CityCouncil_RegularSession_Attachments_04_04_2023 — Milpitas City Council, April 4, 2023 (part 3 of 4)

Per the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Congestion Management Program Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines, dated October 2014, transportation impacts of all land uses that are projected to generate 100 or more net new weekday a.m. or p.m. peak hour, including both inbound and outbound trips are required to prepare a TIA. Based on the trip generation, this project would be exempt from preparing a TIA.

Please contact me if there are questions on this matter.

Very truly yours,
Chris D. Kinzel, P.E.

Vice President
301
Item # 17.

Exhibit 3, Part 3:

Noise Impacts Constraints Analysis for the South Main Street Project in Milpitas, California, prepared by First Carbon Solutions dated May 17, 2022.
302
Item # 17.

Memorandum
Date: May 17, 2022
To: Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
From: Philip Ault, Director of Noise and Air Quality
Subject: Noise Impacts Constraints Analysis for the South Main Street Project in Milpitas, California This memorandum summarizes the findings of a Noise Impacts Constraints Analysis conducted by FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) for the South Main Street Project (proposed project) located on South Main Street, just east of South Abel Street, in Milpitas, California. Recommended measures to avoid or minimize potential project-related noise impacts to sensitive receptors in the project vicinity are included as appropriate.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
The proposed project would construct a 57-unit townhome residential development at South Main Street in Milpitas, California. Exhibit 1 shows the regional location map and Exhibit 2 shows the local vicinity map. The project site includes two parcels with Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 086-25-027 and APN 086-25-028.

The proposed project would include the demolition of the existing Montessori School structure and the construction of 57 attached, 3-story townhome dwelling units and associated amenities on the approximately 2.3-acre site (Exhibit 3). The proposed project would also include 20,368 square feet of open space, including private open space areas. The proposed project would include 124 total parking spaces, including 114 garage unit parking spaces (two spaces per unit), and 10 guest surface parking spaces.
303
Item # 17.
82 35
9 9
17 Santa Clara County
Santa Cruz County
85 Alameda County
Santa Clara County
92 880
680
237
280
84 280
Forest Of
Nisene Marks
St Park
Henry Cowell
Redwoods
St Park
Castle Rock
State Park
Big Basin
Redwoods
State Park
Portola
Redwoods
State Park
Lake Del Valle
State Rec Area
101
101
Lake Del
Valle
San Antonio
Reservoir
Calaveras
Reservoir
Anderson Lake
Calero
Reservoir
Chesbro
Reservoir
Uvas
Reservoir
Hayward
Redwood City Newark
Menlo Park North
Fair Oaks
East Palo
Alto
Milpitas Stanford
Palo Alto Mountain View
Sunnyvale East
Foothills
Los Altos Santa Clara
Cupertino
San Jose
Campbell
Saratoga
Los Gatos
Morgan Hill
Fremont
Exhibit 1
Regional Location Map
5 2.5 0 5
Miles
Text
Project Site
Source: Census 2000 Data, The California Spatial Information Library (CaSIL).

TTLC MANAGEMENT INC., AN ARIZONA COMPANY

SOUTH MAIN STREET MILPITAS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

NOISE CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
56470001 • 04/2022 | 1_regional.mxd
Project Site
87 304
Item # 17.
56470001 • 04/2022 | 2_local_vicinity.mxd
Exhibit 2
Local Vicinity Map
Source: Bing Aerial Imagery. Santa Clara County.

TTLC MANAGEMENT INC., AN ARIZONA COMPANY

SOUTH MAIN STREET MILPITAS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

NOISE CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
1,000 500 0 1,000
Feet
Legend
Project Site
305
Item # 17.
56470001 • 04/2022 | 3_site_plan.cdr
Exhibit 3
Site Plan
TTLC MANAGEMENT INC., AN ARIZONA COMPANY

SOUTH MAIN STREET MILPITAS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

NOISE CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
306
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi
May 17, 2022

Page 5 ends

CHARACTERISTICS OF NOISE
Noise is defined as unwanted sound. Sound levels are usually measured and expressed in decibels (dB), with 0 dB corresponding roughly to the threshold of hearing. Most of the sounds that we hear in the environment do not consist of a single frequency, but rather a broad band of frequencies, with each frequency differing in sound level. The intensities of each frequency add together to generate a sound.

Noise is typically generated by transportation, specific land uses, and ongoing human activity.

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. A change of 3 dB is the lowest change that can be perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. While a change of 5 Aweighted decibel (dBA) is considered to be the minimum readily perceptible change to the human ear in outdoor environments.

Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to sound at all frequencies, the dBA was derived to relate noise to the sensitivity of humans, it gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. The dBA sound level is the basis for a number of various sound level metrics, including the day/night sound level (Ldn) and the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), both of which represent how humans are more sensitive to sound at night. In addition, the equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) is the average sound energy of time-varying noise over a sample period and Lmax is the maximum instantaneous noise level occurring over a sample period.

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The City of Milpitas has established noise land use compatibility and noise performance standards in the Noise Element of the Milpitas General Plan 20401 and in the Milpitas Municipal Code. 2 Milpitas General Plan
The City of Milpitas establishes noise standards for multi-family residential developments in its General Plan. The multi-family residential noise standards will be used to determine noise impacts for this project, as it is a residential building project. According to Table N-1 (see Attachment A) of the Noise Element, the City considers environments with ambient noise levels of up to 65 dBA Ldn to be normally acceptable for new multi-family residential development. Environments with noise levels between 65 dBA and 75 dBA Ldn are considered “conditionally acceptable,” and development may be permitted only after detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Indoor noise levels should not exceed an Ldn of 45 dBA in new residential housing units.
1 City of Milpitas. 2021. Milpitas 2040 General Plan. 2 City of Milpitas. 2021. Milpitas Municipal Code. Website: https://library.municode.com/ca/milpitas/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId= TITVPUHESAWE_CH213NOAB_213-3UNCRPEDINO. Accessed April 18, 2022. 307
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi
May 17, 2022

Page 6 ends

Relevant noise policies are listed below:

Policy N 1-1 Consider the noise compatibility of existing and future development when making land use planning decisions. Require development and infrastructure projects to be consistent with the land use compatibility standards contained in Tables N-1 and N-2 [see Attachment A] to ensure acceptable noise exposure levels for existing and future development.

Policy N 1-2 Require new development to mitigate excessive noise to the standards indicated in Tables N-1 and N-2 [see Attachment A] through best practices, including building location and orientation, building design features, placement of noise-generating equipment away from sensitive receptors, shielding of noise-generating equipment, placement of noise-tolerant features between noise sources and sensitive receptors, and use of noise-minimizing materials.

Policy N 1-3 Use sound walls for sound attenuation only when other measures are not practical, or when recommended by an acoustical expert as part of a mitigation measure. Sound walls shall be designed to be aesthetically pleasing, and should incorporate features such as vegetation, variations in color and texture, artwork, and other features deemed appropriate by the City.

Policy N 1-4 Ensure that new development does not result in indoor noise levels exceeding 45 dBA Ldn for residential uses by requiring the implementation of construction techniques and noise reduction measures for all new residential development.

Policy N 1-6 For projects that are required to prepare an acoustical study to analyze noise impacts, the following criteria shall be used to determine the significance of those impacts:

Stationary and Non-Transportation Noise Sources
• A significant impact will occur if the project results in an exceedance of the noise level standards contained in this element. In instances where the ambient noise level is already above the standards contained in this element, a significant impact will occur if the project results in an increase in ambient noise levels by more than 3 dB. This does not apply to temporary construction activities.

Transportation Noise Source
• Where existing traffic noise levels are 60 dB Ldn or less at the outdoor activity areas of noise-sensitive uses, a +5 dB Ldn increase in roadway noise levels will be considered significant;
• Where existing traffic noise levels are greater than 60 dB Ldn and up to 65 dB Ldn at the outdoor activity areas of noise-sensitive uses, a +3 dB Ldn increase in roadway noise levels will be considered significant; and
308
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi
May 17, 2022

Page 7 ends

• Where existing traffic noise levels are greater than 65 dB Ldn at the outdoor activity areas of noise-sensitive uses, a + 1.5 dB Ldn increase in roadway noise levels will be considered significant.

Policy N 1-8 Require construction activities to comply with standard best practices to reduce noise exposure to adjacent sensitive receptors (see Action N 1d).

Non-Transportation Noise
Policy N 1-12 Require non-transportation related noise from site specific noise sources to comply with the standards shown in Table N-2 [see Attachment A].

Action N-1d During the environmental review process, determine if proposed construction will constitute a significant impact on nearby sensitive receptors and, if necessary, require mitigation measures in addition to the standard best practice controls. Suggested best practices for control of construction noise include:
• Noise-generating construction activities, including truck traffic coming to and from the construction site for any purpose, shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. No construction shall occur on National holidays. • 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 utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists.
• At all times during project grading and construction, stationary noise-generating equipment shall be located as far as practicable from sensitive receptors and placed so that emitted noise is directed away from residences. • Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines shall be prohibited for a duration of longer than 5 minutes.
• Construction staging areas shall be established at locations that will create the greatest distance between the construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction activities, to the extent feasible.
• Neighbors located adjacent to the construction site shall be notified of the construction schedule in writing.
• The construction contractor shall designate a “noise disturbance coordinator” who will be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise.

The disturbance coordinator shall be responsible for determining the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, poor muffler, etc.) and instituting reasonable measures as warranted to correct the problem. A telephone number for the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site. 309
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi
May 17, 2022

Page 8 ends

Policy N 2-2 The City may elect to allow new noise-sensitive land uses within activity centers (areas within the boundaries of an adopted Specific Plan)) that exceed the Land Use Compatibility Standards in Table N-1, and Stationary Noise Source Standards in Table N-2 [see Attachment A]. Noise mitigation, including an acoustical analysis, shall be required to reduce interior space noise levels to 45 dB Ldn, or less, for sensitive receptors.

Exterior noise levels shall be reduced to the extent feasible using building orientation, construction and design features; however ultimately, noise levels may exceed the noise standards identified in Table N-1 and N-2 [see Attachment A], but shall comply with standards identified in Table N-3 [see Attachment A].

Policy N 2-3 Consider groundborne vibration and noise nuisance associated with rail operations prior to approving the development of sensitive uses.

Action N-2b Review new developments within 100 feet of the rail line to ensure that vibration experienced by residents and sensitive uses would not exceed the Federal Transit Administration guidelines.

Action N-2c Establish provisions that would allow new noise-sensitive land uses on a case-by-case basis in proximity to transportation noise sources and mixed-use areas that do not fall within the Conditionally Acceptable Land Use Compatibility Standards in Table N-1[see Attachment A]. Residential projects which are approved in areas where future tenants would be exposed to noise levels that exceed the standards in Table N-1 [see Attachment A] shall be required to include noise disclosure statements on property titles and in [California Code of Regulations] CCRs, where applicable.

Milpitas Municipal Code
The Municipal Code contains noise ordinances that address the City’s construction noise performance standards. According to Chapter V-213-3, Unlawful to Create or Permit Disturbing Noise, the ordinance states that no person shall engage or permit others to engage in construction of any building or related road or walkway, pool, or landscape improvement or in the construction operations related thereto, including delivery of construction materials, supplies, or improvements on or to a construction site except within the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and weekends. No construction work shall be conducted or performed on federal holidays.

NOISE IMPACTS CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
Consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Checklist questions, potential noise impacts are compared to the following significance criteria. Would the proposed project:
310
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi
May 17, 2022

Page 9 ends

a) 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. A significant impact would occur for the proposed project if the proposed residential multi-family land use development would be exposed to ambient noise levels in conflict with the City’s land use compatibility standards. For new residential multi-family development, the Milpitas 2040 General Plan determines exterior noise levels below 65 dBA Ldn to be normally acceptable and 65 dBA Ldn to 75 dBA Ldn to be conditionally acceptable. Normally Acceptable exterior noise levels should not exceed 65 dBA where outdoor use is a major consideration. Additionally, the City requires that interior noise levels are not to exceed the State of California’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA Ldn.

Ambient Noise
The existing ambient noise levels on the project site were documented through a noise monitoring effort performed at the project site. The noise measurements were taken using a Larson-Davis Model LxT Type 2 precision sound level meter programmed in “slow” mode to record noise levels in “A” weighted form. The sound level meter and microphone were held approximately 5 feet above the ground and were equipped with a windscreen during all measurements. The sound level meter was calibrated before and after the monitoring using a Larson-Davis calibrator, Model CAL 150. The accuracy of the calibrator is maintained through a program established by the manufacturer and is traceable to the National Bureau of Standards.

The unit meets the requirements of American National Standards Institute Standard S1.4-1984 and International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 942: 1988 for Class 2 equipment. All noise level measurement equipment meets American National Standards Institute specifications for sound level meters (S1.4 1983 identified in Chapter 19.68.020.AA).

One short-term noise measurement (15 minutes) was taken during the midday peak noise hour on Thursday, October 28, 2021, starting at approximately 1:30 p.m. and ending at approximately 1:45 p.m.

This noise measurement was taken in the northwestern corner of the project site approximately 5 feet from the edge of South Main Street. The resulting measurement showed that ambient noise levels at this location averaged 65.3 dBA Leq. As was observed by the technician at the time of the noise measurement, the dominant noise source at this site was vehicle traffic along South Main Street.

A long-term (approximately 24-hour) noise measurement was also conducted on the project site, from approximately 2:05 p.m. on Thursday, October 28, 2021, to approximately 1:40 p.m. on Friday, October 29, 2021. This long-term noise measurement was taken at the southeastern corner of the project site nearest the rail line to the east of the project site. The resulting measurement determined that ambient noise levels at this location averaged 56.8 dBA Ldn. The daytime average noise level (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) was

54.5 dBA Leq, and the nighttime average noise level (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) was 49.4 dBA Leq.

Documented maximum noise levels ranged up to 74.4 dBA Lmax. As was observed by the technician at the time of the noise measurement, the dominant noise source in the project vicinity was vehicle traffic along South Main Street, children playing outside at the nearby day care facility, and train passings. Observed maximum noise levels were from train passings on the rail line east of the project site. 311
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi
May 17, 2022

Page 10 ends

The noise measurement data sheets are provided in Attachment B of this document.

The City considers environments with noise levels below 65 dBA Ldn to be normally acceptable for new multi-family residential development. Therefore, the documented 24-hour average ambient noise levels of 56.8 dBA Ldn are within the City’s normally acceptable range for new multi-family residential development.

Based on the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Protective Noise Levels, 3 with a
combination of walls, doors, and windows, standard construction in accordance with building code requirements for multi-family residential developments would provide a minimum of 25 dBA in exteriorto-interior noise reduction with windows closed and 15 dBA or more with windows open. With windows open, the interior noise levels of the proposed units nearest to and facing the railroad line would still meet the City’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA Ldn for indoor sleeping areas (i.e., 56.8 dBA - 15 dBA =

41.8 dBA). Therefore, the interior noise level standard would also be met, even with windows open.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the City’s adopted land use-noise compatibility guidelines or interior noise standard, and the impact would be less than significant. b) 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. For purposes of this analysis, a significant impact would occur if construction activities would result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels outside of the City’s permissible hours of construction which would result in annoyance or sleep disturbance of nearby sensitive receptors. According to the City’s noise ordinance, construction activities including delivery of construction materials, supplies, or improvements on or to a construction site are only permitted within the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and weekends. No construction work shall be conducted or performed on federal holidays.

