receptors) 79 on site 0.01470 0.00609 0.00030 0.00030 Building Construction (Post‐Receptors) 105 off site 0.00024 0.00016 0.00000 0.00000 Architectural Coating (Post‐Receptors) 105 Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes) 0.01494 0.00625 0.00030 0.00030 Net Working Days 276 on site 0.03540 0.34540 0.01550 0.01460
off site 0.00659 0.04140 0.00031 0.00029
Building Construction (Pre‐Receptors) 0.04199 0.38680 0.01581 0.01489 Mitigation Applied on site 0.27660 0.04810 0.00241 0.00241 MM AIR‐1 BAAQMD Construction Dust Control Measures off site 0.00096 0.00063 0.00002 0.00001
Architectural Coating (Pre‐Receptors) 0.27756 0.04873 0.00243 0.00242 on site 0.04180 0.40750 0.01820 0.01730
off site 0.00159 0.00794 0.00006 0.00006
Building Construction (Post‐Receptors) 0.04339 0.41544 0.01826 0.01736 Modeling Files:
on site 0.26620 0.06400 0.00320 0.00320 Name: Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) ‐ Contra Costa County, Annual off site 0.00026 0.00017 0.00000 0.00000 Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM Architectural Coating (Post‐Receptors) 0.26646 0.06417 0.00320 0.00320 Total On site 0.70414 1.52119 0.06912 0.06538 Name: Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) ‐ Contra Costa County, Annual Total Off site 0.01234 0.07119 0.00058 0.00052 Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM Total Construction Emissions 0.71648 1.59238 0.06970 0.06590 Construction Emissions (tons) Average Daily Construction Emissions Project Construction Emissions
Mitigation Description
Note: The application of MM AIR‐1 (BAAQMD Dust Control Measures) would reduce the generation of fugitive dust emissions and would not affect ROG, NOx, PM10 Exhaust, or PM2.5 Exhaust emission estimates. 280
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation ‐ Contra Costa County, Annual CalEEMod Run: Annual Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
ROG NOx
PM10
(Total)
PM2.5
(Total)
Area 0.37 0.01 0.02 0.02Energy 0.01 0.07 0.01 0.01
Mobile 0.16 0.18 0.32 0.09Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Total 0.79 0.60 0.46 0.11BAAQMD Significance Thresholds 10 10 15 10 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
ROG NOx
PM10
(Total)
PM2.5
(Total)
Total Emissions (tons) 0.79 0.60 0.46 0.11
Total Emissions (lbs) 1,586 1,203 917 222
Average Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 4.34 3.30 2.51 0.61BAAQMD Significance Thresholds 54 54 82 54Project Exceeds Threshold? No No No No Tons per Year
Average Daily Construction Emissions (lbs/day)
Project Operational Emissions Summary
Emissions Source
281
Construction ‐ GHG Emissions
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) ‐ Contra Costa County, Annual CalEEMod Run: Annual Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) ‐ Contra Costa County, Annual CalEEMod Run: Annual Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Demolition
Site Preparation (Site‐Wide)
Grading (Site‐Wide)
Paving (Roadways & Foundations)
Building Construction (Model Homes)
Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes)
Building Construction (Pre‐Receptors)
Architectural Coating (Pre‐receptors)
Building Construction (Post‐Receptors)
Architectural Coating (Post‐Receptors)
Total
Amortized Over 30 Years
Operations ‐ GHG Emissions
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation ‐ Contra Costa County, Annual CalEEMod Run: Annual Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
Amortized Construction
Area
Energy
Mobile
Waste
Water
Total
Applicable Threshold (MT CO2e/year)
Exceeds Threshold?
12 12
434
No
6 660
14 107
282
24 4
11 Project Operational GHG Emissions Summary
Emissions Source
CO2e
Metric Tons per Year
Emissions Source
Year 2024 CO2e
(Metric Tons/Year)
34 24
80 331
11 49
10 2
93 282
Construction Phase - Note 2
Off-road Equipment - Note 2Off-road Equipment - Off-road Equipment - Note 2Off-road Equipment - Note 2 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr)

0.004

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics - Land Use - Note 1
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric CompanyCO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 203.98 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.033
Precipitation Freq (Days) 58
Climate Zone 5 Operational Year 2024

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2
0 Single Family Housing 40.00 Dwelling Unit 4.86 74,740.00 114 City Park 0.51 Acre 0.51 22,215.60
0 Parking Lot 62.32 1000sqft 1.43 62,320.00 0
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.09 Acre 0.09 3,920.40
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors)
Contra Costa County, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 283
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Residential_Interior 151,349.00 0.00 tblAreaCoating ReapplicationRatePercent 10 0
tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Residential_Exterior 50,450.00 0.00tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Residential_Interior 151,349.00 77,508.00tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Parking 3,974.00 0.00tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Residential_Exterior 50,450.00 25,836.00tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Exterior 1.00 0.00 tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Interior 2.00 0.00 Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Note 6Off-road Equipment - Note 2Off-road Equipment - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
Area Coating - Note 5Landscape Equipment - Note 5Energy Use - Note 5Water And Wastewater - Note 5Solid Waste - Note 5Grading - Note 3Architectural Coating - Note 4Vehicle Trips - Note 5Woodstoves - Note 5Consumer Products - Note 5Off-road Equipment - Note 2Off-road Equipment - Note 2Off-road Equipment - Note 2Trips and VMT - Demolition - Note 3 284
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 4.00 1.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 72,000.00 74,740.00tblLandUse LotAcreage 12.99 4.86 tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 228.80 0.00
tblLandscapeEquipment NumberSummerDays 180 0
tblFireplaces FireplaceDayYear 11.14 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceHourDay 3.50 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24E 45.71 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24NG 35,976.14 0.00tblEnergyUse NT24E 6,155.97 0.00 tblEnergyUse NT24NG 2,615.00 0.00tblEnergyUse LightingElect 0.35 0.00 tblEnergyUse LightingElect 1,608.84 0.00
tblConsumerProducts ROG_EF_Degreaser 3.542E-07 0tblConsumerProducts ROG_EF_PesticidesFertilizers 5.152E-08 0 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 79.00
tblConsumerProducts ROG_EF 2.14E-05 0
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 10.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 230.00 89.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 45.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 230.00 10.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 82.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 41.00
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 82.00
285
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 21.06 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 956.80 0.00
tblWater OutdoorWaterUseRate 607,655.49 0.00
tblWater OutdoorWaterUseRate 1,643,014.56 0.00
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 9.44 0.00
tblWater IndoorWaterUseRate 2,606,161.02 0.00
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 8.55 0.00tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 0.78 0.00tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 9.54 0.00 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 2.19 0.00
tblSolidWaste SolidWasteGenerationRate 47.88 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.96 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblSolidWaste SolidWasteGenerationRate 0.04 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 286
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0229 3.5200e003 1.6500e- 0.0248 0.0548 0.0000 146.9708 146.9708 148.5903 003 Maximum 0.3543 0.6104 0.7721 0.0782 0.0261 0.1003 0.0341 146.9708 146.9708 0.0229 3.5200e003 148.5903

0.0219 8.3000e004 88.5828
2024 0.3543 0.6104 0.7721 1.6500e003 0.0365 0.0261 0.0626 9.4700e-003 0.0248 0.0342 0.0000

1.0000e- 0.0207 0.0548 0.0000 87.7879 87.7879
003
2023 0.0523 0.5024 0.4992 0.0782 0.0221 0.1003 0.0341
CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.0229 3.5200e003 148.5904
Mitigated Construction

1.6500e- 0.0248 0.0948 0.0000 146.9710 146.9710
003
Maximum 0.3543 0.6104 0.7721 0.1675 0.0261 0.1896 0.0742 146.9710 146.9710 0.0229 3.5200e003 148.5904

0.0219 8.3000e004 88.5829
2024 0.3543 0.6104 0.7721 1.6500e003 0.0404 0.0261 0.0665 0.0101 0.0248 0.0348 0.0000

1.0000e- 0.0207 0.0948 0.0000 87.7880 87.7880
003
2023 0.0523 0.5024 0.4992 0.1675 0.0221 0.1896 0.0742
N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.1 Overall Construction
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
287
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 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
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mobile 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 0.0000 0.0000

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
Highest 0.5832 0.5832
9 4-7-2024 7-6-2024 0.3830 0.38308 1-7-2024 4-6-2024 0.5531 0.55317 10-7-2023 1-6-2024 0.5832 0.5832 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 44.83 0.02 36.39 48.24 0.00 31.33 0.00 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2
288
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 5 82
3 Grading (Site-Wide) Grading 10/11/2023 12/6/2023 5 412 Site Preparation (Site-Wide) Site Preparation 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 82
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date

0.00 0.00 0.00

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
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 PM2.5
Total
Fugitive Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO SO2

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 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
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mobile 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 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Area 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
289
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.48 Building Construction (Pre-Receptors) Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes)
Air Compressors 1 6.00 78

0.74 Building Construction (Model Homes) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction (Model Homes) Generator Sets 1 8.00 84

0.29 Building Construction (Model Homes) Forklifts 1 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction (Model Homes) Cranes 1 7.00 231

0.36 Paving (Roadways & Foundations) Rollers 1 8.00 80 0.38 Paving (Roadways & Foundations) Paving Equipment 1 8.00 132

0.37 Paving (Roadways & Foundations) Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42 Grading (Site-Wide) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97

0.41 Grading (Site-Wide) Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40Grading (Site-Wide) Graders 1 8.00 187

0.38 Site Preparation (Site-Wide) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Demolition Excavators 1 8.00 158
Acres of Paving: 1.52
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 2; Non-Residential Outdoor: 1; Striped Parking Area: 3,974 (Architectural OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor 5 79
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 41
8 Architectural Coating (Pre-Receptors)Architectural Coating 2/16/2024 6/5/2024 5 10
7 Building Construction (PreReceptors) Building Construction 2/2/2024 6/5/2024 5 89 6 Architectural Coating (Pavement &
Model Homes)
Architectural Coating 1/19/2024 2/1/2024
5 45
5 Building Construction (Model Homes)Building Construction 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 104 Paving (Roadways & Foundations) Paving 12/1/2023 2/1/2024 290
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed AreaReduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads HHDT
Architectural Coating
(Pre-Receptors)
1 10.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix
(Pre-Receptors)
4 52.00 19.00 0.00
HHDT
Architectural Coating
(Pavement & Model
1 10.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix
(Pavement & Model
1 10.00 0.00 0.00
HHDT
Building Construction
(Model Homes)
4 52.00 19.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving (Roadways & 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix
Foundations)
3 8.00 0.00 0.00
HHDT
Grading (Site-Wide) 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation (Site- 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix Wide)
1 3.00 0.00 0.00
Vendor Vehicle
Class
Hauling Vehicle
Class
Demolition 2 5.00 0.00 224.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number

0.45 Building Construction (Pre-Receptors) Welders 0 8.00 46 0.45Building Construction (Model Homes) Welders 0 8.00 46

0.40 Site Preparation (Site-Wide) Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 247 0.40Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 247

0.73 Grading (Site-Wide) Excavators 0 8.00 158 0.38Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81

0.37 Architectural Coating (Pre-Receptors) Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48Building Construction (Pre-Receptors) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97

0.20 Building Construction (Pre-Receptors) Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74Building Construction (Pre-Receptors) Forklifts 1 8.00 89 291
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

5.6177 5.6177 1.8000e004 7.8000e- 004 5.8529

3.0000e005 3.0000e- 005 0.9027
Total 5.4000e004 0.0109 5.7500e- 003 6.0000e- 005 2.4900e-003 1.0000e- 004 2.5900e- 003 6.8000e-004 9.0000e- 005 7.6000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e005 1.0000e- 3.1000e-004 0.0000 0.8945 0.8945 005 1.1500e-003 1.0000e- 005 1.1600e- 003 Worker 3.8000e- 3.1000e-004 004 2.6000e- 004 3.2500e- 003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

1.5000e004 7.5000e- 004 4.9503
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

8.0000e005 5.0000e- 4.5000e-004 0.0000 4.7233 4.7233 005 1.3400e-003 9.0000e- 005 1.4300e- 003 Hauling 1.6000e- 3.7000e-004 004 0.0107 2.5000e- 003 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

5.0200e003 0.0000 28.8746
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

5.7400e003 3.3000e- 8.3400e-003 0.0000 28.7490 28.7490 004 0.0172 5.9200e- 003 Total 0.0152 0.1199 0.2005 0.0231 2.6000e-003

28.7490 28.7490 5.0200e003 0.0000 28.8746

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0152 0.1199 0.2005 3.3000e004 5.9200e- 003 5.9200e- 003 5.7400e- 003 5.7400e-003 0.0000 Fugitive Dust 0.0172 0.0000 0.0172 2.6000e-003 0.0000 2.6000e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

3.2 Demolition - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
292
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

5.6177 5.6177 1.8000e004 7.8000e- 004 5.8529

3.0000e005 3.0000e- 005 0.9027
Total 5.4000e004 0.0109 5.7500e- 003 6.0000e- 005 2.4900e-003 1.0000e- 004 2.5900e- 003 6.8000e-004 9.0000e- 005 7.6000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e005 1.0000e- 3.1000e-004 0.0000 0.8945 0.8945 005 1.1500e-003 1.0000e- 005 1.1600e- 003 Worker 3.8000e- 3.1000e-004 004 2.6000e- 004 3.2500e- 003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

1.5000e004 7.5000e- 004 4.9503
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

5.0200e003 0.0000 28.8746
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

5.7400e003 3.3000e- 6.9100e-003 0.0000 28.7490 28.7490 004 7.7200e-003 5.9200e- 003 Total 0.0152 0.1199 0.2005 0.0136 1.1700e-003

28.7490 28.7490 5.0200e003 0.0000 28.8746

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0152 0.1199 0.2005 3.3000e004 5.9200e- 003 5.9200e- 003 5.7400e- 003 5.7400e-003 0.0000

7.7200e-003 0.0000 7.7200e- 0.0000 1.1700e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003
Fugitive Dust 1.1700e-003
N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
293
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.8000e-004 0.0000 4.8000e- 0.0000 1.3000e-004 0.0000 0.3581 0.3581 0.3612 004 Worker 1.5000e- 1.3000e-004 004 1.0000e- 004 1.2500e- 003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

6.0000e005 3.1000e- 004 2.0166
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

3.0000e005 2.0000e- 1.9000e-004 0.0000 1.9241 1.9241 005 5.6000e-004 4.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 Hauling 7.0000e- 1.5000e-004 005 4.4200e- 003 1.0400e- 003 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

2.0700e003 0.0000 11.9496
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

2.0900e003 1.4000e- 3.1600e-003 0.0000 11.8979 11.8979 004 7.1000e-003 2.1600e- 003 9.2600e- 003 Total 5.9200e- 1.0700e-003 003 0.0458 0.0830

11.8979 11.8979 2.0700e003 0.0000 11.9496

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 5.9200e003 0.0458 0.0830 1.4000e- 004 2.1600e- 003 2.1600e- 003 2.0900e- 003 2.0900e-003 0.0000

7.1000e-003 0.0000 7.1000e- 0.0000 1.0700e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003
Fugitive Dust 1.0700e-003
N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.2 Demolition - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
294
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

6.0000e005 3.1000e- 004 2.0166
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.0700e003 0.0000 11.9496
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

2.0900e003 1.4000e- 2.5700e-003 0.0000 11.8979 11.8979 004 3.1900e-003 2.1600e- 003 5.3500e- 003 Total 5.9200e- 4.8000e-004 003 0.0458 0.0830

11.8979 11.8979 2.0700e003 0.0000 11.9496

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 5.9200e003 0.0458 0.0830 1.4000e- 004 2.1600e- 003 2.1600e- 003 2.0900e- 003 2.0900e-003 0.0000

3.1900e-003 0.0000 3.1900e- 0.0000 4.8000e-004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003
Fugitive Dust 4.8000e-004
N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

2.2822 2.2822 7.0000e005 3.2000e- 004 Total 2.2000e- 2.3778 004 4.5200e- 003 2.2900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.0400e-003 4.0000e- 005 1.0700e- 003 2.8000e-004 3.0000e- 005 3.2000e-004 0.0000 295
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 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 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

2.5700e003 0.0000 7.9981
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

2.0200e003 9.0000e- 2.0200e-003 0.0000 7.9340 7.9340 005 0.0000 2.2000e- 003 2.2000e- 003 Total 4.3900e- 0.0000 003 0.0445 0.0647

7.9340 7.9340 2.5700e003 0.0000 7.9981

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.3900e003 0.0445 0.0647 9.0000e- 005 2.2000e- 003 2.2000e- 003 2.0200e- 003 2.0200e-003 0.0000 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.3 Site Preparation (Site-Wide) - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

2.2822 2.2822 7.0000e005 3.2000e- 004 2.3778

1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.3612
Total 2.2000e004 4.5200e- 003 2.2900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 1.0400e-003 4.0000e- 005 1.0700e- 003 2.8000e-004 3.0000e- 005 3.2000e-004 0.0000

0.0000 4.8000e-004 0.0000 4.8000e- 0.0000 1.3000e-004 0.0000 0.3581 0.3581 004
Worker 1.5000e- 1.3000e-004
004

1.0000e004 1.2500e- 003
296
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

2.5700e003 0.0000 7.9981
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

2.0200e003 9.0000e- 2.0200e-003 0.0000 7.9340 7.9340 005 0.0000 2.2000e- 003 2.2000e- 003 Total 4.3900e- 0.0000 003 0.0445 0.0647

7.9340 7.9340 2.5700e003 0.0000 7.9981

0.5367 0.5367 2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.5416

2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.5416
Total 2.3000e004 1.6000e- 004 1.9500e- 003 1.0000e- 005 6.9000e-004 0.0000 6.9000e- 004 1.8000e-004 0.0000 1.9000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e- 0.0000 1.9000e-004 0.0000 0.5367 0.5367
005

6.9000e-004 0.0000 6.9000e004 Worker 2.3000e- 1.8000e-004 004 1.6000e- 004 1.9500e- 003 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 0.0000 297
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Exhaust CH4 N2O CO2e
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

1.0600e003 0.0000 3.3117
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

7.3000e004 4.0000e- 7.3000e-004 0.0000 3.2851 3.2851 005 0.0000 8.0000e- 004 8.0000e- 004 Total 1.7300e- 0.0000 003 0.0174 0.0268

3.2851 3.2851 1.0600e003 0.0000 3.3117

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.7300e003 0.0174 0.0268 4.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 004 8.0000e- 004 7.3000e- 004 7.3000e-004 0.0000 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.3 Site Preparation (Site-Wide) - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.5367 0.5367 2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.5416

2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.5416
Total 2.3000e004 1.6000e- 004 1.9500e- 003 1.0000e- 005 6.9000e-004 0.0000 6.9000e- 004 1.8000e-004 0.0000 1.9000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e- 0.0000 1.9000e-004 0.0000 0.5367 0.5367
005

6.9000e-004 0.0000 6.9000e004 Worker 2.3000e- 1.8000e-004 004 1.6000e- 004 1.9500e- 003

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 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 298
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

1.0600e003 0.0000 3.3117
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

7.3000e004 4.0000e- 7.3000e-004 0.0000 3.2851 3.2851 005 0.0000 8.0000e- 004 8.0000e- 004 Total 1.7300e- 0.0000 003 0.0174 0.0268

3.2851 3.2851 1.0600e003 0.0000 3.3117

0.2148 0.2148 1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.2167

1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.2167
Total 9.0000e005 6.0000e- 005 7.5000e- 004 0.0000 2.9000e-004 0.0000 2.9000e- 004 8.0000e-005 0.0000 8.0000e-005 0.0000

0.0000 2.9000e-004 0.0000 2.9000e- 0.0000 8.0000e-005 0.0000 0.2148 0.2148 004
Worker 9.0000e- 8.0000e-005
005

6.0000e005 7.5000e- 004

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 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 Category tons/yr MT/yr
299
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0106 0.0000 33.1727
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

3.7000e- 0.0103 0.0805 0.0000 32.9066 32.9066
004
Total 0.0250 0.2730 0.1441 0.1452 0.0112 0.1564 0.0702

32.9066 32.9066 0.0106 0.0000 33.1727

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0250 0.2730 0.1441 3.7000e004 0.0112 0.0112 0.0103 0.0103 0.0000 Fugitive Dust 0.1452 0.0000 0.1452 0.0702 0.0000 0.0702 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.4 Grading (Site-Wide) - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.2148 0.2148 1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.2167

1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.2167
Total 9.0000e005 6.0000e- 005 7.5000e- 004 0.0000 2.9000e-004 0.0000 2.9000e- 004 8.0000e-005 0.0000 8.0000e-005 0.0000

0.0000 2.9000e-004 0.0000 2.9000e- 0.0000 8.0000e-005 0.0000 0.2148 0.2148 004
Worker 9.0000e- 8.0000e-005
005

6.0000e005 7.5000e- 004

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 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 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
300
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.7000e- 0.0103 0.0419 0.0000 32.9066 32.9066 0.0106 0.0000 33.1727 004
Total 0.0250 0.2730 0.1441 0.0653 0.0112 0.0766 0.0316

32.9066 32.9066 0.0106 0.0000 33.1727

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0250 0.2730 0.1441 3.7000e004 0.0112 0.0112 0.0103 0.0103 0.0000 Fugitive Dust 0.0653 0.0000 0.0653 0.0316 0.0000 0.0316 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

1.0117 1.0117 3.0000e005 3.0000e- 005 1.0209

3.0000e005 3.0000e- 005 1.0209
Total 4.3000e004 2.9000e- 004 3.6800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.3000e-003 1.0000e- 005 1.3100e- 003 3.5000e-004 1.0000e- 005 3.5000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e005 1.0000e- 3.5000e-004 0.0000 1.0117 1.0117 005 1.3000e-003 1.0000e- 005 1.3100e- 003 Worker 4.3000e- 3.5000e-004 004 2.9000e- 004 3.6800e- 003

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 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 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
301
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4000e003 2.4600e- 0.0000 10.5991 003 1.2000e- 2.4600e-003 0.0000 10.5141 10.5141 004 2.6800e- 003 2.6800e- 003 Total 6.2900e- 003 0.0535 0.0766

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

3.4000e003 0.0000 10.5991
Paving 8.7000e004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.4600e003 1.2000e- 2.4600e-003 0.0000 10.5141 10.5141 004 2.6800e- 003 2.6800e- 003 Off-Road 5.4200e- 003 0.0535 0.0766 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.5 Paving (Roadways & Foundations) - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

1.0117 1.0117 3.0000e005 3.0000e- 005 1.0209

3.0000e005 3.0000e- 005 1.0209
Total 4.3000e004 2.9000e- 004 3.6800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.3000e-003 1.0000e- 005 1.3100e- 003 3.5000e-004 1.0000e- 005 3.5000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e005 1.0000e- 3.5000e-004 0.0000 1.0117 1.0117 005 1.3000e-003 1.0000e- 005 1.3100e- 003 Worker 4.3000e- 3.5000e-004 004 2.9000e- 004 3.6800e- 003

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 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 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
302
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4000e003 2.4600e- 0.0000 10.5991 003 1.2000e- 2.4600e-003 0.0000 10.5141 10.5141 004 2.6800e- 003 2.6800e- 003 Total 6.2900e- 003 0.0535 0.0766

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

3.4000e003 0.0000 10.5991
Paving 8.7000e004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.4600e003 1.2000e- 2.4600e-003 0.0000 10.5141 10.5141 004 2.6800e- 003 2.6800e- 003 Off-Road 5.4200e- 003 0.0535 0.0766 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.5182 0.5182 2.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.5229

2.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.5229
Total 2.2000e004 1.5000e- 004 1.8800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 6.7000e-004 0.0000 6.7000e- 004 1.8000e-004 0.0000 1.8000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e- 0.0000 1.8000e-004 0.0000 0.5182 0.5182
005

6.7000e-004 0.0000 6.7000e004 Worker 2.2000e- 1.8000e-004 004 1.5000e- 004 1.8800e- 003

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 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 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
303
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.8900e003 2.5900e- 0.0000 12.1131 003 1.4000e- 2.5900e-003 0.0000 12.0159 12.0159 004 2.8100e- 003 2.8100e- 003 Total 6.9300e- 003 0.0572 0.0878

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

3.8900e003 0.0000 12.1131
Paving 1.0000e003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.5900e003 1.4000e- 2.5900e-003 0.0000 12.0159 12.0159 004 2.8100e- 003 2.8100e- 003 Off-Road 5.9300e- 003 0.0572 0.0878 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.5 Paving (Roadways & Foundations) - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.5182 0.5182 2.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.5229

2.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.5229
Total 2.2000e004 1.5000e- 004 1.8800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 6.7000e-004 0.0000 6.7000e- 004 1.8000e-004 0.0000 1.8000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e- 0.0000 1.8000e-004 0.0000 0.5182 0.5182
005

6.7000e-004 0.0000 6.7000e004 Worker 2.2000e- 1.8000e-004 004 1.5000e- 004 1.8800e- 003

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 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 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
304
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.8900e003 2.5900e- 0.0000 12.1131 003 1.4000e- 2.5900e-003 0.0000 12.0159 12.0159 004 2.8100e- 003 2.8100e- 003 Total 6.9300e- 003 0.0572 0.0878

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

3.8900e003 0.0000 12.1131
Paving 1.0000e003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.5900e003 1.4000e- 2.5900e-003 0.0000 12.0159 12.0159 004 2.8100e- 003 2.8100e- 003 Off-Road 5.9300e- 003 0.0572 0.0878 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.5729 0.5729 2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.5779

2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.5779
Total 2.3000e004 1.5000e- 004 2.0100e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.6000e-004 0.0000 7.7000e- 004 2.0000e-004 0.0000 2.1000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e- 0.0000 2.1000e-004 0.0000 0.5729 0.5729
005

7.6000e-004 0.0000 7.7000e004 Worker 2.3000e- 2.0000e-004 004 1.5000e- 004 2.0100e- 003

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 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 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
305
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

6.9131 6.9131 1.4400e003 0.0000 6.9490

1.4400e003 0.0000 6.9490
Total 3.9800e003 0.0388 0.0416 8.0000e- 005 1.7400e- 003 1.7400e- 003 1.6400e- 003 1.6400e-003 0.0000

1.6400e003 8.0000e- 1.6400e-003 0.0000 6.9131 6.9131 005 1.7400e- 003 1.7400e- 003 Off-Road 3.9800e- 003 0.0388 0.0416 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.6 Building Construction (Model Homes) - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.5729 0.5729 2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.5779

2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.5779
Total 2.3000e004 1.5000e- 004 2.0100e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.6000e-004 0.0000 7.7000e- 004 2.0000e-004 0.0000 2.1000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e- 0.0000 2.1000e-004 0.0000 0.5729 0.5729
005

7.6000e-004 0.0000 7.7000e004 Worker 2.3000e- 2.0000e-004 004 1.5000e- 004 2.0100e- 003

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 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 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
306
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

6.9131 6.9131 1.4400e003 0.0000 6.9490

1.4400e003 0.0000 6.9490
Total 3.9800e003 0.0388 0.0416 8.0000e- 005 1.7400e- 003 1.7400e- 003 1.6400e- 003 1.6400e-003 0.0000

1.6400e003 8.0000e- 1.6400e-003 0.0000 6.9131 6.9131 005 1.7400e- 003 1.7400e- 003 Off-Road 3.9800e- 003 0.0388 0.0416 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

3.4290 3.4290 8.0000e005 3.1000e- 004 3.5243

4.0000e005 4.0000e- 005 1.5652
Total 7.4000e004 4.6600e- 003 6.7800e- 003 4.0000e- 005 2.6900e-003 4.0000e- 005 2.7200e- 003 7.3000e-004 3.0000e- 005 7.6000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e005 2.0000e- 5.6000e-004 0.0000 1.5516 1.5516 005 2.0600e-003 1.0000e- 005 2.0700e- 003 Worker 6.3000e- 5.5000e-004 004 4.2000e- 004 5.4300e- 003

1.8774 1.8774 4.0000e005 2.7000e- 004 1.9591

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 1.1000e004 4.2400e- 003 1.3500e- 003 2.0000e- 005 6.3000e-004 3.0000e- 005 6.5000e- 004 1.8000e-004 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e-004 0.0000 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 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
307
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

1.2766 1.2766 7.0000e005 0.0000 1.2784

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 9.0000e004 6.0900e- 003 9.0500e- 003 1.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e-004 0.0000 Archit. Coating 0.0138 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.7 Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes) - 2024 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

3.4290 3.4290 8.0000e005 3.1000e- 004 3.5243

4.0000e005 4.0000e- 005 1.5652
Total 7.4000e004 4.6600e- 003 6.7800e- 003 4.0000e- 005 2.6900e-003 4.0000e- 005 2.7200e- 003 7.3000e-004 3.0000e- 005 7.6000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e005 2.0000e- 5.6000e-004 0.0000 1.5516 1.5516 005 2.0600e-003 1.0000e- 005 2.0700e- 003 Worker 6.3000e- 5.5000e-004 004 4.2000e- 004 5.4300e- 003

1.8774 1.8774 4.0000e005 2.7000e- 004 1.9591

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 1.1000e004 4.2400e- 003 1.3500e- 003 2.0000e- 005 6.3000e-004 3.0000e- 005 6.5000e- 004 1.8000e-004 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e-004 0.0000 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 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
308
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Archit. Coating 0.0138 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.5968 0.5968 2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.6020

2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.6020
Total 2.4000e004 1.6000e- 004 2.0900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.4800e-003 0.0000 1.4800e- 003 3.8000e-004 0.0000 3.8000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e- 0.0000 3.8000e-004 0.0000 0.5968 0.5968
005

1.4800e-003 0.0000 1.4800e003 Worker 2.4000e- 3.8000e-004 004 1.6000e- 004 2.0900e- 003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

7.0000e005 0.0000 1.2784
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

3.0000e004 1.0000e- 3.0000e-004 0.0000 1.2766 1.2766 005 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 Total 0.0147 6.0900e- 003 9.0500e- 003 309
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.8 Building Construction (Pre-Receptors) - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.5968 0.5968 2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.6020

2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.6020
Total 2.4000e004 1.6000e- 004 2.0900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.4800e-003 0.0000 1.4800e- 003 3.8000e-004 0.0000 3.8000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e- 0.0000 3.8000e-004 0.0000 0.5968 0.5968
005

1.4800e-003 0.0000 1.4800e003 Worker 2.4000e- 3.8000e-004 004 1.6000e- 004 2.0900e- 003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

7.0000e005 0.0000 1.2784
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.0000e004 1.0000e- 3.0000e-004 0.0000 1.2766 1.2766 005 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 Total 0.0147 6.0900e- 003 9.0500e- 003

1.2766 1.2766 7.0000e005 Off-Road 9.0000e- 0.0000 1.2784 004 6.0900e- 003 9.0500e- 003 1.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e-004 0.0000 310
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

30.5180 30.5180 7.3000e004 2.7900e- 003 31.3666

3.9000e004 3.8000e- 004 13.9306
Total 6.5900e003 0.0414 0.0604 3.2000e- 004 0.0239 3.1000e- 004 0.0242 6.4900e-003 2.9000e- 004 6.7800e-003 0.0000

8.0000e005 1.5000e- 4.9600e-003 0.0000 13.8088 13.8088 004 0.0184 9.0000e- 005 Worker 5.6500e- 0.0184 4.8800e-003 003 3.7000e- 003 0.0483

16.7092 16.7092 3.4000e004 2.4100e- 003 17.4361

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 9.4000e004 0.0377 0.0120 1.7000e- 004 5.5600e-003 2.2000e- 004 5.7900e- 003 1.6100e-003 2.1000e- 004 1.8200e-003 0.0000 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 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

61.5262 61.5262 0.0128 0.0000 61.8457

0.0128 0.0000 61.8457
Total 0.0354 0.3454 0.3699 7.1000e004 0.0155 0.0155 0.0146 0.0146 0.0000

7.1000e- 0.0146 0.0146 0.0000 61.5262 61.5262
004
Off-Road 0.0354 0.3454 0.3699 0.0155 0.0155
311
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.9 Architectural Coating (Pre-Receptors) - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

30.5180 30.5180 7.3000e004 2.7900e- 003 31.3666

3.9000e004 3.8000e- 004 13.9306
Total 6.5900e003 0.0414 0.0604 3.2000e- 004 0.0239 3.1000e- 004 0.0242 6.4900e-003 2.9000e- 004 6.7800e-003 0.0000

8.0000e005 1.5000e- 4.9600e-003 0.0000 13.8088 13.8088 004 0.0184 9.0000e- 005 Worker 5.6500e- 0.0184 4.8800e-003 003 3.7000e- 003 0.0483

16.7092 16.7092 3.4000e004 2.4100e- 003 17.4361

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 9.4000e004 0.0377 0.0120 1.7000e- 004 5.5600e-003 2.2000e- 004 5.7900e- 003 1.6100e-003 2.1000e- 004 1.8200e-003 0.0000 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 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

61.5261 61.5261 0.0128 0.0000 61.8457

0.0128 0.0000 61.8457
Total 0.0354 0.3454 0.3699 7.1000e004 0.0155 0.0155 0.0146 0.0146 0.0000

7.1000e- 0.0146 0.0146 0.0000 61.5261 61.5261
004
Off-Road 0.0354 0.3454 0.3699 0.0155 0.0155
312
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

2.3572 2.3572 7.0000e005 6.0000e- 005 2.3780

7.0000e005 6.0000e- 005 2.3780
Total 9.6000e004 6.3000e- 004 8.2500e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.1300e-003 2.0000e- 005 3.1500e- 003 8.3000e-004 1.0000e- 005 8.5000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e005 3.0000e- 8.5000e-004 0.0000 2.3572 2.3572 005 3.1300e-003 2.0000e- 005 3.1500e- 003 Worker 9.6000e- 8.3000e-004 004 6.3000e- 004 8.2500e- 003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

5.7000e004 0.0000 10.0996
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

2.4100e003 1.2000e- 2.4100e-003 0.0000 10.0854 10.0854 004 2.4100e- 003 2.4100e- 003 Total 0.2766 0.0481 0.0715

10.0854 10.0854 5.7000e004 0.0000 10.0996

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 7.1400e003 0.0481 0.0715 1.2000e- 004 2.4100e- 003 2.4100e- 003 2.4100e- 003 2.4100e-003 0.0000 Archit. Coating 0.2694 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 313
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

2.3572 2.3572 7.0000e005 6.0000e- 005 2.3780

7.0000e005 6.0000e- 005 2.3780
Total 9.6000e004 6.3000e- 004 8.2500e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.1300e-003 2.0000e- 005 3.1500e- 003 8.3000e-004 1.0000e- 005 8.5000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e005 3.0000e- 8.5000e-004 0.0000 2.3572 2.3572 005 3.1300e-003 2.0000e- 005 3.1500e- 003 Worker 9.6000e- 8.3000e-004 004 6.3000e- 004 8.2500e- 003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

5.7000e004 0.0000 10.0995
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

2.4100e003 1.2000e- 2.4100e-003 0.0000 10.0853 10.0853 004 2.4100e- 003 2.4100e- 003 Total 0.2766 0.0481 0.0715

10.0853 10.0853 5.7000e004 0.0000 10.0995

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 7.1400e003 0.0481 0.0715 1.2000e- 004 2.4100e- 003 2.4100e- 003 2.4100e- 003 2.4100e-003 0.0000 Archit. Coating 0.2694 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Category tons/yr MT/yr
314
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

4.4 Fleet Mix
Single Family Housing 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3 Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 City Park 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 66 28 6
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

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00
Single Family Housing 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual VMT
City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated

0.0000
Unmitigated 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 0.0000 0.0000
CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Exhaust Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total
PM10
315
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.000337 0.025847 0.001311 0.003372

5.0 Energy Detail
Single Family Housing 0.561700 0.056037 0.179622 0.127612 0.023848 0.005501 0.007131 0.007135 0.000546

0.001311 0.003372
Parking Lot 0.561700 0.056037 0.179622 0.127612 0.023848 0.005501 0.007131 0.007135 0.000546 0.000337 0.025847 0.001311 0.003372

0.000337 0.025847 0.001311 0.003372
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.561700 0.056037 0.179622 0.127612 0.023848 0.005501 0.007131 0.007135 0.000546 0.000337 0.025847 City Park 0.561700 0.056037 0.179622 0.127612 0.023848 0.005501 0.007131 0.007135 0.000546 Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 316
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Single Family 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 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

0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
NaturalGas
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 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

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
NaturalGas PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
317
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Land Use kWh/yr t
on
MT/yr
Mitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000
Land Use kWh/yr t
on
MT/yr
City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 318
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated

0.0000
Unmitigated 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
CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Exhaust Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total

6.0 Area Detail6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10

0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000
City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
319
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 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

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating

0.0000
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
Total 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

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 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

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating

0.0000
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
320
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Land Use Mgal t
on
MT/yr
City Park 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000

7.2 Water by Land Use
Unmitigated
Indoor/Outd
oor Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
CO2e
Category t
on
MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total CO2 CH4 N2O

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

7.0 Water Detail7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 321
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