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, 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 3 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1978. Protective Noise Levels. EPA 550/9-79-100. Website:
https://www.nonoise.org/library/levels/levels.htm. Accessed on May 13, 2022. 312
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi
May 17, 2022

Page 11 ends

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 nose discussion 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 segment in the project vicinity. For these reasons, short-term intermittent noise from trucks would be minor when averaged over a longer time-period.

Therefore, short-term construction-related noise impacts associated with worker commute and equipment transport to the project site would not exceed applicable significance thresholds and 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 noise levels are rarely steady in nature, and often fluctuate depending on the type and number of equipment being used at any given time. In addition, there could be times where large equipment is not operating and noise would be at or near normal ambient levels. Construction is completed in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and 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.

The site preparation phase, which includes excavation and grading activities, tends to generate the highest noise levels because the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving equipment.

Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery and compacting equipment, such as bulldozers, draglines, backhoes, front loaders, roller compactors, scrapers, and graders. 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.

Construction of the proposed project is expected to require the use of front-end loaders, excavators, haul trucks, water trucks, concrete mixer trucks, and pickup trucks. The maximum noise level generated by each concrete mixing truck is assumed to be 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from this equipment.4 Each frontend loader would also generate 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. The maximum noise level generated by excavators is approximately 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. Each doubling of sound sources with equal strength increases the noise level by 3 dBA.

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 earthmoving operations, spending a relatively short amount of time adjacent to any one receptor. Assuming that each piece of construction 4 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2006. Highway Construction Noise Handbook. August. 313
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi
May 17, 2022

Page 12 ends

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 (and a worst-case hourly average of 86 dBA Leq) 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.

The closest sensitive receptor to proposed areas of construction is an apartment complex located west of the project site on South Abel Street. The façade of this closest sensitive receptor would be located approximately 285 feet from the acoustic center of construction activity where multiple pieces of heavy construction equipment would potentially operate at the project site. At this distance, reasonable worstcase construction noise levels could range up to approximately 75 dBA Lmax intermittently, and could have an hourly average of up to 71 dBA Leq at the façade of the nearest sensitive receptor when multiple pieces of equipment operate simultaneously at the nearest center of construction activity. These noise levels would occur for only a short period during the site preparation phase of construction, as noise levels would drop off at a rate of 6 dBs per doubling of distance as construction equipment moves across the site.

Based on the ambient noise monitoring effort described above, documented maximum noise levels on the project site ranged up to 74.4 dBA Lmax. The measured ambient noise adjacent to South Main Street in the vicinity of the nearest sensitive receptors averaged 65.3 dBA Leq.

These potential maximum noise levels are lower than the existing documented maximum noise levels in the project vicinity of 74.4 dBA Lmax. However, these calculated reasonable worst-case hourly average noise levels that could occur during the loudest phase of construction would exceed measured daytime hourly average noise levels of 65.3 dBA Leq by slightly more than 5 dBA. Although there could be a relatively high single-event noise exposure potential causing an intermittent noise nuisance, the effect of construction activities on daytime ambient noise levels would be small. However, these reasonable worst-case construction noise levels could exceed nighttime hourly average noise levels of 49.4 dBA Leq by as much as 21.6 dBA, which would be considered a substantial temporary increase which could result in sleep disturbance or annoyance of nearby sensitive receptors.

However, the proposed project is required to comply with the City’s Municipal Code standards restricting the permissible hours of construction. According to the City’s noise ordinance, no person shall engage or permit others to engage in construction of any building, including, delivery of construction materials, supplies, or improvements on or to a construction site except within the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and weekends. Compliance with these restrictions on permissible hours of construction would ensure that project construction would not result in any nighttime noise. Therefore, project construction activities conducted in compliance with the City’s noise ordinance requirements would not result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels and potential impacts would be less than significant.
314
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi
May 17, 2022

Page 13 ends

Operational/Stationary Source Noise Impacts
Less than significant impact. A significant impact would occur if operational noise levels generated by stationary noise sources at the proposed project site would result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of any of the noise performance thresholds established by the City. The City has established that a significant impact will occur if a project would result in an exceedance of the noise level standards contained in the noise element of the General Plan. As shone in Table N-2 in Attachment A, the City’s noise performance thresholds for stationary noise sources are 55 dBA and 45 dBA Leq for daytime and nighttime hours respectively as measured at receiving residential land uses. In addition, in instances where the ambient noise level is already above the standards, a significant impact would occur if the project resulted in an increase in ambient noise levels by more than 3 dBA.

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

The nearest off-site sensitive receptor is the apartment complex land use, located west of the project site across South Main Street. The nearest façade of this sensitive receptor would be located approximately 370 feet from the proposed mechanical ventilation systems. At this distance, noise generated by mechanical ventilation equipment would attenuate to less than 29 dBA Leq at the nearest sensitive receptor. Existing traffic noise levels along common areas with heavy traffic, such as South Main Street, are documented in the City’s General Plan Noise Element with normal levels of 60 dBA Ldn.

Therefore, noise levels from proposed residential mechanical ventilation equipment operations would not exceed existing ambient noise levels as measured at this nearest sensitive receptor. In addition, these noise levels would not exceed the City’s noise performance thresholds for receiving residential land uses of 55 dBA and 45 dBA Leq for daytime and nighttime hours respectively.

Therefore, noise levels from mechanical ventilation equipment operations would not generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, and the impact would be less than significant.

Operational/Mobile Source Noise Impacts
Less than significant impact. A significant impact would occur if project-generated traffic would result in a substantial increase in ambient noise levels compared with those that would exist without the proposed project.

The City considers traffic noise increases to be significant if (1) an increase in +5 dB Ldn occurs in roadway noise levels where existing traffic noise levels are 60 dB Ldn or less at the outdoor activity areas of noise315 Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi
May 17, 2022

Page 14 ends

sensitive uses, or (2) an increase in +3 dB Ldn occurs in roadway noise levels where existing traffic noise levels are greater than 60 dB Ldn and up to 65 dB Ldn at the outdoor activity areas of noise-sensitive uses, or (3) an increase in + 1.5 dB Ldn occurs in roadway noise levels where existing traffic noise levels are greater than 65 dB Ldn at the outdoor activity areas of noise-sensitive uses.

Based on the traffic analysis prepared for the proposed project, the proposed project would generate 115 fewer daily trips than the existing land uses.
5 In addition, the proposed project would result in 35
fewer AM peak-hour trips and 58 fewer PM peak-hour trips. Because the proposed project would generate fewer daily and peak-hour trips than the existing land uses, the proposed project would result in no increase in traffic noise levels in the project vicinity.

Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not generate a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, and project-related traffic noise impacts would be less than significant. c) 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. For determining construction-related vibration impacts, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 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.

Although groundborne vibration can be felt outdoors, it is typically only an annoyance to people indoors where the associated effects such as the shaking of a building can be notable. When assessing annoyance from groundborne vibration, vibration is typically expressed as root mean square (rms) velocity in units of dBs of 1 microinch per second. To distinguish these vibration levels referenced in dBs from noise levels referenced in dBs, the unit is written as “VdB.” 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.
5 TJKM. 2022. Trip Generation Study for 612 South Main Street, Milpitas, California. April 2. 316
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi
May 17, 2022

Page 15 ends

Short-term Construction Vibration Impacts
A significant impact would occur if project construction activities would generate groundborne vibration levels in excess of levels established by the FTA’s Construction Vibration Impact Criteria for the receiving type of structure.

Of the variety of equipment used during construction, the small vibratory rollers that could be used in the site preparation phase of construction of the project 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 structure to the proposed project construction footprint is a car wash business located immediately north of the project site on South Main Street. The nearest façade of these buildings would be located approximately 20 feet from the nearest construction footprint where the heaviest construction equipment would potentially operate. At this distance, groundborne vibration levels would range up to 0.14 in/sec 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 in/sec PPV for structures of non-engineered timber and masonry construction.

Therefore, project construction activities would not generate groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels in excess of established standards and impacts to off-site receptors would be less than significant.

Operational Vibration Impacts
A significant impact would occur if project operations would generate groundborne vibration levels in excess of the City’s standards. The City prohibits generation of groundborne vibration levels that would be discernible without instruments at the lot line of the establishment or use.

Implementation of the proposed project would not include any permanent sources of vibration that would expose persons in the project vicinity to groundborne vibration levels that could be perceptible without instruments at any of the proposed project lot lines. Therefore, operational groundborne vibration impacts would be less than significant.
d) 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. A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels 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 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport.

The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. The nearest public airport to the project site is the San Jose International Airport, located approximately 3.67 miles southwest of the project site. The project site is located outside of the 60 dBA CNEL airport noise contours of this closest 317
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi
May 17, 2022

Page 16 ends

airport. While aircraft noise is occasionally audible on the project site from aircraft flyovers, aircraft noise associated with nearby airport activity would not expose people residing or working near the project site to excessive noise levels. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not expose persons residing or working in the project vicinity to noise levels from airport activity that would be in excess of normally acceptable standards for the proposed land use development, and no impact would occur.

SUMMARY
Based on our understanding of the proposed project described above, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the City’s adopted land use-noise compatibility guidelines or interior noise standard. Required compliance of the proposed project with the City’s Municipal Code noise ordinance restricting permissible hours of construction to daytime hours would ensure that potential construction noise impacts would not result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels as measured at nearby sensitive receptors. The proposed project would also not result in any substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels compared with noise levels existing without the project. Furthermore, project implementation would not generate groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels in excess of established standards during construction or operation of the proposed project. Finally, implementation of the proposed project would not expose persons residing or working in the project vicinity to noise levels from airport activity that would be in excess of normally acceptable standards for the proposed land use development.

Sincerely,
Philip Ault
Director of Noise and Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions
1350 Treat Boulevard, Suite 380
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
Attachment A: Tables N-1, N-2, and N-3 of the Noise Element of the General Plan Attachment B: Ambient Noise Monitoring Data
318
Item # 17.

Attachment A:

Tables N-1, N-2, and N-3 of the Noise Element of the General Plan 319
Item # 17.

N-9 MILPITAS GENERAL PLAN | NOISE
Table N-1: Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environment Land Use Category
Exterior Noise Exposure (Ldn)
55 60 65 70 75 80
Single-Family Residential
Multi-Family Residential, Hotels, and
Motels
Outdoor Sports and Recreation,
Neighborhood Parks and Playgrounds
Schools, Libraries, Museums, Hospitals,
Personal Care, Public Assembly
Office Buildings, Business
Commercial, and Professional
Industrial
Note: Residential components of Mixed-Use developments are subject to the Multi-Family Residential Noise Standards unless otherwise allowed in conjunction with Policy N 2-2.

NORMALLY ACCEPTABLE
Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional 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 included in the design

UNACCEPTABLE
New construction or development should generally not be undertaken because mitigation was found to be infeasible to comply with noise element policies 320
Item # 17.

MILPITAS GENERAL PLAN | NOISE N-10
Table N-2: Stationary (Non-Transportation) Noise Source Standards Land Use
Receiving the
Noise
Hourly NoiseLevel Descriptor
Exterior Noise-Level Standard (dBA)
Daytime
(7am-10pm)
Nighttime
(10pm-7am)
Residential
Leq
Lmax
55 70
45 65
Notes:
a) The residential standards apply to all properties that are zoned for residential use. The exterior noise level standard is to be applied at the property line of the receiving land use or at a designated outdoor activity area. For mixed-use projects, the exterior noise level standard may be waived in conjunction with Policy N 2-2 (at the discretion of the decision-making body) if the residential portion of the project does not include a designated activity area and mitigation of property line noise is not practical.
b) Each of the noise levels specified above shall be
lowered by 5 dBA for tonal noises characterized
by a whine, screech, or hum, noises consisting
primarily of speech or music, or recurring
impulsive noises. In no case shall mitigation be
required to a level that is less than existing
ambient noise levels, as determined through
measurements conducted during the same
operational period as the subject noise source.
c) In situations where the existing noise level
exceeds the noise levels indicated in the above
table, any new noise source must include
mitigation that reduces the noise level of the
noise source to the existing level plus 3 dB.

Tonal Noises are characterized
by a whine, screech, beep, or
hum, consisting primarily of
speech or music, or recurring
impulsive noises. Tonal noises
can cause unpleasant experiences
in spaces adjacent to areas that
produce tonal noise, which
annoys occupants and, in turn,
lead to increased complaints
from nearby sensitive receptors.
321
Item # 17.

N-11 MILPITAS GENERAL PLAN | NOISE
Table N-3 Stationary (Non-Transportation) Noise Source Standards (Commercial Mixed-Use and Transit-Oriented Areas)
Land Use
Receiving the
Noise
Hourly
Noise-Level
Descriptor
Exterior Noise-Level Standard (dBA)
Daytime
(7am-10pm)
Late Night
(10pm-12am)
Nighttime
(12am-7am)
Residential
(Sunday Night –
Thursday Night)
Leq
Lmax
60 70
55 65
50 65
Residential
(Friday Night –
Saturday Night)
Leq
Lmax
65 75
60 70
55 65
322
Item # 17.

Attachment B:

Ambient Noise Monitoring Data
323
Item # 17.
324
Item # 17.

Summary
Filename LxT_Data.466
Serial Number 4228
Model SoundTrack LxT®
Firmware Version 2.206
User
Location
Job Description
Note
Measurement Description
Start 28/10/2021 13:31:40
Stop 28/10/2021 13:46:43
Duration 0:15:02.4
Run Time 0:15:02.4
Pause 0:00:00.0
Pre Calibration 28/10/2021 13:27:37
Post Calibration None
Calibration Deviation ‐‐‐
Overall Settings
RMS Weight A Weighting
Peak Weight A Weighting
Detector Slow
Preamp PRMLxT2L
Microphone Correction Off
Integration Method Linear
Overload 125.5 dB
AC Z
Under Range Peak 81.7 78.7 83.7 dB
Under Range Limit 27.3 27.3 32.1 dB
Noise Floor 18.1 18.2 22.9 dB
Results
LAeq 65.3 dB
LAE 94.9 dB
EA 341.739 µPa²h
EA8 10.907 mPa²h
EA40 54.533 mPa²h
LApeak (max) 28/10/2021 13:43:19 91.2 dB
LASmax 28/10/2021 13:37:44 74.4 dB
LASmin 28/10/2021 13:37:26 48.8 dB
SEA ‐99.9 dB
LAS > 85.0 dB (Exceedence Counts / Duration) 0 0.0 s
LAS > 115.0 dB (Exceedence Counts / Duration) 0 0.0 s
LApeak > 135.0 dB (Exceedence Counts / Duration) 0 0.0 s LApeak > 137.0 dB (Exceedence Counts / Duration) 0 0.0 s LApeak > 140.0 dB (Exceedence Counts / Duration) 0 0.0 s Community Noise Ldn LDay 07:00‐23:00 LNight 23:00‐07:00 Lden LDay 07:00‐19:00 LEvening 19:00‐23:00 LNight 23:00‐07:00

65.3 65.3 ‐99.9 65.3 65.3 ‐99.9 ‐99.9
LCeq 70.2 dB
LAeq 65.3 dB
LCeq ‐ LAeq 4.9 dB
LAIeq 66.3 dB
LAeq 65.3 dB
LAIeq ‐ LAeq 1.0 dB
# Overloads 0
Overload Duration 0.0 s
Dose Settings
Dose Name OSHA‐1 OSHA‐2
Exch. Rate 5 5 dB
Threshold 90 80 dB
Criterion Level 90 90 dB
Criterion Duration 8 8h
Results
Dose ‐99.9 ‐99.9 %
Projected Dose ‐99.9 ‐99.9 %
TWA (Projected) ‐99.9 ‐99.9 dB
TWA (t) ‐99.9 ‐99.9 dB
Lep (t) 50.3 50.3 dB
Statistics
LAS5.00 70.2 dB
LAS10.00 69.4 dB
LAS33.30 65.8 dB
LAS50.00 63.6 dB
LAS66.60 59.8 dB
LAS90.00 52.3 dB
325
Item # 17.
326
Item # 17.

SLM data
Filename LxT_Data.467
Serial Number 4228
Model SoundTrack LxT®
Firmware Version 2.206
User
Location
Job Description
Note
Measurement Description
Start 28/10/2021 14:05:22
Stop 29/10/2021 13:40:02
Duration 23:34:39.6
Run Time 23:34:39.6
Pause 0:00:00.0
Pre Calibration 28/10/2021 13:26:39
Post Calibration None
Calibration Deviation ‐‐‐
Overall Settings
RMS Weight A Weighting
Peak Weight A Weighting
Detector Slow
Preamp PRMLxT2L
Microphone Correction Off
Integration Method Linear
Overload 125.5 dB
AC Z
Under Range Peak 81.7 78.7 83.7 dB
Under Range Limit 27.3 27.3 32.1 dB
Noise Floor 18.1 18.2 22.9 dB
Results
LAeq 53.3 dB
LAE 102.6 dB
EA 2.035 mPa²h
EA8 690.385 µPa²h
EA40 3.452 mPa²h
LApeak (max) 28/10/2021 17:57:34 97.2 dB
LASmax 28/10/2021 17:57:34 79.6 dB
LASmin 29/10/2021 01:26:19 39.5 dB
SEA ‐99.9 dB
LAS > 85.0 dB (Exceedence Counts / Duration) 0 0.0 s
LAS > 115.0 dB (Exceedence Counts / Duration) 0 0.0 s
LApeak > 135.0 dB (Exceedence Counts / Duration) 0 0.0 s LApeak > 137.0 dB (Exceedence Counts / Duration) 0 0.0 s LApeak > 140.0 dB (Exceedence Counts / Duration) 0 0.0 s Community Noise Ldn LDay 07:00‐23:00 LNight 23:00‐07:00 Lden LDay 07:00‐19:00 LEvening 19:00‐23:00 LNight 23:00‐07:00

56.8 54.5 49.4 57.4 54.9 52.9 49.4
LCeq 65.0 dB
LAeq 53.3 dB
LCeq ‐ LAeq 11.6 dB
LAIeq 56.6 dB
LAeq 53.3 dB
LAIeq ‐ LAeq 3.2 dB
# Overloads 0
Overload Duration 0.0 s
Dose Settings
Dose Name OSHA‐1 OSHA‐2
Exch. Rate 5 5 dB
Threshold 90 80 dB
Criterion Level 90 90 dB
Criterion Duration 8 8h
Results
Dose ‐99.9 ‐99.9 %
Projected Dose ‐99.9 ‐99.9 %
TWA (Projected) ‐99.9 ‐99.9 dB
TWA (t) ‐99.9 ‐99.9 dB
Lep (t) 58.0 58.0 dB
Statistics
LAS5.00 58.0 dB
LAS10.00 55.9 dB
LAS33.30 52.5 dB
LAS50.00 50.8 dB
LAS66.60 48.9 dB
LAS90.00 44.7 dB
327
Item # 17.

Exhibit 3, Part 4:

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Constraints Analysis for the South Main Street Project in Milpitas, California prepared by First Carbon Solutions dated May 27, 2022. 328
Item # 17.

Memorandum
Date: May 27, 2022
To: Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
From: Philip Ault, Director of Noise and Air Quality
Lance Park, Senior Air Quality Scientist
Mercedes Kaiser, Air Quality Analyst
Subject: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Constraints Analysis for the South Main Street Project in Milpitas, California
This memorandum summarizes the findings of an Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts Constraints Analysis conducted by FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) for the TTLC Milpitas–Main Street LLC Project (proposed project) located at 612-630 South Main Street in Milpitas, California. Recommended measures to avoid or minimize potential project-related impacts are included as appropriate.

The proposed project would include the demolition of the existing approximate 29,000-square-foot Montessori School structure and the construction of 57 attached 3-story townhome dwelling units and associated amenities on the approximately 2.3-acre site (Exhibit 3). Twelve of the units would be provided at rates to meet affordable housing requirements. The proposed project would include approximately 0.57 acre of open space and landscaping. The proposed project would include 124 total parking spaces.
329
Item # 17.
82 35
9 9
17 Santa Clara County
Santa Cruz County
85 Alameda County
Santa Clara County
92 880
680
237
280
84 280
Forest Of
Nisene Marks
St Park
Henry Cowell
Redwoods
St Park
Castle Rock
State Park
Big Basin
Redwoods
State Park
Portola
Redwoods
State Park
Lake Del Valle
State Rec Area
101
101
Lake Del
Valle
San Antonio
Reservoir
Calaveras
Reservoir
Anderson Lake
Calero
Reservoir
Chesbro
Reservoir
Uvas
Reservoir
Hayward
Redwood City Newark
Menlo Park North
Fair Oaks
East Palo
Alto
Milpitas Stanford
Palo Alto Mountain View
Sunnyvale East
Foothills
Los Altos Santa Clara
Cupertino
San Jose
Campbell
Saratoga
Los Gatos
Morgan Hill
Fremont
Exhibit 1
Regional Location Map
5 2.5 0 5
Miles
Text
Project Site
Source: Census 2000 Data, The California Spatial Information Library (CaSIL).

TTLC MANAGEMENT INC., AN ARIZONA COMPANY

SOUTH MAIN STREET MILPITAS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ANALYSIS REPORT 56470001 • 04/2022 | 1_regional.mxd
Project Site
87 Legend
City of Milpitas
330
Item # 17.
56470001 • 04/2022 | 2_local_vicinity.mxd
Exhibit 2
Local Vicinity Map
Source: Bing Aerial Imagery. Santa Clara County.

TTLC MANAGEMENT INC., AN ARIZONA COMPANY

SOUTH MAIN STREET MILPITAS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ANALYSIS REPORT 1,000 500 0 1,000
Feet
Legend
Project Site
331
Item # 17.
56470001 • 04/2022 | 3_site_plan.cdr
Exhibit 3
Site Plan
TTLC MANAGEMENT INC., AN ARIZONA COMPANY

SOUTH MAIN STREET MILPITAS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ANALYSIS REPORT 332
Item # 17.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The City of Milpitas is located within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (Air Basin or SFBAAB). The Air Basin is approximately 5,600 square miles in area and consists of nine counties that surround the San Francisco Bay, including all of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Napa counties; the southwestern portion of Solano County; and the southern portion of Sonoma County.

The San Francisco Bay Area has a Mediterranean climate characterized by mild, dry summers and mild, moderately wet winters, moderate daytime onshore breezes, and moderate humidity.

A semi-permanent, high-pressure area centered over the northeastern Pacific Ocean dominates the summer climate of the West Coast. Because this high-pressure cell is persistent, storms rarely affect the California coast during the summer. Thus, the conditions that persist along the coast of California during summer are a northwest airflow and negligible precipitation. A thermal low-pressure area from the Sonoran-Mojave Desert also causes air to flow onshore over the Bay Area much of the summer.

The steady northwesterly flow around the eastern edge of the Pacific High (a high-pressure cell) exerts stress on the ocean surface along the West Coast. This airflow pattern induces upwelling of cold water from below the surface. Upwelling produces a band of cold water off San Francisco that is approximately 80 miles wide. During July, the surface waters off San Francisco are 3°F (degrees Fahrenheit) cooler than those off Vancouver, British Columbia, more than 900 miles to the north. Air approaching the California coast, already cool and moisture-laden from its long trajectory over the Pacific Ocean is further cooled as it flows across this cold bank of water near the coast, thus accentuating the temperature contrast across the coastline. This cooling is often sufficient to produce condensation–a high incidence of fog and stratus clouds along the Northern California coast in summer.

In summer, the northwest winds to the west of the Pacific coastline are drawn into the interior through the gap in the western Coast Ranges, known as the Golden Gate, and over the lower portions of the San Francisco Peninsula. Immediately to the south of Mount Tamalpais, the northwesterly winds accelerate considerably and come more nearly from the west as they stream through the Golden Gate. This channeling of the flow through the Golden Gate produces a jet that sweeps eastward but widens downstream, producing southwest winds at Berkeley and northwest winds at San José; a branch also curves eastward through the Carquinez Straits and into the Central Valley. Wind speeds may be locally strong in regions where air is channeled through a narrow opening such as the Golden Gate, the Carquinez Strait, or San Bruno Gap. For example, the average wind speed at San Francisco International Airport from 3:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. in July is about 20 miles per hour (mph), compared with only about 8 mph at San José and less than 7 mph at the Farallon Islands.

The sea breeze between the coast and the Central Valley2 commences near the surface along the coast in late morning or early afternoon; it may first be observed only through the Golden Gate. Later in the day, the layer deepens and intensifies while spreading inland. As the breeze intensifies and deepens, it flows over the lower hills farther south along the peninsula. This process frequently can be observed as a bank of stratus clouds “rolling over” the coastal hills on the west side of the Bay. The depth of the sea breeze depends in large part upon the height and strength of the inversion. The generally low elevation 333
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 6 ends

of this stable layer of air prevents marine air from flowing over the coastal hills. It is unusual for the summer sea breeze to flow over terrain exceeding 2,000 feet in elevation.

In winter, the SFBAAB experiences periods of storminess, moderate-to-strong winds, and periods of stagnation with very light winds. Winter stagnation episodes are characterized by outflow from the Central Valley, nighttime drainage flows in coastal valleys, weak onshore flows in the afternoon, and otherwise light and variable winds.

A primary factor in air quality is the mixing depth (the vertical air column available for diluting contaminant sources). Generally, the air temperature decreases with height, creating a gradient from warmer air near the ground to cooler air at elevation caused by the sun converting large amounts of energy to sensible heat at the ground, which warms the air at the surface. The warm air rises in the atmosphere, where it expands and cools. Sometimes, however, the temperature of air increases with height. This condition is known as a temperature inversion because the atmosphere's temperature profile is “inverted” from its usual state. Over the SFBAAB, the frequent occurrence of temperature inversions limits mixing depth and, consequently, limits the availability of air for dilution.

Air Pollutant Types, Sources, and Effects
Criteria Air Pollutants
Air pollutants are termed criteria air pollutants if they are regulated by developing specific public healthand welfare-based criteria as the basis for setting permissible levels. Table 1 provides a summary of the types, sources, and effects of criteria air pollutants.

Table 1: Description of Criteria Pollutants of National and California Concern Criteria Pollutant
Physical Description and
Properties Sources
Most Relevant Effects from
Pollutant Exposure
Ozone Ozone is a photochemical
pollutant as it is not emitted
directly into the atmosphere,
but is formed by a complex
series of chemical reactions
between volatile organic
compounds (VOC), nitrous
oxides (NOX), and sunlight.

Ozone is a regional pollutant
that is generated over a large
area and is transported and
spread by the wind.

Ozone is a secondary
pollutant; thus, it is not
emitted directly into the
lower level of the
atmosphere. The
primary sources of
ozone precursors (VOC
and NOX) are mobile
sources (on-road and
off-road vehicle
exhaust).

Irritate respiratory system;
reduce lung function; breathing
pattern changes; reduction of
breathing capacity; inflame and
damage cells that line the lungs;
make lungs more susceptible to
infection; aggravate asthma;
aggravate other chronic lung
diseases; cause permanent lung
damage; some immunological
changes; increased mortality
risk; vegetation and property
damage.

Particulate
matter (PM10)
Suspended particulate matter
is a mixture of small particles
that consist of dry solid
fragments, droplets of water,
or solid cores with liquid
coatings. The particles vary in
shape, size, and composition.

Stationary sources
include fuel or wood
combustion for
electrical utilities,
residential space
heating, and industrial
processes; construction
Short-term exposure
(hours/days): irritation of the
eyes, nose, throat; coughing;
phlegm; chest tightness;
shortness of breath; aggravate
existing lung disease, causing
asthma attacks and acute
Particulate
matter (PM2.5)
334
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 7 ends

Criteria Pollutant
Physical Description and
Properties Sources
Most Relevant Effects from
Pollutant Exposure
PM10 refers to particulate
matter that is between 2.5 and
10 microns in diameter, (one
micron is one-millionth of a
meter). PM2.5 refers to
particulate matter that is 2.5
microns or less in diameter,
about one-thirtieth the size of
the average human hair.
and demolition; metals,
minerals, and
petrochemicals; wood
products processing;
mills and elevators used
in agriculture; erosion
from tilled lands; waste
disposal, and recycling.

Mobile or
transportation-related
sources are from
vehicle exhaust and
road dust. Secondary
particles form from
reactions in the
atmosphere.
bronchitis; those with heart
disease can suffer heart attacks
and arrhythmias.

Long-term exposure: reduced
lung function; chronic
bronchitis; changes in lung
morphology; death.

Nitrogen dioxide
(NO2)
During combustion of fossil
fuels, oxygen reacts with
nitrogen to produce nitrogen
oxides—NOX (NO, NO2, NO3,
N2O, N2O3, N2O4, and N2O5).

NOX is a precursor to ozone,
PM10, and PM2.5 formation.

NOX can react with compounds
to form nitric acid and related
small particles and result in
particulate matter related
health effects.

NOX is produced in
motor vehicle internal
combustion engines and
fossil fuel-fired electric
utility and industrial
boilers. Nitrogen
dioxide forms quickly
from NOX emissions.

NO2 concentrations
near major roads can be
30 to 100 percent
higher than those at
monitoring stations.

Potential to aggravate chronic
respiratory disease and
respiratory symptoms in
sensitive groups; risk to public
health implied by pulmonary
and extra-pulmonary
biochemical and cellular
changes and pulmonary
structural changes;
contributions to atmospheric
discoloration; increased visits
to hospital for respiratory
illnesses.

Carbon
monoxide (CO)
CO is a colorless, odorless,
toxic gas. CO is somewhat
soluble in water; therefore,
rainfall and fog can suppress
CO conditions. CO enters the
body through the lungs,
dissolves in the blood, replaces
oxygen as an attachment to
hemoglobin, and reduces
available oxygen in the blood.

CO is produced by
incomplete combustion
of carbon-containing
fuels (e.g., gasoline,
diesel fuel, and
biomass). Sources
include motor vehicle
exhaust, industrial
processes (metals
processing and chemical
manufacturing),
residential wood
burning, and natural
sources.

Ranges depending on exposure:
slight headaches; nausea;
aggravation of angina pectoris
(chest pain) and other aspects
of coronary heart disease;
decreased exercise tolerance in
persons with peripheral
vascular disease and lung
disease; impairment of central
nervous system functions;
possible increased risk to
fetuses; death.