8.0 Waste Detail8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000
Land Use Mgal t
on
MT/yr
City Park 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
Indoor/Outd
oor Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000
322
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000
Land Use tons t
on
MT/yr
City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
ton
MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Category/Year
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
323
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel TypeEquipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year

0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000
Land Use tons t
on
MT/yr
City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
324
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number

11.0 Vegetation
325
Grading -
Architectural Coating - Note 4Off-road Equipment - Note 2Off-road Equipment - Off-road Equipment - Note 2Trips and VMT - Demolition -

0.004

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics - Land Use - Note 1Construction Phase - Note 2 CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.033 N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Climate Zone 5 Operational Year 2024
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
86 1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 58 Single Family Housing 30.00 Dwelling Unit 3.61 56,350.00 Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors)
Contra Costa County, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 326
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 228.80 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceDayYear 11.14 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceHourDay 3.50 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24E 45.71 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24NG 35,976.14 0.00tblEnergyUse NT24E 6,155.97 0.00 tblEnergyUse NT24NG 2,615.00 0.00
tblConsumerProducts ROG_EF_PesticidesFertilizers 5.152E-08 0 tblEnergyUse LightingElect 1,608.84 0.00
tblConsumerProducts ROG_EF 2.14E-05 0
tblConsumerProducts ROG_EF_Degreaser 3.542E-07 0
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 18.00 105.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 230.00 105.00
tblAreaCoating ReapplicationRatePercent 10 0
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Residential_Exterior 38,036.00 24,614.00tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Residential_Interior 114,109.00 73,841.00 Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Note 6
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
Area Coating - Note 5Landscape Equipment - Note 5Energy Use - Note 5Water And Wastewater - Note 5Solid Waste - Note 5Vehicle Trips - Note 5Woodstoves - Note 5Consumer Products - Note 5 327
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

93.1771 93.1771 0.0160 5.6000e004 93.7443

0.0160 5.6000e004 93.7443
Maximum 0.3098 0.4796 0.5479 1.0700e003 6.4500e-003 0.0215 0.0280 1.7400e-003 0.0205 0.0223 0.0000

1.0700e- 0.0205 0.0223 0.0000 93.1771 93.1771
003
2024 0.3098 0.4796 0.5479 6.4500e-003 0.0215 0.0280 1.7400e-003 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.1 Overall Construction
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 956.80 0.00

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblWater OutdoorWaterUseRate 1,232,260.92 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 21.06 0.00
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 9.44 0.00
tblWater IndoorWaterUseRate 1,954,620.77 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 9.54 0.00
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 8.55 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblSolidWaste SolidWasteGenerationRate 36.12 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 54,000.00 56,350.00tblLandUse LotAcreage 9.74 3.61 tblLandscapeEquipment NumberSummerDays 180 0
328
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
Highest 0.4939 0.4939
2 9-6-2024 9-30-2024 0.1342 0.13421 6-6-2024 9-5-2024 0.4939 0.4939

0.00 0.00 0.00
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 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 PM2.5
Total
Fugitive Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO SO2

93.1770 93.1770 0.0160 5.6000e004 93.7442

0.0160 5.6000e004 93.7442
Maximum 0.3098 0.4796 0.5479 1.0700e003 6.4500e-003 0.0215 0.0280 1.7400e-003 0.0205 0.0223 0.0000

1.0700e- 0.0205 0.0223 0.0000 93.1770 93.1770
003
2024 0.3098 0.4796 0.5479 6.4500e-003 0.0215 0.0280 1.7400e-003 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
329
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 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
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mobile 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 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Water 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
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mobile 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 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Area 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Category tons/yr MT/yr
330
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.45 Architectural Coating (Post-Receptors) Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48Building Construction (Post-Receptors) Welders 0 8.00 46

0.74 Building Construction (Post-Receptors) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37Building Construction (Post-Receptors) Generator Sets 1 8.00 84

0.29 Building Construction (Post-Receptors) Forklifts 1 8.00 89 0.20Building Construction (Post-Receptors) Cranes 1 7.00 231 Acres of Paving: 0
Residential Indoor: 73,841; Residential Outdoor: 24,614; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor 5 105
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
2 Architectural Coating (PostReceptors) Architectural Coating 6/6/2024 10/30/2024 Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Building Construction (PostReceptors) Building Construction 6/6/2024 10/30/2024 5 105 Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date

0.00 0.00 0.00

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
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 PM2.5
Total
Fugitive Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO SO2
331
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

72.5871 72.5871 0.0151 0.0000 72.9641

0.0151 0.0000 72.9641
Total 0.0418 0.4075 0.4364 8.3000e004 0.0182 0.0182 0.0173 0.0173 0.0000

8.3000e- 0.0173 0.0173 0.0000 72.5871 72.5871
004
Off-Road 0.0418 0.4075 0.4364 0.0182 0.0182
N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
HHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed AreaReduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads

3.2 Building Construction (Post-Receptors) - 2024
Architectural Coating 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix
(Post-Receptors)
1 2.00 0.00 0.00
Vendor Vehicle
Class
Hauling Vehicle
Class
Building Construction
(Post-Receptors)
4 11.00 3.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
332
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

72.5870 72.5870 0.0151 0.0000 72.9640

0.0151 0.0000 72.9640
Total 0.0418 0.4075 0.4364 8.3000e004 0.0182 0.0182 0.0173 0.0173 0.0000

8.3000e- 0.0173 0.0173 0.0000 72.5870 72.5870
004
Off-Road 0.0418 0.4075 0.4364 0.0182 0.0182
N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

6.5588 6.5588 1.6000e004 5.4000e- 004 6.7246

1.0000e004 9.0000e- 005 3.4766
Total 1.5900e003 7.9400e- 003 0.0143 7.0000e- 005 5.6200e-003 6.0000e- 005 5.6800e- 003 1.5200e-003 6.0000e- 005 1.5800e-003 0.0000

2.0000e005 4.0000e- 1.2400e-003 0.0000 3.4462 3.4462 005 4.5800e-003 2.0000e- 005 4.6000e- 003 Worker 1.4100e- 1.2200e-003 003 9.2000e- 004 0.0121

3.1126 3.1126 6.0000e005 4.5000e- 004 3.2480

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 1.8000e004 7.0200e- 003 2.2400e- 003 3.0000e- 005 1.0400e-003 4.0000e- 005 1.0800e- 003 3.0000e-004 4.0000e- 005 3.4000e-004 0.0000 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 Category tons/yr MT/yr
333
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

7.5000e004 0.0000 13.4235
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

3.2000e003 1.6000e- 3.2000e-003 0.0000 13.4046 13.4046 004 3.2000e- 003 3.2000e- 003 Total 0.2662 0.0640 0.0950

13.4046 13.4046 7.5000e004 0.0000 13.4235

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 9.4900e003 0.0640 0.0950 1.6000e- 004 3.2000e- 003 3.2000e- 003 3.2000e- 003 3.2000e-003 0.0000 Archit. Coating 0.2567 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.3 Architectural Coating (Post-Receptors) - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

6.5588 6.5588 1.6000e004 5.4000e- 004 6.7246

1.0000e004 9.0000e- 005 3.4766
Total 1.5900e003 7.9400e- 003 0.0143 7.0000e- 005 5.6200e-003 6.0000e- 005 5.6800e- 003 1.5200e-003 6.0000e- 005 1.5800e-003 0.0000

2.0000e005 4.0000e- 1.2400e-003 0.0000 3.4462 3.4462 005 4.5800e-003 2.0000e- 005 4.6000e- 003 Worker 1.4100e- 1.2200e-003 003 9.2000e- 004 0.0121

3.1126 3.1126 6.0000e005 4.5000e- 004 3.2480

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 1.8000e004 7.0200e- 003 2.2400e- 003 3.0000e- 005 1.0400e-003 4.0000e- 005 1.0800e- 003 3.0000e-004 4.0000e- 005 3.4000e-004 0.0000 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 Category tons/yr MT/yr
334
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

7.5000e004 0.0000 13.4234
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.2000e003 1.6000e- 3.2000e-003 0.0000 13.4046 13.4046 004 3.2000e- 003 3.2000e- 003 Total 0.2662 0.0640 0.0950

13.4046 13.4046 7.5000e004 0.0000 13.4234

0.6266 0.6266 2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.6321

2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.6321
Total 2.6000e004 1.7000e- 004 2.1900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.3000e-004 0.0000 8.4000e- 004 2.2000e-004 0.0000 2.3000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e- 0.0000 2.3000e-004 0.0000 0.6266 0.6266
005

8.3000e-004 0.0000 8.4000e004 Worker 2.6000e- 2.2000e-004 004 1.7000e- 004 2.1900e- 003

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 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 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
335
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000
Unmitigated 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

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10

0.6266 0.6266 2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.6321

2.0000e005 2.0000e- 005 0.6321
Total 2.6000e004 1.7000e- 004 2.1900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 8.3000e-004 0.0000 8.4000e- 004 2.2000e-004 0.0000 2.3000e-004 0.0000

1.0000e- 0.0000 2.3000e-004 0.0000 0.6266 0.6266
005

8.3000e-004 0.0000 8.4000e004 Worker 2.6000e- 2.2000e-004 004 1.7000e- 004 2.1900e- 003

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 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 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
336
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.000337 0.025847 0.001311 0.003372

5.0 Energy Detail
Single Family Housing 0.561700 0.056037 0.179622 0.127612 0.023848 0.005501 0.007131 0.007135 0.000546 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2
Single Family Housing 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3 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

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual VMT
Single Family Housing 0.00 0.00 0.00
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
337
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
NaturalGas
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGas
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 338
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Land Use kWh/yr t
on
MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Total 0.0000 0.0000
Land Use kWh/yr t
on
MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000
339
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating

0.0000
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated

0.0000
Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

6.0 Area Detail6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
340
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

7.0 Water Detail7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
Total 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

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 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

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating

0.0000
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
Total 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

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 341
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
Total 0.0000 0.0000
Land Use Mgal t
on
MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000

7.2 Water by Land Use
Unmitigated
Indoor/Outd
oor Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
CO2e
Category t
on
MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total CO2 CH4 N2O
342
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Unmitigated
Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
CO2e
ton
MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total CO2 CH4 N2O

0.0000 0.0000

8.0 Waste Detail8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Category/Year
Total 0.0000 0.0000
Land Use Mgal t
on
MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Indoor/Outd
oor Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
343
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment

0.0000 0.0000

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day
Total 0.0000 0.0000
Land Use tons t
on
MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Total 0.0000 0.0000
Land Use tons t
on
MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
344
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM
Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number

11.0 Vegetation
Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year
345
Construction Phase - Note 5
Off-road Equipment - Note 5Trips and VMT - Note 5Demolition - Grading - N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr)

0.004

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics - Note 1Land Use - Note 1
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric CompanyCO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 203.98 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.033
Precipitation Freq (Days) 58
Climate Zone 5 Operational Year 2024

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2
0 Single Family Housing 40 Dwelling Unit 4.86 74,740.00 114 City Park 0.45 Acre 0.45 19,602.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0 Parking Lot 62.32 1000sqft 1.43 62,320.00 0
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.08 Acre 0.08 3,430.00
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation
Contra Costa County, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population 346
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 0.78 0
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 2.19 0tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 8.55 9.43tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.96 0tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 9.54 9.43 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1 0
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 10 0
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 72,000.00 74,740.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 12.99 4.86
tblFireplaces NumberWood 17.2 0
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 3,484.80 3,430.00
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20 0
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Note 9Energy Mitigation - Note 10Fleet Mix - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
Woodstoves - Note 9Area Coating - Energy Use - Water And Wastewater - Solid Waste - Architectural Coating - Vehicle Trips - Note 5, Note 8Vehicle Emission Factors - Vehicle Emission Factors - Vehicle Emission Factors - 347
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0000 0
000
Maximum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2022 0 0 0 00000 0 0 000
N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
0000 0
000
Maximum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2022 0 0 0 00000 0 0 000
N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.0 Emissions Summary

2.1 Overall Construction
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 9.44 9.43
348
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Mitigated Operational
394.1078 406.7118 0.6952 0.0176 429.3326

0.0853 2.04E-03 5.5777
Total 0.5386 0.2544 1.8867 3.78E-03 0.3223 0.0251 0.3474 0.0861 0.0249 0.111 12.604 Water 00 0 0 0.8268 2.0105 2.8373
0 9.7273 0.5749 0 24.099

0.0184 0.0134 281.518
Waste 0 0 0 0 9.7273Mobile 0.1605 0.1772 1.4647 3.00E-03 0.3223 2.26E-03 0.3246 0.0861 2.10E-03 0.0882 0 277.0634 277.0634 113.2993 113.2993 6.58E-03 2.12E-03 114.0946

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
Highest
000
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0000000000000
PM2.5
Total
Fugitive Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO SO2
349
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0Acres of Paving: 1.51 Residential Indoor: 151,349; Residential Outdoor: 50,450; Non-Residential Indoor: 2; Non-Residential Outdoor: 1; Striped Parking Area: 3,945 Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 3/23/2022 3/22/2022 5 0 Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date

0.17 0.85 1.7

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0 00000 0 0 000 1.84 1.78
PM2.5
Total
Fugitive Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO SO2
386.8725 399.4765 0.6941 0.0174 422.0257

0.0853 2.04E-03 5.5777
Total 0.5386 0.2544 1.8867 3.78E-03 0.3223 0.0251 0.3474 0.0861 0.0249 0.111 12.604 Water 00 0 0 0.8268 2.0105 2.8373
0 9.7273 0.5749 0 24.099

0.0184 0.0134 281.518
Waste 0 0 0 0 9.7273
Mobile 0.1605 0.1772 1.4647 3.00E-03 0.3223 2.26E-03 0.3246 0.0861 2.10E-03 0.0882 0 277.0634 277.0634 106.0639 106.0639 5.41E-03 1.97E-03 106.7877

0.0101 2.00E-05 4.0432
Energy 8.32E-03 0.0711 0.0303 4.50E-04 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 0 Area 0.3698 6.03E-03 0.3918 3.30E-04 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 2.0499 1.7347 3.7845 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
350
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Total 0 0 0 00000 0 0 000 000
0000 0
000
Off-Road 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Archit. Coating 0 0 0 00000 0 0 000
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed AreaReduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads

3.2 Architectural Coating - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
Vendor Vehicle
Class
Hauling Vehicle
Class
Architectural Coating 0 0 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Load Factor
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 0 6 78 0.48
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power OffRoad Equipment
351
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Total 0 0 0 00000 0 0 000 000
0000 0
000
Off-Road 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Archit. Coating 0 0 0 00000 0 0 000
N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
0000 0
000
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Worker 0 0 0 00000 0 0 000
0000 0
000
Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hauling 0 0 0 00000 0 0 000
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
352
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
0000 0
000
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Worker 0 0 0 00000 0 0 000
0000 0
000
Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hauling 0 0 0 00000 0 0 000
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
353
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.000337 0.025847 0.001311 0.003372

5.0 Energy Detail
Single Family Housing 0.5617 0.056037 0.179622 0.127612 0.023848 0.005501 0.007131 0.007135 0.000546

0.001311 0.003372
Parking Lot 0.5617 0.056037 0.179622 0.127612 0.023848 0.005501 0.007131 0.007135 0.000546 0.000337 0.025847 0.001311 0.003372

0.000337 0.025847 0.001311 0.003372
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.5617 0.056037 0.179622 0.127612 0.023848 0.005501 0.007131 0.007135 0.000546 0.000337 0.025847 City Park 0.5617 0.056037 0.179622 0.127612 0.023848 0.005501 0.007131 0.007135 0.000546 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2
Single Family Housing 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3 Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 City Park 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 66 28 6
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

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
871,184
Total 377.20 377.20 377.20 871,184 871,184
Single Family Housing 377.20 377.20 377.20 871,184
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual VMT
City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT

0.0184 0.0134 281.518

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
281.518
Unmitigated 0.1605 0.1772 1.4647 3.00E-03 0.3223 2.26E-03 0.3246 0.0861 2.10E-03 0.0882 0 277.0634 277.0634 Mitigated 0.1605 0.1772 1.4647 3.00E-03 0.3223 2.26E-03 0.3246 0.0861 2.10E-03 0.0882 0 277.0634 277.0634 0.0184 0.0134 354
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied City Park 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 00 0000
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
CO SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
NaturalGas PM10 Total
Use
ROG NOx

1.58E-03 1.51E-03 82.8643

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGas 4.50E-04 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 0 82.3748 82.3748 Unmitigated

8.32E-03 0.0711 0.0303

82.3748 82.3748 1.58E-03 1.51E-03 82.8643

5.00E-03 6.10E-04 31.2303
NaturalGas
Mitigated

8.32E-03 0.0711 0.0303 4.50E-04 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 0 Electricity 00 0 0 0 30.9245 30.9245
Unmitigated

23.6891 23.6891 3.83E-03 4.60E-04 23.9234
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity Mitigated 00 0 0 0
NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Kilowatt Hours of Renewable Electricity Generated
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2
355
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

1.51E-03 82.8643

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Unmitigated

5.75E-03 0 82.3748 82.3748 1.58E-03

82.3748 1.58E-03 1.51E-03 82.8643
Total 8.32E-03 0.0711 0.0303 4.50E-04 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 Single Family 0.0303 4.50E-04 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 0 82.3748 Housing

1.54E+06 8.32E-03 0.0711
000 00
00 Parking Lot 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0000
0000
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
00000 00 0
City Park 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 00
N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

1.51E-03 82.8643
Mitigated
NaturalGas
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

5.75E-03 0 82.3748 82.3748 1.58E-03

82.3748 1.58E-03 1.51E-03 82.8643
Total 8.32E-03 0.0711 0.0303 4.50E-04 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 Single Family 0.0303 4.50E-04 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 5.75E-03 0 82.3748 Housing

1.54E+06 8.32E-03 0.0711
000 00
00 Parking Lot 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Non-Asphalt 0 0000
Surfaces
00000 00 0
356
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Single Family 5.30E-04 27.3655
Housing
292871 27.0975 4.38E-03
0 -1.8267
Parking Lot 2262 0.2093 3.00E-05 0 0.2114
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
-19550 -1.8088 -0.0003
Land Use kWh/yr t
on
MT/yr
City Park -19550 -1.8088 -0.0003 0 -1.8267
Mitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

5.70E-04 29.1922
Total 30.9245 5.01E-03 6.10E-04 31.2303
Single Family
Housing
312421 28.9064 4.68E-03
00 Parking Lot 21812 2.0181 3.30E-04 4.00E-05 2.0381
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
000
Land Use kWh/yr t
on
MT/yr
City Park 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
357
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Architectural 00 0 0 000 000
Coating

0.054
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.0101 2.00E-05 4.0432

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated

4.0432
Unmitigated 0.3698 6.03E-03 0.3918 3.30E-04 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 2.0499 1.7347 3.7845

2.0499 1.7347 3.7845 0.0101 2.00E-05
CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.3698 6.03E-03 0.3918 3.30E-04 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 Exhaust Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total

6.0 Area Detail6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Total 23.6891 3.83E-03 4.50E-04 23.9234
358
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0101 2.00E-05 4.0432

7.0 Water Detail7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
Total 0.3698 6.04E-03 0.3918 3.30E-04 0.0171 0.0171 0.0171 0.0171 2.0499 1.7347 3.7845

0.4863 0.4863 4.70E-04 0 0.498

9.61E-03 2.00E-05 3.5452
Landscaping 8.98E-03 3.43E-03 0.2975 2.00E-05 1.65E-03 1.65E-03 1.65E-03 1.65E-03 0 Hearth 0.0105 2.61E-03 0.0943 3.10E-04 0.0154 0.0154 0.0154 0.0154 2.0499 1.2484 3.2983 0000 0
000
Consumer
Products

0.2963 0 0 0 0 0
Architectural 00 0 0 000
Coating

0.054
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.0101 2.00E-05 4.0432
Mitigated
Total 0.3698 6.04E-03 0.3918 3.30E-04 0.0171 0.0171 0.0171 0.0171 2.0499 1.7347 3.7845

0.4863 0.4863 4.70E-04 0 0.498

0.2963 0 0 0 0 0
359
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.04E-03 5.4024
Total 2.8373 0.0853 2.04E-03 5.5778
Single Family
Housing

2.60616 /

1.64301

2.6636 0.0852
00 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0 0 0 0
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 / 0 0 0
Land Use Mgal t
on
MT/yr
City Park 0 /

0.536167

0.1736 3.00E-05 0 0.1754

5.5777

7.2 Water by Land Use
Unmitigated
Indoor/Outd
oor Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated 2.8373 0.0853 2.04E-03
CO2e
Category t
on
MT/yr
Mitigated 2.8373 0.0853 2.04E-03 5.5777
Total CO2 CH4 N2O
360
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ton
MT/yr

8.0 Waste Detail8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Category/Year
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

2.04E-03 5.4024
Total 2.8373 0.0853 2.04E-03 5.5778
Single Family
Housing

2.60616 /

1.64301

2.6636 0.0852
00 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0 0 0 0
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0 / 0 0 0
Land Use Mgal t
on
MT/yr
City Park 0 /

0.536167

0.1736 3.00E-05 0 0.1754
Mitigated
Indoor/Outd
oor Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
361
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Mitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
0 24.0789
Total 9.7273 0.5749 0 24.099
Single Family
Housing

47.88 9.7192 0.5744
00 Parking Lot 0 0 0 0 0
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
000
Land Use tons t
on
MT/yr
City Park 0.04 8.12E-03 4.80E-04 0 0.0201

24.099

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated 9.7273 0.5749 0
Mitigated 9.7273 0.5749 0 24.099
362
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number

11.0 Vegetation
Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power
Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year
0 24.0789
Total 9.7273 0.5749 0 24.099
Single Family
Housing

47.88 9.7192 0.5744
00 Parking Lot 0 0 0 0 0
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
000
Land Use tons t
on
MT/yr
City Park 0.04 8.12E-03 4.80E-04 0 0.0201
363
Vehicle Emission Factors -
Vehicle Emission Factors - Off-road Equipment - Zeroed out construction equipmentTrips and VMT - Architectural Coating - Vehicle Trips - Zeroed out off-site tripsVehicle Emission Factors -

0.004

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics - Typical construction trailer for estimate of energy usageCO2 Intensity Factor adjusted to reflect SCE's GHG Emissions Factors Land Use - 12'x60' single-wide unit (720 sq ft)Construction Phase - Typical construction trailer for energy use estimates - estimates are included in the operational component of the results CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.033 N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Climate Zone 5 Operational Year 2024
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 58 General Office Building 0.72 1000sqft 0.02 720.00
Typical Construction Trailer
Contra Costa County, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 364
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Mitigated Construction

0.6383 0.6383 4.0000e005 0.0000 0.6393

4.0000e005 0.0000 0.6393
Maximum 4.2300e003 3.2600e- 003 4.5300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e-004 0.0000

1.8000e004 1.0000e- 1.8000e-004 0.0000 0.6383 0.6383 005 0.0000 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 2023 4.2300e- 0.0000 003 3.2600e- 003 4.5300e- 003 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.0 Emissions Summary

2.1 Overall Construction
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
Energy Use - Water And Wastewater - Area Mitigation - Fleet Mix - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
Consumer Products - Area Coating - Landscape Equipment - 365
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.1360 8.0400e003 0.0000 0.3369

2.6000e004 1.9000e- 004 4.0944
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1360

3.0000e005 4.0000e- 1.2800e-003 0.0000 4.0302 4.0302 005 4.6900e-003 3.0000e- 005 4.7300e- 003 Mobile 2.2900e- 1.2500e-003 003 2.5600e- 003 0.0211

1.5379 1.5379 1.4000e004 3.0000e- 005 1.5502

0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e005
Energy 7.0000e005 6.8000e- 004 5.7000e- 004 0.0000 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e-005 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 Area 3.1900e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
Highest

0.00 0.00 0.00
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 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 PM2.5
Total
Fugitive Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO SO2

0.6383 0.6383 4.0000e005 0.0000 0.6393

4.0000e005 0.0000 0.6393
Maximum 4.2300e003 3.2600e- 003 4.5300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 0.0000 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e-004 0.0000

1.8000e004 1.0000e- 1.8000e-004 0.0000 0.6383 0.6383 005 0.0000 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 2023 4.2300e- 0.0000 003 3.2600e- 003 4.5300e- 003 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
366
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.00 0.00 0.00

3.0 Construction Detail
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 PM2.5
Total
Fugitive Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO SO2

5.6575 5.8341 0.0126 3.2000e004 6.2460

0.0000 0.1360 8.0400e003 0.0000 0.3369

2.6000e004 1.9000e- 004 4.0944
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1360

3.0000e005 4.0000e- 1.2800e-003 0.0000 4.0302 4.0302 005 4.6900e-003 3.0000e- 005 4.7300e- 003 Mobile 2.2900e- 1.2500e-003 003 2.5600e- 003 0.0211

1.5379 1.5379 1.4000e004 3.0000e- 005 1.5502

0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e005
Energy 7.0000e005 6.8000e- 004 5.7000e- 004 0.0000 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e-005 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 Area 3.1900e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

5.6575 5.8341 0.0126 3.2000e004 6.2460

4.1800e003 1.0000e- 004 0.2645
Total 5.5500e003 3.2400e- 003 0.0217 4.0000e- 005 4.6900e-003 8.0000e- 005 4.7800e- 003 1.2500e-003 8.0000e- 005 1.3300e-003 0.1766 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0406 0.0895 0.1301
367
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

3.2 Architectural Coating - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
Vendor Vehicle
Class
Hauling Vehicle
Class
Architectural Coating 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Load Factor
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0Acres of Paving: 0
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 1,080; Non-Residential Outdoor: 360; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural OffRoad Equipment
Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 10/2/2023 10/6/2023 5 5 Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date
Construction Phase
368
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Mitigated Construction On-Site

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 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 0.0000 0.0000

4.0000e005 0.0000 0.6393
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

1.8000e004 1.0000e- 1.8000e-004 0.0000 0.6383 0.6383 005 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 Total 4.2300e- 003 3.2600e- 003 4.5300e- 003

0.6383 0.6383 4.0000e005 0.0000 0.6393

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.8000e004 3.2600e- 003 4.5300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e-004 0.0000 Archit. Coating 3.7500e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003
Category tons/yr MT/yr
369
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

4.0000e005 0.0000 0.6393
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

1.8000e004 1.0000e- 1.8000e-004 0.0000 0.6383 0.6383 005 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 Total 4.2300e- 003 3.2600e- 003 4.5300e- 003

0.6383 0.6383 4.0000e005 0.0000 0.6393

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.8000e004 3.2600e- 003 4.5300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e- 004 1.8000e-004 0.0000 Archit. Coating 3.7500e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003
N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
370
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.000337 0.025847 0.001311 0.003372

5.0 Energy Detail
General Office Building 0.561700 0.056037 0.179622 0.127612 0.023848 0.005501 0.007131 0.007135 0.000546 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2
General Office Building 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4 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 12,686

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Total 7.01 1.59 0.50 12,686
Annual VMT
General Office Building 7.01 1.59 0.50 12,686 12,686
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT

2.6000e004 1.9000e- 004 4.0944

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated

4.0944
Unmitigated 2.2900e003 2.5600e- 003 0.0211 4.0000e- 005 4.6900e- 003 3.0000e- 005 4.7300e- 003 1.2500e-003 3.0000e- 005 1.2800e-003 0.0000 4.0302 4.0302

0.0000 4.0302 4.0302 2.6000e004 1.9000e- 004
CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 2.2900e003 2.5600e- 003 0.0211 4.0000e- 005 4.6900e- 003 3.0000e- 005 4.7300e- 003 1.2500e-003 3.0000e- 005 1.2800e-003 Exhaust Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total
PM10
371
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.7358 1.0000e005 5.0000e- 1.0000e-005 0.7402 005 5.7000e- 5.0000e-005 0.0000 0.7358 004 0.0000 5.0000e- 005 General Office 5.0000e-005 Building 13788 7.0000e- 005 6.8000e- 004 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGas
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5

0.7358 0.7358 1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.7402

1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.7402
NaturalGas
Unmitigated

7.0000e005 6.8000e- 004 5.7000e- 004 0.0000 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e-005 0.0000

5.0000e005 0.0000 5.0000e- 5.0000e-005 0.0000 0.7358 0.7358 005 5.0000e- 005 NaturalGas Mitigated 7.0000e- 005 6.8000e- 004 5.7000e- 004

0.8021 0.8021 1.3000e004 2.0000e- 005 0.8100

1.3000e004 2.0000e- 005 0.8100
Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.8021 0.8021 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
372
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.0000e005 Total 0.8021 1.3000e- 0.8100 004
Land Use kWh/yr t
on
MT/yr
General Office
Building
8668.8 0.8021 1.3000e004 2.0000e- 005 0.8100

1.0000e-005 0.7402

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

5.0000e-005 0.0000 0.7358 0.7358 1.0000e005

0.7358 1.0000e005 1.0000e-005 0.7402
Total 7.0000e005 6.8000e- 004 5.7000e- 004 0.0000 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e-005 5.0000e- 005

5.0000e005 5.7000e- 5.0000e-005 0.0000 0.7358 004 0.0000 5.0000e- 005 General Office 5.0000e-005 Building 13788 7.0000e- 005 6.8000e- 004 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

1.0000e-005 0.7402
Mitigated
NaturalGas
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

5.0000e-005 0.0000 0.7358 0.7358 1.0000e005 Total 7.0000e- 005 6.8000e- 004 5.7000e- 004 0.0000 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e-005 5.0000e- 005 373
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e005

1.0000e005
Unmitigated 3.1900e003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005

0.0000 1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000
CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 3.1900e003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Exhaust Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total

2.0000e005 0.8100

6.0 Area Detail6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Total 0.8021 1.3000e004
Land Use kWh/yr t
on
MT/yr
General Office
Building
8668.8 0.8021 1.3000e004 2.0000e- 005 0.8100
Mitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
374
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005

0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e005
Total 3.1900e003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 005

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

2.8100e003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating

3.8000e004
N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 005

0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e005
Total 3.1900e003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e005 1.0000e- 005 Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 005

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

2.8100e003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating

3.8000e004
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Exhaust
PM2.5
SO2 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
375
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

1.0000e004 Total 0.1301 4.1800e- 0.2645 003
Land Use Mgal t
on
MT/yr
General Office
Building

0.127968 / 0.0784322

0.1301 4.1800e003 1.0000e- 004 0.2645

0.2645

7.2 Water by Land Use
Unmitigated
Indoor/Outd
oor Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated 0.1301 4.1800e003 1.0000e- 004
Category t
on
MT/yr
Mitigated 0.1301 4.1800e003 1.0000e- 004 0.2645

7.0 Water Detail7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
376
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Unmitigated 0.1360 8.0400e- 0.3369
003

0.0000
CO2e
ton
MT/yr
Mitigated 0.1360 8.0400e003 0.0000 0.3369
Total CO2 CH4 N2O

1.0000e004 0.2645

8.0 Waste Detail8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Category/Year
Total 0.1301 4.1800e003
Land Use Mgal t
on
MT/yr
General Office
Building

0.127968 / 0.0784322

0.1301 4.1800e003 1.0000e- 004 0.2645
Mitigated
Indoor/Outd
oor Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
377
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

0.0000 0.3369

9.0 Operational Offroad
Total 0.1360 8.0400e003
Land Use tons t
on
MT/yr
General Office
Building

0.67 0.1360 8.0400e003 0.0000 0.3369

0.0000 0.3369
Mitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Total 0.1360 8.0400e003
Land Use tons t
on
MT/yr
General Office
Building

0.67 0.1360 8.0400e003 0.0000 0.3369

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
378
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
Typical Construction Trailer - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day
379
Construction Activity PM2.5 (Exhaust) Construction Hours 1,368 on site 0.00783
off site 0.00012 Elapsed Hours 5,746
Demolition 0.00795
on site 0.00275 Variable Factor 4.20
off site 0.00000
Site Preparation (Site‐Wide) 0.00275 On‐Site Emissions 89.76 pounds on site 0.01030 40,714.42 grams
off site 0.00001 7.086E+00 grams/hours
Grading (Site‐Wide) 0.01031 1.968E‐03 grams/sec
on site 0.00164 6.350E‐04 grams/sec
off site 0.00003
Building Construction (Model Homes) 0.00167 Off‐Site Emissions 0.92 pounds on site 0.00505 417.30 grams
off site 0.00000 7.263E‐02 grams/hour
Paving (Roadways & Model Homes) 0.00505 2.018E‐05 grams/sec on site 0.00030
off site 0.00000
Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes) 0.00030 Mitigation Applied on site 0.01460 MM AIR‐1
off site 0.00029
Building Construction (Pre‐Receptors) 0.01489
on site 0.00241
off site 0.00001
Architectural Coating (Pre‐Receptors) 0.00242
Total On site 0.04488
Total Off site 0.00046
Total Construction Emissions 0.04534
Mitigation Description
BAAQMD Construction Dust Control Measures
(24 hours/day, 239 calendar days)
Project Construction DPM Emissions
(Development Before On‐Site Receptors [10/11/23 ‐ 6/5/24]) Annual Construction Emissions (tons) Exhaust PM2.5 AERMOD Inputs (8 hours/day, 171 workdays)
380
Roadway Segment
Length
(Miles) Proportion of Total
PM2.5 (Exhaust)
Emission Rate (g/sec)
Skelly Road 0.2 100.00% 4.664E‐07
Totals 0.2 100.00% 4.664E‐07
Phase Name Days
Daily Vendor Truck
Trips Total Vendor Truck Trips Total Hauling Truck Trips Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip
Length
Demolition 82 ‐ ‐ 224 7.3 20.0
Site Preparation (Site‐Wide) 82 ‐ ‐ ‐ 7.3 20.0Grading (Site‐Wide) 41 ‐ ‐ ‐ 7.3 20.0Building Construction (Model Homes) 10 19 190 ‐ 7.3 20.0 Paving (Roadways & Model Homes) 45 ‐ ‐ ‐ 7.3 20.0
Architectural Coating (Pavement & Model Homes) 10 ‐ ‐ ‐ 7.3 20.0 Building Construction (Pre‐Receptors) 89 19 1,691 ‐ 7.3 20.0 Architectural Coating (Pre‐Receptors) 79 ‐ ‐ ‐ 7.3 20.0 Totals 1,881 224
Total Vehicle Trips
Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT) Total Vehicle Trips
Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT)
Vendor Trucks 1,881.00 13,731.30 Vendor Trucks 1,881.00 376.20 Hauling Trucks 224 4,480 Hauling Trucks 224 45
Total VMT 18,211 Total VMT 421.00
Proportion of off‐site emissions occuring within 1,000 of project site: 2.3118% Diesel‐Fueled Vehicle Results AERMOD 1,000‐ft Radius Adjustment Off‐Site AERMOD Input Adjustments
Notes:1 Conversion factor of 453.592 grams/pound was used to convert daily emissions expressed in pounds to daily emissions expressed in grams.
2 Off‐site emissions used in the AERMOD air dispersion model were reduced to account for the proportion of emissions occurring within 1,000 feet of the project site.

Off‐Site Emission Adjustment for 1,000‐foot Radius of Project Site 381
Construction Activity PM2.5 (Exhaust) Construction Hours 840 on site 0.01730
off site 0.00006 Elapsed Hours 3,528
Building Construction (Post‐Receptors) 0.01736
on site 0.00320 Variable Factor 4.20
off site 0.00000
Architectural Coating (Post‐Receptors) 0.00320 On‐Site Emissions 41.00 pounds Total On site 0.02050 18,597.27 grams
Total Off site 0.00006 5.271E+00 grams/hours
Total Construction Emissions 0.02056 1.464E‐03 grams/sec

4.723E‐04 grams/sec
Off‐Site Emissions 0.12 pounds

54.43 grams

1.543E‐02 grams/hour4.286E‐06 grams/sec
Mitigation Applied
MM AIR‐1
(24 hours/day, 147 calendar days)
Project Construction DPM Emissions
(Development After On‐Site Receptors [6/6/24 ‐ 10/30/24]) Annual Construction Emissions (tons) Exhaust PM2.5 AERMOD Inputs (8 hours/day, 105 workdays)
Mitigation Description
BAAQMD Construction Dust Control Measures
382
Roadway Segment
Length
(Miles) Proportion of Total
PM2.5 (Exhaust)
Emission Rate (g/sec)
Skelly Road 0.2 100.00% 1.174E‐07Totals 0.2 100.00% 1.174E‐07 Phase Name Days
Daily Vendor Truck
Trips Total Vendor Truck Trips Total Hauling Truck Trips Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip
Length
Building Construction (Post‐Receptors) 18 19 342 ‐ 7.3 20.0 Architectural Coating (Post‐Receptors) 96 ‐ ‐ ‐ 7.3 20.0 Totals 342 ‐
Total Vehicle Trips
Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT) Total Vehicle Trips
Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT)
Vendor Trucks 342.00 2,496.60 Vendor Trucks 342.00 68.40 Hauling Trucks ‐ ‐ Hauling Trucks ‐ ‐ Total VMT 2,497 Total VMT 68.40
Proportion of off‐site emissions occuring within 1,000 of project site: 2.7397% Off‐Site AERMOD Input Adjustments
Notes:1 Conversion factor of 453.592 grams/pound was used to convert daily emissions expressed in pounds to daily emissions expressed in grams.
2 Off‐site emissions used in the AERMOD air dispersion model were reduced to account for the proportion of emissions occurring within 1,000 feet of the project site.