Sulfur dioxide
(SO2)
Sulfur dioxide is a colorless,
pungent gas. At levels greater
than 0.5 parts per million
(ppm), the gas has a strong
odor, similar to rotten eggs.

Sulfur oxides (SOX) include
sulfur dioxide and sulfur
Human caused sources
include fossil fuel
combustion, mineral
ore processing, and
chemical
manufacturing. Volcanic
emissions are a natural
Bronchoconstriction
accompanied by symptoms
which may include wheezing,
shortness of breath and chest
tightness, during exercise or
physical activity in persons with
asthma. Some population335
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 8 ends

Criteria Pollutant
Physical Description and
Properties Sources
Most Relevant Effects from
Pollutant Exposure
trioxide. Sulfuric acid is formed
from sulfur dioxide, which can
lead to acid deposition and can
harm natural resources and
materials. Although sulfur
dioxide concentrations have
been reduced to levels well
below State and federal
standards, further reductions
are desirable because sulfur
dioxide is a precursor to
sulfate and PM10.
source of sulfur dioxide.

The gas can also be
produced in the air by
dimethyl sulfide and
hydrogen sulfide. Sulfur
dioxide is removed from
the air by dissolution in
water, chemical
reactions, and transfer
to soils and ice caps.

The sulfur dioxide levels
in the State are well
below the maximum
standards.
based studies indicate that the
mortality and morbidity effects
associated with fine particles
show a similar association with
ambient sulfur dioxide levels. It
is not clear whether the two
pollutants act synergistically, or
one pollutant alone is the
predominant factor.

Lead (Pb) Lead is a solid heavy metal
that can exist in air pollution
as an aerosol particle
component. Leaded gasoline
was used in motor vehicles
until around 1970. Lead
concentrations have not
exceeded State or federal
standards at any monitoring
station since 1982.

Lead ore crushing, lead
ore smelting, and
battery manufacturing
are currently the largest
sources of lead in the
atmosphere in the
United States. Other
sources include dust
from soils contaminated
with lead-based paint,
solid waste disposal,
and crustal physical
weathering.

Lead accumulates in bones, soft
tissue, and blood and can affect
the kidneys, liver, and nervous
system. It can cause impairment
of blood formation and nerve
conduction, behavior disorders,
mental retardation, neurological
impairment, learning
deficiencies, and low IQs.

Sources:

California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2021. Vinyl Chloride & Health. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/vinylchloride-and-health. Accessed December 2, 2021.

California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2001. Health Effects of Diesel Exhaust. Website:
https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/calenviroscreen/indicators/diesel4-02.pdf. Accessed December 2, 2021.

National Archives and Records Administration. 2009. Part II, Environmental Protection Agency. 40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 50 and 58, Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Nitrogen Dioxide; Proposed Rule. July 15.

Website: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2009-07-15/pdf/E9-15944.pdf. Accessed December 2, 2021.

National Toxicology Program. 2016. Report on Carcinogens, 14th Edition; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. Benzene. November 3. Website: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/twelfth/profiles/Benzene.pdf.

Accessed December 2, 2021.

National Toxicology Program. 2016. Report on Carcinogens, 14th Edition; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. Diesel Exhaust Particles. November 3. Website:
https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/content/profiles/dieselexhaustparticulates.pdf. Accessed December 2, 2021.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD). 2007. Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan. June.

Website: https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2007-air-qualitymanagement-plan/2007-aqmp-final-document.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed December 2, 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2016. Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Pollution. Basic Information about NO2.

Website: https://www.epa.gov/no2-pollution/basic-information-about-no2#What%20is%20NO2. Accessed December 2, 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2020. Particulate Matter (PM) Pollution. Health and Environmental Effects of Particulate Matter (PM). Website: https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/health-and-environmental-effectsparticulate-matter-pm. Accessed December 2, 2021. 336
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 9 ends

Criteria Pollutant
Physical Description and
Properties Sources
Most Relevant Effects from
Pollutant Exposure
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2020. Health Effects Notebook for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Website:
www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/hapindex.html. Accessed December 2, 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2021. Indoor Air Quality (IAQ). Volatile Organic Compounds’ Impact on Indoor Air Quality. Website: https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/volatile-organic-compounds-impact-indoor-airquality. Accessed December 2, 2021.

Toxic Air Contaminants
Concentrations of toxic air contaminants (TACs) are also used as indicators of air quality conditions. Air pollutant human exposure standards are identified for many TACs, including the following common TACs relevant to development projects: particulate matter, fugitive dust, lead, and asbestos. These air pollutants are called TACs because they are air pollutants that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or in serious illness or that may pose a hazard to human health. TACs are usually present in minute quantities in the ambient air; however, their high toxicity or health impact may pose a threat to public health even at low concentrations. TACs can cause long-term health effects (such as cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, asthma, bronchitis, or genetic damage) or short-term acute affects (such as eye watering, respiratory irritation, runny nose, throat pain, or headaches).

TACs are separated into carcinogens and noncarcinogens based on the nature of the physiological effects associated with exposure to a particular TAC. Carcinogens are assumed to have no safe threshold below which health impacts would not occur. Cancer risk is typically expressed as excess cancer cases per million exposed individuals, typically over a lifetime exposure or other prolonged duration. For noncarcinogenic substances, there is generally assumed to be a safe level of exposure below which no negative health impact is believed to occur. These levels may vary depending on the specific pollutant.

Acute and chronic exposure to noncarcinogens is expressed as a hazard index (HI), which is the ratio of expected exposure levels to an acceptable reference exposure levels (RELs). Table 2 provides a summary of the types, sources, and effects of TACs.

Table 2: Description of Toxic Air Contaminants of National and California Concern Toxic Air
Contaminant
Physical Description and
Properties Sources
Most Relevant Effects from
Pollutant Exposure
Diesel
Particulate
Matter (DPM)
DPM is a source of PM2.5—
diesel particles are typically

2.5 microns and smaller.

Diesel exhaust is a complex
mixture of thousands of
particles and gases that is
produced when an engine
burns diesel fuel. Organic
compounds account for 80
percent of the total
particulate matter mass,
which consists of compounds
such as hydrocarbons and
Diesel exhaust is a major
source of ambient
particulate matter pollution
in urban environments.

Typically, the main source of
DPM is from combustion of
diesel fuel in diesel-powered
engines. Such engines are in
on-road vehicles such as
diesel trucks, off-road
construction vehicles, diesel
electrical generators, and
Some short-term (acute)
effects of DPM exposure
include eye, nose, throat,
and lung irritation, coughs,
headaches, lightheadedness, and nausea.

Studies have linked elevated
particle levels in the air to
increased hospital
admissions, emergency room
visits, asthma attacks, and
premature deaths among
those suffering from
respiratory problems.
337
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 10 ends

Toxic Air
Contaminant
Physical Description and
Properties Sources
Most Relevant Effects from
Pollutant Exposure
their derivatives, and
polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons and their
derivatives. Fifteen polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons are
confirmed carcinogens, a
number of which are found in
diesel exhaust.
various pieces of stationary
construction equipment.

Human studies on the
carcinogenicity of DPM
demonstrate an increased
risk of lung cancer, although
the increased risk cannot be
clearly attributed to diesel
exhaust exposure.

VOCs Reactive organic gases
(ROGs), or VOCs, are defined
as any compound of
carbon—excluding carbon
monoxide, carbon dioxide,
carbonic acid, metallic
carbides or carbonates, and
ammonium carbonate—that
participates in atmospheric
photochemical reactions.

Although there are slight
differences in the definition
of ROGs and VOCs, the two
terms are often used
interchangeably.

Indoor sources of VOCs
include paints, solvents,
aerosol sprays, cleansers,
tobacco smoke, etc. Outdoor
sources of VOCs are from
combustion and fuel
evaporation. A reduction in
VOC emissions reduces
certain chemical reactions
that contribute to the
formulation of ozone. VOCs
are transformed into organic
aerosols in the atmosphere,
which contribute to higher
PM10 and lower visibility.

Although health-based
standards have not been
established for VOCs, health
effects can occur from
exposures to high
concentrations because of
interference with oxygen
uptake. In general,
concentrations of VOCs are
suspected to cause eye,
nose, and throat irritation;
headaches; loss of
coordination; nausea; and
damage to the liver, the
kidneys, and the central
nervous system. Many VOCs
have been classified as TACs.

Benzene Benzene is a VOC. It is a clear
or colorless light-yellow,
volatile, highly flammable
liquid with a gasoline-like
odor. The EPA has classified
benzene as a “Group A”
carcinogen.

Benzene is emitted into the
air from fuel evaporation,
motor vehicle exhaust,
tobacco smoke, and from
burning oil and coal.

Benzene is used as a solvent
for paints, inks, oils, waxes,
plastic, and rubber. Benzene
occurs naturally in gasoline
at 1 to 2 percent by volume.

The primary route of human
exposure is through
inhalation.

Short-term (acute) exposure
of high doses from inhalation
of benzene may cause
dizziness, drowsiness,
headaches, eye irritation,
skin irritation, and
respiratory tract irritation,
and at higher levels, loss of
consciousness can occur.

Long-term (chronic)
occupational exposure of
high doses has caused blood
disorders, leukemia, and
lymphatic cancer.

Asbestos Asbestos is the name given to
a number of naturally
occurring fibrous silicate
minerals that have been
mined for their useful
properties such as thermal
insulation, chemical and
thermal stability, and high
tensile strength. The three
most common types of
Chrysotile, also known as
white asbestos, is the most
common type of asbestos
found in buildings. Chrysotile
makes up approximately 90
to 95 percent of all asbestos
contained in buildings in the
United States.

Exposure to asbestos is a
health threat; exposure to
asbestos fibers may result in
health issues such as lung
cancer, mesothelioma (a rare
cancer of the thin
membranes lining the lungs,
chest, and abdominal cavity),
and asbestosis (a noncancerous lung disease that
338
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 11 ends

Toxic Air
Contaminant
Physical Description and
Properties Sources
Most Relevant Effects from
Pollutant Exposure
asbestos are chrysotile,
amosite, and crocidolite.
causes scarring of the lungs).

Exposure to asbestos can
occur during demolition or
remodeling of buildings that
were constructed prior to
the 1977 ban on asbestos for
use in buildings. Exposure to
naturally occurring asbestos
can occur during soildisturbing activities in areas
with deposits present.

Hydrogen
Sulfide
Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is a
flammable, colorless,
poisonous gas that smells like
rotten eggs.

Manure, storage tanks,
ponds, anaerobic lagoons,
and land application sites
are the primary sources of
hydrogen sulfide.

Anthropogenic sources
include the combustion of
sulfur containing fuels (oil
and coal).

High levels of hydrogen
sulfide can cause immediate
respiratory arrest. It can
irritate the eyes and
respiratory tract and cause
headache, nausea, vomiting,
and cough. Long exposure
can cause pulmonary edema.

Sulfates Sulfates occur in combination
with metal and/or hydrogen
ions. Many sulfates are
soluble in water.

Sulfates are particulates
formed through the
photochemical oxidation of
sulfur dioxide. In California,
the main source of sulfur
compounds is combustion of
gasoline and diesel fuel.
(a) Decrease in ventilatory
function;
(b) aggravation of asthmatic
symptoms;
(c) aggravation of
cardiopulmonary
disease;
(d) vegetation damage;
(e) degradation of visibility;
(f) property damage.

VisibilityReducing
Particles
Suspended particulate matter
is a mixture of small particles
that consist of dry solid
fragments, droplets of water,
or solid cores with liquid
coatings. The particles vary in
shape, size, and composition.

PM10 refers to particulate
matter that is between 2.5
and 10 microns in diameter
(1 micron is one-millionth of
a meter). PM2.5 refers to
particulate matter that is 2.5
microns or less in diameter,
about one-thirtieth the size
of the average human hair.

Stationary sources include
fuel or wood combustion for
electrical utilities, residential
space heating, and industrial
processes; construction and
demolition; metals,
minerals, and
petrochemicals; wood
products processing; mills
and elevators used in
agriculture; erosion from
tilled lands; waste disposal;
and recycling. Mobile or
transportation-related
sources are from vehicle
exhaust and road dust.

Secondary particles form
from reactions in the
atmosphere.
• Short-term exposure
(hours/days): irritation of
the eyes, nose, throat;
coughing; phlegm; chest
tightness; shortness of
breath; aggravates existing
lung disease, causing
asthma attacks and acute
bronchitis; those with
heart disease can suffer
heart attacks and
arrhythmias.
• Long-term exposure:
reduced lung function;
chronic bronchitis;
changes in lung
morphology; death.
339
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 12 ends

Toxic Air
Contaminant
Physical Description and
Properties Sources
Most Relevant Effects from
Pollutant Exposure
Vinyl Chloride Vinyl chloride, or
chloroethene, is a chlorinated
hydrocarbon and a colorless
gas with a mild, sweet odor.

In 1990, the California Air
Resources Board (ARB)
identified vinyl chloride as a
toxic air contaminant and
estimated a cancer unit risk
factor.

Most vinyl chloride is used
to make polyvinyl chloride
plastic and vinyl products,
including pipes, wire and
cable coatings, and
packaging materials. It can
be formed when plastics
containing these substances
are left to decompose in
solid waste landfills. Vinyl
chloride has been detected
near landfills, sewage plants,
and hazardous waste sites.

Short-term exposure to high
levels of vinyl chloride in the
air causes central nervous
system effects, such as
dizziness, drowsiness, and
headaches. Epidemiological
studies of occupationally
exposed workers have linked
vinyl chloride exposure to
development of a rare
cancer, liver angiosarcoma,
and have suggested a
relationship between
exposure and lung and brain
cancers.

Lead ore crushing, lead ore
smelting, and battery
manufacturing are currently
the largest sources of lead in
the atmosphere in the
United States. Other sources
include dust from soils
contaminated with leadbased paint, solid waste
disposal, and crustal physical
weathering.

Lead accumulates in bones,
soft tissue, and blood and
can affect the kidneys, liver,
and nervous system. It can
cause impairment of blood
formation and nerve
conduction, behavior
disorders, mental
retardation, neurological
impairment, learning
deficiencies, and low IQs.

Sources:

California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2021. Vinyl Chloride & Health. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/vinylchloride-and-health. December 2, 2021.

National Archives and Records Administration. 2009. Part II, United States Environmental Protection Agency. 40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 50 and 58, Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Nitrogen Dioxide; Proposed Rule.

July 15. Website: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2009-07-15/pdf/E9-15944.pdf. December 2, 2021.

December 2, 2021.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD). 2007. Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan. June.

Website: https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2007-air-qualitymanagement-plan/2007-aqmp-final-document.pdf?sfvrsn=2. December 2, 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2016. Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Pollution. Basic Information about NO2.

Website: https://www.epa.gov/no2-pollution/basic-information-about-no2#What%20is%20NO2. December 2, 2021.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 13 ends

Toxic Air
Contaminant
Physical Description and
Properties Sources
Most Relevant Effects from
Pollutant Exposure
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2020. Health Effects Notebook for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Website:
www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/hapindex.html. December 2, 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2021. Health Effects of Ozone Pollution. Website:
https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/health-effects-ozone-pollution. December 2, 2021.

Air Quality
Air quality is a function of both the rate and location of pollutant emissions under the influence of meteorological conditions and topographic features. Atmospheric conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature inversions interact with the physical features of the landscape to determine the movement and dispersal of air pollutant emissions and, consequently, their effect on air quality.

Regional Air Quality
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is the regional agency regulating air quality within the nine-county SFBAAB. The SFBAAB includes Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties, the western portion of Solano County, and the southern portion of Sonoma County.

Air Pollutant Standards and Attainment Designations
Air pollutant standards have been adopted by the EPA and the ARB for the following six criteria air pollutants that affect ambient air quality: ozone, NO2, CO, SO2, lead, and PM, which is subdivided into two classes based on particle size: PM with aerodynamic diameters equal to or less than 10 microns (PM10), and PM with aerodynamic diameters equal to or less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5). These air pollutants are called “criteria air pollutants” because they are regulated by developing specific public health- and welfare-based criteria as the basis for setting permissible levels. California has also established standards for TACs such as visibility-reducing particles, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride. Table 3 presents the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for these aforementioned air pollutants. Note that there are no State or federal ambient air quality standards for reactive organic gases (ROGs), benzene, or DPM.

Table 3: Federal and State Air Quality Standards in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin Air Pollutant Averaging Time
California Standard
(CAAQS)
Federal Standarda
(NAAQS)
Ozone 1 Hour 0.09 ppm —
8 Hours 0.070 ppm 0.070 ppmf
Nitrogen dioxideb (NO2) 1 Hour 0.18 ppm 0.100 ppm
Annual 0.030 ppm 0.053 ppm
341
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 14 ends

Air Pollutant Averaging Time
California Standard
(CAAQS)
Federal Standarda
(NAAQS)
Carbon monoxide (CO) 1 Hour 20 ppm 35 ppm
8 Hours 9.0 ppm 9 ppm
Sulfur dioxidec (SO2) 1 Hour 0.25 ppm 0.075 ppm
3 Hours — 0.5 ppm
24 Hours 0.04 ppm 0.14 (for certain areas)
Annual — 0.030 ppm (for certain
areas)
Leade 30-day 1.5 µg/m3 —
Quarter — 1.5 µg/m3
Rolling 3-month average — 0.15 µg/m3
Particulate matter (PM10) 24 hours 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3
Mean 20 µg/m3 —
Particulate matter (PM2.5) 24 Hours — 35 µg/m3
Annual 12 µg/m3 12.0 µg/m3
Visibility-reducing particles 8 Hours See note belowd
Sulfates 24 Hours 25 µg/m3 —
Hydrogen sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm —
Vinyl chloridee 24 Hours 0.01 ppm —
Notes:
ppm = parts per million (concentration)
µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter Annual = Annual Arithmetic Mean 30-day = 30-day average
Quarter = Calendar quarter
a Federal standard refers to the primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), or the levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety to protect the public health. All standards listed are primary standards except for 3-Hour SO2, which is a secondary standard. A secondary standard is the level of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant. b To attain the 1-hour nitrogen dioxide national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 98th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 100 parts per billion (0.100 ppm). c On June 2, 2010, a new 1-hour SO2 standard was established and the existing 24-hour and annual primary standards were revoked. To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 75 part per billion (ppb). The 1971 SO2 national standards (24-hour and annual) remain in effect until 1 year after an area is designated for the 2010 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1971 standards, the 1971 standards remain in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2010 standards are approved.
d Visibility-reducing particles: In 1989, the ARB converted both the general Statewide 10-mile visibility standard and the Lake Tahoe 30-mile visibility standard to instrumental equivalents, which are “extinction of 0.23 per kilometer” and “extinction of 0.07 per kilometer” for the Statewide and Lake Tahoe Air Basin standards, respectively. 342
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 15 ends

Air Pollutant Averaging Time
California Standard
(CAAQS)
Federal Standarda
(NAAQS)
e The ARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as “toxic air contaminants” with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined. These actions allow for implementing control measures at levels below the ambient concentrations specified for these pollutants.
f The EPA Administrator approved a revised 8-hour ozone standard of 0.07 ppb on October 1, 2015. The new standard went into effect 60 days after publication the Final Rule in the Federal Register. The Final Rule was published in the Federal Register on October 26, 2015, and became effective on December 28, 2015.

Source:

California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2016. Ambient Air Quality Standards. May 4. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/aaqs2.pdf. December 2, 2021.

Air quality monitoring stations operated by the ARB and BAAQMD measure ambient air pollutant concentrations in the SFBAAB. In general, the SFBAAB experiences low concentrations of most pollutants compared to federal or State standards.

Both the EPA and ARB use ambient air quality monitoring data to designate areas according to their attainment status for criteria air pollutants. These designations identify the areas with air quality problems and initiate planning efforts for improvement. The three basic designation categories are nonattainment, attainment, and unclassified. “Attainment” status refers to those regions that are meeting federal and/or State standards for a specified criteria pollutant. “Nonattainment” refers to regions that do not meet federal and/or State standards for a specified criteria pollutant. “Unclassified” refers to regions with insufficient data to determine the region’s attainment status for a specified criteria air pollutant. Each standard has a different definition, or “form” of what constitutes attainment, based on specific air quality statistics. For example, the federal 8-hour CO standard is not to be exceeded more than once per year; therefore, an area is in attainment of the CO standard if no more than one 8-hour ambient air monitoring values exceeds the threshold per year. In contrast, the federal annual PM2.5 standard is met if the 3-year average of the annual average PM2.5 concentration is less than or equal to the standard.

Table 4 shows the current attainment designations for the SFBAAB. The SFBAAB is designated as nonattainment for the State ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 standards, and the national ozone and PM2.5 standards.

Table 4: San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin Attainment Status Pollutant State Status National Status
Ozone Nonattainment Nonattainment
CO Attainment Attainment
NO2 Attainment Attainment
SO2 Attainment N/A
PM10 Nonattainment Unclassified
343
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 16 ends

Pollutant State Status National Status
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
Sulfates Attainment N/A
Hydrogen Sulfates Unclassified N/A
Visibility-reducing Particles Unclassified N/A
Lead N/A Attainment
Notes: N/A = information not available.

Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status. January 5.

Website: http://www.baaqmd.gov/research-and-data/air-quality-standards-and-attainment-status. December 2, 2021.

Air Quality Index
The health impacts of the various air pollutants of concern can be presented in a number of ways. The clearest comparison is to the State and federal ozone standards. If concentrations are below the standard, it is safe to say that no health impact would occur to anyone. When concentrations exceed the standard, impacts will vary based on the amount by which the standard is exceeded. The EPA developed the Air Quality Index (AQI) as an easy-to-understand measure of health impacts compared with concentrations in the air. Table 5 provides a general description of the health impacts of ozone at different concentrations.

Table 5: Air Quality Index and Health Effects from Ozone Air Quality Index/
8-hour Ozone Concentration Health Effects Description
AQI—0–50—Good
Concentration 0–54 ppb
Sensitive Groups: Children and people with asthma are the groups most at risk.

Health Effects Statements: None.

Cautionary Statements: None.

AQI—51–100—Moderate
Concentration 55–70 ppb
Sensitive Groups: Children and people with asthma are the groups most at risk.

Health Effects Statements: Unusually sensitive individuals may experience respiratory symptoms.

Cautionary Statements: Unusually sensitive people should consider limiting prolonged outdoor exertion.

AQI—101–150—Unhealthy for
Sensitive Groups
Concentration 71–85 ppb
Sensitive Groups: Children and people with asthma are the groups most at risk.

Health Effects Statements: Increasing likelihood of respiratory symptoms and breathing discomfort in active children and adults, and people with respiratory disease, such as asthma.

Cautionary Statements: Active children and adults, and people with respiratory disease, such as asthma, should limit prolonged outdoor exertion. 344
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 17 ends

Air Quality Index/
8-hour Ozone Concentration Health Effects Description
AQI—151–200—Unhealthy
Concentration 86–105 ppb
Sensitive Groups: Children and people with asthma are the groups most at risk.

Health Effects Statements: Greater likelihood of respiratory symptoms and breathing difficulty in active children and adults and people with respiratory disease, such as asthma; possible respiratory effects in general population.

Cautionary Statements: Active children and adults, and people with respiratory disease, such as asthma, should avoid prolonged outdoor exertion; everyone else, especially children, should limit prolonged outdoor exertion.

AQI—201–300—Very
Unhealthy
Concentration 106–200 ppb
Sensitive Groups: Children and people with asthma are the groups most at risk.

Health Effects Statements: Increasingly severe symptoms and impaired breathing likely in active children and adults and people with respiratory disease, such as asthma; increasing likelihood of respiratory effects in general population.

Cautionary Statements: Active children and adults, and people with respiratory disease, such as asthma, should avoid all outdoor exertion; everyone else, especially children, should limit outdoor exertion.

Source: Air Now. n.d. AQI Calculator: AQI to Concentration Calculator. Website: https://www.airnow.gov/aqi/aqi-calculator.

Accessed December 2, 2021.

Local Air Quality
Air quality is a function of both the rate and location of pollutant emissions under the influence of meteorological conditions and topographic features. Atmospheric conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature inversions interact with the physical features of the landscape to determine the movement and dispersal of air pollutant emissions and, consequently, their effect on air quality.

The local air quality can be evaluated by reviewing relevant air pollution concentrations near the project area. The air quality monitoring station closest to the project site is the San José–Jackson Street Air Monitoring Station, located approximately 5 miles south of the project site. Table 6 summarizes the recorded ambient air data at the representative monitoring station for the years 2018 through 2020, which is the most current data available at the time of this analysis. As Table 6 shows, the recorded data show exceedances of the California standards for ozone (1-hour and 8-hour) and PM10, and national standards for 8-hour ozone, NO2, PM2.5, and PM10 on multiple occasions from 2018 through 2020. No recent monitoring data for Santa Clara County or the SFBAAB was available for CO or SO2. Generally, no monitoring is conducted for pollutants that are no longer likely to exceed ambient air quality standards.

Table 6: Air Quality Monitoring Summary
Air Pollutant Averaging Time Item 2018 2019 2020
Ozone
1 Hour
Max 1-Hour (ppm) 0.078 0.095 0.106
Days > State Standard (0.09 ppm) 0 1 1
345
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 18 ends

Air Pollutant Averaging Time Item 2018 2019 2020
8 Hour
Max 8-Hour (ppm) 0.061 0.082 0.086
Days > State Standard (0.07 ppm) 0 2 2
Days > National Standard (0.070 ppm) 0 2 2
CO
8 Hour
Max 8-Hour (ppm) ND ND ND
Days > State Standard (9.0 ppm) ND ND ND
Days > National Standard (9 ppm) ND ND ND
NO2 Annual Annual Average (ppm) 0.012 0.010 0.009
1 Hour
Max 1-Hour (ppm) 0.086 0.060 0.052
Days > State Standard (0.18 ppm) 0 0 0
SO2 Annual Annual Average (ppm) ND ND ND
24 Hour
Max 24-Hour (ppm) ND ND ND
Days > State Standard (0.04 ppm) ND ND ND
Inhalable coarse
particles (PM10)
Annual Annual Average (µg/m3) 23.1 19.1 24.8
24 Hour
Max 24-Hour (µg/m3) 121.8 77.1 137.1
Days > State Standard (50 µg/m3) (3) 4 4 10
Days > National Standard (150 µg/m3) 0 0 0
Fine particulate
matter (PM2.5)
Annual Annual Average (µg/m3) 12.9 9.1 11.5
24 Hour
Max 24-Hour (µg/m3) 133.9 34.4 120.5
Days > National Standard (35 µg/m3) 15 0 12
Notes:
> = exceed ppm = parts per million µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter ID = insufficient data ND = no data max = maximum
Bold = exceedance
State Standard = California Ambient Air Quality Standard (CAAQS).

National Standard = National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).

Sensitive Receptors
Air pollution does not affect every individual in the population in the same way, and some groups are more sensitive to adverse health effects than others are. Land uses such as residences, schools, day care centers, hospitals, nursing and convalescent homes, and parks are considered the most sensitive to poor air quality because the population groups associated with these uses have increased susceptibility to respiratory distress or, as in the case of residential receptors, their exposure time is greater than that for other land uses. Therefore, these groups are referred to as sensitive receptors. Exposure assessment guidance typically assumes that residences would receive exposure to air pollution 24 hours per day, 350 days per year, for 30 years. The BAAQMD defines sensitive receptors as children, adults, and seniors 346
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 19 ends

occupying or residing in residential dwellings, schools, day care centers, hospitals, and senior care facilities.

Project Vicinity
The closest off-site air pollution sensitive receptors near the project site in each direction include the following:
• Ready Preschool approximately 790 feet northwest of the project site. • A multi-family residence approximately 370 feet west of the project site. • A multi-family residence approximately 580 feet southwest of the project site. • A multi-family residence approximately 430 feet southeast of the project site.

Project Vicinity
The primary sources of air pollutants (both criteria air pollutant and TACs) in the project site vicinity include the various other surrounding industrial properties, building-related energy use, and motorrelated vehicle trips associated with the local business use, particularly from the Union Pacific Railroad Company. The project site is located approximately 1,500 feet west of Union Pacific and approximately 2,900 feet east of Interstate 880 (I-880). Other activities that result in emissions include space and water heating, landscape maintenance, and any surrounding industrial uses that can store, produce, decommission, or otherwise handle hazardous materials.

Existing Emission Sources
The Montessori School of Silicon Valley and Game Time Elite Gymnastics currently operate on the 1.6- acre site. There is regular activity from the business that would generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, because the operative status of existing uses is unknown at the time this analysis was prepared, the emissions generated from operation of land uses currently on the project site were not quantified and considered when analyzing net emission generation from the proposed project. As such, this approach represents a conservative assessment of the proposed project’s emissions generation.

Regulatory Framework
Federal
Clean Air Act
Congress established much of the basic structure of the Clean Air Act (CAA) in 1970, and made major revisions in 1977 and 1990. Six common air pollutants (also known as criteria pollutants) are addressed in the CAA. These are particulate matter, ground-level ozone, CO, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and lead. The EPA calls these pollutants criteria air pollutants because it regulates them by developing human health-based and/or environmentally based criteria (science-based guidelines) for setting permissible levels. The set of limits based on human health are called primary standards. Another set of limits intended to prevent environmental and property damage are called secondary standards. The NAAQS provide benchmarks for determining whether air quality is healthy at specific locations and 347
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 20 ends

whether development activities will cause or contribute to a violation of the standards. The criteria pollutants are:
• Ozone • Particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5)
• Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) • Carbon monoxide (CO)
• Lead • Sulfur dioxide
The NAAQS were set to protect public health, including that of sensitive individuals; thus, the EPA is tasked with updating the standards as more medical research is available regarding the health effects of the criteria pollutants. Primary federal standards are the levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health.

The CAA also requires each state to prepare an air quality control plan referred to as a State Implementation Plan (SIP). The federal CAA Amendments of 1990 added requirements for states with nonattainment areas to revise their SIPs to incorporate additional control measures to reduce air pollution. The SIP is periodically modified to reflect the latest emissions inventories, planning documents, and rules and regulations of the air basins, as reported by their jurisdictional agencies.

EPA Emission Standards for New Off-Road Equipment
Before 1994, there were no standards to limit the amount of emissions from off-road equipment. In 1994, the EPA established emission standards for hydrocarbons, NOX, CO, and PM to regulate new pieces of off-road equipment. These emission standards came to be known as Tier 1. Since that time, increasingly more stringent Tier 2, Tier 3, and Tier 4 (interim and final) standards were adopted by the EPA, as well as by the ARB. Each adopted emission standard was phased in over time. New engines built in and after 2015 across all horsepower sizes must meet Tier 4 final emission standards. In other words, new manufactured engines cannot exceed the emissions established for Tier 4 final emissions standards.