Off‐Site Emission Adjustment for 1,000‐foot Radius of Project Site Diesel‐Fueled Vehicle Results AERMOD 1,000‐ft Radius Adjustment 383
Permitted Stationary Sources within 1,000 feet of the Project Site:

Facility ID Name Address City St Zip County Cancer (per million) Hazard PM_2.5 (ug/m3) Type Latitude Longitude 1194* Pinole‐Hercules
WastewaterTreatment Plant
11 Tennent
Avenue
Pinole CA 94564 Contra Costa 41.37 0.08 0.22 Contact
BAAQMD

38.008 ‐122.293
110796 The Pump House 700
TennentAve
Pinole CA 94564 Contra Costa 16.27 0.07 0 Gas
DispensingFacility

38.005 ‐122.291
Notes:* This facility is misrepresented on the map shown above and is instead over 2,000 feet from the project site. Therefore, this facility was not included in the cumulative health impact analysis.

Facility ID 110796 Facility ID 110796
Distance to Off‐Site MIR (feet): 1,835
Distance to On‐Site MIR (feet): 1,415
Data provided by BAAQMD: Data adjusted for distance:

Cancer Risk 16.27 Cancer Risk 0.24
Hazard 0 Hazard 0PM2.5 (ug/m3) 0 PM2.5 (ug/m3) 0Source Type Gas Dispensing Facility Source Type Gas Dispensing Facility Existing Stationary Sources within 1,000 Feet of the Project Lat, Long Project Site: 38.008381, ‐122.288325
384
Skelly Road Residential Project ‐ Off‐Site Residential Cancer Risks Unmitigated Construction ‐ Cancer Risk Calculations
Residential MIR Coordinates: 562,470.86 meters easting and 4,207,142.06 meters northing.

Residential ‐ Infant (AERMOD Receptor ID: R‐18)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 3rd Trimester Site‐Wide & Phase 1 0.04431 1.1 361 0.25 350 25550 1 10 0.60 95th Percentile DBR 0 to 1 Phases 2 through 5 0.04431 1.1 1090 0.25 350 25550 1 10 1.82 0 to 1 Phases 2 through 5 0.04616 1.1 1090 0.50 350 25550 1 10 3.79 Total 6.21
Residential ‐ Child (AERMOD Receptor ID: R‐18)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 3 to 4 Site‐Wide & Phase 1 0.04431 1.1 631 0.50 350 25550 1 3 0.63 80th Percentile DBR 3 to 4 Phases 2 through 5 0.04616 1.1 631 0.50 350 25550 1 3 0.66 Total 1.29
Residential ‐ Adult (AERMOD Receptor ID: R‐18)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 16 to 17 Site‐Wide & Phase 1 0.04431 1.1 261 0.50 350 25550 0.73 1 0.06 80th Percentile DBR 16 to 17 Phases 2 through 5 0.04616 1.1 261 0.50 350 25550 0.73 1 0.07 Total 0.13
Maximum Total 6.21
Skelly Road Residential Project ‐ On‐Site Residential Cancer Risks Unmitigated Construction ‐ Cancer Risk Calculations
Residential MIR Coordinates: 562,414.89 meters easting and 4,207,033.80 meters northing.

Residential ‐ Infant (AERMOD Receptor ID: OSR‐1)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (70 years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 3rd Trimester Phases 2 through 5 0.06321 1.1 361 0.25 350 25550 1 10 0.86 95th Percentile DBR 0 to 1 Phases 2 through 5 0.06321 1.1 1090 0.25 350 25550 1 10 2.60 Total 3.46
Residential ‐ Child (AERMOD Receptor ID: OSR‐1)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (70 years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 3 to 4 Phases 2 through 5 0.06321 1.1 631 0.50 350 25550 1 3 0.90 80th Percentile DBR Total 0.90
Residential ‐ Adult (AERMOD Receptor ID: OSR‐1)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (70 years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 16 to 17 Phases 2 through 5 0.06321 1.1 261 0.50 350 25550 0.73 1 0.09 80th Percentile DBR Total 0.09
Maximum Total 3.46
385
Skelly Road Residential Project ‐ Daycare Cancer Risks (Loving Arms Family Daycare) Unmitigated Construction ‐ Cancer Risk Calculations
Daycare MIR Coordinates: 562,235.26 meters easting and 4,207,149.71 meters northing.

Daycare ‐ Infant (AERMOD Receptor ID: LAFD‐3)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (70 years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 3rd Trimester Site‐Wide & Phase 1 0.00341 1.1 361 0.25 350 25550 1 10 0.05 95th Percentile DBR 0 to 1 Phases 2 through 5 0.00341 1.1 1090 0.25 350 25550 1 10 0.14 0 to 1 Phases 2 through 5 0.00253 1.1 1090 0.50 350 25550 1 10 0.21 Total 0.39
Daycare ‐ Child (AERMOD Receptor ID: LAFD‐3)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (70 years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 3 to 4 Site‐Wide & Phase 1 0.00341 1.1 631 0.50 350 25550 1 3 0.05 80th Percentile DBR 3 to 4 Phases 2 through 5 0.00253 1.1 631 0.50 350 25550 1 3 0.04 Total 0.08
Daycare ‐ Adult (AERMOD Receptor ID: LAFD‐3)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (70 years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 16 to 17 Site‐Wide & Phase 1 0.00341 1.1 261 0.50 350 25550 1 1 0.01 80th Percentile DBR 16 to 17 Phases 2 through 5 0.00253 1.1 261 0.50 350 25550 1 1 0.00 Total 0.01
Maximum Total 0.39
386
Skelly Road Residential Project ‐ School Cancer Risks (La Casitas Bilingual Montessori School [ages 2.5+]) Unmitigated Construction ‐ Cancer Risk Calculations
School MIR Coordinates: 562,279.18 meters easting and 4,206,860.34 meters northing.

School ‐ Infant (AERMOD Receptor ID: LCBMS‐5)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (70 years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 2 to 3 Site‐Wide & Phase 1 0.00109 1.1 1090 0.50 250 25550 1 10 0.06 95th Percentile DBR 3 to 4 Phases 2 through 5 0.00103 1.1 1090 0.50 250 25550 1 10 0.06 Total 0.12
School ‐ Child (AERMOD Receptor ID: LCBMS‐5)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (70 years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 3 to 4 Site‐Wide & Phase 1 0.00109 1.1 861 0.50 250 25550 1 3 0.02 95th Percentile DBR 3 to 4 Phases 2 through 5 0.00103 1.1 861 0.50 250 25550 1 3 0.01 Total 0.03
School ‐ Adult (AERMOD Receptor ID: LCBMS‐5)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (70 years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 16 to 17 Site‐Wide & Phase 1 0.00109 1.1 335 0.50 250 25550 1 1 0.00 95th Percentile DBR 16 to 17 Phases 2 through 5 0.00103 1.1 335 0.50 250 25550 1 1 0.00 Total 0.00
Maximum Total 0.12
387
Skelly Road Residential Project ‐ Community Center Cancer Risks (Pinole Community Players [ages 6+]) Unmitigated Construction ‐ Cancer Risk Calculations
Community Center MIR Coordinates: 562,320.28 meters easting and 4,206,816.04 meters northing.

Community Center ‐ Child (AERMOD Receptor ID: PCP‐49)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (70 years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 6 to 7 Site‐Wide & Phase 1 0.00130 1.1 861 0.50 350 25550 1 3 0.03 95th Percentile DBR 6 to 7 Phases 2 through 5 0.00126 1.1 861 0.50 350 25550 1 3 0.02 Total 0.05
Community Center ‐ Adult (AERMOD Receptor ID: PCP‐49)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (70 years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 16 to 17 Site‐Wide & Phase 1 0.00130 1.1 335 0.50 350 25550 1 1 0.00 95th Percentile DBR 16 to 17 Phases 2 through 5 0.00126 1.1 335 0.50 350 25550 1 1 0.00 Total 0.01
Maximum Total 0.05
Skelly Road Residential Project ‐ Community Center Cancer Risks (Pinole Senior Center [ages 55+]) Unmitigated Construction ‐ Cancer Risk Calculations
Community Center MIR Coordinates: 562,330.42 meters easting and 4,206,909.56 meters northing.

Community Center ‐ Adult (AERMOD Receptor ID: PSC‐2)
Annual
DPM CPF DBR ED EF AT TAH Risk
Year Activity (ug/m3) (mg/kg‐day)^‐1 (l/kg‐day) (years) (days) (70 years) (%) ASF (risk/million) 55 to 56 Site‐Wide & Phase 1 0.00313 1.1 290 0.50 350 25550 1 1 0.01 95th Percentile DBR 55 to 56 Phases 2 through 5 0.00364 1.1 290 0.50 350 25550 1 1 0.01 Total 0.01
Maximum Total 0.01
388
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
Roadway Screening Analysis Calculator
County specific tables containing estimates of risk and hazard impacts from roadways in the Bay Area.• Roadway Direction: Select the orientation that best matches the roadway. If the roadway orientation is neither clearly north-south nor east-west, use the highest values predicted from either orientation.• Annual Average Daily Traffic (ADT): Enter the annual average daily traffic on the roadway. These data may be collected from the city or the county (if the area is unincorporated).Notes and References listed below the Search BoxesSearch Parameters Results County Contra Costa CountyRoadway Direction EAST-WEST DIRECTIONAL ROADWAYSide of the Roadway PM2.5 annual averageDistance from Roadway 270 feet (μg/m3) Cancer Risk
20,900 (per million)
.

Data for Contra Costa County based on meteorological data collected from Chevron Refinery in 2005 Notes and References:1. Emissions were developed using EMFAC2011 for fleet mix in 2014 assuming 10,000 AADT and includes impacts from diesel and gasoline vehicle exhaust, brake and tire wear, and resuspended dust.2. Roadways were modeled using CALINE4 air dispersion model assuming a source length of one kilometer. Meteorological data used to estimate the screening values are noted at the bottom of the “Re

3. Cancer risks were estimated for 70 year lifetime exposure starting in 2014 that includes sensitivity values for early life exposures and OEHHA toxicity values adopted in 2013.

Adjustment factor to account for updated OEHHA Guidance: 1.3744 Adjusted Cancer Risk: 2.84
INSTRUCTIONS:

Annual Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 2.07

0.052
Input the site-specific characteristics of your project by using the drop down menu in the “Search Parameter” box. We recommend that this analysis be used for roadways with 10,000 AADT and above.• County: Select the County where the project is located. The calculator is only applicable for projects within the nine Bay Area counties.• Side of the Roadway: Identify on which side of the roadway the project is located.• Distance from Roadway: Enter the distance in feet from the nearest edge of the roadway to the project site. The calculator estimates values for distances greater than 10feet and less than 1000 feet. For distances greater than 1000 feet, the user can choose to extrapolate values using a distribution curve or apply 1000 feet values for greater distances. When the user has completed the data entries, the screening level PM2.5 annual average concentration and the cancer risk results will appear in the Results Box on the right. Please note that the roadway tool is not applicable for California State Highways and the District refers the user to the Highway Screening Analysis Tool at: http://www.baaqmd.gov/Divisions/Planningand-Research/CEQA-GUIDELINES/Tools-and-Methodology.aspx 389
Control Pathway
AERMOD
Flat & Elevated Terrain
No Stack-Tip Downwash (NOSTD)
Run in Screening Mode
Conversion of NOx to NO2 (OLM or PVMRM)
No Checks for Non-Sequential Met Data
Fast All Sources (FASTALL)
Fast Area Sources (FASTAREA)
Optimized Area Source Plume Depletion
Gas Deposition
BETA Options:

Capped and Horizontal Stack Releases
Adjusted Friction Velocity (u*) in AERMET (ADJ_U*)
Low Wind Options
SCIM (Sampled Chronological Input Model)
Ignore Urban Night / Daytime Transition (NOURBTRAN)
Total Deposition (Dry & Wet)
Dry Deposition
Wet Deposition
Output Type
Concentration
Regulatory Default Non-Default Options
Dispersion Options
21180006 Skelly Residential Project
Site-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development
Titles
Dispersion Options
Population:

Name (Optional):

Roughness Length:

Plume Depletion
Dry Removal
Wet Removal
Output Warnings
No Output Warnings
Non-fatal Warnings for Non-sequential Met Data
Dispersion Coefficient
Urban
Pollutant / Averaging Time / Terrain Options
TG: Meters
RE: Meters
1 2 3 4 6 8 12 24 Flat Elevated SO: Meters
Hours Terrain Height Options
Averaging Time Options
Yes No
Pollutant Type Exponential Decay
Month Period Annual
PM2.5
Flagpole Receptors
Yes No
Default Height = 1.50 m
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software CO - 1 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 390
Control Pathway
AERMOD
Optional Files
Re-Start File Init File Multi-Year Analyses Event Input File Error Listing File Detailed Error Listing File
Filename: 21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.err
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software CO - 2 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 391
AERMOD View - Lakes Environmental Software C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc SCALE:

0.5 km
1:19,268
PROJECT NO.:

DATE:
4/12/2022
MODELER:

COMPANY NAME:

PROJECT TITLE: COMMENTS:
21180006 Skelly Residential Project
Site-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development
SOURCES:

RECEPTORS:
2291
OUTPUT TYPE:

Concentration
MAX:

8.9E-02 ug/m^3
392
Meteorology Pathway
AERMOD
Met Input Data
Surface Met Data
Profile Met Data
C:\Users\lpark\OneDrive - ADEC Solutions USA, Inc\Desktop\01. Project Files\2118.0006 Skelly Rd Residenti Default AERMET format
Filename:

Format Type:

Filename:

Format Type:

C:\Users\lpark\OneDrive - ADEC Solutions USA, Inc\Desktop\01. Project Files\2118.0006 Skelly Rd Residenti Potential Temperature Profile
Base Elevation above MSL (for Primary Met Tower): 4.30 [m] Wind Direction
Rotation Adjustment [deg]:

Meteorological Station Data
Upper Air
Station No. Year Station Name
Surface
Stations X Coordinate [m] Y Coordinate [m]
2009 Napa County Airport
2009 OAKLAND/WSO AP
Default AERMET format
Wind Speed
Wind Speeds are Vector Mean (Not Scalar Means)
Data Period
Start Date: 1/1/2009 Start Hour: 1 End Date: 1/2/2014 End Hour: 24 Data Period to Process