State
California Air Quality Control Plan (State Implementation Plan) An SIP is a document prepared by each state describing existing air quality conditions and measures that will be followed to attain and maintain federal standards. The SIP for the State of California is administered by the ARB, which has overall responsibility for Statewide air quality maintenance and air pollution prevention. California’s SIP incorporates individual federal attainment plans for regional air districts—an air district prepares their federal attainment plan, which is sent to the ARB to be approved and incorporated into the California SIP. Federal attainment plans include the technical foundation for understanding air quality (e.g., emission inventories and air quality monitoring), control measures and strategies, and enforcement mechanisms for attaining and maintaining air quality standards.

Areas designated nonattainment must develop air quality plans and regulations to achieve standards by specified dates, depending on the severity of the exceedances. For much of the country, implementation of federal motor vehicle standards and compliance with federal permitting requirements for industrial sources are adequate to attain air quality standards on schedule. For many areas of California, however, additional State and local regulation is required to achieve the standards. 348
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 21 ends

California Clean Air Act
The California Legislature enacted the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) in 1988 to address air quality issues of concern not adequately addressed by the federal CAA at the time. California’s air quality problems were and continue to be some of the most severe in the nation, and required additional actions beyond the federal mandates. The ARB administers the CAAQS for the 10 air pollutants designated in the CCAA.

The 10 State air pollutants are the six federal standards listed above as well as visibility-reducing particulates, hydrogen sulfide, sulfates, and vinyl chloride. The EPA authorized California to adopt its own regulations for motor vehicles and other sources that are more stringent than similar federal regulations implementing the CAA. Generally, the planning requirements of the CCAA are more stringent than the federal CAA; therefore, consistency with the CAA will also demonstrate consistency with the CCAA.

Other ARB responsibilities include but are not limited to overseeing local air district compliance with California and federal laws; approving local air quality plans; submitting SIPs to the EPA; monitoring air quality; determining and updating area designations and maps; conducting basic research aimed at providing a better understanding between emissions and public well-being, and setting emissions standards for new mobile sources, consumer products, small utility engines, off-road vehicles, and fuels.

California Health and Safety Code Section 39655 and California Code of Regulations Title 17 Section 93000 (Substances Identified as Toxic Air Contaminants) The ARB identifies substances as TACs as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 39655 and listed in Title 17, Section 93000 of the California Code of Regulations, “Substances Identified As Toxic Air Contaminants.” A TAC is defined as an air pollutant that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or that may pose a hazard to human health. TACs are usually present in minute quantities in the ambient air; however, their high toxicity or health risk may pose a threat to public health even at low concentrations. In general, for those TACs that may cause cancer, there are thresholds set by regulatory agencies below which adverse health impacts are not expected to occur.

This contrasts with the criteria pollutants for which acceptable levels of exposure can be determined and for which the State and federal government have set ambient air quality standards. According to the California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality, the majority of the estimated health risk from TACs for the State of California can be attributed to relatively few compounds, the most important of which is diesel particulate matter (DPM) from diesel-fueled engines.

California Low Emission Vehicle Program
The ARB first adopted Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) program standards in 1990. These first LEV standards ran from 1994 through 2003. LEV II regulations, running from 2004 through 2010, represent continuing progress in emission reductions. As the State’s passenger vehicle fleet continues to grow and more sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks are used as passenger cars rather than work vehicles, the more stringent LEV II standards were adopted to provide reductions necessary for California to meet federally mandated clean air goals outlined in the 1994 SIP. In 2012, the ARB adopted the LEV III amendments to California’s LEV regulations. These amendments, also known as the Advanced Clean Car Program, include more stringent emission standards for model years 2017 through 2025 for both criteria pollutants and GHG emissions for new passenger vehicles.
349
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 22 ends

California On-Road Heavy-Duty Vehicle Program
The ARB has adopted standards for emissions from various types of new on-road heavy-duty vehicles.

Section 1956.8, Title 13, California Code of Regulations contains California’s emission standards for onroad heavy-duty engines and vehicles, and test procedures. The ARB has also adopted programs to reduce emissions from in-use heavy-duty vehicles including the Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicle Idling Reduction Program, the Heavy-Duty Diesel In-Use Compliance Program, the Public Bus Fleet Rule and Engine Standards, and the School Bus Program and others.

California In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation
On July 26, 2007, the ARB adopted a regulation to reduce DPM and NOX emissions from in-use (existing) off-road heavy-duty diesel vehicles in California. Such vehicles are used in construction, mining, and industrial operations. The regulation limits idling to no more than five consecutive minutes, requires reporting and labeling, and requires disclosure of the regulation upon vehicle sale. The ARB is enforcing that part of the rule with fines up to $10,000 per day for each vehicle in violation. Performance requirements of the rule are based on a fleet’s average NOX emissions, which can be met by replacing older vehicles with newer, cleaner vehicles or by applying exhaust retrofits. The regulation was amended in 2010 to delay the original timeline of the performance requirements, making the first compliance deadline January 1, 2014, for large fleets (over 5,000 horsepower), 2017 for medium fleets (2,501-5,000 horsepower), and 2019 for small fleets (2,500 horsepower or less).

The latest amendments to the Truck and Bus regulation became effective on December 31, 2014. The amended regulation requires diesel trucks and buses that operate in California to be upgraded to reduce emissions. Newer heavier trucks and buses must meet PM filter requirements beginning January 1, 2012. Lighter and older heavier trucks must be replaced starting January 1, 2015. By January 1, 2023, nearly all trucks and buses will need to have 2010 model year engines or equivalent.

The regulation applies to nearly all privately and federally owned diesel-fueled trucks and buses and to privately and publicly owned school buses with a gross vehicle weight rating greater than 14,000 pounds.

The regulation provides a variety of flexibility options tailored to fleets operating low use vehicles, fleets operating in selected vocations like agricultural and construction, and small fleets of three or fewer trucks.

California Airborne Toxic Control Measures for Asbestos The ARB has adopted Airborne Toxic Control Measures (ATCM) for sources that emit a particular TAC. If there is a safe threshold for a substance at which there is no toxic effect, the control measure must reduce exposure below that threshold. If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate Best Available Control Technology (BACT) to minimize emissions.

In July 2001, the ARB approved an ATCM for construction, grading, quarrying and surface mining operations to minimize emissions of naturally occurring asbestos. The regulation requires application of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control fugitive dust in areas known to have naturally occurring asbestos and requires notification to the local air district prior to commencement of ground-disturbing activities. The measure establishes specific testing, notification and engineering controls prior to grading, 350
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 23 ends

quarrying, or surface mining in construction zones where naturally occurring asbestos is located on projects of any size. There are additional notification and engineering controls at work sites larger than one acre in size. These projects require the submittal of a “Dust Mitigation Plan” and approval by the air district prior to the start of a project.

Construction sometimes requires the demolition of existing buildings where construction occurs.

Asbestos is also found in a natural state, known as naturally occurring asbestos. Exposure and disturbance of rock and soil that naturally contain asbestos can result in the release of fibers into the air and consequent exposure to the public. Asbestos most commonly occurs in ultramafic rock that has undergone partial or complete alteration to serpentine rock (serpentinite) and often contains chrysotile asbestos. In addition, another form of asbestos, tremolite, can be found associated with ultramafic rock, particularly near faults. Sources of asbestos emissions include unpaved roads or driveways surfaced with ultramafic rock, construction activities in ultramafic rock deposits, or rock quarrying activities where ultramafic rock is present.

The ARB has an ATCM for construction, grading, quarrying, and surface mining operations, requiring the implementation of mitigation measures to minimize emissions of asbestos-laden dust. The measure applies to road construction and maintenance, construction and grading operations, and quarries and surface mines when the activity occurs in an area where naturally occurring asbestos is likely to be found. Areas are subject to the regulation if they are identified on maps published by the Department of Conservation as ultramafic rock units or if the Air Pollution Control Officer or owner/operator has knowledge of the presence of ultramafic rock, serpentine, or naturally occurring asbestos on the site.

The measure also applies if ultramafic rock, serpentine, or asbestos is discovered during any operation or activity. Review of the Department of Conservation maps indicates that no ultramafic rock has been found near the project site.1
Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies
The EPA and the ARB tiered off-road emission standards only apply to new engines and off-road equipment can last several years. The ARB has developed Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies (VDECS), which are devices, systems, or strategies used to achieve the highest level of pollution control from existing off-road vehicles, to help reduce emissions from existing engines. VDECS are designed primarily for the reduction of DPM emissions and have been verified by ARB. There are three levels of VDECS, the most effective of which is the Level 3 VDECS. Tier 4 engines are not required to install VDECS because they already meet the emissions standards for lower tiered equipment with installed controls.

California Diesel Risk Reduction Plan
The ARB Diesel Risk Reduction Plan has led to the adoption of new State regulatory standards for all new on-road, off-road, and stationary diesel-fueled engines, and vehicles to reduce DPM emissions in 2020 by about 90 percent overall from year 2000 levels. The projected emission benefits associated with the full 1 Department of Conservation. 2011. Map Sheet 59: Reported Historic Asbestos Mines, Historic Asbestos Prospects, and Other Natural Occurrences of Asbestos in California. Website: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Publications/MapSheets/MS_059_Plate.pdf. Accessed December 3, 2021. 351
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 24 ends

implementation of this plan, including federal measures, are reductions in DPM emissions and associated cancer risks of 75 percent by 2010, and 85 percent by 2020.

Tanner Air Toxics Act and Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act TACs in California are primarily regulated through the Tanner Air Toxics Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 1807) and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588), also known as the Hot Spots Act. To date, the ARB has identified more than 21 TACs, and has adopted the EPA’s list of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) as TACs.

Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program The Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program (Carl Moyer Program), a partnership between the ARB and local air districts, issues grants to replace or retrofit older engines and equipment with engines and equipment that exceed current regulatory requirements to reduce air pollution. Money collected through the Carl Moyer Program complements California’s regulatory program by providing incentives to effect early or extra emission reductions, especially from emission sources in environmental justice communities and areas disproportionately affected by air pollution. The program has established guidelines and criteria for the funding of emissions reduction projects. Within the SFBAAB, the BAAQMD administers the Carl Moyer Program. The program has established guidelines and criteria for the funding of emissions reduction projects and has established cost-effectiveness criteria for funding emission reductions projects, which under the final 2017 Carl Moyer Program Guidelines are $30,000 per weighted ton of NOX, ROG, and PM.

Regional
BAAQMD California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines The BAAQMD is the primary agency responsible for ensuring that air quality standards (NAAQS and CAAQS) are attained and maintained in the SFBAAB through comprehensive planning, regulation, enforcement, technical innovation, and promotion of the understanding of air quality issues. The BAAQMD prepares plans to attain ambient air quality standards in the SFBAAB and prepares ozone attainment plans for the national ozone standard, clean air plans for the California standard, and PM plans to fulfill federal air quality planning requirements. The BAAQMD also inspects stationary sources of air pollution; responds to citizen complaints; monitors ambient air quality and meteorological conditions; and implements programs and regulations required by the CAA and the CCAA.

The BAAQMD developed quantitative thresholds of significance for its California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines in 2010, which were also included in its updated 2011 Guidelines. The BAAQMD’s adoption of the 2010 thresholds of significance was later challenged in court. In an opinion issued on December 17, 2015, related to the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, the California Supreme Court held that CEQA does not generally require an analysis of the impacts of locating development in areas subject to environmental hazards unless the proposed project would exacerbate existing environmental hazards.

The California Supreme Court also found that CEQA requires the analysis of exposing people to environmental hazards in specific circumstances, including the location of development near airports, schools near sources of toxic contamination, and certain exemptions for infill and workforce housing. 352
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 25 ends

The California Supreme Court also held that public agencies remain free to voluntarily conduct this analysis not required by CEQA for their own public projects (CBIA v. BAAQMD (2016) 2 Cal.App.5th 1067, 1083).

In view of the California Supreme Court’s opinion, the BAAQMD published a new version of its CEQA Guidelines in May 2017. The BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines state that local agencies may rely on thresholds designed to reflect the impact of locating development near areas of toxic air contamination where CEQA requires such an analysis, or where the agency has determined that such an analysis would assist in making a decision about the proposed project. However, the thresholds are not mandatory, and agencies should apply them only after determining that they reflect an appropriate measure of a project’s impacts. The BAAQMD’s guidelines for implementing the thresholds are for informational purposes only, to assist local agencies.

BAAQMD Particulate Matter Plan
To fulfill federal air quality planning requirements, the BAAQMD adopted a PM2.5 emissions inventory for the year 2010 at a public hearing on November 7, 2012. The Bay Area Clean Air Plan also included several measures for reducing PM emissions from stationary sources and wood burning. On January 9, 2013, the EPA issued a final rule determining that the Bay Area has attained the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, suspending federal SIP planning requirements for the SFBAAB. Despite this EPA action, the SFBAAB will continue to be designated as nonattainment for the national 24-hour PM2.5 standard until the BAAQMD submits a redesignation request and a maintenance plan to the EPA, and the EPA approves the proposed redesignation.

The Air Basin is designated nonattainment for the State PM10 and PM2.5 standards, but the Air Basin is currently unclassified for the federal PM10 standard and nonattainment for federal PM2.5 standards. The EPA lowered the 24-hour PM2.5 standard from 65 µg/m3 to 35 µg/m3 in 2006, and designated the Air Basin as nonattainment for the new PM2.5 standard effective December 14, 2009.

On December 8, 2011, the ARB submitted a “clean data finding” request to the EPA on behalf of the Bay Area. If the clean data finding request is approved, then EPA guidelines provide that the region can fulfill federal PM2.5 SIP requirements by preparing either a redesignation request and a PM2.5 maintenance plan, or a “clean data” SIP submittal. Because peak PM2.5 levels can vary from year to year based on natural, short-term changes in weather conditions, the BAAQMD believes that it would be premature to submit a redesignation request and PM2.5 maintenance plan at this time. Therefore, the BAAQMD will prepare a “clean data” SIP to address the required elements, including:
• An emission inventory for primary PM2.5, as well as precursors to secondary PM formation • Amendments to the BAAQMD’s New Source Review regulation to address PM2.5 BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan
In May 2017, the BAAQMD adopted the final Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan. The BAAQMD prepared the 2017 Clean Air Plan in cooperation with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan are to reduce 353
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 26 ends

regional air pollutants and climate pollutants to improve the health of Bay Area residents for the next decades. The 2017 Clean Air Plan aims to lead the region into a post-carbon economy, continue progress toward attaining all State and federal air quality standards, and eliminate health risk disparities from air pollution exposure in Bay Area communities. The Plan includes 85 distinct control measures to help the region reduce air pollutants and has a long-term strategic vision that forecasts what a clean air Bay Area will look like in the year 2050. The 2017 Clean Air Plan envisions a future whereby the year 2050:
• Buildings will be energy efficient—heated, cooled and powered by renewable energy. • Transportation will be a combination of electric vehicles, both shared and privately owned; autonomous public transit fleets; with a large share of trips by bicycling, walking, and transit. • The Bay Area will be powered by clean, renewable electricity and will be a leading incubator and producer of clean energy technologies leading the world in the carbon-efficiency of our products. • Bay Area residents will have developed a low-carbon lifestyle by driving electric vehicles, living in zero-net-energy homes, eating low-carbon foods, and purchasing goods and services with low carbon content.
• Waste will be greatly reduced, waste products will be re-used or recycled, and all organic waste will be composted and put to productive use.