10.8 8.23

5.14 3.09

1.54 No Upper Bound
Wind Speed [m/s] Stability Category Wind Speed [m/s]
F
E
D
C
B
A
Stability Category
Wind Speed Categories
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software ME - 1 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 393
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
Receptor Networks
Note: Terrain Elavations and Flagpole Heights for Network Grids are in Page RE2 - 1 (If applicable) Generated Discrete Receptors for Multi-Tier (Risk) Grid and Receptor Locations for Fenceline Grid are in Page RE3 - 1 (If applicable) Discrete Receptors
Discrete Cartesian Receptors
X-Coordinate [m] Y-Coordinate [m] Terrain Elevations
Flagpole Heights [m]
(Optional)
Record
Number
Group Name
(Optional)
1 562293.81 4207045.66 Res 2.33 1.50
2 562305.03 4207059.24 Res 2.40 1.50
3 562279.13 4207106.06 Res 2.44 1.50
4 562296.00 4207111.74 Res 2.39 1.50
5 562304.79 4207117.42 Res 2.80 1.50
6 562322.17 4207119.32 Res 3.52 1.50
7 562333.83 4207123.38 Res 3.89 1.50
8 562346.05 4207130.57 Res 4.17 1.50
9 562359.62 4207135.24 Res 4.36 1.50
10 562372.97 4207141.03 Res 4.53 1.50
11 562386.19 4207148.75 Res 4.70 1.50
12 562400.36 4207152.13 Res 4.82 1.50
13 562410.20 4207156.25 Res 4.91 1.50
14 562425.95 4207163.76 Res 5.16 1.50
15 562439.64 4207168.84 Res 5.52 1.50
16 562448.45 4207177.65 Res 6.40 1.50
17 562457.39 4207154.50 Res 5.95 1.50
18 562470.86 4207142.06 Res 6.55 1.50
19 562483.62 4207129.91 Res 7.26 1.50
20 562494.77 4207113.09 Res 8.05 1.50
21 562502.01 4207095.70 Res 9.33 1.50
22 562513.36 4207078.68 Res 10.75 1.50
23 562522.88 4207065.10 Res 12.32 1.50
24 562538.46 4207021.31 Res 15.95 1.50
25 562556.90 4207027.02 Res 17.04 1.50
26 562572.28 4207035.22 Res 17.67 1.50
27 562588.97 4207044.15 Res 20.29 1.50
28 562607.12 4207051.62 Res 24.74 1.50
29 562625.42 4207064.35 Res 26.31 1.50
30 562637.06 4207077.67 Res 26.83 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 1 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 394
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
31 562649.81 4207092.83 Res 27.36 1.50
32 562656.70 4207112.98 Res 27.08 1.50
33 562662.56 4207131.75 Res 27.73 1.50
34 562660.84 4207155.40 Res 28.13 1.50
35 562656.88 4207175.55 Res 28.69 1.50
36 562647.75 4207194.67 Res 28.39 1.50
37 562640.08 4207211.01 Res 27.82 1.50
38 562633.98 4207228.74 Res 27.25 1.50
39 562625.49 4207246.31 Res 26.26 1.50
40 562566.88 4207085.38 Res 14.28 1.50
41 562557.55 4207100.07 Res 12.93 1.50
42 562548.46 4207113.39 Res 12.76 1.50
43 562533.15 4207129.32 Res 12.53 1.50
44 562592.52 4207103.18 Res 19.23 1.50
45 562607.46 4207116.87 Res 20.81 1.50
46 562611.64 4207140.35 Res 21.80 1.50
47 562582.97 4207146.17 Res 18.36 1.50
48 562609.42 4207160.03 Res 22.13 1.50
49 562564.52 4207164.03 Res 16.81 1.50
50 562559.40 4207183.06 Res 16.77 1.50
51 562572.72 4207206.93 Res 18.65 1.50
52 562591.23 4207215.76 Res 21.15 1.50
53 562580.09 4207241.29 Res 21.94 1.50
54 562576.40 4207260.81 Res 21.15 1.50
55 562577.58 4207278.68 Res 19.68 1.50
56 562579.59 4207299.32 Res 15.88 1.50
57 562582.23 4207316.96 Res 14.03 1.50
58 562524.48 4207146.24 Res 12.34 1.50
59 562512.14 4207161.68 Res 11.32 1.50
60 562502.60 4207175.99 Res 10.94 1.50
61 562490.25 4207188.62 Res 11.09 1.50
62 562479.59 4207204.05 Res 11.34 1.50
63 562465.56 4207221.02 Res 10.64 1.50
64 562425.96 4207214.34 Res 5.86 1.50
65 562412.61 4207209.09 Res 5.16 1.50
66 562402.35 4207205.04 Res 4.97 1.50
67 562389.23 4207197.88 Res 4.73 1.50
68 562357.51 4207185.00 Res 4.28 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 2 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 395
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
69 562347.73 4207180.94 Res 4.13 1.50
70 562333.42 4207174.50 Res 3.85 1.50
71 562319.56 4207165.77 Res 3.47 1.50
72 562307.80 4207162.73 Res 3.03 1.50
73 562295.23 4207156.45 Res 2.48 1.50
74 562281.85 4207150.97 Res 2.35 1.50
75 562269.68 4207148.13 Res 2.43 1.50
76 562255.69 4207142.05 Res 2.58 1.50
77 562230.12 4206977.87 Res 4.33 1.50
78 562241.11 4206995.30 Res 4.08 1.50
79 562233.34 4207015.08 Res 4.02 1.50
80 562216.64 4207027.09 Res 4.14 1.50
81 562208.44 4207038.37 Res 4.13 1.50
82 562211.07 4206975.81 Res 4.60 1.50
83 562444.86 4206878.58 Res 10.34 1.50
84 562434.77 4206866.25 Res 9.91 1.50
85 562423.69 4206856.66 Res 9.42 1.50
86 562419.10 4206817.49 Res 8.63 1.50
87 562404.28 4206836.97 Res 8.51 1.50
88 562395.83 4206830.42 Res 8.11 1.50
89 562387.09 4206788.03 Res 6.39 1.50
90 562371.27 4206807.34 Res 5.70 1.50
91 562366.91 4206816.18 Res 5.86 1.50
92 562559.49 4206885.66 Res 16.49 1.50
93 562548.04 4206874.69 Res 14.22 1.50
94 562626.84 4206905.90 Res 29.57 1.50
95 562663.83 4206894.92 Res 32.30 1.50
96 562567.19 4206858.13 Res 16.23 1.50
97 562521.71 4206853.33 Res 12.07 1.50
98 562510.24 4206845.68 Res 11.70 1.50
99 562103.04 4206790.15 School 10.69 1.50
100 562122.03 4206757.18 School 6.68 1.50
101 562190.19 4206791.82 School 6.10 1.50
102 562183.24 4206803.74 School 6.14 1.50
103 562279.18 4206860.34 School 4.74 1.50
104 562263.31 4206884.83 School 4.63 1.50
105 562230.89 4206906.39 School 4.94 1.50
106 562192.97 4206912.57 School 5.30 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 3 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 396
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
107 562157.64 4206906.27 School 5.52 1.50
108 562134.18 4206893.22 School 6.06 1.50
109 562174.91 4206820.05 School 6.14 1.50
110 562105.41 4206786.03 School 9.69 1.50
111 562107.79 4206781.91 School 8.83 1.50
112 562110.16 4206777.79 School 8.11 1.50
113 562112.54 4206773.67 School 7.60 1.50
114 562114.91 4206769.54 School 7.28 1.50
115 562117.28 4206765.42 School 7.03 1.50
116 562119.66 4206761.30 School 6.82 1.50
117 562126.29 4206759.35 School 6.60 1.50
118 562130.55 4206761.51 School 6.57 1.50
119 562134.81 4206763.68 School 6.54 1.50
120 562139.07 4206765.84 School 6.51 1.50
121 562143.33 4206768.01 School 6.48 1.50
122 562147.59 4206770.17 School 6.44 1.50
123 562151.85 4206772.34 School 6.40 1.50
124 562156.11 4206774.50 School 6.36 1.50
125 562160.37 4206776.67 School 6.32 1.50
126 562164.63 4206778.83 School 6.28 1.50
127 562168.89 4206781.00 School 6.23 1.50
128 562173.15 4206783.16 School 6.19 1.50
129 562177.41 4206785.33 School 6.17 1.50
130 562181.67 4206787.49 School 6.15 1.50
131 562185.93 4206789.66 School 6.12 1.50
132 562187.87 4206795.79 School 6.11 1.50
133 562185.56 4206799.77 School 6.12 1.50
134 562187.41 4206806.20 School 6.11 1.50
135 562191.58 4206808.66 School 6.07 1.50
136 562195.75 4206811.12 School 6.02 1.50
137 562199.93 4206813.58 School 5.98 1.50
138 562204.10 4206816.04 School 5.95 1.50
139 562208.27 4206818.51 School 5.91 1.50
140 562212.44 4206820.97 School 5.88 1.50
141 562216.61 4206823.43 School 5.85 1.50
142 562220.78 4206825.89 School 5.83 1.50
143 562224.95 4206828.35 School 5.79 1.50
144 562229.12 4206830.81 School 5.76 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 4 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 397
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
145 562233.30 4206833.27 School 5.73 1.50
146 562237.47 4206835.73 School 5.70 1.50
147 562241.64 4206838.19 School 5.67 1.50
148 562245.81 4206840.65 School 5.62 1.50
149 562249.98 4206843.11 School 5.57 1.50
150 562254.15 4206845.58 School 5.51 1.50
151 562258.32 4206848.04 School 5.43 1.50
152 562262.49 4206850.50 School 5.35 1.50
153 562266.67 4206852.96 School 5.25 1.50
154 562270.84 4206855.42 School 5.13 1.50
155 562275.01 4206857.88 School 4.95 1.50
156 562276.54 4206864.42 School 4.72 1.50
157 562273.89 4206868.50 School 4.72 1.50
158 562271.25 4206872.59 School 4.73 1.50
159 562268.60 4206876.67 School 4.71 1.50
160 562265.96 4206880.75 School 4.67 1.50
161 562259.26 4206887.53 School 4.66 1.50
162 562255.21 4206890.22 School 4.71 1.50
163 562251.15 4206892.92 School 4.76 1.50
164 562247.10 4206895.61 School 4.81 1.50
165 562243.05 4206898.31 School 4.84 1.50
166 562239.00 4206901.00 School 4.86 1.50
167 562234.94 4206903.70 School 4.90 1.50
168 562226.15 4206907.16 School 5.02 1.50
169 562221.41 4206907.94 School 5.10 1.50
170 562216.67 4206908.71 School 5.14 1.50
171 562211.93 4206909.48 School 5.18 1.50
172 562207.19 4206910.25 School 5.21 1.50
173 562202.45 4206911.03 School 5.24 1.50
174 562197.71 4206911.80 School 5.27 1.50
175 562188.55 4206911.78 School 5.32 1.50
176 562184.14 4206911.00 School 5.34 1.50
177 562179.72 4206910.21 School 5.36 1.50
178 562175.31 4206909.42 School 5.38 1.50
179 562170.89 4206908.63 School 5.41 1.50
180 562166.47 4206907.85 School 5.44 1.50
181 562162.06 4206907.06 School 5.48 1.50
182 562153.73 4206904.10 School 5.57 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 5 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 398
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
183 562149.82 4206901.92 School 5.63 1.50
184 562145.91 4206899.75 School 5.70 1.50
185 562142.00 4206897.57 School 5.82 1.50
186 562138.09 4206895.40 School 5.94 1.50
187 562136.58 4206888.92 School 6.07 1.50
188 562138.97 4206884.61 School 6.08 1.50
189 562141.37 4206880.31 School 6.10 1.50
190 562143.76 4206876.00 School 6.12 1.50
191 562146.16 4206871.70 School 6.14 1.50
192 562148.56 4206867.40 School 6.16 1.50
193 562150.95 4206863.09 School 6.17 1.50
194 562153.35 4206858.79 School 6.18 1.50
195 562155.74 4206854.48 School 6.19 1.50
196 562158.14 4206850.18 School 6.20 1.50
197 562160.53 4206845.88 School 6.20 1.50
198 562162.93 4206841.57 School 6.21 1.50
199 562165.33 4206837.27 School 6.21 1.50
200 562167.72 4206832.96 School 6.19 1.50
201 562170.12 4206828.66 School 6.16 1.50
202 562172.51 4206824.35 School 6.14 1.50
203 562170.42 4206818.18 School 6.19 1.50
204 562165.93 4206816.31 School 6.27 1.50
205 562161.43 4206814.44 School 6.34 1.50
206 562156.94 4206812.58 School 6.41 1.50
207 562152.45 4206810.71 School 6.48 1.50
208 562147.96 4206808.84 School 6.55 1.50
209 562143.47 4206806.97 School 6.59 1.50
210 562138.98 4206805.10 School 6.62 1.50
211 562134.48 4206803.23 School 6.65 1.50
212 562129.99 4206801.36 School 6.68 1.50
213 562125.50 4206799.49 School 6.71 1.50
214 562121.01 4206797.63 School 7.34 1.50
215 562116.52 4206795.76 School 8.35 1.50
216 562112.02 4206793.89 School 9.25 1.50
217 562107.53 4206792.02 School 10.03 1.50
218 562242.15 4207189.12 Daycare 2.45 1.50
219 562255.39 4207158.50 Daycare 2.50 1.50
220 562235.26 4207149.71 Daycare 2.74 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 6 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 399
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
221 562227.31 4207163.59 Daycare 2.73 1.50
222 562225.09 4207175.24 Daycare 2.68 1.50
223 562229.54 4207184.67 Daycare 2.58 1.50
224 562244.04 4207184.75 Daycare 2.46 1.50
225 562245.93 4207180.37 Daycare 2.46 1.50
226 562247.82 4207176.00 Daycare 2.47 1.50
227 562249.72 4207171.62 Daycare 2.48 1.50
228 562251.61 4207167.25 Daycare 2.49 1.50
229 562253.50 4207162.87 Daycare 2.50 1.50
230 562251.36 4207156.74 Daycare 2.55 1.50
231 562247.34 4207154.98 Daycare 2.59 1.50
232 562243.31 4207153.23 Daycare 2.64 1.50
233 562239.29 4207151.47 Daycare 2.69 1.50
234 562233.27 4207153.18 Daycare 2.74 1.50
235 562231.29 4207156.65 Daycare 2.74 1.50
236 562229.30 4207160.12 Daycare 2.73 1.50
237 562226.57 4207167.47 Daycare 2.71 1.50
238 562225.83 4207171.36 Daycare 2.70 1.50
239 562226.57 4207178.38 Daycare 2.64 1.50
240 562228.06 4207181.53 Daycare 2.61 1.50
241 562233.74 4207186.15 Daycare 2.54 1.50
242 562237.95 4207187.64 Daycare 2.49 1.50
243 562185.94 4206803.18 School 6.12 1.50
244 562213.54 4206752.30 School 6.24 1.50
245 562243.21 4206767.30 School 6.11 1.50
246 562256.49 4206746.43 School 6.42 1.50
247 562333.43 4206801.29 School 4.81 1.50
248 562280.82 4206860.28 School 4.69 1.50
249 562188.24 4206798.94 School 6.11 1.50
250 562190.54 4206794.70 School 6.10 1.50
251 562192.84 4206790.46 School 6.09 1.50
252 562195.14 4206786.22 School 6.08 1.50
253 562197.44 4206781.98 School 6.07 1.50
254 562199.74 4206777.74 School 6.08 1.50
255 562202.04 4206773.50 School 6.10 1.50
256 562204.34 4206769.26 School 6.13 1.50
257 562206.64 4206765.02 School 6.16 1.50
258 562208.94 4206760.78 School 6.19 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 7 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 400
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
259 562211.24 4206756.54 School 6.21 1.50
260 562217.78 4206754.44 School 6.23 1.50
261 562222.02 4206756.59 School 6.22 1.50
262 562226.26 4206758.73 School 6.20 1.50
263 562230.49 4206760.87 School 6.19 1.50
264 562234.73 4206763.01 School 6.16 1.50
265 562238.97 4206765.16 School 6.14 1.50
266 562245.87 4206763.13 School 6.16 1.50
267 562248.52 4206758.95 School 6.22 1.50
268 562251.18 4206754.78 School 6.28 1.50
269 562253.83 4206750.60 School 6.35 1.50
270 562260.54 4206749.32 School 6.39 1.50
271 562264.59 4206752.21 School 6.36 1.50
272 562268.64 4206755.09 School 6.33 1.50
273 562272.69 4206757.98 School 6.30 1.50
274 562276.74 4206760.87 School 6.27 1.50
275 562280.79 4206763.75 School 6.24 1.50
276 562284.84 4206766.64 School 6.20 1.50
277 562288.89 4206769.53 School 6.17 1.50
278 562292.94 4206772.42 School 6.14 1.50
279 562296.98 4206775.30 School 6.10 1.50
280 562301.03 4206778.19 School 6.04 1.50
281 562305.08 4206781.08 School 5.98 1.50
282 562309.13 4206783.97 School 5.92 1.50
283 562313.18 4206786.85 School 5.85 1.50
284 562317.23 4206789.74 School 5.78 1.50
285 562321.28 4206792.63 School 5.62 1.50
286 562325.33 4206795.52 School 5.39 1.50
287 562329.38 4206798.40 School 5.12 1.50
288 562330.14 4206804.98 School 4.82 1.50
289 562326.85 4206808.66 School 4.87 1.50
290 562323.57 4206812.35 School 4.93 1.50
291 562320.28 4206816.04 School 4.92 1.50
292 562316.99 4206819.72 School 4.83 1.50
293 562313.70 4206823.41 School 4.76 1.50
294 562310.41 4206827.10 School 4.73 1.50
295 562307.13 4206830.79 School 4.74 1.50
296 562303.84 4206834.47 School 4.79 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 8 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 401
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
297 562300.55 4206838.16 School 4.87 1.50
298 562297.26 4206841.85 School 4.93 1.50
299 562293.97 4206845.53 School 4.92 1.50
300 562290.68 4206849.22 School 4.83 1.50
301 562287.40 4206852.91 School 4.76 1.50
302 562284.11 4206856.59 School 4.71 1.50
303 562276.69 4206857.80 School 4.90 1.50
304 562272.57 4206855.32 School 5.08 1.50
305 562268.44 4206852.83 School 5.23 1.50
306 562264.32 4206850.35 School 5.33 1.50
307 562260.19 4206847.87 School 5.41 1.50
308 562256.07 4206845.38 School 5.49 1.50
309 562251.94 4206842.90 School 5.56 1.50
310 562247.82 4206840.42 School 5.61 1.50
311 562243.69 4206837.94 School 5.66 1.50
312 562239.57 4206835.45 School 5.69 1.50
313 562235.44 4206832.97 School 5.72 1.50
314 562231.32 4206830.49 School 5.75 1.50
315 562227.19 4206828.01 School 5.78 1.50
316 562223.07 4206825.52 School 5.82 1.50
317 562218.94 4206823.04 School 5.85 1.50
318 562214.82 4206820.56 School 5.87 1.50
319 562210.69 4206818.08 School 5.91 1.50
320 562206.57 4206815.59 School 5.94 1.50
321 562202.44 4206813.11 School 5.97 1.50
322 562198.32 4206810.63 School 6.01 1.50
323 562194.19 4206808.15 School 6.05 1.50
324 562190.07 4206805.66 School 6.09 1.50
325 562305.93 4206897.31 5.25 1.50
326 562330.42 4206909.56 7.31 1.50
327 562362.85 4206855.73 7.44 1.50
328 562343.02 4206842.45 5.25 1.50
329 562310.01 4206899.35 5.80 1.50
330 562314.09 4206901.39 6.34 1.50
331 562318.18 4206903.44 6.82 1.50
332 562322.26 4206905.48 7.00 1.50
333 562326.34 4206907.52 7.16 1.50
334 562332.91 4206905.42 7.36 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 9 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 402
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
335 562335.41 4206901.28 7.44 1.50
336 562337.90 4206897.14 7.45 1.50
337 562340.40 4206893.00 7.49 1.50
338 562342.89 4206888.86 7.55 1.50
339 562345.39 4206884.72 7.57 1.50
340 562347.88 4206880.58 7.58 1.50
341 562350.38 4206876.43 7.59 1.50
342 562352.87 4206872.29 7.60 1.50
343 562355.37 4206868.15 7.56 1.50
344 562357.86 4206864.01 7.47 1.50
345 562360.36 4206859.87 7.43 1.50
346 562358.88 4206853.07 7.09 1.50
347 562354.92 4206850.42 6.71 1.50
348 562350.95 4206847.76 6.27 1.50
349 562346.99 4206845.11 5.79 1.50
350 562340.37 4206846.37 5.38 1.50
351 562337.72 4206850.29 5.48 1.50
352 562335.07 4206854.21 5.53 1.50
353 562332.42 4206858.12 5.53 1.50
354 562329.77 4206862.04 5.50 1.50
355 562327.12 4206865.96 5.41 1.50
356 562324.48 4206869.88 5.29 1.50
357 562321.83 4206873.80 5.25 1.50
358 562319.18 4206877.72 5.26 1.50
359 562316.53 4206881.64 5.34 1.50
360 562313.88 4206885.55 5.40 1.50
361 562311.23 4206889.47 5.41 1.50
362 562308.58 4206893.39 5.36 1.50
363 562303.47 4206592.57 9.32 1.50
364 562344.28 4206615.31 8.59 1.50
365 562373.32 4206568.00 8.40 1.50
366 562334.13 4206544.65 9.25 1.50
367 562307.55 4206594.84 9.25 1.50
368 562311.63 4206597.12 9.18 1.50
369 562315.71 4206599.39 9.11 1.50
370 562319.79 4206601.67 9.04 1.50
371 562323.88 4206603.94 8.96 1.50
372 562327.96 4206606.21 8.88 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 10 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 403
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
373 562332.04 4206608.49 8.80 1.50
374 562336.12 4206610.76 8.73 1.50
375 562340.20 4206613.04 8.66 1.50
376 562346.70 4206611.37 8.59 1.50
377 562349.12 4206607.43 8.59 1.50
378 562351.54 4206603.48 8.58 1.50
379 562353.96 4206599.54 8.58 1.50
380 562356.38 4206595.60 8.57 1.50
381 562358.80 4206591.66 8.56 1.50
382 562361.22 4206587.71 8.54 1.50
383 562363.64 4206583.77 8.52 1.50
384 562366.06 4206579.83 8.49 1.50
385 562368.48 4206575.89 8.46 1.50
386 562370.90 4206571.94 8.43 1.50
387 562369.40 4206565.67 8.49 1.50
388 562365.48 4206563.33 8.58 1.50
389 562361.56 4206561.00 8.67 1.50
390 562357.64 4206558.66 8.76 1.50
391 562353.73 4206556.33 8.84 1.50
392 562349.81 4206553.99 8.93 1.50
393 562345.89 4206551.66 9.01 1.50
394 562341.97 4206549.32 9.09 1.50
395 562338.05 4206546.99 9.17 1.50
396 562331.58 4206548.64 9.28 1.50
397 562329.02 4206552.64 9.31 1.50
398 562326.47 4206556.63 9.34 1.50
399 562323.91 4206560.62 9.36 1.50
400 562321.36 4206564.62 9.38 1.50
401 562318.80 4206568.61 9.38 1.50
402 562316.25 4206572.60 9.38 1.50
403 562313.69 4206576.60 9.37 1.50
404 562311.14 4206580.59 9.36 1.50
405 562308.58 4206584.58 9.35 1.50
406 562306.03 4206588.58 9.34 1.50
Plant Boundary Receptors
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 11 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 404
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
Receptor Groups
Group ID Group Description
Record
Number
1 FENCEPRI Cartesian plant boundary Primary Receptors
2 FENCEINT Cartesian plant boundary Intermediate Receptors 3 Res
4 School
5 Daycare
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 12 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 405
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.01444 ug/m^3 R-1 562293.81 4207045.66 2.33 1.50 2.33 PERIOD 0.01762 ug/m^3 R-2 562305.03 4207059.24 2.40 1.50 2.40 PERIOD 0.00946 ug/m^3 R-3 562279.13 4207106.06 2.44 1.50 2.44 PERIOD 0.01054 ug/m^3 R-4 562296.00 4207111.74 2.39 1.50 2.39 PERIOD 0.01107 ug/m^3 R-5 562304.79 4207117.42 2.80 1.50 2.80 PERIOD 0.01947 ug/m^3 R-6 562322.17 4207119.32 3.52 1.50 3.52 PERIOD 0.02536 ug/m^3 R-7 562333.83 4207123.38 3.89 1.50 3.89 PERIOD 0.02793 ug/m^3 R-8 562346.05 4207130.57 4.17 1.50 4.17 PERIOD 0.03219 ug/m^3 R-9 562359.62 4207135.24 4.36 1.50 4.36 PERIOD 0.03439 ug/m^3 R-10 562372.97 4207141.03 4.53 1.50 4.53 PERIOD 0.03376 ug/m^3 R-11 562386.19 4207148.75 4.70 1.50 4.70 PERIOD 0.03757 ug/m^3 R-12 562400.36 4207152.13 4.82 1.50 4.82 PERIOD 0.03732 ug/m^3 R-13 562410.20 4207156.25 4.91 1.50 30.41 PERIOD 0.03502 ug/m^3 R-14 562425.95 4207163.76 5.16 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.03327 ug/m^3 R-15 562439.64 4207168.84 5.52 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.02876 ug/m^3 R-16 562448.45 4207177.65 6.40 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.04165 ug/m^3 R-17 562457.39 4207154.50 5.95 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.04431 ug/m^3 R-18 562470.86 4207142.06 6.55 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.04235 ug/m^3 R-19 562483.62 4207129.91 7.26 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.04172 ug/m^3 R-20 562494.77 4207113.09 8.05 1.50 32.49 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 1 of 21
406
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.04033 ug/m^3 R-21 562502.01 4207095.70 9.33 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.03526 ug/m^3 R-22 562513.36 4207078.68 10.75 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.02911 ug/m^3 R-23 562522.88 4207065.10 12.32 1.50 31.59 PERIOD 0.01498 ug/m^3 R-24 562538.46 4207021.31 15.95 1.50 31.53 PERIOD 0.01109 ug/m^3 R-25 562556.90 4207027.02 17.04 1.50 27.75 PERIOD 0.00914 ug/m^3 R-26 562572.28 4207035.22 17.67 1.50 30.32 PERIOD 0.00725 ug/m^3 R-27 562588.97 4207044.15 20.29 1.50 27.75 PERIOD 0.00556 ug/m^3 R-28 562607.12 4207051.62 24.74 1.50 25.65 PERIOD 0.00476 ug/m^3 R-29 562625.42 4207064.35 26.31 1.50 26.31 PERIOD 0.00442 ug/m^3 R-30 562637.06 4207077.67 26.83 1.50 26.83 PERIOD 0.00406 ug/m^3 R-31 562649.81 4207092.83 27.36 1.50 27.36 PERIOD 0.00396 ug/m^3 R-32 562656.70 4207112.98 27.08 1.50 27.08 PERIOD 0.00379 ug/m^3 R-33 562662.56 4207131.75 27.73 1.50 30.36 PERIOD 0.00386 ug/m^3 R-34 562660.84 4207155.39 28.13 1.50 31.48 PERIOD 0.00396 ug/m^3 R-35 562656.88 4207175.55 28.69 1.50 31.48 PERIOD 0.00428 ug/m^3 R-36 562647.75 4207194.67 28.39 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.00456 ug/m^3 R-37 562640.08 4207211.01 27.82 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.00476 ug/m^3 R-38 562633.98 4207228.74 27.25 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.00504 ug/m^3 R-39 562625.49 4207246.31 26.26 1.50 32.37 PERIOD 0.01347 ug/m^3 R-40 562566.88 4207085.38 14.28 1.50 32.49 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 2 of 21
407
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.01616 ug/m^3 R-41 562557.55 4207100.07 12.93 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.01813 ug/m^3 R-42 562548.46 4207113.39 12.76 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.02101 ug/m^3 R-43 562533.15 4207129.32 12.53 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.00863 ug/m^3 R-44 562592.52 4207103.18 19.23 1.50 31.64 PERIOD 0.00711 ug/m^3 R-45 562607.46 4207116.87 20.81 1.50 31.64 PERIOD 0.00669 ug/m^3 R-46 562611.64 4207140.35 21.80 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.00968 ug/m^3 R-47 562582.97 4207146.17 18.36 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.00673 ug/m^3 R-48 562609.42 4207160.03 22.13 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.01174 ug/m^3 R-49 562564.52 4207164.03 16.81 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.01162 ug/m^3 R-50 562559.40 4207183.06 16.77 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.00925 ug/m^3 R-51 562572.72 4207206.93 18.65 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.00744 ug/m^3 R-52 562591.23 4207215.76 21.15 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.00746 ug/m^3 R-53 562580.09 4207241.29 21.94 1.50 32.37 PERIOD 0.00724 ug/m^3 R-54 562576.40 4207260.81 21.15 1.50 32.37 PERIOD 0.00688 ug/m^3 R-55 562577.58 4207278.68 19.68 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.00660 ug/m^3 R-56 562579.59 4207299.32 15.88 1.50 32.39 PERIOD 0.00622 ug/m^3 R-57 562582.23 4207316.96 14.03 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.02122 ug/m^3 R-58 562524.48 4207146.24 12.34 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.02207 ug/m^3 R-59 562512.14 4207161.68 11.32 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.02158 ug/m^3 R-60 562502.60 4207175.99 10.94 1.50 32.49 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 3 of 21
408
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.02080 ug/m^3 R-61 562490.25 4207188.62 11.09 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.01856 ug/m^3 R-62 562479.59 4207204.05 11.34 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.01598 ug/m^3 R-63 562465.56 4207221.02 10.64 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.01604 ug/m^3 R-64 562425.96 4207214.34 5.87 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.01550 ug/m^3 R-65 562412.61 4207209.09 5.16 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.01475 ug/m^3 R-66 562402.35 4207205.04 4.97 1.50 14.10 PERIOD 0.01392 ug/m^3 R-67 562389.23 4207197.88 4.73 1.50 4.73 PERIOD 0.01044 ug/m^3 R-68 562357.51 4207185.00 4.28 1.50 4.28 PERIOD 0.00923 ug/m^3 R-69 562347.73 4207180.94 4.13 1.50 4.13 PERIOD 0.00750 ug/m^3 R-70 562333.42 4207174.50 3.85 1.50 3.85 PERIOD 0.00628 ug/m^3 R-71 562319.56 4207165.77 3.47 1.50 3.47 PERIOD 0.00514 ug/m^3 R-72 562307.80 4207162.73 3.03 1.50 3.03 PERIOD 0.00465 ug/m^3 R-73 562295.23 4207156.45 2.48 1.50 2.48 PERIOD 0.00437 ug/m^3 R-74 562281.85 4207150.97 2.35 1.50 2.35 PERIOD 0.00417 ug/m^3 R-75 562269.68 4207148.13 2.43 1.50 2.43 PERIOD 0.00425 ug/m^3 R-76 562255.69 4207142.05 2.58 1.50 2.58 PERIOD 0.00473 ug/m^3 R-77 562230.12 4206977.87 4.33 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00661 ug/m^3 R-78 562241.11 4206995.30 4.08 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00680 ug/m^3 R-79 562233.34 4207015.08 4.02 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00607 ug/m^3 R-80 562216.64 4207027.09 4.14 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 4 of 21
409
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00580 ug/m^3 R-81 562208.44 4207038.37 4.13 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00381 ug/m^3 R-82 562211.07 4206975.81 4.60 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00273 ug/m^3 R-83 562444.86 4206878.58 10.34 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00251 ug/m^3 R-84 562434.77 4206866.25 9.91 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00237 ug/m^3 R-85 562423.69 4206856.66 9.42 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00181 ug/m^3 R-86 562419.10 4206817.49 8.63 1.50 44.03 PERIOD 0.00207 ug/m^3 R-87 562404.28 4206836.97 8.51 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00197 ug/m^3 R-88 562395.83 4206830.42 8.11 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00150 ug/m^3 R-89 562387.09 4206788.03 6.39 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00166 ug/m^3 R-90 562371.27 4206807.34 5.70 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00173 ug/m^3 R-91 562366.91 4206816.18 5.86 1.50 34.43 PERIOD 0.00115 ug/m^3 R-92 562559.49 4206885.66 16.49 1.50 44.57 PERIOD 0.00125 ug/m^3 R-93 562548.04 4206874.68 14.22 1.50 44.57 PERIOD 0.00081 ug/m^3 R-94 562626.84 4206905.90 29.57 1.50 31.53 PERIOD 0.00063 ug/m^3 R-95 562663.83 4206894.92 32.30 1.50 32.30 PERIOD 0.00088 ug/m^3 R-96 562567.19 4206858.13 16.23 1.50 44.57 PERIOD 0.00146 ug/m^3 R-97 562521.71 4206853.33 12.07 1.50 44.57 PERIOD 0.00153 ug/m^3 R-98 562510.24 4206845.68 11.70 1.50 44.57 PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-1 562103.04 4206790.15 10.69 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-2 562122.03 4206757.18 6.68 1.50 50.63 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 5 of 21
410
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00030 ug/m^3 LCBMS-3 562190.19 4206791.82 6.10 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00030 ug/m^3 LCBMS-4 562183.24 4206803.74 6.14 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00109 ug/m^3 LCBMS-5 562279.18 4206860.34 4.74 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00102 ug/m^3 LCBMS-6 562263.31 4206884.83 4.63 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00092 ug/m^3 LCBMS-7 562230.89 4206906.39 4.94 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00091 ug/m^3 LCBMS-8 562192.97 4206912.57 5.30 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00076 ug/m^3 LCBMS-9 562157.64 4206906.27 5.52 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00059 ug/m^3 LCBMS-10 562134.18 4206893.22 6.06 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00030 ug/m^3 LCBMS-11 562174.91 4206820.05 6.14 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-12 562105.41 4206786.03 9.69 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-13 562107.79 4206781.91 8.83 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-14 562110.16 4206777.79 8.11 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-15 562112.54 4206773.67 7.60 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-16 562114.91 4206769.54 7.28 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-17 562117.28 4206765.42 7.03 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-18 562119.66 4206761.30 6.82 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00018 ug/m^3 LCBMS-19 562126.29 4206759.35 6.60 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00018 ug/m^3 LCBMS-20 562130.55 4206761.51 6.57 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00019 ug/m^3 LCBMS-21 562134.81 4206763.68 6.54 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00019 ug/m^3 LCBMS-22 562139.07 4206765.84 6.51 1.50 50.63 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 6 of 21
411
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00020 ug/m^3 LCBMS-23 562143.33 4206768.01 6.48 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00020 ug/m^3 LCBMS-24 562147.59 4206770.17 6.44 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00021 ug/m^3 LCBMS-25 562151.85 4206772.34 6.40 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00022 ug/m^3 LCBMS-26 562156.11 4206774.50 6.36 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00023 ug/m^3 LCBMS-27 562160.37 4206776.67 6.32 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00023 ug/m^3 LCBMS-28 562164.63 4206778.83 6.28 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00024 ug/m^3 LCBMS-29 562168.89 4206781.00 6.23 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00025 ug/m^3 LCBMS-30 562173.15 4206783.16 6.19 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00027 ug/m^3 LCBMS-31 562177.41 4206785.33 6.17 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00028 ug/m^3 LCBMS-32 562181.67 4206787.49 6.15 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00029 ug/m^3 LCBMS-33 562185.93 4206789.66 6.12 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00030 ug/m^3 LCBMS-34 562187.87 4206795.79 6.11 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00030 ug/m^3 LCBMS-35 562185.56 4206799.77 6.12 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00031 ug/m^3 LCBMS-36 562187.41 4206806.20 6.11 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00032 ug/m^3 LCBMS-37 562191.58 4206808.66 6.07 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00034 ug/m^3 LCBMS-38 562195.75 4206811.12 6.02 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00035 ug/m^3 LCBMS-39 562199.93 4206813.58 5.98 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00037 ug/m^3 LCBMS-40 562204.10 4206816.04 5.95 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00039 ug/m^3 LCBMS-41 562208.27 4206818.51 5.91 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00040 ug/m^3 LCBMS-42 562212.44 4206820.97 5.88 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 7 of 21
412
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00043 ug/m^3 LCBMS-43 562216.61 4206823.43 5.85 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00045 ug/m^3 LCBMS-44 562220.78 4206825.89 5.83 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00047 ug/m^3 LCBMS-45 562224.95 4206828.35 5.79 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00050 ug/m^3 LCBMS-46 562229.12 4206830.81 5.76 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00053 ug/m^3 LCBMS-47 562233.30 4206833.27 5.73 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00056 ug/m^3 LCBMS-48 562237.47 4206835.73 5.70 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00059 ug/m^3 LCBMS-49 562241.64 4206838.19 5.67 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00063 ug/m^3 LCBMS-50 562245.81 4206840.65 5.62 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00067 ug/m^3 LCBMS-51 562249.98 4206843.11 5.57 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00071 ug/m^3 LCBMS-52 562254.15 4206845.58 5.51 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00076 ug/m^3 LCBMS-53 562258.32 4206848.04 5.43 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00081 ug/m^3 LCBMS-54 562262.49 4206850.50 5.35 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00087 ug/m^3 LCBMS-55 562266.67 4206852.96 5.25 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00094 ug/m^3 LCBMS-56 562270.84 4206855.42 5.13 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00101 ug/m^3 LCBMS-57 562275.01 4206857.88 4.95 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00108 ug/m^3 LCBMS-58 562276.54 4206864.42 4.72 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00106 ug/m^3 LCBMS-59 562273.89 4206868.50 4.72 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00105 ug/m^3 LCBMS-60 562271.25 4206872.59 4.73 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00104 ug/m^3 LCBMS-61 562268.60 4206876.67 4.71 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00102 ug/m^3 LCBMS-62 562265.95 4206880.75 4.67 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 8 of 21
413
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00098 ug/m^3 LCBMS-63 562259.26 4206887.53 4.66 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00095 ug/m^3 LCBMS-64 562255.20 4206890.22 4.71 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00093 ug/m^3 LCBMS-65 562251.15 4206892.92 4.76 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00091 ug/m^3 LCBMS-66 562247.10 4206895.61 4.81 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00090 ug/m^3 LCBMS-67 562243.05 4206898.31 4.84 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00090 ug/m^3 LCBMS-68 562239.00 4206901.00 4.86 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00091 ug/m^3 LCBMS-69 562234.94 4206903.70 4.90 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00091 ug/m^3 LCBMS-70 562226.15 4206907.16 5.02 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00090 ug/m^3 LCBMS-71 562221.41 4206907.93 5.10 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00090 ug/m^3 LCBMS-72 562216.67 4206908.71 5.14 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00090 ug/m^3 LCBMS-73 562211.93 4206909.48 5.18 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00090 ug/m^3 LCBMS-74 562207.19 4206910.25 5.21 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00090 ug/m^3 LCBMS-75 562202.45 4206911.03 5.24 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00090 ug/m^3 LCBMS-76 562197.71 4206911.80 5.27 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00089 ug/m^3 LCBMS-77 562188.55 4206911.78 5.32 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00086 ug/m^3 LCBMS-78 562184.14 4206911.00 5.34 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00085 ug/m^3 LCBMS-79 562179.72 4206910.21 5.36 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00083 ug/m^3 LCBMS-80 562175.31 4206909.42 5.38 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00081 ug/m^3 LCBMS-81 562170.89 4206908.63 5.41 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00079 ug/m^3 LCBMS-82 562166.47 4206907.85 5.44 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 9 of 21
414
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00077 ug/m^3 LCBMS-83 562162.06 4206907.06 5.48 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00072 ug/m^3 LCBMS-84 562153.73 4206904.10 5.57 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00069 ug/m^3 LCBMS-85 562149.82 4206901.92 5.63 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00066 ug/m^3 LCBMS-86 562145.91 4206899.75 5.70 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00064 ug/m^3 LCBMS-87 562142.00 4206897.57 5.82 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00061 ug/m^3 LCBMS-88 562138.09 4206895.39 5.94 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00055 ug/m^3 LCBMS-89 562136.58 4206888.92 6.07 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00052 ug/m^3 LCBMS-90 562138.97 4206884.61 6.08 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00049 ug/m^3 LCBMS-91 562141.37 4206880.31 6.10 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00046 ug/m^3 LCBMS-92 562143.76 4206876.00 6.12 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00044 ug/m^3 LCBMS-93 562146.16 4206871.70 6.14 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 LCBMS-94 562148.56 4206867.39 6.16 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00039 ug/m^3 LCBMS-95 562150.95 4206863.09 6.17 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00038 ug/m^3 LCBMS-96 562153.35 4206858.79 6.18 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00035 ug/m^3 LCBMS-97 562155.74 4206854.48 6.19 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00034 ug/m^3 LCBMS-98 562158.14 4206850.18 6.20 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00033 ug/m^3 LCBMS-99 562160.53 4206845.88 6.20 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00032 ug/m^3 LCBMS-100 562162.93 4206841.57 6.21 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00031 ug/m^3 LCBMS-101 562165.33 4206837.27 6.21 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00030 ug/m^3 LCBMS-102 562167.72 4206832.96 6.19 1.50 50.63 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 10 of 21
415
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00031 ug/m^3 LCBMS-103 562170.12 4206828.66 6.16 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00030 ug/m^3 LCBMS-104 562172.51 4206824.35 6.14 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00028 ug/m^3 LCBMS-105 562170.42 4206818.18 6.19 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00027 ug/m^3 LCBMS-106 562165.93 4206816.31 6.27 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00026 ug/m^3 LCBMS-107 562161.43 4206814.44 6.34 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00026 ug/m^3 LCBMS-108 562156.94 4206812.58 6.41 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00025 ug/m^3 LCBMS-109 562152.45 4206810.71 6.48 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00024 ug/m^3 LCBMS-110 562147.96 4206808.84 6.55 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00023 ug/m^3 LCBMS-111 562143.47 4206806.97 6.59 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00023 ug/m^3 LCBMS-112 562138.98 4206805.10 6.62 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00022 ug/m^3 LCBMS-113 562134.48 4206803.23 6.65 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00021 ug/m^3 LCBMS-114 562129.99 4206801.36 6.68 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00021 ug/m^3 LCBMS-115 562125.50 4206799.49 6.71 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00020 ug/m^3 LCBMS-116 562121.01 4206797.63 7.34 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00019 ug/m^3 LCBMS-117 562116.52 4206795.76 8.35 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00018 ug/m^3 LCBMS-118 562112.02 4206793.89 9.25 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00018 ug/m^3 LCBMS-119 562107.53 4206792.02 10.03 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00199 ug/m^3 LAFD-1 562242.15 4207189.12 2.45 1.50 2.45 PERIOD 0.00326 ug/m^3 LAFD-2 562255.39 4207158.50 2.50 1.50 2.50 PERIOD 0.00341 ug/m^3 LAFD-3 562235.26 4207149.71 2.74 1.50 2.74 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 11 of 21
416
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00270 ug/m^3 LAFD-4 562227.31 4207163.59 2.73 1.50 2.73 PERIOD 0.00227 ug/m^3 LAFD-5 562225.09 4207175.24 2.68 1.50 2.68 PERIOD 0.00203 ug/m^3 LAFD-6 562229.54 4207184.67 2.58 1.50 2.58 PERIOD 0.00212 ug/m^3 LAFD-7 562244.04 4207184.75 2.46 1.50 2.46 PERIOD 0.00227 ug/m^3 LAFD-8 562245.93 4207180.37 2.46 1.50 2.46 PERIOD 0.00243 ug/m^3 LAFD-9 562247.82 4207176.00 2.47 1.50 2.47 PERIOD 0.00261 ug/m^3 LAFD-10 562249.72 4207171.62 2.48 1.50 2.48 PERIOD 0.00280 ug/m^3 LAFD-11 562251.61 4207167.25 2.49 1.50 2.49 PERIOD 0.00302 ug/m^3 LAFD-12 562253.50 4207162.87 2.50 1.50 2.50 PERIOD 0.00329 ug/m^3 LAFD-13 562251.36 4207156.74 2.55 1.50 2.55 PERIOD 0.00332 ug/m^3 LAFD-14 562247.34 4207154.98 2.59 1.50 2.59 PERIOD 0.00335 ug/m^3 LAFD-15 562243.31 4207153.23 2.64 1.50 2.64 PERIOD 0.00338 ug/m^3 LAFD-16 562239.29 4207151.47 2.69 1.50 2.69 PERIOD 0.00321 ug/m^3 LAFD-17 562233.27 4207153.18 2.74 1.50 2.74 PERIOD 0.00303 ug/m^3 LAFD-18 562231.29 4207156.65 2.74 1.50 2.74 PERIOD 0.00286 ug/m^3 LAFD-19 562229.30 4207160.12 2.73 1.50 2.73 PERIOD 0.00255 ug/m^3 LAFD-20 562226.57 4207167.47 2.71 1.50 2.71 PERIOD 0.00241 ug/m^3 LAFD-21 562225.83 4207171.36 2.70 1.50 2.70 PERIOD 0.00219 ug/m^3 LAFD-22 562226.57 4207178.38 2.64 1.50 2.64 PERIOD 0.00210 ug/m^3 LAFD-23 562228.06 4207181.53 2.61 1.50 2.61 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 12 of 21
417
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00201 ug/m^3 LAFD-24 562233.74 4207186.15 2.54 1.50 2.54 PERIOD 0.00200 ug/m^3 LAFD-25 562237.95 4207187.64 2.49 1.50 2.49 PERIOD 0.00030 ug/m^3 PCP-1 562185.94 4206803.18 6.12 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00034 ug/m^3 PCP-2 562213.54 4206752.30 6.24 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00049 ug/m^3 PCP-3 562243.21 4206767.30 6.11 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00052 ug/m^3 PCP-4 562256.49 4206746.43 6.42 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00131 ug/m^3 PCP-5 562333.43 4206801.29 4.81 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00111 ug/m^3 PCP-6 562280.82 4206860.28 4.69 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00030 ug/m^3 PCP-7 562188.24 4206798.94 6.11 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00031 ug/m^3 PCP-8 562190.54 4206794.70 6.10 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00031 ug/m^3 PCP-9 562192.84 4206790.46 6.09 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00031 ug/m^3 PCP-10 562195.14 4206786.22 6.08 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00032 ug/m^3 PCP-11 562197.44 4206781.98 6.07 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00032 ug/m^3 PCP-12 562199.74 4206777.74 6.08 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00032 ug/m^3 PCP-13 562202.04 4206773.50 6.10 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00033 ug/m^3 PCP-14 562204.34 4206769.26 6.13 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00033 ug/m^3 PCP-15 562206.64 4206765.02 6.16 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00033 ug/m^3 PCP-16 562208.94 4206760.78 6.19 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00034 ug/m^3 PCP-17 562211.24 4206756.54 6.21 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00036 ug/m^3 PCP-18 562217.78 4206754.44 6.23 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 13 of 21
418
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00038 ug/m^3 PCP-19 562222.02 4206756.59 6.22 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00039 ug/m^3 PCP-20 562226.26 4206758.73 6.20 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 PCP-21 562230.49 4206760.87 6.19 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00044 ug/m^3 PCP-22 562234.73 4206763.01 6.16 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00047 ug/m^3 PCP-23 562238.97 4206765.16 6.14 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00050 ug/m^3 PCP-24 562245.87 4206763.13 6.16 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00050 ug/m^3 PCP-25 562248.52 4206758.95 6.22 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00051 ug/m^3 PCP-26 562251.18 4206754.78 6.28 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00051 ug/m^3 PCP-27 562253.83 4206750.60 6.35 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00054 ug/m^3 PCP-28 562260.54 4206749.32 6.39 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00057 ug/m^3 PCP-29 562264.59 4206752.21 6.36 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00060 ug/m^3 PCP-30 562268.64 4206755.09 6.33 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00063 ug/m^3 PCP-31 562272.69 4206757.98 6.30 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00066 ug/m^3 PCP-32 562276.74 4206760.87 6.27 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00069 ug/m^3 PCP-33 562280.79 4206763.75 6.24 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00072 ug/m^3 PCP-34 562284.84 4206766.64 6.20 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00076 ug/m^3 PCP-35 562288.89 4206769.53 6.17 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00080 ug/m^3 PCP-36 562292.94 4206772.42 6.14 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00084 ug/m^3 PCP-37 562296.98 4206775.30 6.10 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00088 ug/m^3 PCP-38 562301.03 4206778.19 6.04 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 14 of 21
419
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00092 ug/m^3 PCP-39 562305.08 4206781.08 5.98 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00097 ug/m^3 PCP-40 562309.13 4206783.97 5.92 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00102 ug/m^3 PCP-41 562313.18 4206786.85 5.85 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00107 ug/m^3 PCP-42 562317.23 4206789.74 5.78 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00113 ug/m^3 PCP-43 562321.28 4206792.63 5.62 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00118 ug/m^3 PCP-44 562325.33 4206795.51 5.39 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00125 ug/m^3 PCP-45 562329.38 4206798.40 5.12 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00131 ug/m^3 PCP-46 562330.14 4206804.98 4.82 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00131 ug/m^3 PCP-47 562326.85 4206808.66 4.87 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00130 ug/m^3 PCP-48 562323.57 4206812.35 4.93 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00130 ug/m^3 PCP-49 562320.28 4206816.04 4.92 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00130 ug/m^3 PCP-50 562316.99 4206819.72 4.83 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00129 ug/m^3 PCP-51 562313.70 4206823.41 4.76 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00128 ug/m^3 PCP-52 562310.41 4206827.10 4.73 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00127 ug/m^3 PCP-53 562307.13 4206830.79 4.74 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00125 ug/m^3 PCP-54 562303.84 4206834.47 4.79 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00124 ug/m^3 PCP-55 562300.55 4206838.16 4.87 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00122 ug/m^3 PCP-56 562297.26 4206841.85 4.93 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00120 ug/m^3 PCP-57 562293.97 4206845.53 4.92 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00118 ug/m^3 PCP-58 562290.68 4206849.22 4.83 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 15 of 21
420
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00116 ug/m^3 PCP-59 562287.40 4206852.91 4.76 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00114 ug/m^3 PCP-60 562284.11 4206856.59 4.71 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00103 ug/m^3 PCP-61 562276.69 4206857.80 4.90 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00096 ug/m^3 PCP-62 562272.57 4206855.32 5.08 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00089 ug/m^3 PCP-63 562268.44 4206852.83 5.23 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00083 ug/m^3 PCP-64 562264.32 4206850.35 5.33 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00078 ug/m^3 PCP-65 562260.19 4206847.87 5.41 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00073 ug/m^3 PCP-66 562256.07 4206845.38 5.49 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00069 ug/m^3 PCP-67 562251.94 4206842.90 5.56 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00064 ug/m^3 PCP-68 562247.82 4206840.42 5.61 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00061 ug/m^3 PCP-69 562243.69 4206837.94 5.66 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00057 ug/m^3 PCP-70 562239.57 4206835.45 5.69 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00054 ug/m^3 PCP-71 562235.44 4206832.97 5.72 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00051 ug/m^3 PCP-72 562231.32 4206830.49 5.75 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00048 ug/m^3 PCP-73 562227.19 4206828.01 5.78 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00046 ug/m^3 PCP-74 562223.07 4206825.52 5.82 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00043 ug/m^3 PCP-75 562218.94 4206823.04 5.85 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 PCP-76 562214.82 4206820.56 5.87 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00039 ug/m^3 PCP-77 562210.69 4206818.08 5.91 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00038 ug/m^3 PCP-78 562206.57 4206815.59 5.94 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 16 of 21
421
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00036 ug/m^3 PCP-79 562202.44 4206813.11 5.97 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00034 ug/m^3 PCP-80 562198.32 4206810.63 6.01 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00033 ug/m^3 PCP-81 562194.19 4206808.14 6.05 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00032 ug/m^3 PCP-82 562190.07 4206805.66 6.09 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00217 ug/m^3 PSC-1 562305.93 4206897.31 5.25 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00313 ug/m^3 PSC-2 562330.42 4206909.56 7.31 1.50 7.31 PERIOD 0.00220 ug/m^3 PSC-3 562362.85 4206855.73 7.44 1.50 7.44 PERIOD 0.00188 ug/m^3 PSC-4 562343.02 4206842.45 5.25 1.50 32.90 PERIOD 0.00233 ug/m^3 PSC-5 562310.01 4206899.35 5.80 1.50 6.76 PERIOD 0.00243 ug/m^3 PSC-6 562314.09 4206901.39 6.34 1.50 6.76 PERIOD 0.00258 ug/m^3 PSC-7 562318.18 4206903.43 6.82 1.50 6.82 PERIOD 0.00276 ug/m^3 PSC-8 562322.26 4206905.48 7.00 1.50 7.00 PERIOD 0.00295 ug/m^3 PSC-9 562326.34 4206907.52 7.16 1.50 7.16 PERIOD 0.00302 ug/m^3 PSC-10 562332.91 4206905.42 7.36 1.50 7.36 PERIOD 0.00292 ug/m^3 PSC-11 562335.41 4206901.28 7.44 1.50 7.44 PERIOD 0.00284 ug/m^3 PSC-12 562337.90 4206897.14 7.45 1.50 7.45 PERIOD 0.00276 ug/m^3 PSC-13 562340.40 4206893.00 7.49 1.50 7.49 PERIOD 0.00268 ug/m^3 PSC-14 562342.89 4206888.86 7.55 1.50 7.55 PERIOD 0.00260 ug/m^3 PSC-15 562345.39 4206884.72 7.57 1.50 7.57 PERIOD 0.00254 ug/m^3 PSC-16 562347.88 4206880.58 7.58 1.50 7.58 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 17 of 21
422
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00247 ug/m^3 PSC-17 562350.38 4206876.43 7.59 1.50 7.59 PERIOD 0.00241 ug/m^3 PSC-18 562352.87 4206872.29 7.60 1.50 7.60 PERIOD 0.00236 ug/m^3 PSC-19 562355.37 4206868.15 7.56 1.50 7.56 PERIOD 0.00231 ug/m^3 PSC-20 562357.86 4206864.01 7.47 1.50 7.47 PERIOD 0.00226 ug/m^3 PSC-21 562360.36 4206859.87 7.43 1.50 7.43 PERIOD 0.00213 ug/m^3 PSC-22 562358.88 4206853.07 7.09 1.50 7.09 PERIOD 0.00206 ug/m^3 PSC-23 562354.92 4206850.42 6.71 1.50 6.71 PERIOD 0.00200 ug/m^3 PSC-24 562350.95 4206847.76 6.27 1.50 6.27 PERIOD 0.00195 ug/m^3 PSC-25 562346.99 4206845.11 5.79 1.50 5.79 PERIOD 0.00190 ug/m^3 PSC-26 562340.37 4206846.37 5.38 1.50 5.38 PERIOD 0.00192 ug/m^3 PSC-27 562337.72 4206850.29 5.48 1.50 5.48 PERIOD 0.00194 ug/m^3 PSC-28 562335.07 4206854.21 5.53 1.50 7.27 PERIOD 0.00197 ug/m^3 PSC-29 562332.42 4206858.12 5.53 1.50 7.27 PERIOD 0.00199 ug/m^3 PSC-30 562329.77 4206862.04 5.50 1.50 7.27 PERIOD 0.00202 ug/m^3 PSC-31 562327.12 4206865.96 5.41 1.50 7.27 PERIOD 0.00205 ug/m^3 PSC-32 562324.48 4206869.88 5.29 1.50 7.27 PERIOD 0.00207 ug/m^3 PSC-33 562321.83 4206873.80 5.25 1.50 5.25 PERIOD 0.00209 ug/m^3 PSC-34 562319.18 4206877.72 5.26 1.50 5.26 PERIOD 0.00210 ug/m^3 PSC-35 562316.53 4206881.64 5.34 1.50 5.34 PERIOD 0.00212 ug/m^3 PSC-36 562313.88 4206885.55 5.40 1.50 5.40 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 18 of 21
423
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00213 ug/m^3 PSC-37 562311.23 4206889.47 5.41 1.50 6.76 PERIOD 0.00215 ug/m^3 PSC-38 562308.58 4206893.39 5.36 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00042 ug/m^3 SJC-1 562303.47 4206592.57 9.32 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00054 ug/m^3 SJC-2 562344.28 4206615.31 8.59 1.50 39.11 PERIOD 0.00048 ug/m^3 SJC-3 562373.32 4206568.00 8.40 1.50 86.08 PERIOD 0.00040 ug/m^3 SJC-4 562334.13 4206544.65 9.25 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00043 ug/m^3 SJC-5 562307.55 4206594.84 9.25 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00044 ug/m^3 SJC-6 562311.63 4206597.12 9.18 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00045 ug/m^3 SJC-7 562315.71 4206599.39 9.11 1.50 38.28 PERIOD 0.00047 ug/m^3 SJC-8 562319.79 4206601.67 9.04 1.50 9.04 PERIOD 0.00048 ug/m^3 SJC-9 562323.88 4206603.94 8.96 1.50 8.96 PERIOD 0.00049 ug/m^3 SJC-10 562327.96 4206606.21 8.88 1.50 8.88 PERIOD 0.00050 ug/m^3 SJC-11 562332.04 4206608.49 8.80 1.50 37.69 PERIOD 0.00051 ug/m^3 SJC-12 562336.12 4206610.76 8.73 1.50 37.69 PERIOD 0.00052 ug/m^3 SJC-13 562340.20 4206613.04 8.66 1.50 39.11 PERIOD 0.00053 ug/m^3 SJC-14 562346.70 4206611.37 8.59 1.50 39.11 PERIOD 0.00053 ug/m^3 SJC-15 562349.12 4206607.43 8.59 1.50 39.11 PERIOD 0.00052 ug/m^3 SJC-16 562351.54 4206603.48 8.58 1.50 39.99 PERIOD 0.00052 ug/m^3 SJC-17 562353.96 4206599.54 8.58 1.50 39.99 PERIOD 0.00052 ug/m^3 SJC-18 562356.38 4206595.60 8.57 1.50 39.99 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 19 of 21
424
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00051 ug/m^3 SJC-19 562358.80 4206591.66 8.56 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00051 ug/m^3 SJC-20 562361.22 4206587.71 8.54 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00050 ug/m^3 SJC-21 562363.64 4206583.77 8.52 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00050 ug/m^3 SJC-22 562366.06 4206579.83 8.49 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00049 ug/m^3 SJC-23 562368.48 4206575.89 8.46 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00049 ug/m^3 SJC-24 562370.90 4206571.94 8.43 1.50 86.08 PERIOD 0.00048 ug/m^3 SJC-25 562369.40 4206565.67 8.49 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00047 ug/m^3 SJC-26 562365.48 4206563.33 8.58 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00046 ug/m^3 SJC-27 562361.56 4206561.00 8.67 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00045 ug/m^3 SJC-28 562357.64 4206558.66 8.76 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00044 ug/m^3 SJC-29 562353.73 4206556.33 8.84 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00043 ug/m^3 SJC-30 562349.81 4206553.99 8.93 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00043 ug/m^3 SJC-31 562345.89 4206551.66 9.01 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00042 ug/m^3 SJC-32 562341.97 4206549.32 9.09 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 SJC-33 562338.05 4206546.99 9.17 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00040 ug/m^3 SJC-34 562331.57 4206548.64 9.28 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 SJC-35 562329.02 4206552.64 9.31 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 SJC-36 562326.46 4206556.63 9.34 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 SJC-37 562323.91 4206560.62 9.36 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 SJC-38 562321.36 4206564.62 9.38 1.50 93.89 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 20 of 21
425
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectSite-Wide Activity and Phase 1 Development PM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL
Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 SJC-39 562318.80 4206568.61 9.38 1.50 86.08 PERIOD 0.00042 ug/m^3 SJC-40 562316.25 4206572.60 9.38 1.50 86.08 PERIOD 0.00042 ug/m^3 SJC-41 562313.69 4206576.60 9.37 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00042 ug/m^3 SJC-42 562311.14 4206580.59 9.36 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00042 ug/m^3 SJC-43 562308.58 4206584.58 9.35 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00042 ug/m^3 SJC-44 562306.03 4206588.58 9.34 1.50 82.06 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc RS - 21 of 21
426
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 1 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 427
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
Polygon Area Sources
Source Type: AREA POLY
Source: PROJECTSITE (Project Site - Site-wide Grading and Site Prep) X Coordinate
for Vertices
[m]
Y Coordinate
for Vertices
[m]
Base
Elevation
(Optional)
Emission
Rate
[g/ (s-m^2)]
Release
Height
[m]
Initial
Vertical
Dim. [m]
Number of
Vertices
(or sides)