The focus of control measures includes aggressively targeting the largest source of GHG, ozone pollutants and particulate matter emissions—transportation. This includes more incentives for electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure, off-road electrification projects such as Caltrain and shore power at ports, and reducing emissions from trucks, school buses, marine vessels, locomotives, and off-road equipment.

Additionally, the BAAQMD will continue to work with regional and local governments to reduce vehicle miles traveled through the further funding of rideshare, bike and shuttle programs.

BAAQMD Regulations
Regulation 2, Rule 1 (Permits–General Requirements)
The BAAQMD regulates new sources of air pollution and the modification and operation of existing sources through the issuances of authorities to construct and permits to operate. Regulation 2, Rule 1 provides an orderly procedure which the project would be required to comply with to receive authorities to construct or permits to operate from the BAAQMD for new sources of air pollutants, as applicable.

Regulation 2, Rule 5 (New Source Review Permitting)
The BAAQMD regulates backup emergency generators, fire pumps, and other sources of TACs through its New Source Review (Regulation 2, Rule 5) permitting process. Although emergency generators are intended for use only during periods of power outages, monthly testing of each generator is required; however, the BAAQMD limits testing to no more than 50 hours per year. Each emergency generator installed is assumed to meet a minimum of Tier 2 emission standards (before control measures). As part of the permitting process, the BAAQMD limits the excess cancer risk from any facility to no more than 10 per 1-million-population for any permits that are applied for within a 2-year period and would require 354
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 27 ends

any source that would result in an excess cancer risk greater than 1 per 1 million to install BACT for Toxics.

Regulation 6, Rule 1 (Particulate Matter–General Requirements) The BAAQMD regulates particulate matter emissions through Regulation 6 by means of establishing limitations on emission rates, emissions concentrations, and emission visibility and opacity. Regulation 6, Rule 1 provides existing standards for particulate matter emissions that could result during project construction or operation that the project would be required to comply with, as applicable, such as the prohibition of emissions from any source for a period or aggregate periods of more than three minutes in any hour which are equal to or greater than 20 percent opacity.

Regulation 6, Rule 6, (Particulate Matter–Prohibition of Trackout) One rule by which the BAAQMD regulates particulate matter includes Regulation 6, Rule 6, which prohibits particulate matter trackout during project construction and operation. Regulation 6, Rule 6 requires the prevention or timely cleanup of trackout of solid materials onto paved public roads outside the boundaries of large bulk material sites, large construction sites, and large disturbed surface sides such as landfills.

Regulation 8, Rule 3 (Architectural Coatings)
This rule governs the manufacture, distribution, and sale of architectural coatings and limits the ROG content in paints and paint solvents. Although this rule does not directly apply to the proposed project, it does dictate the ROG content of paint available for use during the construction.

Regulation 8, Rule 15 (Emulsified and Liquid Asphalts)
Although this rule does not directly apply to the proposed project, it does dictate the reactive organic gases content of asphalt available for use during the construction through regulating the sale and use of asphalt and limits the ROG content in asphalt.

Regulation 9, Rule 8 (Inorganic Gaseous Pollutants – Nitrogen Oxides and Carbon Monoxide from Stationary Internal Combustion Engines)
Under Regulation 9, Rule 8, the BAAQMD regulates the emissions of nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide from stationary internal combustion engines with an output rated by the manufacturer at more than 50 brake horsepower. As such, any proposed stationary source equipment (e.g., backup generators, fire pumps) which would be greater than 50 horsepower would require a BAAQMD permit under Regulation 9, Rule 8 to operate.

Regulation 11, Rule 2 (Hazardous Pollutants – Asbestos Demolition, Renovation, and Manufacturing) Under Regulation 11, Rule 2, the BAAQMD regulates emissions of asbestos to the atmosphere during demolition, renovation, milling, and manufacturing, and establish appropriate waste disposal procedures. Any of these activities which pose the potential to generate emissions of airborne asbestos are required to comply with the appropriate provisions of this regulation. 355
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 28 ends

Regulation 1, Rule 301 (Odorous Emissions)
The BAAQMD is responsible for investigating and controlling odor complaints in the Bay Area. The agency enforces odor control by helping the public to document a public nuisance. Upon receipt of a complaint, the BAAQMD sends an investigator to interview the complainant and to locate the odor source if possible. The BAAQMD typically brings a public nuisance court action when there are a substantial number of confirmed odor events within a 24-hour period. An odor source with five or more confirmed complaints per year, averaged over 3 years is considered to have a substantial effect on receptors.

Several BAAQMD regulations and rules apply to odorous emissions. Regulation 1, Rule 301 is the nuisance provision that states that sources cannot emit air contaminants that cause nuisance to several people. Regulation 7 specifies limits for the discharge of odorous substances where the BAAQMD receives complaints from 10 or more complainants within a 90-day period. Among other things, Regulation 7 precludes discharge of an odorous substance that causes the ambient air at or beyond the property line to be odorous after dilution with four parts of odor-free air and specifies maximum limits on the emission of certain odorous compounds.

Lastly, the BAAQMD enforces the Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP) ATCM on behalf of the ARB. Under the PERP, owners or operators of portable engines and other types of equipment which meet the qualifications of the ATCM can register their equipment to operate throughout California.

However, owners and operators of portable engines which meet the qualifications of this ATCM that do not register their equipment under the PERP must obtain individual permits from local air districts.

Permits issued under the PERP must be honored by all air districts throughout California.

Plan Bay Area
On July 18, 2013, ABAG and the MTC approved the Plan Bay Area. The Plan Bay Area includes integrated land use and transportation strategies for the region and was developed through OneBayArea, a joint initiative between ABAG, BAAQMD, MTC, and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. The plan’s transportation policies focus on maintaining the extensive existing transportation network and utilizing these systems more efficiently to handle density in Bay Area transportation cores. Assumptions for land use development come from local and regional planning documents. Emission forecasts in the Bay Area Clean Air Plan rely on projections of vehicle miles traveled, population, employment, and land use projections made by local jurisdictions during development of Plan Bay Area. The Plan Bay Area 2050 was adopted 2021 and is the most recent update to the Plan Bay Area.

Plan Bay Area 2050, published by the MTC and ABAG, is a long-range integrated transportation and land use/housing strategy through 2050 for the Bay Area. Plan Bay Area 2050 functions as the sustainable communities’ strategy mandated by Senate Bill (SB) 375. As a regional land use plan, Plan Bay Area 2050 aims to reduce per capita GHG emissions by promoting more compact, mixed-use residential and commercial neighborhoods located near transit. Plan Bay Area 2050 is a limited and focused update that builds upon a growth pattern and strategies developed in the original Plan Bay Area but with updated 356
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 29 ends

planning assumptions that incorporate key economic, demographic, and financial trends from the release of the previous Plan Bay Area version.

Local
City of Milpitas General Plan 2040
The City of Milpitas adopted its General Plan on March 9, 2021, which contains objectives and policies that help address air quality and reduce the community’s vulnerability to air pollution. The following objectives and policies from the City’s General Plan are relevant to air quality and apply to the proposed project:

CON 7-1 Ensure that land use and transportation plans support air quality goals through a logical development pattern that focuses growth in and around existing urbanized areas, locates new housing near places of employment, encourages alternative modes of transportation, supports efficient parking strategies, reduces vehicle miles traveled, and requires projects to mitigate significant air quality impacts CON 7-2 Minimize exposure of the public to toxic or harmful air emissions and odors through requiring an adequate buffer or setback distance between residential and other sensitive land uses and land uses that typically generate air pollutants, toxic air contaminants, or obnoxious fumes or odors, including but not limited to industrial, manufacturing, and processing facilities, high-volume roadways, and industrial rail lines.

New sensitive receptors, such as residences (including residential care and assisted living facilities for the elderly), childcare centers, schools, playgrounds, churches, and medical facilities shall be located away from existing point sources of air pollution such that excessive levels of exposure do not result in unacceptable health risks. Compliance shall be verified through the preparation of a Health Risk Assessment when deemed necessary by the Planning Director.

CON 7-3 Require projects which generate high levels of air pollutants, such as heavy industrial, manufacturing facilities and hazardous waste handling operations, to incorporate air quality mitigations in their design to reduce impacts to the greatest extent feasible.

CON 7-4 Require projects to adhere to the requirements of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD).

CON 7-5 Use the City’s development review process and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to evaluate and mitigate the local and cumulative effects of new development on air quality.

CON 7-6 Coordinate with the California Air Resources Board (ARB) and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District to properly measure air quality emission sources and enforce the standards of the Clean Air Act.
357
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 30 ends

CON 7-7 Comply with regional and federal standards and programs for control of all airborne pollutants and noxious odors, regardless of source.

CON 7-8 Consider the health risks associated with Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) when reviewing development applications.

CON 7-9 Coordinate with Santa Clara County and nearby cities to implement regional GHG reduction plans and to consolidate efforts to reduce GHGs throughout the county as appropriate.

CON 7-10 Implement policies and action from the Land Use and Circulation Elements to provide mixed-use developments, locate high-density uses near transit facilities, provide neighborhood-serving retail uses convenient to residential neighborhoods, and other Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs that would reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled, thus reducing air pollutant emissions.

CON 7-11 Encourage improvements and design features that reduce vehicle delay such as bus turnouts, and synchronized traffic signals for new development to reduce excessive vehicle emissions caused by idling.

CON 7-12 Encourage and prioritize infrastructure investments and improvements that promote safe walking, bicycling and increased transit ridership.

CON 7-13 Implement energy policies and actions that have co-benefits of reduced air pollution and greenhouse gases by increasing energy efficiency, conservation, and the use of renewable resources.

City of Milpitas Climate Action Plan
The City of Milpitas Climate Action Plan (Milpitas CAP) contains the following GHG actions and measures.

Measure 5.1 Increased densities: continue to promote the increase of density and mixed uses in key opportunity areas, including the Midtown Specific Plan, Transit Area Specific Plan, and town center areas.

Action A Require new development to include two or more uses per building if located along identified corridors or in a specific plan area.

Measure 5.2 Urban plazas: encourage development of urban plazas in new development in the Transit Area Specific Plan, Midtown Specific Plan, and town center areas to encourage pedestrian activity and vibrant mixed-use centers that reduce vehicular activity.

Measure 6.1 Transit density: support high levels of ridership at the new BART station by encouraging higher density, mixed uses, and connectivity along transit corridors and at transit nodes. 358
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 31 ends

Measure 12.1 Lawn and garden equipment support a community-wide transition to cleaner outdoor lawn and garden equipment.

Action C Require new buildings to provide accessible exterior electrical outlets to charge electric powered lawn and garden equipment.

Milpitas Midtown Specific Plan Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures from the Milpitas Midtown Specific Plan apply to residential development projects proposed in the City of Milpitas to ensure that associated air quality impacts are less than significant. These mitigation measures are incorporated into this report as project design features required by the Midtown Specific Plan Draft EIR.

MM AIR-1 The following basic control measures are required to be implemented at all construction sites in the Midtown area. These measures shall be incorporated into construction contracts for projects in the Midtown area:
a.) Water all active construction areas twice daily and more often during windy periods.

Active areas adjacent to existing land uses shall be kept damp at all times, or shall be treated with non-toxic stabilizers or dust palliatives. b.) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials, or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
c.) Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. d.) Sweep daily all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.
e.) Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is carried on to adjacent public streets. f.) Hydroseed or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas. g.) Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.)
h.) Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. i.) Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways.
j.) Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. k.) Suspend excavation and grading activity whenever the wind is so high that it results in visible dust plumes despite control efforts.

After implementation of the listed mitigation measures, construction-related emissions would be less than significant.

MM AIR-2 The Specific Plan contains policies directed at reducing vehicle miles traveled. The Specific Plan encourages a compatible mixture of land uses, provides for a land use mix that supports major transit facilities, locates higher density development around hubs and commercial centers, provides for the continuation of pedestrian-oriented retail 359
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 32 ends

development and provides pedestrian connections between the transit stations and important destinations.

Though these policies would help to reduce emissions, they would not reduce them to a level of insignificance. Due to the intensity of the development proposed, the proposed Specific Plan could not be feasibly developed without an increase in air emissions above the significance thresholds of 15 tons per year for ROG, NOX, and PM10. This impact is considered significant and unavoidable.

MM AIR-3 Due to the intensity of the development proposed, the Specific Plan could not be feasibly developed without causing an increase in regional emissions, and all feasible mitigation measures have been incorporated into the specific plan as policies. This impact is considered significant and unavoidable.

AIR QUALITY IMPACTS CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
According to the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist, to determine whether impacts to air quality are significant environmental effects, the following questions are analyzed and evaluated.

Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
The above questions are analyzed and evaluated below.
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than significant impact with mitigation. The BAAQMD has adopted several air quality policies and plans to address the attainment and maintenance of State and federal air quality standards. The most recent BAAQMD plan is the 2017 Clean Air Plan, which was adopted in April of 2017. The 2017 Clean Air Plan serves as the regional Air Quality Plan (AQP) for the Air Basin for attaining federal ambient air quality standards. The primary goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan are to protect public health and protect the climate. The 2017 Clean Air Plan acknowledges that the BAAQMD’s two stated goals of protection are closely related. As such, the 2017 Clean Air Plan identifies a wide range of control measures intended 360
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 33 ends

to decrease both criteria air pollutants2 and GHGs.
3 The 2017 Clean Air Plan also accounts for projections of population growth provided by ABAG and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) provided by the MTC and identifies strategies to bring regional emissions into compliance with federal and State air quality standards. A project would be judged to conflict with or obstruct the 2017 Clean Air Plan implementation if it would result in substantial new regional emissions not foreseen in the air quality planning process.

The BAAQMD does not provide a numerical threshold of significance for project-level consistency analysis with AQPs. Therefore, the following criteria will be used for determining a project’s consistency with the AQP.
• Criterion 1: Does the project support the primary goals of the AQP? • Criterion 2: Does the project include applicable control measures from the AQP? • Criterion 3: Does the project disrupt or hinder implementation of any AQP control measures? Criterion 1
The primary goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan, the current AQP to date, are to:
• Attain air quality standards;
• Reduce population exposure to unhealthy air and protecting public health in the Bay Area; and • Reduce GHG emissions and protect the climate.