2.68 3.33 2.07E-8 30 562307.78 4207095.31

2.07E-8 562401.56 4207132.772.07E-8 562453.03 4207129.992.07E-8 562505.54 4207055.792.07E-8 562517.03 4207028.392.07E-8 562508.70 4207024.882.07E-8 562519.86 4206999.032.07E-8 562499.01 4206995.312.07E-8 562506.66 4206980.222.07E-8 562535.68 4206985.462.07E-8 562541.19 4206973.552.07E-8 562503.86 4206966.912.07E-8 562470.86 4206962.002.07E-8 562439.86 4206958.312.07E-8 562438.77 4206965.912.07E-8 562414.78 4206963.742.07E-8 562400.21 4206962.532.07E-8 562382.09 4206961.482.07E-8 562365.63 4206960.702.07E-8 562350.20 4206960.142.07E-8 562331.99 4206959.792.07E-8 562315.36 4206959.792.07E-8 562301.59 4206959.852.07E-8 562301.64 4206961.662.07E-8 562297.63 4206961.822.07E-8 562297.79 4206967.982.07E-8 562297.77 4206972.162.07E-8 562297.72 4206978.092.07E-8 562297.24 4206985.482.07E-8 562318.71 4207052.95 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 2 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 428
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
Source Type: AREA POLY
Source: PROJECTSITE (Project Site - Site-wide Grading and Site Prep) X Coordinate
for Vertices
[m]
Y Coordinate
for Vertices
[m]
Base
Elevation
(Optional)
Emission
Rate
[g/ (s-m^2)]
Release
Height
[m]
Initial
Vertical
Dim. [m]
Number of
Vertices
(or sides)
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 3 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 429
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
Source Type: AREA POLY
Source: PH.2.TO.5 (Phases 2 through 5 Construction after intro of new receptors) X Coordinate
for Vertices
[m]
Y Coordinate
for Vertices
[m]
Base
Elevation
(Optional)
Emission
Rate
[g/ (s-m^2)]
Release
Height
[m]
Initial
Vertical
Dim. [m]
Number of
Vertices
(or sides)

7.25 3.33 0.00E+0 26 562415.03 4207004.73

0.00E+0 562407.75 4207018.640.00E+0 562407.91 4207048.340.00E+0 562449.62 4207052.400.00E+0 562475.22 4207030.410.00E+0 562480.63 4207027.820.00E+0 562509.69 4207039.220.00E+0 562503.69 4207053.030.00E+0 562490.40 4207071.680.00E+0 562464.02 4207055.260.00E+0 562449.38 4207076.280.00E+0 562473.94 4207094.890.00E+0 562450.29 4207128.520.00E+0 562403.09 4207130.910.00E+0 562366.48 4207116.770.00E+0 562378.74 4207084.550.00E+0 562354.85 4207073.660.00E+0 562349.17 4207064.280.00E+0 562311.06 4207083.970.00E+0 562319.40 4207051.980.00E+0 562297.77 4206985.640.00E+0 562298.03 4206961.260.00E+0 562302.32 4206961.220.00E+0 562302.19 4206959.680.00E+0 562354.11 4206960.330.00E+0 562418.58 4206963.43 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 4 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 430
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
Line Volume Sources
Source Type: LINE VOLUMESource: SKELLYRD (Skelly Road - Off-Site Emissions) Release Height
[m]
Base Elevation
[m]
Y Coordinate for points
[m]
X Coordinate for Points
[m]
Length of Side
[m]
Emission Rate
[g/ s]
Building Height
[m]

12.00 4.66E-7 562513.83 4207036.73 14.75 3.12
562561.10 4207060.25 13.15 3.12562596.00 4207075.54 19.76 3.12562619.04 4207096.26 24.67 3.12562634.60 4207128.45 24.74 3.12562635.36 4207150.41 24.65 3.12562629.93 4207172.50 22.40 3.12562606.40 4207228.76 24.45 3.12562603.93 4207236.59 24.54 3.12562601.14 4207256.12 23.24 3.12562600.97 4207279.44 22.11 3.12562605.24 4207329.80 14.50 3.12 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 5 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 431
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
Volume Sources Generated from Line Sources
Line
Source
ID
Volume
Source
ID
X Coordinate
[m]
Y Coordinate
[m]
Base
Elevation
[m]
Release
Height
[m[
Emission
Rate
[g/s]
Length of
Side
[m]
Building
Height
[m]
Initial Lateral
Dimencion
[m]
Initial Vertical
Dimencion
[m]
SKELLYRD L0000001 562519.20 4207039.40 14.38 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8 L0000002 562529.94 4207044.75 13.99 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000003 562540.69 4207050.09 13.52 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000004 562551.43 4207055.44 13.04 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000005 562562.20 4207060.73 13.44 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000006 562573.19 4207065.55 16.14 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000007 562584.18 4207070.36 18.68 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000008 562595.17 4207075.18 21.29 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000009 562604.25 4207082.96 23.30 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000010 562613.17 4207090.99 24.36 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8 L0000011 562620.83 4207099.96 24.34 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8 L0000012 562626.05 4207110.77 24.17 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000013 562631.28 4207121.57 24.46 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000014 562634.75 4207132.80 24.88 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000015 562635.17 4207144.80 24.90 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000016 562633.84 4207156.61 25.09 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000017 562630.98 4207168.26 25.28 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000018 562626.99 4207179.55 25.27 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000019 562622.36 4207190.62 24.90 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000020 562617.73 4207201.69 24.54 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000021 562613.10 4207212.76 24.24 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000022 562608.46 4207223.83 24.08 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000023 562604.40 4207235.11 24.05 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000024 562602.46 4207246.93 23.88 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 6 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 432
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
Line
Source
ID
Volume
Source
ID
X Coordinate
[m]
Y Coordinate
[m]
Base
Elevation
[m]
Release
Height
[m[
Emission
Rate
[g/s]
Length of
Side
[m]
Building
Height
[m]
Initial Lateral
Dimencion
[m]
Initial Vertical
Dimencion
[m]
SKELLYRD L0000025 562601.12 4207258.84 23.18 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8 L0000026 562601.04 4207270.83 22.59 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000027 562601.26 4207282.82 20.26 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000028 562602.27 4207294.78 17.73 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000029 562603.29 4207306.74 15.73 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8L0000030 562604.30 4207318.69 15.10 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 1.55E-8 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 7 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phase 1.isc 433
Control Pathway
AERMOD
Flat & Elevated Terrain
No Stack-Tip Downwash (NOSTD)
Run in Screening Mode
Conversion of NOx to NO2 (OLM or PVMRM)
No Checks for Non-Sequential Met Data
Fast All Sources (FASTALL)
Fast Area Sources (FASTAREA)
Optimized Area Source Plume Depletion
Gas Deposition
BETA Options:

Capped and Horizontal Stack Releases
Adjusted Friction Velocity (u*) in AERMET (ADJ_U*)
Low Wind Options
SCIM (Sampled Chronological Input Model)
Ignore Urban Night / Daytime Transition (NOURBTRAN)
Total Deposition (Dry & Wet)
Dry Deposition
Wet Deposition
Output Type
Concentration
Regulatory Default Non-Default Options
Dispersion Options
21180006 Skelly Residential Project
Phases 2 thru 5 Development
Titles
Dispersion Options
Population:

Name (Optional):

Roughness Length:

Plume Depletion
Dry Removal
Wet Removal
Output Warnings
No Output Warnings
Non-fatal Warnings for Non-sequential Met Data
Dispersion Coefficient
Urban
Pollutant / Averaging Time / Terrain Options
TG: Meters
RE: Meters
1 2 3 4 6 8 12 24 Flat Elevated SO: Meters
Hours Terrain Height Options
Averaging Time Options
Yes No
Pollutant Type Exponential Decay
Month Period Annual
PM2.5
Flagpole Receptors
Yes No
Default Height = 1.50 m
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software CO - 1 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 434
Control Pathway
AERMOD
Optional Files
Re-Start File Init File Multi-Year Analyses Event Input File Error Listing File Detailed Error Listing File
Filename: 21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.err AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software CO - 2 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 435
AERMOD View - Lakes Environmental Software C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc SCALE:

0.5 km
1:23,505
PROJECT NO.:

DATE:
4/12/2022
MODELER:

COMPANY NAME:

PROJECT TITLE: COMMENTS:
21180006 Skelly Residential Project
Phases 2 thru 5 Development
SOURCES:

RECEPTORS:
2299
OUTPUT TYPE:

Concentration
MAX:

7.8E-02 ug/m^3
436
Meteorology Pathway
AERMOD
Met Input Data
Surface Met Data
Profile Met Data
C:\Users\lpark\OneDrive - ADEC Solutions USA, Inc\Desktop\01. Project Files\2118.0006 Skelly Rd Residenti Default AERMET format
Filename:

Format Type:

Filename:

Format Type:

10.8 8.23

5.14 3.09

1.54 No Upper Bound
Wind Speed [m/s] Stability Category Wind Speed [m/s]
F
E
D
C
B
A
Stability Category
Wind Speed Categories
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software ME - 1 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 437
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
Receptor Networks
Note: Terrain Elavations and Flagpole Heights for Network Grids are in Page RE2 - 1 (If applicable) Generated Discrete Receptors for Multi-Tier (Risk) Grid and Receptor Locations for Fenceline Grid are in Page RE3 - 1 (If applicable) Discrete Receptors
Discrete Cartesian Receptors
X-Coordinate [m] Y-Coordinate [m] Terrain Elevations
Flagpole Heights [m]
(Optional)
Record
Number
Group Name
(Optional)
1 562293.81 4207045.66 Res 2.33 1.50
2 562305.03 4207059.24 Res 2.40 1.50
3 562279.13 4207106.06 Res 2.44 1.50
4 562296.00 4207111.74 Res 2.39 1.50
5 562304.79 4207117.42 Res 2.80 1.50
6 562322.17 4207119.32 Res 3.52 1.50
7 562333.83 4207123.38 Res 3.89 1.50
8 562346.05 4207130.57 Res 4.17 1.50
9 562359.62 4207135.24 Res 4.36 1.50
10 562372.97 4207141.03 Res 4.53 1.50
11 562386.19 4207148.75 Res 4.70 1.50
12 562400.36 4207152.13 Res 4.82 1.50
13 562410.20 4207156.25 Res 4.91 1.50
14 562425.95 4207163.76 Res 5.16 1.50
15 562439.64 4207168.84 Res 5.52 1.50
16 562448.45 4207177.65 Res 6.40 1.50
17 562457.39 4207154.50 Res 5.95 1.50
18 562470.86 4207142.06 Res 6.55 1.50
19 562483.62 4207129.91 Res 7.26 1.50
20 562494.77 4207113.09 Res 8.05 1.50
21 562502.01 4207095.70 Res 9.33 1.50
22 562513.36 4207078.68 Res 10.75 1.50
23 562522.88 4207065.10 Res 12.32 1.50
24 562538.46 4207021.31 Res 15.95 1.50
25 562556.90 4207027.02 Res 17.04 1.50
26 562572.28 4207035.22 Res 17.67 1.50
27 562588.97 4207044.15 Res 20.29 1.50
28 562607.12 4207051.62 Res 24.74 1.50
29 562625.42 4207064.35 Res 26.31 1.50
30 562637.06 4207077.67 Res 26.83 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 1 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 438
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
31 562649.81 4207092.83 Res 27.36 1.50
32 562656.70 4207112.98 Res 27.08 1.50
33 562662.56 4207131.75 Res 27.73 1.50
34 562660.84 4207155.40 Res 28.13 1.50
35 562656.88 4207175.55 Res 28.69 1.50
36 562647.75 4207194.67 Res 28.39 1.50
37 562640.08 4207211.01 Res 27.82 1.50
38 562633.98 4207228.74 Res 27.25 1.50
39 562625.49 4207246.31 Res 26.26 1.50
40 562566.88 4207085.38 Res 14.28 1.50
41 562557.55 4207100.07 Res 12.93 1.50
42 562548.46 4207113.39 Res 12.76 1.50
43 562533.15 4207129.32 Res 12.53 1.50
44 562592.52 4207103.18 Res 19.23 1.50
45 562607.46 4207116.87 Res 20.81 1.50
46 562611.64 4207140.35 Res 21.80 1.50
47 562582.97 4207146.17 Res 18.36 1.50
48 562609.42 4207160.03 Res 22.13 1.50
49 562564.52 4207164.03 Res 16.81 1.50
50 562559.40 4207183.06 Res 16.77 1.50
51 562572.72 4207206.93 Res 18.65 1.50
52 562591.23 4207215.76 Res 21.15 1.50
53 562580.09 4207241.29 Res 21.94 1.50
54 562576.40 4207260.81 Res 21.15 1.50
55 562577.58 4207278.68 Res 19.68 1.50
56 562579.59 4207299.32 Res 15.88 1.50
57 562582.23 4207316.96 Res 14.03 1.50
58 562524.48 4207146.24 Res 12.34 1.50
59 562512.14 4207161.68 Res 11.32 1.50
60 562502.60 4207175.99 Res 10.94 1.50
61 562490.25 4207188.62 Res 11.09 1.50
62 562479.59 4207204.05 Res 11.34 1.50
63 562465.56 4207221.02 Res 10.64 1.50
64 562425.96 4207214.34 Res 5.86 1.50
65 562412.61 4207209.09 Res 5.16 1.50
66 562402.35 4207205.04 Res 4.97 1.50
67 562389.23 4207197.88 Res 4.73 1.50
68 562357.51 4207185.00 Res 4.28 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 2 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 439
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
69 562347.73 4207180.94 Res 4.13 1.50
70 562333.42 4207174.50 Res 3.85 1.50
71 562319.56 4207165.77 Res 3.47 1.50
72 562307.80 4207162.73 Res 3.03 1.50
73 562295.23 4207156.45 Res 2.48 1.50
74 562281.85 4207150.97 Res 2.35 1.50
75 562269.68 4207148.13 Res 2.43 1.50
76 562255.69 4207142.05 Res 2.58 1.50
77 562230.12 4206977.87 Res 4.33 1.50
78 562241.11 4206995.30 Res 4.08 1.50
79 562233.34 4207015.08 Res 4.02 1.50
80 562216.64 4207027.09 Res 4.14 1.50
81 562208.44 4207038.37 Res 4.13 1.50
82 562211.07 4206975.81 Res 4.60 1.50
83 562444.86 4206878.58 Res 10.34 1.50
84 562434.77 4206866.25 Res 9.91 1.50
85 562423.69 4206856.66 Res 9.42 1.50
86 562419.10 4206817.49 Res 8.63 1.50
87 562404.28 4206836.97 Res 8.51 1.50
88 562395.83 4206830.42 Res 8.11 1.50
89 562387.09 4206788.03 Res 6.39 1.50
90 562371.27 4206807.34 Res 5.70 1.50
91 562366.91 4206816.18 Res 5.86 1.50
92 562559.49 4206885.66 Res 16.49 1.50
93 562548.04 4206874.69 Res 14.22 1.50
94 562626.84 4206905.90 Res 29.57 1.50
95 562663.83 4206894.92 Res 32.30 1.50
96 562567.19 4206858.13 Res 16.23 1.50
97 562521.71 4206853.33 Res 12.07 1.50
98 562510.24 4206845.68 Res 11.70 1.50
99 562103.04 4206790.15 School 10.69 1.50
100 562122.03 4206757.18 School 6.68 1.50
101 562190.19 4206791.82 School 6.10 1.50
102 562183.24 4206803.74 School 6.14 1.50
103 562279.18 4206860.34 School 4.74 1.50
104 562263.31 4206884.83 School 4.63 1.50
105 562230.89 4206906.39 School 4.94 1.50
106 562192.97 4206912.57 School 5.30 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 3 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 440
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
107 562157.64 4206906.27 School 5.52 1.50
108 562134.18 4206893.22 School 6.06 1.50
109 562174.91 4206820.05 School 6.14 1.50
110 562105.41 4206786.03 School 9.69 1.50
111 562107.79 4206781.91 School 8.83 1.50
112 562110.16 4206777.79 School 8.11 1.50
113 562112.54 4206773.67 School 7.60 1.50
114 562114.91 4206769.54 School 7.28 1.50
115 562117.28 4206765.42 School 7.03 1.50
116 562119.66 4206761.30 School 6.82 1.50
117 562126.29 4206759.35 School 6.60 1.50
118 562130.55 4206761.51 School 6.57 1.50
119 562134.81 4206763.68 School 6.54 1.50
120 562139.07 4206765.84 School 6.51 1.50
121 562143.33 4206768.01 School 6.48 1.50
122 562147.59 4206770.17 School 6.44 1.50
123 562151.85 4206772.34 School 6.40 1.50
124 562156.11 4206774.50 School 6.36 1.50
125 562160.37 4206776.67 School 6.32 1.50
126 562164.63 4206778.83 School 6.28 1.50
127 562168.89 4206781.00 School 6.23 1.50
128 562173.15 4206783.16 School 6.19 1.50
129 562177.41 4206785.33 School 6.17 1.50
130 562181.67 4206787.49 School 6.15 1.50
131 562185.93 4206789.66 School 6.12 1.50
132 562187.87 4206795.79 School 6.11 1.50
133 562185.56 4206799.77 School 6.12 1.50
134 562187.41 4206806.20 School 6.11 1.50
135 562191.58 4206808.66 School 6.07 1.50
136 562195.75 4206811.12 School 6.02 1.50
137 562199.93 4206813.58 School 5.98 1.50
138 562204.10 4206816.04 School 5.95 1.50
139 562208.27 4206818.51 School 5.91 1.50
140 562212.44 4206820.97 School 5.88 1.50
141 562216.61 4206823.43 School 5.85 1.50
142 562220.78 4206825.89 School 5.83 1.50
143 562224.95 4206828.35 School 5.79 1.50
144 562229.12 4206830.81 School 5.76 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 4 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 441
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
145 562233.30 4206833.27 School 5.73 1.50
146 562237.47 4206835.73 School 5.70 1.50
147 562241.64 4206838.19 School 5.67 1.50
148 562245.81 4206840.65 School 5.62 1.50
149 562249.98 4206843.11 School 5.57 1.50
150 562254.15 4206845.58 School 5.51 1.50
151 562258.32 4206848.04 School 5.43 1.50
152 562262.49 4206850.50 School 5.35 1.50
153 562266.67 4206852.96 School 5.25 1.50
154 562270.84 4206855.42 School 5.13 1.50
155 562275.01 4206857.88 School 4.95 1.50
156 562276.54 4206864.42 School 4.72 1.50
157 562273.89 4206868.50 School 4.72 1.50
158 562271.25 4206872.59 School 4.73 1.50
159 562268.60 4206876.67 School 4.71 1.50
160 562265.96 4206880.75 School 4.67 1.50
161 562259.26 4206887.53 School 4.66 1.50
162 562255.21 4206890.22 School 4.71 1.50
163 562251.15 4206892.92 School 4.76 1.50
164 562247.10 4206895.61 School 4.81 1.50
165 562243.05 4206898.31 School 4.84 1.50
166 562239.00 4206901.00 School 4.86 1.50
167 562234.94 4206903.70 School 4.90 1.50
168 562226.15 4206907.16 School 5.02 1.50
169 562221.41 4206907.94 School 5.10 1.50
170 562216.67 4206908.71 School 5.14 1.50
171 562211.93 4206909.48 School 5.18 1.50
172 562207.19 4206910.25 School 5.21 1.50
173 562202.45 4206911.03 School 5.24 1.50
174 562197.71 4206911.80 School 5.27 1.50
175 562188.55 4206911.78 School 5.32 1.50
176 562184.14 4206911.00 School 5.34 1.50
177 562179.72 4206910.21 School 5.36 1.50
178 562175.31 4206909.42 School 5.38 1.50
179 562170.89 4206908.63 School 5.41 1.50
180 562166.47 4206907.85 School 5.44 1.50
181 562162.06 4206907.06 School 5.48 1.50
182 562153.73 4206904.10 School 5.57 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 5 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 442
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
183 562149.82 4206901.92 School 5.63 1.50
184 562145.91 4206899.75 School 5.70 1.50
185 562142.00 4206897.57 School 5.82 1.50
186 562138.09 4206895.40 School 5.94 1.50
187 562136.58 4206888.92 School 6.07 1.50
188 562138.97 4206884.61 School 6.08 1.50
189 562141.37 4206880.31 School 6.10 1.50
190 562143.76 4206876.00 School 6.12 1.50
191 562146.16 4206871.70 School 6.14 1.50
192 562148.56 4206867.40 School 6.16 1.50
193 562150.95 4206863.09 School 6.17 1.50
194 562153.35 4206858.79 School 6.18 1.50
195 562155.74 4206854.48 School 6.19 1.50
196 562158.14 4206850.18 School 6.20 1.50
197 562160.53 4206845.88 School 6.20 1.50
198 562162.93 4206841.57 School 6.21 1.50
199 562165.33 4206837.27 School 6.21 1.50
200 562167.72 4206832.96 School 6.19 1.50
201 562170.12 4206828.66 School 6.16 1.50
202 562172.51 4206824.35 School 6.14 1.50
203 562170.42 4206818.18 School 6.19 1.50
204 562165.93 4206816.31 School 6.27 1.50
205 562161.43 4206814.44 School 6.34 1.50
206 562156.94 4206812.58 School 6.41 1.50
207 562152.45 4206810.71 School 6.48 1.50
208 562147.96 4206808.84 School 6.55 1.50
209 562143.47 4206806.97 School 6.59 1.50
210 562138.98 4206805.10 School 6.62 1.50
211 562134.48 4206803.23 School 6.65 1.50
212 562129.99 4206801.36 School 6.68 1.50
213 562125.50 4206799.49 School 6.71 1.50
214 562121.01 4206797.63 School 7.34 1.50
215 562116.52 4206795.76 School 8.35 1.50
216 562112.02 4206793.89 School 9.25 1.50
217 562107.53 4206792.02 School 10.03 1.50
218 562242.15 4207189.12 Daycare 2.45 1.50
219 562255.39 4207158.50 Daycare 2.50 1.50
220 562235.26 4207149.71 Daycare 2.74 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 6 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 443
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
221 562227.31 4207163.59 Daycare 2.73 1.50
222 562225.09 4207175.24 Daycare 2.68 1.50
223 562229.54 4207184.67 Daycare 2.58 1.50
224 562244.04 4207184.75 Daycare 2.46 1.50
225 562245.93 4207180.37 Daycare 2.46 1.50
226 562247.82 4207176.00 Daycare 2.47 1.50
227 562249.72 4207171.62 Daycare 2.48 1.50
228 562251.61 4207167.25 Daycare 2.49 1.50
229 562253.50 4207162.87 Daycare 2.50 1.50
230 562251.36 4207156.74 Daycare 2.55 1.50
231 562247.34 4207154.98 Daycare 2.59 1.50
232 562243.31 4207153.23 Daycare 2.64 1.50
233 562239.29 4207151.47 Daycare 2.69 1.50
234 562233.27 4207153.18 Daycare 2.74 1.50
235 562231.29 4207156.65 Daycare 2.74 1.50
236 562229.30 4207160.12 Daycare 2.73 1.50
237 562226.57 4207167.47 Daycare 2.71 1.50
238 562225.83 4207171.36 Daycare 2.70 1.50
239 562226.57 4207178.38 Daycare 2.64 1.50
240 562228.06 4207181.53 Daycare 2.61 1.50
241 562233.74 4207186.15 Daycare 2.54 1.50
242 562237.95 4207187.64 Daycare 2.49 1.50
243 562185.94 4206803.18 School 6.12 1.50
244 562213.54 4206752.30 School 6.24 1.50
245 562243.21 4206767.30 School 6.11 1.50
246 562256.49 4206746.43 School 6.42 1.50
247 562333.43 4206801.29 School 4.81 1.50
248 562280.82 4206860.28 School 4.69 1.50
249 562188.24 4206798.94 School 6.11 1.50
250 562190.54 4206794.70 School 6.10 1.50
251 562192.84 4206790.46 School 6.09 1.50
252 562195.14 4206786.22 School 6.08 1.50
253 562197.44 4206781.98 School 6.07 1.50
254 562199.74 4206777.74 School 6.08 1.50
255 562202.04 4206773.50 School 6.10 1.50
256 562204.34 4206769.26 School 6.13 1.50
257 562206.64 4206765.02 School 6.16 1.50
258 562208.94 4206760.78 School 6.19 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 7 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 444
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
259 562211.24 4206756.54 School 6.21 1.50
260 562217.78 4206754.44 School 6.23 1.50
261 562222.02 4206756.59 School 6.22 1.50
262 562226.26 4206758.73 School 6.20 1.50
263 562230.49 4206760.87 School 6.19 1.50
264 562234.73 4206763.01 School 6.16 1.50
265 562238.97 4206765.16 School 6.14 1.50
266 562245.87 4206763.13 School 6.16 1.50
267 562248.52 4206758.95 School 6.22 1.50
268 562251.18 4206754.78 School 6.28 1.50
269 562253.83 4206750.60 School 6.35 1.50
270 562260.54 4206749.32 School 6.39 1.50
271 562264.59 4206752.21 School 6.36 1.50
272 562268.64 4206755.09 School 6.33 1.50
273 562272.69 4206757.98 School 6.30 1.50
274 562276.74 4206760.87 School 6.27 1.50
275 562280.79 4206763.75 School 6.24 1.50
276 562284.84 4206766.64 School 6.20 1.50
277 562288.89 4206769.53 School 6.17 1.50
278 562292.94 4206772.42 School 6.14 1.50
279 562296.98 4206775.30 School 6.10 1.50
280 562301.03 4206778.19 School 6.04 1.50
281 562305.08 4206781.08 School 5.98 1.50
282 562309.13 4206783.97 School 5.92 1.50
283 562313.18 4206786.85 School 5.85 1.50
284 562317.23 4206789.74 School 5.78 1.50
285 562321.28 4206792.63 School 5.62 1.50
286 562325.33 4206795.52 School 5.39 1.50
287 562329.38 4206798.40 School 5.12 1.50
288 562330.14 4206804.98 School 4.82 1.50
289 562326.85 4206808.66 School 4.87 1.50
290 562323.57 4206812.35 School 4.93 1.50
291 562320.28 4206816.04 School 4.92 1.50
292 562316.99 4206819.72 School 4.83 1.50
293 562313.70 4206823.41 School 4.76 1.50
294 562310.41 4206827.10 School 4.73 1.50
295 562307.13 4206830.79 School 4.74 1.50
296 562303.84 4206834.47 School 4.79 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 8 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 445
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
297 562300.55 4206838.16 School 4.87 1.50
298 562297.26 4206841.85 School 4.93 1.50
299 562293.97 4206845.53 School 4.92 1.50
300 562290.68 4206849.22 School 4.83 1.50
301 562287.40 4206852.91 School 4.76 1.50
302 562284.11 4206856.59 School 4.71 1.50
303 562276.69 4206857.80 School 4.90 1.50
304 562272.57 4206855.32 School 5.08 1.50
305 562268.44 4206852.83 School 5.23 1.50
306 562264.32 4206850.35 School 5.33 1.50
307 562260.19 4206847.87 School 5.41 1.50
308 562256.07 4206845.38 School 5.49 1.50
309 562251.94 4206842.90 School 5.56 1.50
310 562247.82 4206840.42 School 5.61 1.50
311 562243.69 4206837.94 School 5.66 1.50
312 562239.57 4206835.45 School 5.69 1.50
313 562235.44 4206832.97 School 5.72 1.50
314 562231.32 4206830.49 School 5.75 1.50
315 562227.19 4206828.01 School 5.78 1.50
316 562223.07 4206825.52 School 5.82 1.50
317 562218.94 4206823.04 School 5.85 1.50
318 562214.82 4206820.56 School 5.87 1.50
319 562210.69 4206818.08 School 5.91 1.50
320 562206.57 4206815.59 School 5.94 1.50
321 562202.44 4206813.11 School 5.97 1.50
322 562198.32 4206810.63 School 6.01 1.50
323 562194.19 4206808.15 School 6.05 1.50
324 562190.07 4206805.66 School 6.09 1.50
325 562305.93 4206897.31 5.25 1.50
326 562330.42 4206909.56 7.31 1.50
327 562362.85 4206855.73 7.44 1.50
328 562343.02 4206842.45 5.25 1.50
329 562310.01 4206899.35 5.80 1.50
330 562314.09 4206901.39 6.34 1.50
331 562318.18 4206903.44 6.82 1.50
332 562322.26 4206905.48 7.00 1.50
333 562326.34 4206907.52 7.16 1.50
334 562332.91 4206905.42 7.36 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 9 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 446
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
335 562335.41 4206901.28 7.44 1.50
336 562337.90 4206897.14 7.45 1.50
337 562340.40 4206893.00 7.49 1.50
338 562342.89 4206888.86 7.55 1.50
339 562345.39 4206884.72 7.57 1.50
340 562347.88 4206880.58 7.58 1.50
341 562350.38 4206876.43 7.59 1.50
342 562352.87 4206872.29 7.60 1.50
343 562355.37 4206868.15 7.56 1.50
344 562357.86 4206864.01 7.47 1.50
345 562360.36 4206859.87 7.43 1.50
346 562358.88 4206853.07 7.09 1.50
347 562354.92 4206850.42 6.71 1.50
348 562350.95 4206847.76 6.27 1.50
349 562346.99 4206845.11 5.79 1.50
350 562340.37 4206846.37 5.38 1.50
351 562337.72 4206850.29 5.48 1.50
352 562335.07 4206854.21 5.53 1.50
353 562332.42 4206858.12 5.53 1.50
354 562329.77 4206862.04 5.50 1.50
355 562327.12 4206865.96 5.41 1.50
356 562324.48 4206869.88 5.29 1.50
357 562321.83 4206873.80 5.25 1.50
358 562319.18 4206877.72 5.26 1.50
359 562316.53 4206881.64 5.34 1.50
360 562313.88 4206885.55 5.40 1.50
361 562311.23 4206889.47 5.41 1.50
362 562308.58 4206893.39 5.36 1.50
363 562303.47 4206592.57 9.32 1.50
364 562344.28 4206615.31 8.59 1.50
365 562373.32 4206568.00 8.40 1.50
366 562334.13 4206544.65 9.25 1.50
367 562307.55 4206594.84 9.25 1.50
368 562311.63 4206597.12 9.18 1.50
369 562315.71 4206599.39 9.11 1.50
370 562319.79 4206601.67 9.04 1.50
371 562323.88 4206603.94 8.96 1.50
372 562327.96 4206606.21 8.88 1.50
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 10 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 447
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
373 562332.04 4206608.49 8.80 1.50
374 562336.12 4206610.76 8.73 1.50
375 562340.20 4206613.04 8.66 1.50
376 562346.70 4206611.37 8.59 1.50
377 562349.12 4206607.43 8.59 1.50
378 562351.54 4206603.48 8.58 1.50
379 562353.96 4206599.54 8.58 1.50
380 562356.38 4206595.60 8.57 1.50
381 562358.80 4206591.66 8.56 1.50
382 562361.22 4206587.71 8.54 1.50
383 562363.64 4206583.77 8.52 1.50
384 562366.06 4206579.83 8.49 1.50
385 562368.48 4206575.89 8.46 1.50
386 562370.90 4206571.94 8.43 1.50
387 562369.40 4206565.67 8.49 1.50
388 562365.48 4206563.33 8.58 1.50
389 562361.56 4206561.00 8.67 1.50
390 562357.64 4206558.66 8.76 1.50
391 562353.73 4206556.33 8.84 1.50
392 562349.81 4206553.99 8.93 1.50
393 562345.89 4206551.66 9.01 1.50
394 562341.97 4206549.32 9.09 1.50
395 562338.05 4206546.99 9.17 1.50
396 562331.58 4206548.64 9.28 1.50
397 562329.02 4206552.64 9.31 1.50
398 562326.47 4206556.63 9.34 1.50
399 562323.91 4206560.62 9.36 1.50
400 562321.36 4206564.62 9.38 1.50
401 562318.80 4206568.61 9.38 1.50
402 562316.25 4206572.60 9.38 1.50
403 562313.69 4206576.60 9.37 1.50
404 562311.14 4206580.59 9.36 1.50
405 562308.58 4206584.58 9.35 1.50
406 562306.03 4206588.58 9.34 1.50
407 562414.89 4207033.80 7.12
408 562430.23 4207034.32 8.59
409 562443.53 4207035.00 10.01
410 562422.56 4206993.06 8.02
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 11 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 448
Receptor Pathway
AERMOD
411 562434.67 4206992.55 9.37
412 562447.11 4206995.44 10.84
413 562459.90 4206995.96 12.39
414 562472.34 4206998.68 13.15
Plant Boundary Receptors
Receptor Groups
Group ID Group Description
Record
Number
1 FENCEPRI Cartesian plant boundary Primary Receptors
2 FENCEINT Cartesian plant boundary Intermediate Receptors 3 Res
4 School
5 Daycare
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software RE1 - 12 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 449
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.01142 ug/m^3 R-1 562293.81 4207045.66 2.33 1.50 2.33 PERIOD 0.01397 ug/m^3 R-2 562305.03 4207059.24 2.40 1.50 2.40 PERIOD 0.00580 ug/m^3 R-3 562279.13 4207106.06 2.44 1.50 2.44 PERIOD 0.00693 ug/m^3 R-4 562296.00 4207111.74 2.39 1.50 2.39 PERIOD 0.00798 ug/m^3 R-5 562304.79 4207117.42 2.80 1.50 2.80 PERIOD 0.01269 ug/m^3 R-6 562322.17 4207119.32 3.52 1.50 3.52 PERIOD 0.01598 ug/m^3 R-7 562333.83 4207123.38 3.89 1.50 3.89 PERIOD 0.01750 ug/m^3 R-8 562346.05 4207130.57 4.17 1.50 4.17 PERIOD 0.01983 ug/m^3 R-9 562359.62 4207135.24 4.36 1.50 4.36 PERIOD 0.02330 ug/m^3 R-10 562372.97 4207141.03 4.53 1.50 4.53 PERIOD 0.02753 ug/m^3 R-11 562386.19 4207148.75 4.70 1.50 4.70 PERIOD 0.03406 ug/m^3 R-12 562400.36 4207152.13 4.82 1.50 4.82 PERIOD 0.03620 ug/m^3 R-13 562410.20 4207156.25 4.91 1.50 30.41 PERIOD 0.03594 ug/m^3 R-14 562425.95 4207163.76 5.16 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.03468 ug/m^3 R-15 562439.64 4207168.84 5.52 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.02992 ug/m^3 R-16 562448.45 4207177.65 6.40 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.04445 ug/m^3 R-17 562457.39 4207154.50 5.95 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.04616 ug/m^3 R-18 562470.86 4207142.06 6.55 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.04005 ug/m^3 R-19 562483.62 4207129.91 7.26 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.03269 ug/m^3 R-20 562494.77 4207113.09 8.05 1.50 32.49 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 1 of 21
450
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.03044 ug/m^3 R-21 562502.01 4207095.70 9.33 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.02613 ug/m^3 R-22 562513.36 4207078.68 10.75 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.01715 ug/m^3 R-23 562522.88 4207065.10 12.32 1.50 31.59 PERIOD 0.00522 ug/m^3 R-24 562538.46 4207021.31 15.95 1.50 31.53 PERIOD 0.00473 ug/m^3 R-25 562556.90 4207027.02 17.04 1.50 27.75 PERIOD 0.00451 ug/m^3 R-26 562572.28 4207035.22 17.67 1.50 30.32 PERIOD 0.00398 ug/m^3 R-27 562588.97 4207044.15 20.29 1.50 27.75 PERIOD 0.00327 ug/m^3 R-28 562607.12 4207051.62 24.74 1.50 25.65 PERIOD 0.00295 ug/m^3 R-29 562625.42 4207064.35 26.31 1.50 26.31 PERIOD 0.00281 ug/m^3 R-30 562637.06 4207077.67 26.83 1.50 26.83 PERIOD 0.00262 ug/m^3 R-31 562649.81 4207092.83 27.36 1.50 27.36 PERIOD 0.00257 ug/m^3 R-32 562656.70 4207112.98 27.08 1.50 27.08 PERIOD 0.00246 ug/m^3 R-33 562662.56 4207131.75 27.73 1.50 30.36 PERIOD 0.00249 ug/m^3 R-34 562660.84 4207155.39 28.13 1.50 31.48 PERIOD 0.00256 ug/m^3 R-35 562656.88 4207175.55 28.69 1.50 31.48 PERIOD 0.00277 ug/m^3 R-36 562647.75 4207194.67 28.39 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.00299 ug/m^3 R-37 562640.08 4207211.01 27.82 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.00316 ug/m^3 R-38 562633.98 4207228.74 27.25 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.00340 ug/m^3 R-39 562625.49 4207246.31 26.26 1.50 32.37 PERIOD 0.00771 ug/m^3 R-40 562566.88 4207085.38 14.28 1.50 32.49 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 2 of 21
451
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00973 ug/m^3 R-41 562557.55 4207100.07 12.93 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.01160 ug/m^3 R-42 562548.46 4207113.39 12.76 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.01461 ug/m^3 R-43 562533.15 4207129.32 12.53 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.00524 ug/m^3 R-44 562592.52 4207103.18 19.23 1.50 31.64 PERIOD 0.00442 ug/m^3 R-45 562607.46 4207116.87 20.81 1.50 31.64 PERIOD 0.00422 ug/m^3 R-46 562611.64 4207140.35 21.80 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.00620 ug/m^3 R-47 562582.97 4207146.17 18.36 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.00430 ug/m^3 R-48 562609.42 4207160.03 22.13 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.00794 ug/m^3 R-49 562564.52 4207164.03 16.81 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.00818 ug/m^3 R-50 562559.40 4207183.06 16.77 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.00652 ug/m^3 R-51 562572.72 4207206.93 18.65 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.00512 ug/m^3 R-52 562591.23 4207215.76 21.15 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.00538 ug/m^3 R-53 562580.09 4207241.29 21.94 1.50 32.37 PERIOD 0.00536 ug/m^3 R-54 562576.40 4207260.81 21.15 1.50 32.37 PERIOD 0.00517 ug/m^3 R-55 562577.58 4207278.68 19.68 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.00503 ug/m^3 R-56 562579.59 4207299.32 15.88 1.50 32.39 PERIOD 0.00476 ug/m^3 R-57 562582.23 4207316.96 14.03 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.01571 ug/m^3 R-58 562524.48 4207146.24 12.34 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.01790 ug/m^3 R-59 562512.14 4207161.68 11.32 1.50 32.49 PERIOD 0.01883 ug/m^3 R-60 562502.60 4207175.99 10.94 1.50 32.49 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 3 of 21
452
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.01944 ug/m^3 R-61 562490.25 4207188.62 11.09 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.01797 ug/m^3 R-62 562479.59 4207204.05 11.34 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.01568 ug/m^3 R-63 562465.56 4207221.02 10.64 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.01507 ug/m^3 R-64 562425.96 4207214.34 5.87 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.01410 ug/m^3 R-65 562412.61 4207209.09 5.16 1.50 32.38 PERIOD 0.01304 ug/m^3 R-66 562402.35 4207205.04 4.97 1.50 14.10 PERIOD 0.01174 ug/m^3 R-67 562389.23 4207197.88 4.73 1.50 4.73 PERIOD 0.00782 ug/m^3 R-68 562357.51 4207185.00 4.28 1.50 4.28 PERIOD 0.00689 ug/m^3 R-69 562347.73 4207180.94 4.13 1.50 4.13 PERIOD 0.00579 ug/m^3 R-70 562333.42 4207174.50 3.85 1.50 3.85 PERIOD 0.00508 ug/m^3 R-71 562319.56 4207165.77 3.47 1.50 3.47 PERIOD 0.00427 ug/m^3 R-72 562307.80 4207162.73 3.03 1.50 3.03 PERIOD 0.00380 ug/m^3 R-73 562295.23 4207156.45 2.48 1.50 2.48 PERIOD 0.00346 ug/m^3 R-74 562281.85 4207150.97 2.35 1.50 2.35 PERIOD 0.00320 ug/m^3 R-75 562269.68 4207148.13 2.43 1.50 2.43 PERIOD 0.00313 ug/m^3 R-76 562255.69 4207142.05 2.58 1.50 2.58 PERIOD 0.00429 ug/m^3 R-77 562230.12 4206977.87 4.33 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00599 ug/m^3 R-78 562241.11 4206995.30 4.08 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00605 ug/m^3 R-79 562233.34 4207015.08 4.02 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00534 ug/m^3 R-80 562216.64 4207027.09 4.14 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 4 of 21
453
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00502 ug/m^3 R-81 562208.44 4207038.37 4.13 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00343 ug/m^3 R-82 562211.07 4206975.81 4.60 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00196 ug/m^3 R-83 562444.86 4206878.58 10.34 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00195 ug/m^3 R-84 562434.77 4206866.25 9.91 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00196 ug/m^3 R-85 562423.69 4206856.66 9.42 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00150 ug/m^3 R-86 562419.10 4206817.49 8.63 1.50 44.03 PERIOD 0.00184 ug/m^3 R-87 562404.28 4206836.97 8.51 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00179 ug/m^3 R-88 562395.83 4206830.42 8.11 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00131 ug/m^3 R-89 562387.09 4206788.03 6.39 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00150 ug/m^3 R-90 562371.27 4206807.34 5.70 1.50 43.84 PERIOD 0.00161 ug/m^3 R-91 562366.91 4206816.18 5.86 1.50 34.43 PERIOD 0.00077 ug/m^3 R-92 562559.49 4206885.66 16.49 1.50 44.57 PERIOD 0.00078 ug/m^3 R-93 562548.04 4206874.68 14.22 1.50 44.57 PERIOD 0.00058 ug/m^3 R-94 562626.84 4206905.90 29.57 1.50 31.53 PERIOD 0.00045 ug/m^3 R-95 562663.83 4206894.92 32.30 1.50 32.30 PERIOD 0.00058 ug/m^3 R-96 562567.19 4206858.13 16.23 1.50 44.57 PERIOD 0.00085 ug/m^3 R-97 562521.71 4206853.33 12.07 1.50 44.57 PERIOD 0.00089 ug/m^3 R-98 562510.24 4206845.68 11.70 1.50 44.57 PERIOD 0.00015 ug/m^3 LCBMS-1 562103.04 4206790.15 10.69 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00014 ug/m^3 LCBMS-2 562122.03 4206757.18 6.68 1.50 50.63 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 5 of 21
454
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00026 ug/m^3 LCBMS-3 562190.19 4206791.82 6.10 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00025 ug/m^3 LCBMS-4 562183.24 4206803.74 6.14 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00103 ug/m^3 LCBMS-5 562279.18 4206860.34 4.74 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00089 ug/m^3 LCBMS-6 562263.31 4206884.83 4.63 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00073 ug/m^3 LCBMS-7 562230.89 4206906.39 4.94 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00072 ug/m^3 LCBMS-8 562192.97 4206912.57 5.30 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00060 ug/m^3 LCBMS-9 562157.64 4206906.27 5.52 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00046 ug/m^3 LCBMS-10 562134.18 4206893.22 6.06 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00025 ug/m^3 LCBMS-11 562174.91 4206820.05 6.14 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00015 ug/m^3 LCBMS-12 562105.41 4206786.03 9.69 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00014 ug/m^3 LCBMS-13 562107.79 4206781.91 8.83 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00014 ug/m^3 LCBMS-14 562110.16 4206777.79 8.11 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00014 ug/m^3 LCBMS-15 562112.54 4206773.67 7.60 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00014 ug/m^3 LCBMS-16 562114.91 4206769.54 7.28 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00014 ug/m^3 LCBMS-17 562117.28 4206765.42 7.03 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00014 ug/m^3 LCBMS-18 562119.66 4206761.30 6.82 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00015 ug/m^3 LCBMS-19 562126.29 4206759.35 6.60 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00015 ug/m^3 LCBMS-20 562130.55 4206761.51 6.57 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00016 ug/m^3 LCBMS-21 562134.81 4206763.68 6.54 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00016 ug/m^3 LCBMS-22 562139.07 4206765.84 6.51 1.50 50.63 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 6 of 21
455
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-23 562143.33 4206768.01 6.48 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-24 562147.59 4206770.17 6.44 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00018 ug/m^3 LCBMS-25 562151.85 4206772.34 6.40 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00018 ug/m^3 LCBMS-26 562156.11 4206774.50 6.36 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00019 ug/m^3 LCBMS-27 562160.37 4206776.67 6.32 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00020 ug/m^3 LCBMS-28 562164.63 4206778.83 6.28 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00021 ug/m^3 LCBMS-29 562168.89 4206781.00 6.23 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00022 ug/m^3 LCBMS-30 562173.15 4206783.16 6.19 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00023 ug/m^3 LCBMS-31 562177.41 4206785.33 6.17 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00024 ug/m^3 LCBMS-32 562181.67 4206787.49 6.15 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00025 ug/m^3 LCBMS-33 562185.93 4206789.66 6.12 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00025 ug/m^3 LCBMS-34 562187.87 4206795.79 6.11 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00025 ug/m^3 LCBMS-35 562185.56 4206799.77 6.12 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00026 ug/m^3 LCBMS-36 562187.41 4206806.20 6.11 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00027 ug/m^3 LCBMS-37 562191.58 4206808.66 6.07 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00028 ug/m^3 LCBMS-38 562195.75 4206811.12 6.02 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00030 ug/m^3 LCBMS-39 562199.93 4206813.58 5.98 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00031 ug/m^3 LCBMS-40 562204.10 4206816.04 5.95 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00033 ug/m^3 LCBMS-41 562208.27 4206818.51 5.91 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00035 ug/m^3 LCBMS-42 562212.44 4206820.97 5.88 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 7 of 21
456
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00037 ug/m^3 LCBMS-43 562216.61 4206823.43 5.85 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00039 ug/m^3 LCBMS-44 562220.78 4206825.89 5.83 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 LCBMS-45 562224.95 4206828.35 5.79 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00044 ug/m^3 LCBMS-46 562229.12 4206830.81 5.76 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00047 ug/m^3 LCBMS-47 562233.30 4206833.27 5.73 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00050 ug/m^3 LCBMS-48 562237.47 4206835.73 5.70 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00053 ug/m^3 LCBMS-49 562241.64 4206838.19 5.67 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00057 ug/m^3 LCBMS-50 562245.81 4206840.65 5.62 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00061 ug/m^3 LCBMS-51 562249.98 4206843.11 5.57 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00066 ug/m^3 LCBMS-52 562254.15 4206845.58 5.51 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00070 ug/m^3 LCBMS-53 562258.32 4206848.04 5.43 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00076 ug/m^3 LCBMS-54 562262.49 4206850.50 5.35 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00082 ug/m^3 LCBMS-55 562266.67 4206852.96 5.25 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00088 ug/m^3 LCBMS-56 562270.84 4206855.42 5.13 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00095 ug/m^3 LCBMS-57 562275.01 4206857.88 4.95 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00101 ug/m^3 LCBMS-58 562276.54 4206864.42 4.72 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00098 ug/m^3 LCBMS-59 562273.89 4206868.50 4.72 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00096 ug/m^3 LCBMS-60 562271.25 4206872.59 4.73 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00094 ug/m^3 LCBMS-61 562268.60 4206876.67 4.71 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00091 ug/m^3 LCBMS-62 562265.95 4206880.75 4.67 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 8 of 21
457
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00084 ug/m^3 LCBMS-63 562259.26 4206887.53 4.66 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00080 ug/m^3 LCBMS-64 562255.20 4206890.22 4.71 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00077 ug/m^3 LCBMS-65 562251.15 4206892.92 4.76 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00075 ug/m^3 LCBMS-66 562247.10 4206895.61 4.81 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00073 ug/m^3 LCBMS-67 562243.05 4206898.31 4.84 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00072 ug/m^3 LCBMS-68 562239.00 4206901.00 4.86 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00072 ug/m^3 LCBMS-69 562234.94 4206903.70 4.90 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00072 ug/m^3 LCBMS-70 562226.15 4206907.16 5.02 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00071 ug/m^3 LCBMS-71 562221.41 4206907.93 5.10 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00071 ug/m^3 LCBMS-72 562216.67 4206908.71 5.14 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00071 ug/m^3 LCBMS-73 562211.93 4206909.48 5.18 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00071 ug/m^3 LCBMS-74 562207.19 4206910.25 5.21 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00071 ug/m^3 LCBMS-75 562202.45 4206911.03 5.24 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00072 ug/m^3 LCBMS-76 562197.71 4206911.80 5.27 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00070 ug/m^3 LCBMS-77 562188.55 4206911.78 5.32 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00068 ug/m^3 LCBMS-78 562184.14 4206911.00 5.34 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00067 ug/m^3 LCBMS-79 562179.72 4206910.21 5.36 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00065 ug/m^3 LCBMS-80 562175.31 4206909.42 5.38 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00064 ug/m^3 LCBMS-81 562170.89 4206908.63 5.41 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00062 ug/m^3 LCBMS-82 562166.47 4206907.85 5.44 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 9 of 21
458
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00061 ug/m^3 LCBMS-83 562162.06 4206907.06 5.48 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00057 ug/m^3 LCBMS-84 562153.73 4206904.10 5.57 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00054 ug/m^3 LCBMS-85 562149.82 4206901.92 5.63 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00052 ug/m^3 LCBMS-86 562145.91 4206899.75 5.70 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00050 ug/m^3 LCBMS-87 562142.00 4206897.57 5.82 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00048 ug/m^3 LCBMS-88 562138.09 4206895.39 5.94 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00043 ug/m^3 LCBMS-89 562136.58 4206888.92 6.07 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00040 ug/m^3 LCBMS-90 562138.97 4206884.61 6.08 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00038 ug/m^3 LCBMS-91 562141.37 4206880.31 6.10 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00036 ug/m^3 LCBMS-92 562143.76 4206876.00 6.12 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00034 ug/m^3 LCBMS-93 562146.16 4206871.70 6.14 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00032 ug/m^3 LCBMS-94 562148.56 4206867.39 6.16 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00031 ug/m^3 LCBMS-95 562150.95 4206863.09 6.17 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00029 ug/m^3 LCBMS-96 562153.35 4206858.79 6.18 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00028 ug/m^3 LCBMS-97 562155.74 4206854.48 6.19 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00027 ug/m^3 LCBMS-98 562158.14 4206850.18 6.20 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00027 ug/m^3 LCBMS-99 562160.53 4206845.88 6.20 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00026 ug/m^3 LCBMS-100 562162.93 4206841.57 6.21 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00026 ug/m^3 LCBMS-101 562165.33 4206837.27 6.21 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00025 ug/m^3 LCBMS-102 562167.72 4206832.96 6.19 1.50 50.63 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 10 of 21
459
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00025 ug/m^3 LCBMS-103 562170.12 4206828.66 6.16 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00025 ug/m^3 LCBMS-104 562172.51 4206824.35 6.14 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00024 ug/m^3 LCBMS-105 562170.42 4206818.18 6.19 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00023 ug/m^3 LCBMS-106 562165.93 4206816.31 6.27 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00022 ug/m^3 LCBMS-107 562161.43 4206814.44 6.34 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00021 ug/m^3 LCBMS-108 562156.94 4206812.58 6.41 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00021 ug/m^3 LCBMS-109 562152.45 4206810.71 6.48 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00020 ug/m^3 LCBMS-110 562147.96 4206808.84 6.55 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00019 ug/m^3 LCBMS-111 562143.47 4206806.97 6.59 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00019 ug/m^3 LCBMS-112 562138.98 4206805.10 6.62 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00018 ug/m^3 LCBMS-113 562134.48 4206803.23 6.65 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00018 ug/m^3 LCBMS-114 562129.99 4206801.36 6.68 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-115 562125.50 4206799.49 6.71 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00017 ug/m^3 LCBMS-116 562121.01 4206797.63 7.34 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00016 ug/m^3 LCBMS-117 562116.52 4206795.76 8.35 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00015 ug/m^3 LCBMS-118 562112.02 4206793.89 9.25 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00015 ug/m^3 LCBMS-119 562107.53 4206792.02 10.03 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00154 ug/m^3 LAFD-1 562242.15 4207189.12 2.45 1.50 2.45 PERIOD 0.00250 ug/m^3 LAFD-2 562255.39 4207158.50 2.50 1.50 2.50 PERIOD 0.00253 ug/m^3 LAFD-3 562235.26 4207149.71 2.74 1.50 2.74 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 11 of 21
460
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00204 ug/m^3 LAFD-4 562227.31 4207163.59 2.73 1.50 2.73 PERIOD 0.00173 ug/m^3 LAFD-5 562225.09 4207175.24 2.68 1.50 2.68 PERIOD 0.00156 ug/m^3 LAFD-6 562229.54 4207184.67 2.58 1.50 2.58 PERIOD 0.00164 ug/m^3 LAFD-7 562244.04 4207184.75 2.46 1.50 2.46 PERIOD 0.00176 ug/m^3 LAFD-8 562245.93 4207180.37 2.46 1.50 2.46 PERIOD 0.00188 ug/m^3 LAFD-9 562247.82 4207176.00 2.47 1.50 2.47 PERIOD 0.00201 ug/m^3 LAFD-10 562249.72 4207171.62 2.48 1.50 2.48 PERIOD 0.00216 ug/m^3 LAFD-11 562251.61 4207167.25 2.49 1.50 2.49 PERIOD 0.00232 ug/m^3 LAFD-12 562253.50 4207162.87 2.50 1.50 2.50 PERIOD 0.00250 ug/m^3 LAFD-13 562251.36 4207156.74 2.55 1.50 2.55 PERIOD 0.00250 ug/m^3 LAFD-14 562247.34 4207154.98 2.59 1.50 2.59 PERIOD 0.00251 ug/m^3 LAFD-15 562243.31 4207153.23 2.64 1.50 2.64 PERIOD 0.00252 ug/m^3 LAFD-16 562239.29 4207151.47 2.69 1.50 2.69 PERIOD 0.00239 ug/m^3 LAFD-17 562233.27 4207153.18 2.74 1.50 2.74 PERIOD 0.00227 ug/m^3 LAFD-18 562231.29 4207156.65 2.74 1.50 2.74 PERIOD 0.00215 ug/m^3 LAFD-19 562229.30 4207160.12 2.73 1.50 2.73 PERIOD 0.00193 ug/m^3 LAFD-20 562226.57 4207167.47 2.71 1.50 2.71 PERIOD 0.00183 ug/m^3 LAFD-21 562225.83 4207171.36 2.70 1.50 2.70 PERIOD 0.00167 ug/m^3 LAFD-22 562226.57 4207178.38 2.64 1.50 2.64 PERIOD 0.00161 ug/m^3 LAFD-23 562228.06 4207181.53 2.61 1.50 2.61 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 12 of 21
461
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00155 ug/m^3 LAFD-24 562233.74 4207186.15 2.54 1.50 2.54 PERIOD 0.00154 ug/m^3 LAFD-25 562237.95 4207187.64 2.49 1.50 2.49 PERIOD 0.00025 ug/m^3 PCP-1 562185.94 4206803.18 6.12 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00032 ug/m^3 PCP-2 562213.54 4206752.30 6.24 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00046 ug/m^3 PCP-3 562243.21 4206767.30 6.11 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00049 ug/m^3 PCP-4 562256.49 4206746.43 6.42 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00123 ug/m^3 PCP-5 562333.43 4206801.29 4.81 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00105 ug/m^3 PCP-6 562280.82 4206860.28 4.69 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00026 ug/m^3 PCP-7 562188.24 4206798.94 6.11 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00026 ug/m^3 PCP-8 562190.54 4206794.70 6.10 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00026 ug/m^3 PCP-9 562192.84 4206790.46 6.09 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00027 ug/m^3 PCP-10 562195.14 4206786.22 6.08 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00027 ug/m^3 PCP-11 562197.44 4206781.98 6.07 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00028 ug/m^3 PCP-12 562199.74 4206777.74 6.08 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00028 ug/m^3 PCP-13 562202.04 4206773.50 6.10 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00029 ug/m^3 PCP-14 562204.34 4206769.26 6.13 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00030 ug/m^3 PCP-15 562206.64 4206765.02 6.16 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00030 ug/m^3 PCP-16 562208.94 4206760.78 6.19 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00031 ug/m^3 PCP-17 562211.24 4206756.54 6.21 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00033 ug/m^3 PCP-18 562217.78 4206754.44 6.23 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 13 of 21
462
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00035 ug/m^3 PCP-19 562222.02 4206756.59 6.22 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00037 ug/m^3 PCP-20 562226.26 4206758.73 6.20 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00039 ug/m^3 PCP-21 562230.49 4206760.87 6.19 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 PCP-22 562234.73 4206763.01 6.16 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00043 ug/m^3 PCP-23 562238.97 4206765.16 6.14 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00047 ug/m^3 PCP-24 562245.87 4206763.13 6.16 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00047 ug/m^3 PCP-25 562248.52 4206758.95 6.22 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00048 ug/m^3 PCP-26 562251.18 4206754.78 6.28 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00049 ug/m^3 PCP-27 562253.83 4206750.60 6.35 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00052 ug/m^3 PCP-28 562260.54 4206749.32 6.39 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00055 ug/m^3 PCP-29 562264.59 4206752.21 6.36 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00057 ug/m^3 PCP-30 562268.64 4206755.09 6.33 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00060 ug/m^3 PCP-31 562272.69 4206757.98 6.30 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00063 ug/m^3 PCP-32 562276.74 4206760.87 6.27 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00066 ug/m^3 PCP-33 562280.79 4206763.75 6.24 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00070 ug/m^3 PCP-34 562284.84 4206766.64 6.20 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00073 ug/m^3 PCP-35 562288.89 4206769.53 6.17 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00077 ug/m^3 PCP-36 562292.94 4206772.42 6.14 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00081 ug/m^3 PCP-37 562296.98 4206775.30 6.10 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00085 ug/m^3 PCP-38 562301.03 4206778.19 6.04 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 14 of 21
463
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00089 ug/m^3 PCP-39 562305.08 4206781.08 5.98 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00093 ug/m^3 PCP-40 562309.13 4206783.97 5.92 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00098 ug/m^3 PCP-41 562313.18 4206786.85 5.85 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00103 ug/m^3 PCP-42 562317.23 4206789.74 5.78 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00108 ug/m^3 PCP-43 562321.28 4206792.63 5.62 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00113 ug/m^3 PCP-44 562325.33 4206795.51 5.39 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00118 ug/m^3 PCP-45 562329.38 4206798.40 5.12 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00124 ug/m^3 PCP-46 562330.14 4206804.98 4.82 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00125 ug/m^3 PCP-47 562326.85 4206808.66 4.87 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00125 ug/m^3 PCP-48 562323.57 4206812.35 4.93 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00126 ug/m^3 PCP-49 562320.28 4206816.04 4.92 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00125 ug/m^3 PCP-50 562316.99 4206819.72 4.83 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00125 ug/m^3 PCP-51 562313.70 4206823.41 4.76 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00124 ug/m^3 PCP-52 562310.41 4206827.10 4.73 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00123 ug/m^3 PCP-53 562307.13 4206830.79 4.74 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00122 ug/m^3 PCP-54 562303.84 4206834.47 4.79 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00121 ug/m^3 PCP-55 562300.55 4206838.16 4.87 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00119 ug/m^3 PCP-56 562297.26 4206841.85 4.93 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00117 ug/m^3 PCP-57 562293.97 4206845.53 4.92 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00114 ug/m^3 PCP-58 562290.68 4206849.22 4.83 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 15 of 21
464
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00111 ug/m^3 PCP-59 562287.40 4206852.91 4.76 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00108 ug/m^3 PCP-60 562284.11 4206856.59 4.71 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00098 ug/m^3 PCP-61 562276.69 4206857.80 4.90 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00090 ug/m^3 PCP-62 562272.57 4206855.32 5.08 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00084 ug/m^3 PCP-63 562268.44 4206852.83 5.23 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00078 ug/m^3 PCP-64 562264.32 4206850.35 5.33 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00072 ug/m^3 PCP-65 562260.19 4206847.87 5.41 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00067 ug/m^3 PCP-66 562256.07 4206845.38 5.49 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00063 ug/m^3 PCP-67 562251.94 4206842.90 5.56 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00059 ug/m^3 PCP-68 562247.82 4206840.42 5.61 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00055 ug/m^3 PCP-69 562243.69 4206837.94 5.66 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00051 ug/m^3 PCP-70 562239.57 4206835.45 5.69 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00048 ug/m^3 PCP-71 562235.44 4206832.97 5.72 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00045 ug/m^3 PCP-72 562231.32 4206830.49 5.75 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00043 ug/m^3 PCP-73 562227.19 4206828.01 5.78 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00040 ug/m^3 PCP-74 562223.07 4206825.52 5.82 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00038 ug/m^3 PCP-75 562218.94 4206823.04 5.85 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00036 ug/m^3 PCP-76 562214.82 4206820.56 5.87 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00034 ug/m^3 PCP-77 562210.69 4206818.08 5.91 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00032 ug/m^3 PCP-78 562206.57 4206815.59 5.94 1.50 40.66 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 16 of 21
465
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00031 ug/m^3 PCP-79 562202.44 4206813.11 5.97 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00029 ug/m^3 PCP-80 562198.32 4206810.63 6.01 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00028 ug/m^3 PCP-81 562194.19 4206808.14 6.05 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00027 ug/m^3 PCP-82 562190.07 4206805.66 6.09 1.50 50.63 PERIOD 0.00220 ug/m^3 PSC-1 562305.93 4206897.31 5.25 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00364 ug/m^3 PSC-2 562330.42 4206909.56 7.31 1.50 7.31 PERIOD 0.00227 ug/m^3 PSC-3 562362.85 4206855.73 7.44 1.50 7.44 PERIOD 0.00185 ug/m^3 PSC-4 562343.02 4206842.45 5.25 1.50 32.90 PERIOD 0.00244 ug/m^3 PSC-5 562310.01 4206899.35 5.80 1.50 6.76 PERIOD 0.00267 ug/m^3 PSC-6 562314.09 4206901.39 6.34 1.50 6.76 PERIOD 0.00290 ug/m^3 PSC-7 562318.18 4206903.43 6.82 1.50 6.82 PERIOD 0.00314 ug/m^3 PSC-8 562322.26 4206905.48 7.00 1.50 7.00 PERIOD 0.00339 ug/m^3 PSC-9 562326.34 4206907.52 7.16 1.50 7.16 PERIOD 0.00350 ug/m^3 PSC-10 562332.91 4206905.42 7.36 1.50 7.36 PERIOD 0.00336 ug/m^3 PSC-11 562335.41 4206901.28 7.44 1.50 7.44 PERIOD 0.00324 ug/m^3 PSC-12 562337.90 4206897.14 7.45 1.50 7.45 PERIOD 0.00313 ug/m^3 PSC-13 562340.40 4206893.00 7.49 1.50 7.49 PERIOD 0.00301 ug/m^3 PSC-14 562342.89 4206888.86 7.55 1.50 7.55 PERIOD 0.00291 ug/m^3 PSC-15 562345.39 4206884.72 7.57 1.50 7.57 PERIOD 0.00281 ug/m^3 PSC-16 562347.88 4206880.58 7.58 1.50 7.58 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 17 of 21
466
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00271 ug/m^3 PSC-17 562350.38 4206876.43 7.59 1.50 7.59 PERIOD 0.00262 ug/m^3 PSC-18 562352.87 4206872.29 7.60 1.50 7.60 PERIOD 0.00253 ug/m^3 PSC-19 562355.37 4206868.15 7.56 1.50 7.56 PERIOD 0.00244 ug/m^3 PSC-20 562357.86 4206864.01 7.47 1.50 7.47 PERIOD 0.00236 ug/m^3 PSC-21 562360.36 4206859.87 7.43 1.50 7.43 PERIOD 0.00220 ug/m^3 PSC-22 562358.88 4206853.07 7.09 1.50 7.09 PERIOD 0.00212 ug/m^3 PSC-23 562354.92 4206850.42 6.71 1.50 6.71 PERIOD 0.00204 ug/m^3 PSC-24 562350.95 4206847.76 6.27 1.50 6.27 PERIOD 0.00195 ug/m^3 PSC-25 562346.99 4206845.11 5.79 1.50 5.79 PERIOD 0.00189 ug/m^3 PSC-26 562340.37 4206846.37 5.38 1.50 5.38 PERIOD 0.00193 ug/m^3 PSC-27 562337.72 4206850.29 5.48 1.50 5.48 PERIOD 0.00197 ug/m^3 PSC-28 562335.07 4206854.21 5.53 1.50 7.27 PERIOD 0.00201 ug/m^3 PSC-29 562332.42 4206858.12 5.53 1.50 7.27 PERIOD 0.00204 ug/m^3 PSC-30 562329.77 4206862.04 5.50 1.50 7.27 PERIOD 0.00207 ug/m^3 PSC-31 562327.12 4206865.96 5.41 1.50 7.27 PERIOD 0.00209 ug/m^3 PSC-32 562324.48 4206869.88 5.29 1.50 7.27 PERIOD 0.00212 ug/m^3 PSC-33 562321.83 4206873.80 5.25 1.50 5.25 PERIOD 0.00214 ug/m^3 PSC-34 562319.18 4206877.72 5.26 1.50 5.26 PERIOD 0.00217 ug/m^3 PSC-35 562316.53 4206881.64 5.34 1.50 5.34 PERIOD 0.00219 ug/m^3 PSC-36 562313.88 4206885.55 5.40 1.50 5.40 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 18 of 21
467
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00220 ug/m^3 PSC-37 562311.23 4206889.47 5.41 1.50 6.76 PERIOD 0.00220 ug/m^3 PSC-38 562308.58 4206893.39 5.36 1.50 40.66 PERIOD 0.00037 ug/m^3 SJC-1 562303.47 4206592.57 9.32 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00045 ug/m^3 SJC-2 562344.28 4206615.31 8.59 1.50 39.11 PERIOD 0.00039 ug/m^3 SJC-3 562373.32 4206568.00 8.40 1.50 86.08 PERIOD 0.00033 ug/m^3 SJC-4 562334.13 4206544.65 9.25 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00037 ug/m^3 SJC-5 562307.55 4206594.84 9.25 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00038 ug/m^3 SJC-6 562311.63 4206597.12 9.18 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00039 ug/m^3 SJC-7 562315.71 4206599.39 9.11 1.50 38.28 PERIOD 0.00040 ug/m^3 SJC-8 562319.79 4206601.67 9.04 1.50 9.04 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 SJC-9 562323.88 4206603.94 8.96 1.50 8.96 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 SJC-10 562327.96 4206606.21 8.88 1.50 8.88 PERIOD 0.00042 ug/m^3 SJC-11 562332.04 4206608.49 8.80 1.50 37.69 PERIOD 0.00043 ug/m^3 SJC-12 562336.12 4206610.76 8.73 1.50 37.69 PERIOD 0.00044 ug/m^3 SJC-13 562340.20 4206613.04 8.66 1.50 39.11 PERIOD 0.00044 ug/m^3 SJC-14 562346.70 4206611.37 8.59 1.50 39.11 PERIOD 0.00044 ug/m^3 SJC-15 562349.12 4206607.43 8.59 1.50 39.11 PERIOD 0.00043 ug/m^3 SJC-16 562351.54 4206603.48 8.58 1.50 39.99 PERIOD 0.00043 ug/m^3 SJC-17 562353.96 4206599.54 8.58 1.50 39.99 PERIOD 0.00042 ug/m^3 SJC-18 562356.38 4206595.60 8.57 1.50 39.99 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 19 of 21
468
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00042 ug/m^3 SJC-19 562358.80 4206591.66 8.56 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 SJC-20 562361.22 4206587.71 8.54 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00041 ug/m^3 SJC-21 562363.64 4206583.77 8.52 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00040 ug/m^3 SJC-22 562366.06 4206579.83 8.49 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00040 ug/m^3 SJC-23 562368.48 4206575.89 8.46 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00039 ug/m^3 SJC-24 562370.90 4206571.94 8.43 1.50 86.08 PERIOD 0.00038 ug/m^3 SJC-25 562369.40 4206565.67 8.49 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00038 ug/m^3 SJC-26 562365.48 4206563.33 8.58 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00037 ug/m^3 SJC-27 562361.56 4206561.00 8.67 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00036 ug/m^3 SJC-28 562357.64 4206558.66 8.76 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00036 ug/m^3 SJC-29 562353.73 4206556.33 8.84 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00035 ug/m^3 SJC-30 562349.81 4206553.99 8.93 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00035 ug/m^3 SJC-31 562345.89 4206551.66 9.01 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00034 ug/m^3 SJC-32 562341.97 4206549.32 9.09 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00034 ug/m^3 SJC-33 562338.05 4206546.99 9.17 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00033 ug/m^3 SJC-34 562331.57 4206548.64 9.28 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00034 ug/m^3 SJC-35 562329.02 4206552.64 9.31 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00034 ug/m^3 SJC-36 562326.46 4206556.63 9.34 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00034 ug/m^3 SJC-37 562323.91 4206560.62 9.36 1.50 93.89 PERIOD 0.00035 ug/m^3 SJC-38 562321.36 4206564.62 9.38 1.50 93.89 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 20 of 21
469
Sensitive Receptor Summary
21180006 Skelly Residential ProjectPhases 2 thru 5 DevelopmentPM2.5 - Concentration - Source Group: ALL Averaging
Period Rank Peak
X
(m)
Y
(m)
ZELEV
(m)
ZHILL
(m)
Peak Date,
Start Hour
ZFLAG
(m) Units
Receptor
ID
PERIOD 0.00035 ug/m^3 SJC-39 562318.80 4206568.61 9.38 1.50 86.08 PERIOD 0.00035 ug/m^3 SJC-40 562316.25 4206572.60 9.38 1.50 86.08 PERIOD 0.00036 ug/m^3 SJC-41 562313.69 4206576.60 9.37 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00036 ug/m^3 SJC-42 562311.14 4206580.59 9.36 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00036 ug/m^3 SJC-43 562308.58 4206584.58 9.35 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.00036 ug/m^3 SJC-44 562306.03 4206588.58 9.34 1.50 82.06 PERIOD 0.06321 ug/m^3 OSR-1 562414.89 4207033.80 7.12 1.50 12.72 PERIOD 0.04281 ug/m^3 OSR-2 562430.23 4207034.32 8.59 1.50 12.72 PERIOD 0.03053 ug/m^3 OSR-3 562443.53 4207035.00 10.01 1.50 12.72 PERIOD 0.04030 ug/m^3 OSR-4 562422.56 4206993.06 8.02 1.50 31.53 PERIOD 0.02335 ug/m^3 OSR-5 562434.67 4206992.55 9.37 1.50 31.53 PERIOD 0.01584 ug/m^3 OSR-6 562447.11 4206995.44 10.84 1.50 12.82 PERIOD 0.01160 ug/m^3 OSR-7 562459.90 4206995.96 12.39 1.50 12.82 PERIOD 0.00972 ug/m^3 OSR-8 562472.34 4206998.68 13.15 1.50 13.15 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software 4/12/2022
Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc RS - 21 of 21
470
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 1 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 471
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
Polygon Area Sources
Source Type: AREA POLY
Source: PROJECTSITE (Project Site - Site-wide Grading and Site Prep) X Coordinate
for Vertices
[m]
Y Coordinate
for Vertices
[m]
Base
Elevation
(Optional)
Emission
Rate
[g/ (s-m^2)]
Release
Height
[m]
Initial
Vertical
Dim. [m]
Number of
Vertices
(or sides)

2.68 3.33 0.00E+0 30 562307.78 4207095.31

0.00E+0 562401.56 4207132.770.00E+0 562453.03 4207129.990.00E+0 562505.54 4207055.790.00E+0 562517.03 4207028.390.00E+0 562508.70 4207024.880.00E+0 562519.86 4206999.030.00E+0 562499.01 4206995.310.00E+0 562506.66 4206980.220.00E+0 562535.68 4206985.460.00E+0 562541.19 4206973.550.00E+0 562503.86 4206966.910.00E+0 562470.86 4206962.000.00E+0 562439.86 4206958.310.00E+0 562438.77 4206965.910.00E+0 562414.78 4206963.740.00E+0 562400.21 4206962.530.00E+0 562382.09 4206961.480.00E+0 562365.63 4206960.700.00E+0 562350.20 4206960.140.00E+0 562331.99 4206959.790.00E+0 562315.36 4206959.790.00E+0 562301.59 4206959.850.00E+0 562301.64 4206961.660.00E+0 562297.63 4206961.820.00E+0 562297.79 4206967.980.00E+0 562297.77 4206972.160.00E+0 562297.72 4206978.090.00E+0 562297.24 4206985.480.00E+0 562318.71 4207052.95 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 2 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 472
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
Source Type: AREA POLY
Source: PROJECTSITE (Project Site - Site-wide Grading and Site Prep) X Coordinate
for Vertices
[m]
Y Coordinate
for Vertices
[m]
Base
Elevation
(Optional)
Emission
Rate
[g/ (s-m^2)]
Release
Height
[m]
Initial
Vertical
Dim. [m]
Number of
Vertices
(or sides)
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 3 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 473
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
Source Type: AREA POLY
Source: PH.2.TO.5 (Phases 2 through 5 Construction after intro of new receptors) X Coordinate
for Vertices
[m]
Y Coordinate
for Vertices
[m]
Base
Elevation
(Optional)
Emission
Rate
[g/ (s-m^2)]
Release
Height
[m]
Initial
Vertical
Dim. [m]
Number of
Vertices
(or sides)

7.25 3.33 2.47E-8 26 562415.03 4207004.73

2.47E-8 562407.75 4207018.642.47E-8 562407.91 4207048.342.47E-8 562449.62 4207052.402.47E-8 562475.22 4207030.412.47E-8 562480.63 4207027.822.47E-8 562509.69 4207039.222.47E-8 562503.69 4207053.032.47E-8 562490.40 4207071.682.47E-8 562464.02 4207055.262.47E-8 562449.38 4207076.282.47E-8 562473.94 4207094.892.47E-8 562450.29 4207128.522.47E-8 562403.09 4207130.912.47E-8 562366.48 4207116.772.47E-8 562378.74 4207084.552.47E-8 562354.85 4207073.662.47E-8 562349.17 4207064.282.47E-8 562311.06 4207083.972.47E-8 562319.40 4207051.982.47E-8 562297.77 4206985.642.47E-8 562298.03 4206961.262.47E-8 562302.32 4206961.222.47E-8 562302.19 4206959.682.47E-8 562354.11 4206960.332.47E-8 562418.58 4206963.43 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 4 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 474
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
Line Volume Sources
Source Type: LINE VOLUMESource: SKELLYRD (Skelly Road - Off-Site Emissions) Release Height
[m]
Base Elevation
[m]
Y Coordinate for points
[m]
X Coordinate for Points
[m]
Length of Side
[m]
Emission Rate
[g/ s]
Building Height
[m]

12.00 1.17E-7 562513.83 4207036.73 14.75 3.12
562561.10 4207060.25 13.15 3.12562596.00 4207075.54 19.76 3.12562619.04 4207096.26 24.67 3.12562634.60 4207128.45 24.74 3.12562635.36 4207150.41 24.65 3.12562629.93 4207172.50 22.40 3.12562606.40 4207228.76 24.45 3.12562603.93 4207236.59 24.54 3.12562601.14 4207256.12 23.24 3.12562600.97 4207279.44 22.11 3.12562605.24 4207329.80 14.50 3.12 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 5 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 475
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
Volume Sources Generated from Line Sources
Line
Source
ID
Volume
Source
ID
X Coordinate
[m]
Y Coordinate
[m]
Base
Elevation
[m]
Release
Height
[m[
Emission
Rate
[g/s]
Length of
Side
[m]
Building
Height
[m]
Initial Lateral
Dimencion
[m]
Initial Vertical
Dimencion
[m]
SKELLYRD L0000001 562519.20 4207039.40 14.38 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9 L0000002 562529.94 4207044.75 13.99 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000003 562540.69 4207050.09 13.52 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000004 562551.43 4207055.44 13.04 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000005 562562.20 4207060.73 13.44 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000006 562573.19 4207065.55 16.14 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000007 562584.18 4207070.36 18.68 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000008 562595.17 4207075.18 21.29 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000009 562604.25 4207082.96 23.30 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000010 562613.17 4207090.99 24.36 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9 L0000011 562620.83 4207099.96 24.34 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9 L0000012 562626.05 4207110.77 24.17 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000013 562631.28 4207121.57 24.46 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000014 562634.75 4207132.80 24.88 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000015 562635.17 4207144.80 24.90 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000016 562633.84 4207156.61 25.09 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000017 562630.98 4207168.26 25.28 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000018 562626.99 4207179.55 25.27 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000019 562622.36 4207190.62 24.90 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000020 562617.73 4207201.69 24.54 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000021 562613.10 4207212.76 24.24 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000022 562608.46 4207223.83 24.08 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000023 562604.40 4207235.11 24.05 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000024 562602.46 4207246.93 23.88 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 6 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 476
Source Pathway - Source Inputs
AERMOD
Line
Source
ID
Volume
Source
ID
X Coordinate
[m]
Y Coordinate
[m]
Base
Elevation
[m]
Release
Height
[m[
Emission
Rate
[g/s]
Length of
Side
[m]
Building
Height
[m]
Initial Lateral
Dimencion
[m]
Initial Vertical
Dimencion
[m]
SKELLYRD L0000025 562601.12 4207258.84 23.18 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9 L0000026 562601.04 4207270.83 22.59 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000027 562601.26 4207282.82 20.26 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000028 562602.27 4207294.78 17.73 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000029 562603.29 4207306.74 15.73 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9L0000030 562604.30 4207318.69 15.10 3.12 12.00 5.58 2.90 3.91E-9 AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software SO1 - 7 4/12/2022 Project File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5\21180006 Skelly Residential_Phases 2 thru 5.isc 477
Skelly Residential Project Energy Use Summary
Summary of Energy Use During Construction (Annually)
Construction vehicle fuel 8,254 gallons (gasoline, diesel) Construction equipment fuel 24,300 gallons (diesel)
Total construction fuel 32,555 gallons (gasoline, diesel) Construction office electricity 6,555 kilowatt hours
Summary of Energy Use During Operations (Annually)
Operation vehicle fuel 29,686 gallons (gasoline, diesel) Operation natural gas 1,540,000 kilo‐British Thermal Units Operation electricity 256,033 kilowatt hours
478
Skelly Residential Project Construction Assumptions
CalEEMod output file: Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) ‐ Contra Costa County, Annua Time stamp: Date: 4/7/2022 9:17 AM
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date
Num Days
Week Num Days
Demolition Demolition 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 82
Site Preparation (site‐wide) Site preparation 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 82 Grading (site‐wide) Grading 10/11/2023 12/6/2023 5 41
Paving (roadways and
foundations) Paving 12/1/2023 2/1/2024 5 45
Building Construction
(Model Homes) Building Construction 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 10 Architectural Coating
(pavement and model
homes) Architectural Coating 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 10
Building Construction (Pre
receptors) Building Construction 2/2/2024 6/5/2024 5 89 Architectural Coating (Pre
receptors) Architectural Coating 2/16/2024 6/5/2024 5 79 Building Construction (post
receptors) Building Construction 6/6/2024 10/30/2024 5 105 Architectural Coating (post
receptors) Architectural Coating 6/6/2024 10/30/2024 5 105 Total Workdays 648
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Excavators 1 8 158 0.38
Site Preparation (site‐wide) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 97 0.37 Grading (site‐wide) Graders 1 8 187 0.41
Grading (site‐wide) Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8 247 0.4
Grading (site‐wide) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 97 0.37 Paving (roadways and
foundations) Pavers 1 8 130 0.42
Paving (roadways and
foundations) Paving Equipment 1 8 132 0.36
Paving (roadways and
foundations) Rollers 1 7 80 0.38
Building Construction
(Model Homes) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7 97 0.37
Building Construction
(Model Homes) Cranes 1 7 97 0.37
Building Construction
(Model Homes) Forklifts 1 8 130 0.42
Building Construction
(Model Homes) Generator Sets 1 8 132 0.36
Building Construction
(Model Homes) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7 80 0.38
Architectural Coating
(pavement and model
homes) Air Compressors 1 6 78 0.48
Building Construction (Pre
receptors) Cranes 1 7 97 0.37
Building Construction (Pre
receptors) Forklifts 1 8 130 0.42
Building Construction (Pre
receptors) Generator Sets 1 8 132 0.36
Building Construction (Pre
receptors) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7 80 0.38
Architectural Coating (Pre
receptors) Air Compressors 1 6 78 0.48
On‐Site Construction
Off‐Road Equipment
479
Building Construction (post
receptors) Cranes 1 7 97 0.37
Building Construction (post
receptors) Forklifts 1 8 130 0.42
Building Construction (post
receptors) Generator Sets 1 8 132 0.36
Building Construction (post
receptors) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7 80 0.38
Architectural Coating (post
receptors) Air Compressors 1 6 78 0.48
Phase Name Worker Trip Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Demolition 5 0 224 10.8 7.3 20
Site Preparation (site‐wide) 3 0 0 10.8 7.3 20
Grading (site‐wide) 8 0 0 10.8 7.3 20
Paving (roadways and
foundations) 8 0 0 10.8 7.3 20
Building Construction
(Model Homes) 52 19 0 10.8 7.3 20
Architectural Coating
(pavement and model
homes) 10 0
0 10.8 7.3 20
Building Construction (Pre
receptors) 52 19 0 10.8 7.3 20
Architectural Coating (Pre
receptors) 10 0 0 10.8 7.3 20
Building Construction (post
receptors) 52 19 0 10.8 7.3 20
Architectural Coating (post
receptors) 10 0 0 10.8 7.3 20
Trips and VMT
480
Construction Vehicle Fuel Calculations
California Air Resource Board (ARB). 2022. EMFAC2017 Web Database. Website: https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions‐inventory/9d80a196ff7175eb01f2161f39e572013131647b. Accessed April 12, 2022 VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled
FE = Fuel Economy
Source: EMFAC2017 (v1.0.3) Emissions InventoryRegion Type: CountyRegion: Contra CostaCalendar Year: 2024Season: AnnualVehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 CategoriesUnits: miles/day for VMT, trips/day for Trips, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel ConsumptionRegion CalYr VehClass MdlYr Speed Fuel Population VMT Trips Fuel_Consumption FE VMT*FE (mi/day) (1000 gallons/day) (mi/gallon)
CONTRA COSTA 2023 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 2.5538992 326.0302982 51.09842 0.073466 4.437855443 1446.875334CONTRA COSTA 2023 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 5197.8222 628100.9399 54490.17 92.41798 6.79630661 4268766.57 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 415473.55 15421746.18 1949195 469.7434 32.83014843 506298216.1CONTRA COSTA 2023 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 4583.4538 173065.8983 21477.78 3.441231 50.29185725 8703805.451 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 42903.228 1560070.346 196335.5 55.8014 27.9575489 43615742.98CONTRA COSTA 2023 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 23.39799 398.9985164 77.63046 0.016483 24.20605452 9658.179843 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 136800.1 5101359.876 635180.3 196.0618 26.01914803 132733037.7 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 961.6321 40776.24302 4679.641 1.10959 36.748913 1498482.607 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 10141.215 353591.6844 151089 41.71301 8.476772663 2997316.324 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 8597.3408 314852.4382 108143.7 17.12671 18.38370707 5788154.995CONTRA COSTA 2023 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1267.0063 45469.50058 18876.51 6.08917 7.467273689 339533.2054 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 2958.1461 110401.0059 37209.76 6.718772 16.43172465 1814078.93CONTRA COSTA 2023 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 807.40555 45803.81966 16154.57 9.192351 4.982818755 228232.1317 CONTRA COSTA 2023 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 4601.6248 262908.2893 43927.33 26.81733 9.803671632 2577466.537 Worker
Sum of VMT*FE (Column BI) 692858943
Total VMT 22297417.54
Weighted Average FE 31.07350624
Vendor
Sum of VMT*FE (Column BI) 18014995.57
Total VMT 1761453.708
Weighted Average FE 10.22734545
Haul
Sum of VMT*FE (Column BI) 4270213.445
Total VMT 628426.9702
Weighted Average FE 6.795083037
Skelly Residential Project Construction Assumptions
On‐site Construction
Source: AQ/GHG Appendix, CalEEMod Output
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors) ‐ Contra Costa County, Annual Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors) ‐ Contra Costa County, Annual Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM Construction Schedule Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week Num Days
Demolition Demolition 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 82Site Preparation (site‐wide) Site preparation 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 82Grading (site‐wide) Grading 10/11/2023 12/6/2023 5 41Paving (roadways and foundations) Paving 12/1/2023 2/1/2024 5 45Building Construction (Model Homes) Building Construction 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 10Architectural Coating (pavement andmodel homes) Architectural Coating 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 10Building Construction (Pre receptors) Building Construction 2/2/2024 6/5/2024 5 89 Architectural Coating (Pre receptors) Architectural Coating 2/16/2024 6/5/2024 5 79 Building Construction (post
receptors) Building Construction 6/6/2024 10/30/2024 5 105 Architectural Coating (postreceptors) Architectural Coating 6/6/2024 10/30/2024 5 105 Calculations
481
Trips and VMT Phase Name Total Trips
Worker Trip Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor
Trip Length
Hauling Trip
Length Vendor VehNum Days
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker
Trips
Vendor
Trips
Hauling
Trips
Worker
Trips Vendor Trips
Hauling
Trips
Demolition 5 0 224 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 82 410 0 224 4,428 0 4,480 142.50 0.00 659.30 Site Preparation (site‐wide) 3 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 82 246 0 0 2,657 0 0 85.50 0.00 0.00 Grading (site‐wide) 8 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 41 328 0 0 3,542 0 0 114.00 0.00 0.00 Paving (roadways and foundations) 8 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 45 360 0 0 3,888 0 0 125.12 0.00 0.00 Building Construction (Model
Homes) 52 19 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 10 520 190 0 5,616 1,387 0 180.73 135.62 0.00Architectural Coating (pavement andmodel homes) 10 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 10 100 0 0 1,080 0 0 34.76 0.00 0.00 Building Construction (Pre receptors) 52 19 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 89 4,628 1,691 0 49,982 12,344 0 1,608.52 1,206.99 0.00 Architectural Coating (Pre receptors) 10 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 79 790 0 0 8,532 0 0 274.57 0.00 0.00 Building Construction (post
receptors) 52 19 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 105 5,460 1,995 0 58,968 14,564 0 1,897.69 1,423.98 0.00 Architectural Coating (post
receptors) 10 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 105 1,050 0 0 11,340 0 0 364.94 0.00 0.00 On‐site Total Construction VMT (miles)
182,808
On‐Site Total Fuel Consumption (gallons)
8,254
Trips per Day Trips per Phase VMT per Phase Fuel Consumption (gallons) 482
Construction Vehicle Fuel Calculations
California Air Resource Board (ARB). 2022. EMFAC2017 Web Database. Website: https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsͲinventory/9d80a196ff7175eb01f2161f39e572013131647b. Accessed April 12, 2022 VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled
FE = Fuel Economy
Source: EMFAC2017 (v1.0.3) Emissions InventoryRegion Type: CountyRegion: Contra CostaCalendar Year: 2024Season: AnnualVehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 CategoriesUnits: miles/day for VMT, trips/day for Trips, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel ConsumptionRegion CalYr VehClass MdlYr Speed Fuel Population VMT Trips Fuel_Consumption FE VMT*FE (mi/day) (1000 gallons/day) (mi/gallon)
CONTRA COSTA 2023 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 2.5538992 326.0302982 51.09842 0.073466 4.437855443 1446.875334CONTRA COSTA 2023 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 5197.8222 628100.9399 54490.17 92.41798 6.79630661 4268766.57 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 415473.55 15421746.18 1949195 469.7434 32.83014843 506298216.1CONTRA COSTA 2023 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 4583.4538 173065.8983 21477.78 3.441231 50.29185725 8703805.451 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 42903.228 1560070.346 196335.5 55.8014 27.9575489 43615742.98 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 23.39799 398.9985164 77.63046 0.016483 24.20605452 9658.179843CONTRA COSTA 2023 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 136800.1 5101359.876 635180.3 196.0618 26.01914803 132733037.7CONTRA COSTA 2023 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 961.6321 40776.24302 4679.641 1.10959 36.748913 1498482.607CONTRA COSTA 2023 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 10141.215 353591.6844 151089 41.71301 8.476772663 2997316.324 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 8597.3408 314852.4382 108143.7 17.12671 18.38370707 5788154.995 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1267.0063 45469.50058 18876.51 6.08917 7.467273689 339533.2054 CONTRA COSTA 2023 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 2958.1461 110401.0059 37209.76 6.718772 16.43172465 1814078.93 CONTRA COSTA 2023 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 807.40555 45803.81966 16154.57 9.192351 4.982818755 228232.1317 CONTRA COSTA 2023 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 4601.6248 262908.2893 43927.33 26.81733 9.803671632 2577466.537 Worker
Sum of VMT*FE (Column BI) 692858943
Total VMT 22297417.54
Weighted Average FE 31.07350624
Vendor
Sum of VMT*FE (Column BI) 18014995.57
Total VMT 1761453.708
Weighted Average FE 10.22734545
Haul
Sum of VMT*FE (Column BI) 4270213.445
Total VMT 628426.9702
Weighted Average FE 6.795083037
Skelly Residential Project Construction Assumptions
OnͲsite Construction
Source: AQ/GHG Appendix, CalEEMod Output
Skelly Rd Construction (Before New Receptors)ͲContra Costa County, Annual Date: 4/12/2022 1:32 PM Skelly Rd Construction (After New Receptors)ͲContra Costa County, Annual Date: 4/12/2022 1:35 PM Construction Schedule Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week Num Days
Demolition Demolition 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 82Site Preparation (siteͲwide) Site preparation 10/11/2023 2/1/2024 5 82Grading (siteͲwide) Grading 10/11/2023 12/6/2023 5 41 Paving (roadways and foundations) Paving 12/1/2023 2/1/2024 5 45 Building Construction (Model
Homes) Building Construction 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 10
Architectural Coating (pavement and
model homes) Architectural Coating 1/19/2024 2/1/2024 5 10Building Construction (Pre receptors) Building Construction 2/2/2024 6/5/2024 5 89 Architectural Coating (Pre receptors) Architectural Coating 2/16/2024 6/5/2024 5 79 Building Construction (post
receptors) Building Construction 6/6/2024 10/30/2024 5 105Architectural Coating (postreceptors) Architectural Coating 6/6/2024 10/30/2024 5 105 Calculations
483
Trips and VMT Phase Name Total Trips
Worker Trip Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor
Trip Length
Hauling Trip
Length Vendor VehNum Days
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker
Trips
Vendor
Trips
Hauling
Trips
Worker
Trips Vendor Trips
Hauling
Trips
Demolition 5 0 224 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 82 410 0 224 4,428 0 4,480 142.50 0.00 659.30Site Preparation (siteͲwide) 3 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 82 246 0 0 2,657 0 0 85.50 0.00 0.00 Grading (siteͲwide) 8 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 41 328 0 0 3,542 0 0 114.00 0.00 0.00 Paving (roadways and foundations) 8 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 45 360 0 0 3,888 0 0 125.12 0.00 0.00 Building Construction (Model
Homes) 52 19 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 10 520 190 0 5,616 1,387 0 180.73 135.62 0.00Architectural Coating (pavement andmodel homes) 10 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 10 100 0 0 1,080 0 0 34.76 0.00 0.00 Building Construction (Pre receptors) 52 19 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 89 4,628 1,691 0 49,982 12,344 0 1,608.52 1,206.99 0.00Architectural Coating (Pre receptors) 10 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 79 790 0 0 8,532 0 0 274.57 0.00 0.00Building Construction (post receptors) 52 19 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 105 5,460 1,995 0 58,968 14,564 0 1,897.69 1,423.98 0.00 Architectural Coating (post
receptors) 10 0 0 10.8 7.3 20 HDT_Mix 105 1,050 0 0 11,340 0 0 364.94 0.00 0.00 OnͲsite Total Construction VMT (miles)
182,808
OnͲSite Total Fuel Consumption (gallons)
8,254
Trips per Day Trips per Phase VMT per Phase Fuel Consumption (gallons) 484
Construction Office Electricity Calculation
Energy Appendix: CalEEMod Typical Construction Trailer
Typical Construction Trailer ‐ Contra Costa County, Annual Date: 4/11/2022 3:15 PM
kWh/yr = kilowatt hours per year
Energy by Land Use ‐ Electricity
Annual 8,669 kWh/yr
Total Over Construction 6,555 kWh
Total Construction Schedule
Start 10/11/2023
End 10/30/2024
Total Calendar Days 276
Consecutive workdays
only (no overlap)
Years 0.76
485
Proposed Operation Fuel Calculation
California Air Resource Board (ARB). 2022. EMFAC2017 Web Database. Website: https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions‐inventory/9d80a196ff7175eb01f2161f39e572013131647b. Accessed April 12, 202EMFAC2014 (v1.0.7) Emissions Inventory VMT = Vehicle Miles TraveledRegion Type: County FE = Fuel EconomyRegion: San BernardinoCalendar Year: 2022Season: AnnualVehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 CategoriesUnits: miles/day for VMT, trips/day for Trips, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel ConsumptionGivenRegion CalYr VehClass MdlYr Speed Fuel Population VMT Fuel
Consumption FE VMT*FE
CONTRA COSTA 2024 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 2.62615587 352.571602 0.077413082 4.554419 1605.75876CONTRA COSTA 2024 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 5369.96533 644008.096 93.32397156 6.900779 4444157.499CONTRA COSTA 2024 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 424002.7 15638010.2 462.9054734 33.7823 528287902.6CONTRA COSTA 2024 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 4766.18285 178809.301 3.462298249 51.64468 9234549.959CONTRA COSTA 2024 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 43486.3132 1574810.82 54.82710178 28.72322 45233635.29CONTRA COSTA 2024 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 21.5405842 370.340918 0.014988569 24.70822 9150.466598CONTRA COSTA 2024 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 138047.48 5107761.37 189.7404491 26.91973 137499549.2CONTRA COSTA 2024 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1027.93047 42718.2348 1.131568761 37.75134 1612670.524CONTRA COSTA 2024 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 10022.0628 348469.314 40.60401777 8.582139 2990611.992CONTRA COSTA 2024 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 8682.76917 315653.419 16.91692909 18.65903 5889785.347CONTRA COSTA 2024 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1278.12814 45708.8071 6.040618746 7.566908 345874.3435CONTRA COSTA 2024 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 3036.82387 112130.337 6.721691715 16.68186 1870542.869CONTRA COSTA 2024 MCY Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 20272.9721 150835.274 4.036357781 37.36915 5636586.525CONTRA COSTA 2024 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 96641.9601 3343210.94 153.7335167 21.74679 72704115.9CONTRA COSTA 2024 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 2405.86448 94971.4265 3.310076524 28.69161 2724883.185CONTRA COSTA 2024 MH Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1848.85436 16982.6047 3.409749877 4.980601 84583.58342CONTRA COSTA 2024 MH Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 796.078241 7171.6485 0.711608539 10.07808 72276.45449CONTRA COSTA 2024 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 831.928497 47583.7346 9.361503464 5.082916 241864.1197CONTRA COSTA 2024 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 4761.34708 264391.325 26.65878724 9.917605 2622128.761CONTRA COSTA 2024 OBUS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 293.333926 13840.1398 2.807456993 4.929778 68228.81691CONTRA COSTA 2024 OBUS Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 134.625537 10562.0349 1.278009258 8.264443 87289.33737CONTRA COSTA 2024 SBUS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 68.2737846 3441.19612 0.34318331 10.02728 34505.84687CONTRA COSTA 2024 SBUS Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 960.261868 31547.4635 3.439132547 9.173087 289387.6406CONTRA COSTA 2024 UBUS Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 25.281148 2468.69094 0.300432202 8.217132 20285.55832CONTRA COSTA 2024 UBUS Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 188.434558 19045.969 2.882599841 6.607219 125840.8915 Vehicles
Sum of VMT*FE 822132012.4
Total VMT 28014855.22
Weighted Average FE 29.3462881 miles/gallon
Total VMTSource: AQ/GHG Appendix, CalEEMod Output
215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation ‐ Contra Costa County, Annua Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
Annual VMT
(miles)
Fuel
Consumption
Total VMT 871,184 29,686 gallons per year
Calculations
486
Operation Natural Gas Use
Source: AQ/GHG Appendix, CalEEMod Output215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation ‐ Contra Costa County, Annual Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
kBTU/yr = kilo‐British Thermal Units/year
CF = cubic feet
Natural Gas Use
City Park 0Other Asphalt Surfaces 0
Parking Lot 0
Single Family Housing 1540000Total 1,540,000 kBTU/yr
487
Operation Electricity Use
Source: AQ/GHG Appendix, CalEEMod Output215 Skelly Hercules Residential Project 2024 Operation ‐ Contra Costa County, Annual Date: 4/11/2022 1:42 PM
Project Electricity Use
kWh/yr = kilowatt hours per year
Electricity Use
Land Use (kWh/yr)City Park ‐19550Other Asphalt Surfaces ‐19550Parking Lot 2262 Single Family Housing 292871.1Total 256,033 kWh/yr
488

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
489
Biological Resources Supporting Information
490

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
491
B.1 - Database Search Results
492

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
493
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Accipiter cooperii
Cooper's hawk
ABNKC12040 None None G5 S4 WL
Adela oplerella
Opler's longhorn moth
IILEE0G040 None None G2 S2
Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
ABPBXB0020 None Threatened G1G2 S1S2 SSC
Amorpha californica var. napensis
Napa false indigo
PDFAB08012 None None G4T2 S2 1B.2
Amsinckia lunaris
bent-flowered fiddleneck
PDBOR01070 None None G3 S3 1B.2
Andrena blennospermatis
Blennosperma vernal pool andrenid bee
IIHYM35030 None None G2 S2
Antrozous pallidus
pallid bat
AMACC10010 None None G4 S3 SSC
Aquila chrysaetos
golden eagle
ABNKC22010 None None G5 S3 FP
Archoplites interruptus
Sacramento perch
AFCQB07010 None None G2G3 S1 SSC
Arctostaphylos pallida
pallid manzanita
PDERI04110 Threatened Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
Ardea alba
great egret
ABNGA04040 None None G5 S4
Ardea herodias
great blue heron
ABNGA04010 None None G5 S4
Asio flammeus
short-eared owl
ABNSB13040 None None G5 S3 SSC
Astragalus tener var. tener
alkali milk-vetch
PDFAB0F8R1 None None G2T1 S1 1B.2
Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
ABNSB10010 None None G4 S3 SSC
Balsamorhiza macrolepis
big-scale balsamroot
PDAST11061 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Blennosperma bakeri
Sonoma sunshine
PDAST1A010 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
Blepharizonia plumosa
big tarplant
PDAST1C011 None None G1G2 S1S2 1B.1
Quad IS (Mare Island (3812213) OR Cordelia (3812222) OR Briones Valley (3712282) OR Richmond (3712283) OR Benicia (3812212) OR Petaluma Point (3812214) OR Cuttings Wharf (3812223) OR Sears Point (3812224) OR San Quentin (3712284))
Query Criteria:

Report Printed on Tuesday, April 12, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated April, 1 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 6 Information Expires 10/1/2022
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
494
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Bombus caliginosus
obscure bumble bee
IIHYM24380 None None G2G3 S1S2
Bombus crotchii
Crotch bumble bee
IIHYM24480 None None G2 S1S2
Bombus occidentalis
western bumble bee
IIHYM24250 None None G2G3 S1
Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy shrimp
ICBRA03030 Threatened None G3 S3
Branta hutchinsii leucopareia
cackling (=Aleutian Canada) goose
ABNJB05035 Delisted None G5T3 S3 WL
Buteo regalis
ferruginous hawk
ABNKC19120 None None G4 S3S4 WL
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
ABNKC19070 None Threatened G5 S3
Calochortus pulchellus
Mt. Diablo fairy-lantern
PMLIL0D160 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Calochortus tiburonensis
Tiburon mariposa-lily
PMLIL0D1C0 Threatened Threatened G1 S1 1B.1
Calystegia purpurata ssp. saxicola
coastal bluff morning-glory
PDCON040D2 None None G4T2T3 S2S3 1B.2
Carex lyngbyei
Lyngbye's sedge
PMCYP037Y0 None None G5 S3 2B.2
Castilleja affinis var. neglecta
Tiburon paintbrush
PDSCR0D013 Endangered Threatened G4G5T1T2 S1S2 1B.2
Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii
Congdon's tarplant
PDAST4R0P1 None None G3T1T2 S1S2 1B.1
Centromadia parryi ssp. parryi
pappose tarplant
PDAST4R0P2 None None G3T2 S2 1B.2
Charadrius nivosus nivosus
western snowy plover
ABNNB03031 Threatened None G3T3 S2 SSC
Chloropyron maritimum ssp. palustre
Point Reyes salty bird's-beak
PDSCR0J0C3 None None G4?T2 S2 1B.2
Chloropyron molle ssp. molle
soft salty bird's-beak
PDSCR0J0D2 Endangered Rare G2T1 S1 1B.2
Cicuta maculata var. bolanderi
Bolander's water-hemlock
PDAPI0M051 None None G5T4T5 S2? 2B.1
Circus hudsonius
northern harrier
ABNKC11011 None None G5 S3 SSC
Cirsium andrewsii
Franciscan thistle
PDAST2E050 None None G3 S3 1B.2
Coastal Brackish Marsh
Coastal Brackish Marsh
CTT52200CA None None G2 S2.1
Report Printed on Tuesday, April 12, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated April, 1 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 2 of 6 Information Expires 10/1/2022
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
495
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Coastal Terrace Prairie
Coastal Terrace Prairie
CTT41100CA None None G2 S2.1
Corynorhinus townsendii
Townsend's big-eared bat
AMACC08010 None None G4 S2 SSC
Coturnicops noveboracensis
yellow rail
ABNME01010 None None G4 S1S2 SSC
Danaus plexippus pop. 1
monarch - California overwintering population
IILEPP2012 Candidate None G4T2T3 S2S3
Desmocerus californicus dimorphus
valley elderberry longhorn beetle
IICOL48011 Threatened None G3T2T3 S3
Dipodomys heermanni berkeleyensis
Berkeley kangaroo rat
AMAFD03061 None None G4T1 S1
Dirca occidentalis
western leatherwood
PDTHY03010 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Downingia pusilla
dwarf downingia
PDCAM060C0 None None GU S2 2B.2
Egretta thula
snowy egret
ABNGA06030 None None G5 S4
Elanus leucurus
white-tailed kite
ABNKC06010 None None G5 S3S4 FP
Emys marmorata
western pond turtle
ARAAD02030 None None G3G4 S3 SSC
Eriogonum luteolum var. caninum
Tiburon buckwheat
PDPGN083S1 None None G5T2 S2 1B.2
Eryngium jepsonii
Jepson's coyote-thistle
PDAPI0Z130 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Extriplex joaquinana
San Joaquin spearscale
PDCHE041F3 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Falco peregrinus anatum
American peregrine falcon
ABNKD06071 Delisted Delisted G4T4 S3S4 FP
Fissidens pauperculus
minute pocket moss
NBMUS2W0U0 None None G3? S2 1B.2
Fritillaria liliacea
fragrant fritillary
PMLIL0V0C0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
saltmarsh common yellowthroat
ABPBX1201A None None G5T3 S3 SSC
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
bald eagle
ABNKC10010 Delisted Endangered G5 S3 FP
Helianthella castanea
Diablo helianthella
PDAST4M020 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Helminthoglypta nickliniana bridgesi
Bridges' coast range shoulderband
IMGASC2362 None None G3T1 S1S2
Report Printed on Tuesday, April 12, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated April, 1 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 3 of 6 Information Expires 10/1/2022
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
496
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Hesperolinon congestum
Marin western flax
PDLIN01060 Threatened Threatened G1 S1 1B.1
Hoita strobilina
Loma Prieta hoita
PDFAB5Z030 None None G2? S2? 1B.1
Holocarpha macradenia
Santa Cruz tarplant
PDAST4X020 Threatened Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
Hydroprogne caspia
Caspian tern
ABNNM08020 None None G5 S4
Hypomesus transpacificus
Delta smelt
AFCHB01040 Threatened Endangered G1 S1
Isocoma arguta
Carquinez goldenbush
PDAST57050 None None G1 S1 1B.1
Lasionycteris noctivagans
silver-haired bat
AMACC02010 None None G3G4 S3S4
Lasiurus cinereus
hoary bat
AMACC05030 None None G3G4 S4
Lasthenia conjugens
Contra Costa goldfields
PDAST5L040 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1
Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus
California black rail
ABNME03041 None Threatened G3T1 S1 FP
Lathyrus jepsonii var. jepsonii
Delta tule pea
PDFAB250D2 None None G5T2 S2 1B.2
Legenere limosa
legenere
PDCAM0C010 None None G2 S2 1B.1
Leptosiphon jepsonii
Jepson's leptosiphon
PDPLM09140 None None G2G3 S2S3 1B.2
Lilaeopsis masonii
Mason's lilaeopsis
PDAPI19030 None Rare G2 S2 1B.1
Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus
Alameda whipsnake
ARADB21031 Threatened Threatened G4T2 S2
Meconella oregana
Oregon meconella
PDPAP0G030 None None G2G3 S2 1B.1
Melospiza melodia maxillaris
Suisun song sparrow
ABPBXA301K None None G5T3 S3 SSC
Melospiza melodia pusillula
Alameda song sparrow
ABPBXA301S None None G5T2? S2S3 SSC
Melospiza melodia samuelis
San Pablo song sparrow
ABPBXA301W None None G5T2 S2 SSC
Microcina leei
Lee's micro-blind harvestman
ILARA47040 None None G1 S1
Microcina tiburona
Tiburon micro-blind harvestman
ILARA47060 None None G1 S2
Report Printed on Tuesday, April 12, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated April, 1 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 4 of 6 Information Expires 10/1/2022
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
497
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Microtus californicus sanpabloensis
San Pablo vole
AMAFF11034 None None G5T1T2 S1S2 SSC
Nannopterum auritum
double-crested cormorant
ABNFD01020 None None G5 S4 WL
Neotoma fuscipes annectens
San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat
AMAFF08082 None None G5T2T3 S2S3 SSC
Northern Coastal Salt Marsh
Northern Coastal Salt Marsh
CTT52110CA None None G3 S3.2
Northern Maritime Chaparral
Northern Maritime Chaparral
CTT37C10CA None None G1 S1.2
Northern Vernal Pool
Northern Vernal Pool
CTT44100CA None None G2 S2.1
Nycticorax nycticorax
black-crowned night heron
ABNGA11010 None None G5 S4
Nyctinomops macrotis
big free-tailed bat
AMACD04020 None None G5 S3 SSC
Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 8
steelhead - central California coast DPS
AFCHA0209G Threatened None G5T2T3Q S2S3
Pandion haliaetus
osprey
ABNKC01010 None None G5 S4 WL
Pentachaeta bellidiflora
white-rayed pentachaeta
PDAST6X030 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
Plagiobothrys glaber
hairless popcornflower
PDBOR0V0B0 None None GX SX 1A
Pogonichthys macrolepidotus
Sacramento splittail
AFCJB34020 None None GNR S3 SSC
Polygonum marinense
Marin knotweed
PDPGN0L1C0 None None G2Q S2 3.1
Rallus obsoletus obsoletus
California Ridgway's rail
ABNME05011 Endangered Endangered G3T1 S1 FP
Rana boylii
foothill yellow-legged frog
AAABH01050 None Endangered G3 S3 SSC
Rana draytonii
California red-legged frog
AAABH01022 Threatened None G2G3 S2S3 SSC
Reithrodontomys raviventris
salt-marsh harvest mouse
AMAFF02040 Endangered Endangered G1G2 S1S2 FP
Riparia riparia
bank swallow
ABPAU08010 None Threatened G5 S2
Senecio aphanactis
chaparral ragwort
PDAST8H060 None None G3 S2 2B.2
Serpentine Bunchgrass
Serpentine Bunchgrass
CTT42130CA None None G2 S2.2
Report Printed on Tuesday, April 12, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated April, 1 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 5 of 6 Information Expires 10/1/2022
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
498
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Sorex ornatus sinuosus
Suisun shrew
AMABA01103 None None G5T1T2Q S1S2 SSC
Sorex vagrans halicoetes
salt-marsh wandering shrew
AMABA01071 None None G5T1 S1 SSC
Spergularia macrotheca var. longistyla
long-styled sand-spurrey
PDCAR0W062 None None G5T2 S2 1B.2
Speyeria callippe callippe
callippe silverspot butterfly
IILEPJ6091 Endangered None G5T1 S1
Speyeria zerene sonomensis
Sonoma zerene fritillary
IILEPJ6083 None None G5T1 S1
Spirinchus thaleichthys
longfin smelt
AFCHB03010 Candidate Threatened G5 S1
Streptanthus glandulosus ssp. niger
Tiburon jewelflower
PDBRA2G0T0 Endangered Endangered G4T1 S1 1B.1
Suaeda californica
California seablite
PDCHE0P020 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1
Symphyotrichum lentum
Suisun Marsh aster
PDASTE8470 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Syncaris pacifica
California freshwater shrimp
ICMAL27010 Endangered Endangered G2 S2
Taxidea taxus
American badger
AMAJF04010 None None G5 S3 SSC
Thaleichthys pacificus
eulachon
AFCHB04010 Threatened None G5 S2
Trifolium amoenum
two-fork clover
PDFAB40040 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1
Trifolium hydrophilum
saline clover
PDFAB400R5 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Triquetrella californica
coastal triquetrella
NBMUS7S010 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Tryonia imitator
mimic tryonia (=California brackishwater snail)
IMGASJ7040 None None G2 S2
Valley Needlegrass Grassland
Valley Needlegrass Grassland
CTT42110CA None None G3 S3.1
Viburnum ellipticum
oval-leaved viburnum
PDCPR07080 None None G4G5 S3? 2B.3
Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus
yellow-headed blackbird
ABPBXB3010 None None G5 S3 SSC
Record Count: 121
Report Printed on Tuesday, April 12, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated April, 1 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 6 of 6 Information Expires 10/1/2022
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
499
4/12/22, 8:31 AM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&crpr=1A:1B:2A:2B:3&fesa=FE:FT:FC&cesa=CE:CT:CR:CE:CT&fsao=or&qsl=9&quad=3812222:3712282:3712283:3812212:3812213:3812214:3812223:3812224:3712… 1/2 Search Results
CNPS Rare Plant Inventory
13 matches found. Click on scientific name for details
Search Criteria: CRPR is one of [1A:1B:2A:2B:3] Fed List is one of [FE:FT:FC] or State List is one of [CE:CT:CR:CE:CT] , 9-Quad include [3812222:3712282:3712283:3812212:3812213:3812214:3812223:3812224:3712284] ▲ SCIENTIFIC
NAME
COMMON

NAME FAMILY LIFEFORM

BLOOMING
PERIOD
FED
LIST
STATE
LIST
GLOBAL
RANK
STATE
RANK

CA RARE
PLANT

RANK PHOTO
Arctostaphylos
pallida
pallid
manzanita
Ericaceae perennial
evergreen shrub
Dec-Mar FT CE G1 S1 1B.1
No Photo
Available
Blennosperma
bakeri
Sonoma
sunshine
Asteraceae annual herb Mar-May FE CE G1 S1 1B.1
No Photo
Available
Calochortus
tiburonensis
Tiburon
mariposa-lily
Liliaceae perennial
bulbiferous herb
Mar-Jun FT CT G1 S1 1B.1
No Photo
Available
Castilleja affinis
var. neglecta
Tiburon
paintbrush
Orobanchaceae perennial herb
(hemiparasitic)
Apr-Jun FE CT G4G5T1T2 S1S2 1B.2
No Photo
Available
Chloropyron
molle ssp. molle
soft salty
bird's-beak
Orobanchaceae annual herb
(hemiparasitic)
Jun-Nov FE CR G2T1 S1 1B.2
No Photo
Available
Hesperolinon
congestum
Marin western
flax
Linaceae annual herb Apr-Jul FT CT G1 S1 1B.1
© 2009
Neal Kramer
Holocarpha
macradenia
Santa Cruz
tarplant
Asteraceae annual herb Jun-Oct FT CE G1 S1 1B.1
© 2011
Dylan
Neubauer
Lasthenia
conjugens
Contra Costa
goldfields
Asteraceae annual herb Mar-Jun FE None G1 S1 1B.1
© 2013
Neal Kramer
Lilaeopsis masonii Mason's
lilaeopsis
Apiaceae perennial
rhizomatous
herb
Apr-Nov None CR G2 S2 1B.1
No Photo
Available
Pentachaeta
bellidiflora
white-rayed
pentachaeta
Asteraceae annual herb Mar-May FE CE G1 S1 1B.1
No Photo
Available
Streptanthus
glandulosus ssp.
niger
Tiburon
jewelflower
Brassicaceae annual herb May-Jun FE CE G4T1 S1 1B.1
No Photo
Available
500
4/12/22, 8:31 AM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&crpr=1A:1B:2A:2B:3&fesa=FE:FT:FC&cesa=CE:CT:CR:CE:CT&fsao=or&qsl=9&quad=3812222:3712282:3712283:3812212:3812213:3812214:3812223:3812224:3712… 2/2 Suaeda californica California
seablite
Chenopodiaceae perennial
evergreen shrub
Jul-Oct FE None G1 S1 1B.1
No Photo
Available
Trifolium
amoenum
two-fork
clover
Fabaceae annual herb Apr-Jun FE None G1 S1 1B.1
No Photo
Available
Showing 1 to 13 of 13 entries
Suggested Citation:

California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2022. Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v9-01 1.5). Website https://www.rareplants.cnps.org [accessed 12 April 2022].

ABOUT THIS WEBSITE
About the Inventory
Release Notes
Advanced Search
Glossary

ABOUT CNPS
About the Rare Plant Program
CNPS Home Page
About CNPS
Join CNPS

CONTRIBUTORS
The Calflora Database
The California Lichen Society
California Natural Diversity
Database
The Jepson Flora Project
The Consortium of California
Herbaria
CalPhotos
Copyright © 2010-2022 California Native Plant Society. All rights reserved. 501
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 1/15 IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.

Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS office(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.

Location
Contra Costa County, California
Map of project location
Local office
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
 (916) 414-6600
 (916) 414-6713
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
IPaC U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
502
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 2/15 Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.

The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species.

Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a fish population even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential effects to species, additional site-specific and project-specific information is often required.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an official species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field office directly.

For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an official species list by doing the following:

1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.

2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.

3. Log in (if directed to do so).

4. Provide a name and description for your project.

5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.

Listed species and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries ).

Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.

1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ).

2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:

Mammals
1 2
503
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 3/15 Birds
Reptiles
Amphibians

NAME STATUS
Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse Reithrodontomys raviventris
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/613
Endangered

NAME STATUS
California Clapper Rail Rallus longirostris obsoletus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4240
Endangered
California Least Tern Sterna antillarum browni
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8104
Endangered
Northern Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis caurina
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1123
Threatened
Western Snowy Plover Charadrius nivosus nivosus
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8035
Threatened

NAME STATUS
Alameda Whipsnake (=striped Racer) Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5524
Threatened

NAME STATUS
504
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 4/15 Fishes
Insects
Crustaceans
Flowering Plants
California Red-legged Frog Rana draytonii
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2891
Threatened

NAME STATUS
Delta Smelt Hypomesus transpacificus
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/321
Threatened

NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Candidate

NAME STATUS
California Freshwater Shrimp Syncaris pacifica
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7903
Endangered
Conservancy Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta conservatio
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8246
Endangered

NAME STATUS
Contra Costa Goldfields Lasthenia conjugens
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7058
Endangered
505
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 5/15 Critical habitats
Potential effects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves.

THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS AT THIS LOCATION.

Migratory birds
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip:
enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird Soft Bird's-beak Cordylanthus mollis ssp. mollis
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8541
Endangered
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act .

Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.

1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.

2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/ birds-of-conservation-concern.php
Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/ conservation-measures.php
Nationwide conservation measures for birds
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf 1 2
506
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 6/15 species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found below.

For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

NAME BREEDING SEASON (IF A

BREEDING SEASON IS INDICATED

FOR A BIRD ON YOUR LIST, THE

BIRD MAY BREED IN YOUR

PROJECT AREA SOMETIME WITHIN

THE TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED,

WHICH IS A VERY LIBERAL

ESTIMATE OF THE DATES INSIDE

WHICH THE BIRD BREEDS
ACROSS ITS ENTIRE RANGE.
"BREEDS ELSEWHERE" INDICATES

THAT THE BIRD DOES NOT LIKELY
BREED IN YOUR PROJECT AREA.)
Allen's Hummingbird Selasphorus sasin
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9637
Breeds Feb 1 to Jul 15
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
Black Oystercatcher Haematopus bachmani
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9591
Breeds Apr 15 to Oct 31
Black Turnstone Arenaria melanocephala
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds elsewhere
California Thrasher Toxostoma redivivum
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Jan 1 to Jul 31
507
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 7/15 Clark's Grebe Aechmophorus clarkii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 31
Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2084
Breeds May 20 to Jul 31
Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
Lawrence's Goldfinch Carduelis lawrencei
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9464
Breeds Mar 20 to Sep 20
Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9481
Breeds elsewhere
Nuttall's Woodpecker Picoides nuttallii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9410
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 20
Oak Titmouse Baeolophus inornatus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9656
Breeds Mar 15 to Jul 15
Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3914
Breeds May 20 to Aug 31
Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480
Breeds elsewhere
508
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 8/15 Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Probability of Presence ( )
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.

2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is

0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

Breeding Season ( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Effort ( )
Willet Tringa semipalmata
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds elsewhere
Wrentit Chamaea fasciata
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10
509
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 9/15 probability of presence breeding season survey effort no data Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.

To see a bar's survey effort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ( )
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Allen's
Hummingbird
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Bald Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable (This is
not a Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) in
this area, but
warrants attention
because of the
Eagle Act or for
potential
susceptibilities in
offshore areas
from certain types
of development or
activities.)
Black
Oystercatcher
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
510
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 10/15 Black Turnstone
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
California Thrasher
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Clark's Grebe
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Common
Yellowthroat
BCC - BCR (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) only
in particular Bird
Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in
the continental
USA)
Golden Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable (This is
not a Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) in
this area, but
warrants attention
because of the
Eagle Act or for
potential
susceptibilities in
offshore areas
from certain types
of development or
activities.)
511
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 11/15 Lawrence's
Goldfinch
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Marbled Godwit
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Nuttall's
Woodpecker
BCC - BCR (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) only
in particular Bird
Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in
the continental
USA)
Oak Titmouse
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Olive-sided
Flycatcher
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
512
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 12/15 Short-billed
Dowitcher
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Willet
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Wrentit
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.

Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.

What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location? The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or development.
513
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 13/15 Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the AKN Phenology Tool.

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets .

Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.

How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my project area? To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds guide. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:

1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);

2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and

3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).

Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.

Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review.

Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.

Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.
514
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 14/15 What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.

Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS AT THIS LOCATION.

Fish hatcheries
THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION.

Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes. 515
4/12/22, 8:39 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/H6ZGWVYLTZGFLLX2W2MFPOYRMI/resources 15/15 For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

WETLAND INFORMATION IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME
This can happen when the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map service is unavailable, or for very large projects that intersect many wetland areas. Try again, or visit the NWI map to view wetlands at this location.

Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted.

Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters.

Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory.

These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.

Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may affect such activities.
516

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
517
B.2 - Biological Resources Analysis Report
518

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
519

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ANALYSIS REPORT

FOR THE

SKELLY PROPERTY

CITY OF HERCULES, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:

D.R. HORTON
6683 Owens Drive
Pleasanton, California 94588
Prepared by:

OLBERDING ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.

Wetland Regulatory Consultants
3170 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 260
San Ramon, California 94583
Phone: (925) 866-2111 ~ Fax: (925) 866-2126
E-mail: [email protected]
Contact: Jeff Olberding
MARCH 2022 (Amended)
520

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................... 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................ 3

2.0 LOCATION.......................................................................................................................... 3

3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION............................................................................................... 3

4.0 REGULATORY SETTING ................................................................................................. 5

4.1 Federal Regulatory Setting................................................................................................... 5

4.1.1 Plants and Wildlife ........................................................................................... 5

4.1.2 Wetlands/Waters............................................................................................... 5

4.1.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act................................................................................ 8

4.1.4 Federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act................................................ 8

4.2 State Regulatory Setting....................................................................................................... 9

4.2.1 Plants and Wildlife ........................................................................................... 9

4.2.2 Wetlands/Waters ............................................................................................. 10

4.2.3 California Environmental Quality Act............................................................ 10

4.2.4 City of Hercules Municipal Code ................................................................... 11

5.0 METHODS OF ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................ 12

5.1 Soils Evaluation .................................................................................................................. 14

5.2 Plant Survey Methods ........................................................................................................ 14

5.2.1 Review of Literature and Data Sources .......................................................... 14

5.2.2 Field Surveys .................................................................................................. 14

5.3 Wildlife Survey Methods ................................................................................................... 15

5.3.1 Review of Literature and Data Sources .......................................................... 15

5.3.2 Field Surveys .................................................................................................. 15

6.0 RESULTS FOR GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ............................................. 16

6.1 Soil Evaluation Results ...................................................................................................... 16

6.2 Plant Survey Results ........................................................................................................... 17

6.2.1 Floristic Inventory and Habitat Characterization ........................................... 17

6.3 Wildlife Survey Results ...................................................................................................... 21

6.3.1 General Wildlife Species and Habitats ........................................................... 21

7.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................ 29

7.1 Wetlands ............................................................................................................................. 29

7.2 Special-status Plants ........................................................................................................... 30

7.3 Special-status Wildlife ....................................................................................................... 30

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 30

9.0 LITERATURE CITED ....................................................................................................... 34 521

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHMENT 1 FIGURES
Figure 1 Regional Map
Figure 2 Vicinity Map
Figure 3 USGS Topographic Map
Figure 4 Aerial Map
Figure 5 CNDDB Wildlife Occurrences within 5 miles
Figure 6 CNDDB Plant Occurrences within 5 miles
Figure 7 USFWS Critical Habitat
Figure 8 Soils Map
Figure 9 Photo Location Map
Figure 10 Habitat Map
ATTACHMENT 2 TABLES
Table 1 Plant and Wildlife Species Observed Within/Adjacent to the Survey Area
Table 2 Special-Status Species Occurring Within/Adjacent to the Survey Area
ATTACHMENT 3 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
This report should be cited as: Olberding Environmental, Inc. March 2022. Biological Resources Analysis Report for the Skelly Property, City of Hercules, Contra Costa County, California. Prepared for D.R. Horton, Pleasanton, California.
522

SUMMARY
On November 11, 2020, Olberding Environmental, Inc. conducted a field reconnaissance survey of the Skelly Property (Property) for the purpose of identifying sensitive plant and wildlife species, sensitive habitats, and biological constraints potentially occurring on the Property. The Property surveyed is comprised of approximately 7.49 acres located in the City of Hercules, Contra Costa County, California.

Results of the reconnaissance survey identified a small drainage feature at the southern portion of the property and two isolated seasonal wetlands that had developed in shallow topographical depressions associated with a horse paddock along the northern boundary. It was determined that these wetlands/waters might be considered jurisdictional by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and/or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). A jurisdictional delineation was prepared and presented to the Corps for verification purposes. Following an onsite verification, the Corps concluded that the perennial drainage was a jurisdiction feature. However, the two seasonal wetlands Were determined to be non-jurisdictional by the Corps due to their isolation and lack of connectivity to jurisdictional waters. Both the perennial drainage and the isolated wetlands qualify as jurisdictional “Waters of the State” by the RWQCB. The CDFW would have jurisdiction over the perennial drainage.

The proposed project would incorporate project design features to avoid the two seasonal wetlands. These design features include the creation of a bio retention basin surrounding the isolated wetlands with a 5-foot setback buffer to avoid impacts to the wetlands. Additionally, treated stormwater runoff water would be directed to the isolated wetlands from the retention basin, augmenting hydrology to support the functions and values being provided by the wetland habitat. The project will avoid the perennial drainage area entirely. There are no anticipated impacts to either the perennial drainage or the two seasonal wetlands. As such, no Corps, CDFW or RWQCB permits will be required.

A query of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) showed that thirteen specialstatus plant species have been recorded within a 5-mile radius of the Property. Eleven species were identified as having no potential to occur on the Property, based on the absence of suitable habitat, soil composition, and the development and disturbance of the Property. Suitable habitats for these species include vernal pool, serpentine environments, chaparral, broad-leafed upland forest, cismontane woodlands, coastal prairie, coastal scrub, freshwater wetland, brackish or freshwater marsh, none of which are found on the Property. Two plants, Diablo helianthella (Helianthella castanea) and Santa Cruz tarplant (Holocarpha macradenia) were both found to have marginally suitable habitat within the Property due to the presence of riparian woodland and grassland habitat with clay soils; however, it was determined that both species are not likely to occur on the Property due to the development and high level of disturbance historically to the 523
site through livestock activities such as grazing. In addition to the disturbance to the Property, the lack of nearby extant occurrences of Santa Cruz tarplant also made it unlikely that this species would occur onsite. For these reasons, a rare plant survey is not needed.

A total of four avian species were identified to have a high potential to occur on the Property.

The red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), and white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) all have a high potential to occur in both a foraging and nesting capacity. The red-tailed hawk was the only raptor observed foraging on or near the Property during the time of the survey. If project construction-related activities such as vegetation removal or grading take place during the nesting season (February through August), preconstruction surveys for nesting passerine birds and raptors are recommended.

No sign of bat use was observed on the Property during the November 2020 survey; however, based on habitat suitability, it was determined that bats have a moderate to high potential to utilize the site in a roosting and foraging capacity. These bat species include pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans), and Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis). If project construction-related activities such as tree removal or the removal of the existing structures take place it is recommended that a bat habitat assessment is conducted by a qualified bat biologist during seasonal periods of bat activity to determine suitability of the onsite habitat. If special-status bat species are discovered, construction activities may be timed to minimize impacts and additional mitigation may be required.

CNDDB listed 8 occurrences of California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) in the 5-mile radius of the Property. The potential seasonal wetland and perennial drainage on the Property do not provide suitable breeding habitat within the site. The Property contains suitable dispersal corridors and foraging habitat for CRLF; however, the closest occurrence of CRLF to the Property is approximately 1.5 miles east of the Property outside of the known 1-mile dispersal distance and separated by extensive residential development and Interstate 80. USFWS designated CRLF critical habitat is recorded 3.5 miles southeast of the Property, and the majority of the CNDDB occurrences are recorded in this region. For these reasons, CRLF has a low potential to occur on the Property and is not likely to occur.

The monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) was identified as having a moderate potential to overwinter on the Property. Monarchs generally overwinter beginning in September or October.

If project construction-related activities such as tree and vegetation removal take place during the overwintering season, preconstruction surveys for monarch butterfly are recommended during the months of September or October.
524

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Olberding Environmental, Inc. has conducted a biological resources analysis (biological constraints assessment) of the Skelly Property, located in the City of Hercules in Contra Costa County, California. This biological resources analysis included a review of pertinent literature on relevant background information and habitat characteristics of the site. Our review included researching existing information in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) maintained by the CDFW and the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Also included was a review of information related to species of plants and animals that could potentially utilize the described habitats identified on and immediately surrounding the Property. To assist in the assessment, a field reconnaissance investigation of the Property was conducted on November 11, 2020. This report documents the methods, results, and conclusions for the reconnaissance-level survey associated with the biological resources analysis for the Property.

2.0 LOCATION
The Property is located west of Interstate 80, and directly north of San Pablo Avenue in the city of Hercules, within Contra Costa County, California. Attachment 1, Figure 1 depicts the regional location of the Property in Contra Costa County, and Attachment 1, Figure 2 illustrates the vicinity of the Property in relationship to the City of Hercules. Attachment 1, Figure 3 identifies the location of the Property on the USGS 7.5 Quadrangle Map for Mare Island. An aerial photograph of the Property has been included as Attachment 1, Figure 4.

Access to the Property is provided from Highway 4. Traveling west on Highway 4, turn left onto San Pablo Avenue. Continue on San Pablo Avenue for 0.8 miles, and then take a right onto Hercules Avenue. Continue on Hercules Avenue for 0.2 miles, and then take a left onto Skelly.

Continue on Skelly for 0.2 miles and the Property will be at the terminus of the road.

3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The Property encompasses approximately 7.49 acres in a roughly rectangular shape, bounded on all sides by residential housing. A concrete v-ditch approximately two feet wide lies along the north, east, and western perimeter of the site, outside of the Property boundary. This feature did not contain water during the time of the survey and was surrounded by ruderal grassland and eucalyptus woodland habitat and lined with native and ornamental trees which separate the Property from the adjacent residential housing. To the south of the Property lies railroad tracks and the Pinole Senior Center, and to the west, a public walking trail separates the Property from the adjacent Pinole Creek. The Property supports six habitat types: developed, ruderal grassland, perennial drainage, riparian woodland, eucalyptus woodland, and seasonal wetland habitat (Attachment 1, Figure 10).
525
The Property was previously a residence that contained numerous barns and paddocks for housing horses and other livestock. The Property still contains the residence and many of the barn structures, paddocks, and outbuildings, all of which are vacant. An asphalt and gravel driveway associated with the residence is present throughout the northeast corner of the Property, and remnants of old farm equipment and vehicles are found throughout the Property. Several large blue gum eucalyptus trees (Eucalyptus globulus) surround the driveway to the residence and many of the horse stalls on the Property. The residence and vacant structures are surrounded by ornamental vegetation and trees such as English ivy (Hedera helix), date palm (Phoenix sp.), olive (Olea europaea), pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana), English walnut (Juglans regius), blue gum eucalyptus, and Peruvian peppertree (Schinus molle). In addition to these structures, the Property contains a water storage tank located in the southwestern portion of the site, and a cell tower and associated utilities located in the southeastern corner of the Property.

Much of the ruderal grassland habitat throughout the site is located in areas once used as paddocks, and these locations have been regularly disturbed for over twenty years through both grazing and livestock activity as observed through analysis of aerial imagery (Google Earth 2020). The majority of the ruderal grassland habitat has been disked recently, with patches of ruderal vegetation scattered throughout, and concentrated along the margins of the habitat. The remaining vegetation is dominated by wild oat (Avena fatua), barbed wild oat (Avena barbata), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), bristly ox-tongue (Helminthotheca echioides), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), and a mix of other non-native species.

A perennial drainage feature is found along the southern boundary of the site, and enters from the southeastern corner, flowing west and exiting the Property via a culvert near the southwestern corner. This feature was surrounded by a mix of native and non-native riparian vegetation such as English walnut, eucalyptus, Himalayan black berry (Rubus armeniacus), northern California black walnut (Juglans hindsii), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), and Lombardy poplar (Populus nigra). This feature contained water throughout much of its length and had a defined bed and bank.

Two seasonal wetlands were located along the northern boundary of the Property adjacent to an old horse stall and paddock. Dominant species include common plantain (Plantago major), annual beard grass (Polypogon monspeliensis), Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), and bristly oxtongue.

The topography of the Property is relatively flat with a gentle slope near the southeastern corner, and ranges between 9 feet above sea level at the northwestern boundary and 53 feet above sea level near the southeastern boundary.
526

4.0 REGULATORY SETTING

4.1 Federal Regulatory Setting

4.1.1 Plants and Wildlife
The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 USC 1531 et seq., as amended) prohibits federal agencies from authorizing, permitting, or funding any action that would result in biological jeopardy to a plant or animal species listed as Threatened or Endangered under the Act. Listed species are taxa for which proposed and final rules have been published in the Federal Register (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 2020). If a proposed project may jeopardize listed species, Section 7 of the ESA requires consideration of those species through formal consultations with the USFWS. Federal Proposed species (USFWS, 2019) are species for which a proposed listing as Threatened or Endangered under ESA has been published in the Federal Register. If a proposed project may jeopardize proposed species, Section 7 of the ESA affords consideration of those species through informal conferences with USFWS. The USFWS defines federal Candidate species as “those taxa for which we have on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats to support issuance of a proposed rule to list, but issuance of the proposed rule is precluded by other higher priority listing actions” (USFWS, 2019).

Federal Candidate species are not afforded formal protection, although USFWS encourages other federal agencies to give consideration to Candidate species in environmental planning.

4.1.2 Wetlands/Waters
The federal government, acting through the Corps and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has jurisdiction over all “waters of the United States” as authorized by §404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and §10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 CFR Parts 320-330).

Properties that cause the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States require permitting by the Corps. Actions affecting small areas of jurisdictional waters of the United States may qualify for a Nationwide Permit (NWP), provided conditions of the permit are met, such as avoiding impacts to threatened or endangered species or to important cultural sites.

Properties that affect larger areas or which do not meet the conditions of an NWP require an Individual Permit. The process for obtaining an Individual Permit requires a detailed alternatives analysis and development of a comprehensive mitigation/monitoring plan.

On January 23, 2020 the EPA and the Corps enacted the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR) to redefine “waters of the United States” to include four categories. Their landward extent was defined following the definitions provided in the Corps of Engineers regulations [33 CFR §328.3]:
527
(a) Jurisdictional waters. The Clean Water Act defines “waters of the United States” as:
(1) The territorial seas, and waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(2) Tributaries;
(3) Lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters; and (4) Adjacent wetlands.

Wetlands are transitional habitats between upland terrestrial areas and deeper aquatic habitats such as rivers and lakes. Adjacent wetlands are wetlands that abut, meaning to touch at least at one point or side of, jurisdictional waters or are inundated by flooding from jurisdictional waters in a typical year (33 CFR Section 328 (c)(1)). Under federal regulation, wetlands are defined as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal conditions do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (33 CFR Section 328 (c)(16)).

Swamps, marshes, bogs, fens, and estuaries are all defined as wetlands, as are seasonally saturated or inundated areas such as vernal pools, alkali wetlands, seeps, and springs. In addition, portions of the riparian habitat along a river or stream may be a wetland where the riparian vegetation is at or below the ordinary high-water mark and thus also meets the wetland hydrology and hydric soil criteria.

Navigable waters include all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tides, including the open ocean, tidal bays, and tidal sloughs. Navigable waters also include some large, non-tidal rivers and lakes, which are important for transportation in commerce. The jurisdictional limit over navigable waters extends laterally to the entire water surface and bed of the waterbody landward to the limits of the mean high tide line. For non-tidal rivers or lakes, which have been designated (by the Corps) to be navigable waters, the limit of jurisdiction along the shoreline is defined by the ordinary high-water mark. Ordinary high-water mark is that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas (33 CFR Section 328(c)(7)). The Corps regulates other waters to the outward limit of the ordinary high-water mark. Streams should exhibit a defined channel, bed and banks to be delineated as other waters.

The 2020 NWPR defines non-jurisdiction waters as:
(1) Waters or water features that are not identified in (a)(1) through (4) above; 528
(2) Groundwater, including groundwater drainage through subsurface drainage systems;
(3) Ephemeral features, including ephemeral streams, swales, gullies, rills, and pools; (4) Diffuse stormwater run-off and direction sheet flow over upland; (5) Ditches that are not territorial seas or traditional navigable waters, or tributaries, and those portions constructed in adjacent wetlands that do not satisfy the conditions of adjacent wetlands;
(6) Prior converted cropland;
(7) Artificially irrigated areas, including fields flooded for agricultural production, that would revert to upland should application of irrigation water to that area cease;
(8) Artificial lakes and ponds, including water storage reservoirs and farm, irrigation, stock watering, and clog cleaning ponds, constructed of excavated in upland or in non-jurisdictional waters, so long as those artificial lakes and ponds are not impoundments of jurisdictional waters that meet the conditions of lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters;
(9) Water-filled depressions constructed or excavated in upland or in nonjurisdictional waters incidental to mining or construction activity, and pits excavated in upland or in non-jurisdictional waters for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel;
(10) Stormwater control features constructed of excavated in upland or in nonjurisdictional waters to convey, treat, infiltrate, or store stormwater run-off; (11) Groundwater recharge, water reuse, and wastewater recycling structures, including detention, retention, and infiltrations basins and ponds, constructed or excavated in upland or in non-jurisdictional waters; and (12) Waste treatment systems.

However, the preamble also states “the Corps reserves the right on a case-by-case basis to determine that a particular waterbody within these categories” can be regulated as jurisdictional water. The EPA also has authority to determine jurisdictional waters of the U.S. on a case-bycase basis. Riparian habitat that is above the ordinary high-water mark and does not meet the three-parameter criteria for a wetland would not be regulated as jurisdictional waters of the United States, but is regulated by CDFW.
529

4.1.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Raptors are migratory bird species protected by international treaty under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 U.S.C. 703-711). The MBTA makes it unlawful to take, possess, buy, sell, purchase, or barter any migratory bird listed in 50 CFR. Part 10, including feathers or other parts, nests, eggs, or products, except as allowed by implementing regulations (50 CFR 21). Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3800 of the California Fish and Game Code prohibit the take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests or eggs. Implementation of the take provisions requires that Property-related disturbance at active nesting territories be reduced or eliminated during critical phases of the nesting cycle (generally February 1 – September 1, annually). Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (e.g., killing or abandonment of eggs or young) or the loss of habitat upon which the birds depend, is considered “taking” and is potentially punishable by fines and/or imprisonment. Such taking would also violate federal law protecting migratory birds (e.g., MBTA).

4.1.4 Federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
In addition to protection under the MBTA, both the bald eagle and the golden eagle are also protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940 (16 U.S.C. 668-668c). The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and amended several times since being enacted in 1940, prohibits anyone, without a permit issued by the Secretary of the Interior, from “taking” bald or golden eagles, including their parts, nests, or eggs (USFWS 2007). The Act provides criminal penalties for persons who “take, possess, sell, purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or import, at any time or any manner, any bald eagle ... [or any golden eagle], alive or dead, or any part, nest, or egg thereof.” The Act defines “take” as “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb” (USFWS 2007).

For purposes of these guidelines, “disturb” means: “to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, 1) injury to an eagle, 2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or 3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior” (USFWS 2007).

In addition to immediate impacts, this definition also covers impacts that result from humaninduced alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present, if, upon the eagle’s return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that interferes with or interrupts normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering habits, and causes injury, death or nest abandonment (USFWS 2007).
530

4.2 State Regulatory Setting

4.2.1 Plants and Wildlife
Property permitting and approval requires compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the 1984 California Endangered Species Act (CESA), and the 1977 Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA). The CESA and NPPA authorize the California Fish and Game Commission to designate Endangered, Threatened and Rare species and to regulate the taking of these species (§§2050-2098, Fish & Game Code). The California Code of Regulations (Title 14, §670.5) lists animal species considered Endangered or Threatened by the State.

The Natural Heritage Division of the CDFW administers the state rare species program. The CDFW maintains lists of designated Endangered, Threatened, and Rare plant and animal species (CDFW 2020b and 2019). Listed species either were designated under the NPPA or designated by the Fish and Game Commission. In addition to recognizing three levels of endangerment, the CDFW can afford interim protection to candidate species while they are being reviewed by the Fish and Game Commission.

The CDFW also maintains a list of animal species of special concern (CDFW 2019), most of which are species whose breeding populations in California may face extirpation. Although these species have no legal status, the CDFW recommends considering them during analysis of proposed property impacts to protect declining populations and avoid the need to list them as endangered in the future.

Under provisions of §15380(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, the CEQA lead agency and CDFW, in making a determination of significance, must treat non-listed plant and animal species as equivalent to listed species if such species satisfy the minimum biological criteria for listing. In general, the CDFW considers plant species on List 1A (Plants Presumed Extinct in California), List 1B (Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere), or List 2 (Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, But More Common Elsewhere) of the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (Skinner and Pavlik 1994) as qualifying for legal protection under §15380(d). Species on CNPS Lists 3 or 4 may, but generally do not, qualify for protection under this provision.

Sensitive habitats include riparian corridors, wetlands, habitats for legally protected species and CDFW Species of Special Concern, areas of high biological diversity, areas providing important wildlife habitat, and unusual or regionally restricted habitat types. Habitat types considered sensitive include those listed on the CNDDB working list of “high priority” habitats (i.e., those habitats that are rare or endangered within the borders of California) (Holland 1986). 531

4.2.2 Wetlands/Waters
The RWQCB regulates activities in wetlands and other waters through §401 of the Clean Water Act. Section 401 requires a state water quality certification for properties subject to 404 regulations. Requirements of the certification include mitigation for loss of wetland habitat. In the San Francisco Bay region, the RWQCB may identify additional wetland mitigation beyond the mitigation required by the Corps. California Fish and Game Code §§1600-1607 require the CDFW be notified of any activity that could affect the bank or bed of any stream that has value to fish and wildlife. Upon notification, the CDFW has the discretion to execute a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The CDFW defines a stream as follows:
“... a body of water that flows at least periodically...through a bed or channel having banks and supporting fish and other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having a subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation.” (Source: Streambed Alteration Program, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2016).

In practice, CDFW authority is extended to any “blue line” stream shown on a USGS topographic map, as well as unmapped channels with a definable bank and bed. Wetlands, as defined by the Corps, need not be present for CDFW to exert authority.

4.2.3 California Environmental Quality Act
According to Appendix G of the CEQA (CEQA 2020) Guidelines, a proposed project would have a significant impact on biological resources if it would:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW and USFWS? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
532
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

4.2.4 City of Hercules Municipal Code
According to the City of Hercules Municipal Code, Title 4. Public Welfare, Morals, and Conduct, the removal of mature trees is prohibited from any undeveloped or partially developed property, whether public or private, within the City of Hercules for any reason. Some exceptions apply (Ord. 331 § 1 (part), 1996).

Definitions for the above terms:
(a) “Mature tree” includes any living tree with a trunk diameter measuring twelve (12) inches or greater when measured at “breast height,” which is roughly four and one-half (4-1/2) feet above the surface of the ground.
(b) “Tree removal” shall include any one or more of the following:
(1) Complete removal of a mature tree.
(2) Any action foreseeably leading to the death of a mature tree or permanent damage to its health.
(3) Removal of more than one-third (1/3) of the foliage of a mature tree, except where such removal of foliage is necessary for periodic maintenance appropriate to the particular tree species in question.
(c) “Undeveloped or partially developed property” includes all properties which are available for future development or redevelopment but does not include developed residential or nonresidential properties. (Ord. 331 § 1 (part), 1996) Exemptions to the above municipal code are as follows:

Section 4-15.04
(a) If a mature tree poses an immediate and substantial threat to the safety of persons or property, the property owner may contact the Public Works Director and request approval to remove the tree. After consultation with the City Manager if at all possible, the Public Works Director shall confirm that an emergency situation exists. The Public Works 533
Director may then authorize removal. The Public Works Director may consult with a certified arborist if deemed necessary to confirm the necessity for tree removal. The removal of a mature tree under emergency conditions with approval by the Public Works Director shall be reported to the City Council at the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting (4-15.04).

Section 4-15.05 Tree Removal In Conjunction with Development Mature trees may be removed in conjunction with development projects for which the City has issued all necessary land use approvals, provided however, that the City approves, and the developer implements a tree replacement plan. In addition, mature trees may be removed in conjunction with development projects for which the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and/or the California Department of Fish and Game has issued a permit, provided that the following conditions are satisfied:
(a) The property owner has obtained and is in compliance with a Grading Permit and Erosion and Sediment Control Plan pursuant to Chapter 7-2 of this Code; (b) The City has approved and the property owner is implementing a tree replacement plan as part of an environmental mitigation program approved by the applicable state or federal agency; and
(c) The proposed pre-development activities are consistent with the City’s General Plan, as determined by the Community and Business Development Director. (Ord. 331 § 1 (part), 1996)
Violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter or the knowing or intentional misrepresentation to any officer or employee of the City of any material fact when requesting tree removal under Sections 4-15.04 or 4-15.05 shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment for a period not to exceed six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 331 § 1 (part), 1996).

5.0 METHODS OF ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES A special-status plant and wildlife species database search and review was conducted using the CNDDB and other sources. An additional search was conducted for special-status plants using CNPS Inventory on-line. Special-status species reports were accessed by searching the CNDDB database for the Mare Island, Sears Point, Cuttings Wharf, Cordelia, Benicia, Briones Valley, Richmond, San Quentin, and Petaluma Point USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles which surround the Property, and by examining those species that have been identified in the vicinity of the Property. These quadrangles will be henceforth noted as surrounding quads. The database report identified special-status species known to occur in the region or those that have the potential to 534
occur in the vicinity of the Property. The CNDDB report was used to focus special-status species analysis of the site prior to the reconnaissance surveys.

Olberding Environmental biologists conducted a reconnaissance-level survey of the Property on November 11, 2020. The survey consisted of walking throughout the Property and evaluating the site and adjacent lands for potential biological resources. Existing conditions observed plants and wildlife, adjacent land use, soils and potential biological resource constraints were recorded during the visit. Plant and wildlife species observed within and adjacent to the Property during the reconnaissance survey are listed in Attachment 2, Table 1. Site photographs are provided in Attachment 3 of this document. Attachment 1, Figure 9 shows where each site photo was taken.

The objectives of the field survey were to determine the potential presence or absence of specialstatus species habitat listed in the CNDDB database report and to identify any wetland areas that could be potentially regulated by the Corps, RWQCB, and/or CDFW (CNDDB 2020). In addition, the Olberding Environmental biologists looked for other potential sensitive species or habitats that may not have been obvious from background database reports or research. Surveys conducted after the growing season or conducted outside of the specific flowering period for a special-status plant cannot conclusively determine the presence or absence of such plant species; therefore, site conditions and habitat type were used to determine potential for occurrence. When suitable habitat was observed to support a special-status plant or animal species, it was noted in the discussion for that particular species. Regulatory agencies evaluate the possibility of occurrence based on habitats observed on-site and the degree of connectivity with other specialstatus animal habitats in the vicinity of the Property. These factors are discussed in each specialstatus plant or animal section. Potential for occurrence of each special-status or protected plant and animal species was evaluated using the following criteria. • Present: The species has been recorded by CNDDB or other literature as occurring on the Property and/or was observed on the Property during the reconnaissance survey or protocol surveys.
• May Occur: The species has been recorded by CNDDB or other literature as occurring within five miles of the Property, and/or was observed within five miles of the Property, and/or suitable habitat for the species is present on the Property or its immediate vicinity. • Not Likely to Occur: The species has historically occurred on or within five miles of the Property, but has no current records. The species occurs within five miles of the Property but only marginally suitable habitat conditions are present. The Property is likely to be used only as incidental foraging habitat or as an occasional migratory corridor. • Presumed Absent: The species will not occur on the Property due to the absence of suitable habitat conditions, and/or the lack of current occurrences. Alternatively, if 535
directed or protocol-level surveys were done during the proper occurrence period and the species was not found, it is presumed absent.

Hercules City CouncilSeptember 27, 2022

Hercules City Council
September 27, 2022