A measure for determining whether the proposed project supports the primary goals of the AQP is if the proposed project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQPs. The development of the AQP is based, in part, on the Land Use General Plan determinations of the various cities and counties that constitute the Air Basin. The project site is designated Mixed-Use Flex (MU-F) on the City’s Zoning Map and is designated Mixed Used Flex (7-24 du/ac) on the General Plan Land Use Plan. The proposed project is considered consistent with the General Plan land use designation and associated density limits as the proposed project would only include 57 attached 3-story townhome dwelling units on the approximately 2.35-acre site, resulting in an average development density of 24 dwelling units per acre. Because the proposed project would not increase the population growth, and subsequent VMT, during project operation beyond that assumed in the General Plan, and by extension the AQP, it is reasonable to conclude that the proposed project would not adversely affect the implementation of the AQP. Moreover, as further discussed under Air Quality Impact(b) and Impact(c), the proposed project would not create a localized or contribute to a regional 2 The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six of the most common air pollutants—carbon monoxide, lead, ground-level ozone, particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur dioxide— known as “criteria” air pollutants (or simply “criteria pollutants”). 3 A greenhouse gas is any gaseous compound in the atmosphere that is capable of absorbing infrared radiation, thereby trapping and holding heat in the atmosphere. By increasing the heat in the atmosphere, greenhouse gases are responsible for the greenhouse effect, which ultimately leads to global warming.
361
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 34 ends

violation of State or federal air quality standards. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with Criterion 1.

Criterion 2
The 2017 Clean Air Plan contains 85 control measures that describe specific actions to reduce air pollutants and GHGs at the local, regional, and global levels. Along with the traditional stationary, area, mobile source, and transportation control measures, the 2017 Clean Air Plan contains several control measures designed to protect the climate, promote mixed use, and compact development to reduce vehicle emissions and exposure to pollutants from stationary and mobile sources. The 2017 Clean Air Plan also includes an account of the implementation status of control measures identified in the 2010 Clean Air Plan.

Table 7 lists the relevant Clean Air Plan policies to the proposed project and evaluates the proposed project’s consistency with the policies. As shown below, the proposed project would be consistent with applicable measures.

Table 7: Project Consistency with Applicable Clean Air Plan Control Measures Control Measure Project Consistency
Buildings Control Measures
BL1: Green Buildings Consistent. The proposed project would not conflict with the implementation of this measure. The proposed
project would comply with the latest energy efficiency
standards and incorporate applicable energy efficiency
features designed to reduce project energy
consumption.

BL4: Urban Heat Island Mitigation Consistent. The proposed project would incorporate landscaping throughout the site. The proposed project
would provide landscaping, including trees, shrubs,
vines, and groundcover according to City standards that would reduce the urban heat island effect.

Energy Control Measures
EN1: Decarbonize Electricity Generation Consistent. The proposed project would not conflict with the implementation of this measure. The proposed
project would comply with the latest energy efficiency
standards such as the 2019 California Title 24 Energy
Code, including Title 24, Part 6, Subchapter 8, which
would require the proposed project to incorporate
rooftop solar.
362
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 35 ends

Control Measure Project Consistency
EN2: Decrease Electricity Demand Consistent. The proposed project would be required to conform to the California Building Standards Code's
energy efficiency requirements, also known as Title 24, which was adopted to meet an Executive Order in the
Green Building Initiative to improve the energy
efficiency of buildings through aggressive standards.

The 2019 Title 24 Standards are the current State
building regulations, which went into effect on January 1, 2020. Proposed buildings that would receive building permits after January 1, 2020, would be subject to the
2019 Title 24 Standards, including the proposed project.

Natural and Working Lands Control Measures
NW2: Urban Tree Planting Consistent. The proposed project would incorporate landscaping throughout the site. The proposed project
would provide trees according to City standards that
would reduce the urban heat island effect.

WA3: Green Waste Diversion Consistent. The proposed project's waste service provider will be required to meet the AB 341 and SB
939 and SB 1374 requirements that require waste
service providers to divert green waste.

WA4: Recycling and Waste Reduction Consistent. The proposed project's waste service provider will be required to meet the AB 341 and SB
939 and SB 1374 requirements that require waste to be
recycled.

Stationary Control Measures
SS36: Particulate Matter from Trackout Consistent with Mitigation. Mitigation Measure Air-1 from the Midtown Milpitas Specific Plan requires that
basic control measures be incorporated into
construction contracts for projects in the Midtown
area. As a result, mud and dirt that may be tracked out onto the nearby public roads during construction
activities would need to be removed promptly by the
contractor based on the Midtown Milpitas Specific Plan
requirements.

SS37: Particulate Matter from Asphalt Operations Consistent. Asphalt used during project construction would be subject to BAAQMD Regulation 8, Rule 15-
Emulsified and Liquid Asphalts. Although this rule does not directly apply to the proposed project, it does limit the ROG content of asphalt available for use during
construction by regulating the sale and use of asphalt.

Using asphalt from facilities that meet BAAQMD
regulations, the proposed project would be consistent
with this Clean Air Plan measure.
363
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 36 ends

Control Measure Project Consistency
Transportation Control Measures
TR9: Bicycle and Pedestrian Access and Facilities Consistent. The proposed project would be pedestrianaccessible by providing a sidewalk from the existing face of curb, within the City’s existing right-of-way.

Therefore, the proposed project would not obstruct or
conflict with the BAAQMD’s effort to encourage
planning for bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. April 19. Website:
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/plans/2017-clean-air-plan/attachment-a_-proposed-finalcap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed July 13, 2021.

In summary, the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable measures under the 2017 Clean Air Plan after implementing Basic Construction Mitigation Measures, as required by Mitigation Measure Air-1 Mentioned in the Midtown Milpitas Specific Plan; therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with Criterion 2 after incorporation of mitigation.

Criterion 3
The proposed project would not preclude extension of a transit line or bike path, propose excessive parking beyond parking requirements, or otherwise create an impediment or disruption to implementing any AQP control measures. Table 7 illustrates that the proposed project would incorporate several AQP control measures as project design features, such as utilizing asphalt which would be compliant with BAAQMD regulations, complying with energy efficiency standards contained in the 2019 California Building Code, and installing landscaping across the project site. Considering this information, the proposed project would not disrupt or hinder the implementation of any AQP control measures.

Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with Criterion 3.

Summary
As addressed above, the proposed project would be consistent with all three criteria after incorporating Basic Construction Mitigation Measures, as required by Mitigation Measure Air-1. Thus, the proposed project would not conflict with the 2017 Clean Air Plan. Therefore, impacts associated with conflicting with or obstructing the 2017 Clean Air Plan's implementation would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard? Less than significant impact. This impact is related to the cumulative effect of a project’s criteria pollutant emissions. By its nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact resulting from emissions generated over a large geographic region. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants results from past and present development within the Air Basin, and this regional impact is a cumulative impact.

Therefore, new development projects (such as the proposed project) within the Air Basin would 364
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 37 ends

contribute to this impact only on a cumulative basis. No single project would be sufficient in size, by itself, to result in nonattainment of regional air quality standards. Instead, a project’s emissions may be individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when evaluated in combination with past, present, and future development projects.

Potential impacts could result in exceedances of State or federal standards for nitrogen oxides (NOX), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), or carbon monoxide (CO). NOX emissions are of concern because of potential health impacts from exposure to NOX emissions during construction and operation and as a precursor in the formation of ground-level ozone. PM10 and PM2.5 are of concern during construction because of the potential to emit exhaust emissions from the operation of off-road construction equipment and fugitive dust during earth-disturbing activities (construction fugitive dust). Particulate matter is also of concern during both construction and operation due to the operation of motor vehicles generating aerated brake particulates and aerated tire particulates from vehicle wear and tear. CO emissions are of concern during project operation because operational CO hotspots are related to increases in on-road vehicle congestion and their consequential health impacts.

ROG emissions are also important because of their participation in the formation of ground-level ozone.

Ozone is a respiratory irritant and an oxidant that increases susceptibility to respiratory infections that can cause substantial damage to vegetation and other materials. Excessive ozone concentrations result in reduced lung function, particularly during vigorous physical activity. This health problem is particularly acute in sensitive receptors such as the sick, elderly, and young children.

The cumulative analysis focuses on whether a specific project would result in cumulatively considerable emissions. According to Section 15064(h)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines, the existence of significant cumulative impacts caused by other projects alone does not constitute substantial evidence that the project’s incremental effects would be cumulatively considerable. Rather, the determination of cumulative air quality impacts for construction and operational emissions is based on whether that project would result in emissions that exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance for construction and operations on a project level. The thresholds of significance represent the allowable emissions each project can generate without generating a cumulatively considerable contribution to regional air quality impacts. Therefore, a project that would not exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance on a project level also would not be considered to result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to these regional air quality impacts. Construction and operational emissions are discussed separately below.

Construction Emissions
Construction Fugitive Dust
The BAAQMD bases the determination of significance for fugitive dust on considering the control measures to be implemented. If the appropriate emissions control measures are implemented for a project as recommended by the BAAQMD, then fugitive dust emissions during construction are not considered significant. The proposed project would implement the Midtown Milpitas Specific Plan’s Mitigation Measure Air-1, which includes the following measures:
365
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 38 ends

a) Water all active construction areas twice daily and more often during windy periods. Active areas adjacent to existing land uses shall be kept damp at all times, or shall be treated with non-toxic stabilizers or dust palliatives.
b) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials, or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
c) Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. d) Sweep daily all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. e) Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is carried on to adjacent public streets. f) Hydroseed or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas. g) Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.)
h) Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. i) Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. j) Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. k) Suspend excavation and grading activity whenever the wind is so high that it results in visible dust plumes despite control efforts.

With the incorporation of the above dust control measures, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact related to short-term construction fugitive dust emissions.

Construction Air Pollutant Emissions: ROG, NOX, Exhaust PM10, and Exhaust PM2.5 CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0, was used to estimate the proposed project’s construction emissions.

CalEEMod provides a consistent platform for estimating construction and operational emissions from various land use projects and is the model recommended by the BAAQMD for estimating project emissions. Estimated construction emissions are compared with the applicable thresholds of significance established by the BAAQMD to assess ROG, NOX, exhaust PM10, and exhaust PM2.5 construction emissions to determine significance for this impact. The predominant activity which would generate ROG, NOX, exhaust PM10, and exhaust PM2.5 during project construction would be the operation of construction equipment and vehicles.

At the time of this analysis, the construction of the proposed project was anticipated to begin in Fall of 2023 and be completed 11 months later. If the construction schedule moves to later years, construction emissions would likely decrease because of improvements in technology and more stringent regulatory requirements.

Construction activities such as grading, excavation, and travel on unpaved surfaces would generate dust and lead to elevated concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5. According to the project applicant, approximately 3,430 cubic yards of soil is anticipated to be imported during grading activities. Table 8 presents 366
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 39 ends

construction-period emissions that would result from the development of the proposed project, which considers implementation of Mitigation Measure Air-1.

Table 8: Construction Emissions
Construction Activity
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (tons)
ROG NOX PM10 (Exhaust) PM2.5 (Exhaust)
Demolition 0.02 0.16 0.01 0.01
Site Preparation <0.01 0.02 <0.01 <0.01
Grading <0.01 0.07 <0.01 <0.01
Building Construction 0.20 1.51 0.06 0.06
Paving 0.01 0.04 <0.01 <0.01
Architectural Coating 0.85 0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Total Construction Emissions (tons) 1.07 1.82 0.07 0.07 BAAQMD Significance Thresholds (tons/year) 10 10 15 10
Significant Impact? No No No No
Average Daily Emissions
Total Construction Emissions (lbs) 2,138.70 3,631.70 145.34 138.58 Average Daily Construction Emissions
(lbs/day) 7.95 13.50 0.54 0.52
BAAQMD Significance Thresholds (lbs/day) 54 54 82 54
Significant Impact? No No No No
Notes:

This analysis relies on a 269-day construction schedule, consistent with the construction schedule and modeling results contained in Attachment A.
lbs = pounds
ROG = reactive organic gases
NOX = nitrogen oxides
PM10 = particulate matter, including dust, 10 micrometers or less in diameter PM2.5 = particulate matter, including dust, 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District
Source: Attachment A.

As shown in Table 8, emissions generated during project construction would not exceed BAAQMD significance thresholds. Therefore, construction emissions would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure Air-1.
367
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 40 ends

Operational Emissions
Operational Air Pollutant Emissions: ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 Operational emissions would include area, energy, and mobile sources. Area sources would include emissions from architectural coatings, consumer products, and landscape equipment. Energy sources include emissions from the combustion of natural gas for water and space heating. Mobile sources include exhaust and road dust emissions from the vehicles that would travel to and from the project site.

Pollutants of concern include ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 and are shown in Table 9. As previously mentioned, because the operative status of existing uses was unknown at the time this analysis was prepared, the emissions generated from operation of land uses currently on the project site were not quantified and considered when analyzing net emission generation from the proposed project. As such, this approach represents a conservative assessment of the proposed project’s emissions generation.

Table 9: Operational Emissions
Emissions Source
Criteria Pollutant Emissions (Tons)1

ROG NOX
PM10
(Total)
PM2.5
(Total)
Area 0.56 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Energy 0.01 0.05 <0.01 <0.01
Mobile 0.11 0.12 0.25 0.07
Total (tons/year) 0.67 0.17 0.26 0.07
BAAQMD Significance Thresholds (tons/year) 10 10 15 10
Significant Impact? No No No No
Average Daily Operational Emissions (lbs/day)
Total Emissions (tons) 0.67 0.17 0.26 0.07
Total Emissions (lbs) 1,349.80 338.76 510.44 147.24
Average Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 3.70 0.93 1.40 0.40
BAAQMD Significance Thresholds (lbs/day) 54 54 82 54
Project Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
Notes:
lbs = pounds
ROG = reactive organic gases
NOX = nitrogen oxides
PM10 = particulate matter, including dust, 10 micrometers or less in diameter PM2.5 = particulate matter, including dust, 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District
Source: Attachment A.
368
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 41 ends

Table 9 indicates that the proposed project would result in operational-related criteria air pollutants or ozone precursors which would not exceed the BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance. Therefore, longterm operational impacts associated with criteria pollutant emissions generated by the proposed project would be less than significant.

Operational Carbon Monoxide Hotspot
The CO emissions from traffic generated by the proposed project are a concern at the local level because congested intersections can result in high, localized concentrations of CO (referred to as a CO hotspot).

The BAAQMD recommends a screening analysis to determine whether a project has the potential to contribute to a CO hotspot. The screening criteria identify when site-specific CO dispersion modeling is necessary. The proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to air quality for local CO if the following screening criteria are met:

1. The proposed project is consistent with an applicable congestion management program established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways, regional transportation plan, and local congestion management agency plans; and

2. The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour; and

3. The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or urban street canyon, below-grade roadway).

Based on the information provided in the Transportation Generation Study prepared by TJKM, 4 the
proposed project would generate an estimated 21 total AM peak-hour trips, 23 total PM peak-hour trips, and 259 daily vehicle trips. Fehr Peers in 2020 prepared a Draft Local Transportation Analysis Report for a land use development near the project site which forecasted cumulative 2040 traffic volumes for roadway segments and intersections around the project site. 5 According to the Draft Local
Transportation Analysis Report, the intersection of South Main Street and Montague Expressway would experience an estimated 8,134 vehicles during the AM peak-hour and 9,597 vehicles during the PM peak-hour under cumulative 2040 conditions. As the proposed project would introduce an estimated 21 vehicles to the AM peak-hour and 23 vehicles to the PM peak-hour, resulting in 8,155 AM peak-hour vehicles and 9,620 PM peak-hour vehicles under 2040 cumulative conditions including trips generated by the proposed project. Therefore, the new traffic volumes introduced by the proposed project would not result in any nearby intersection or roadway segment exceeding 44,000 vehicles per hour.

Nonetheless, CO hotspots can occur when a transportation facility’s design or orientation prevents the adequate dispersion of CO emissions from vehicles, resulting in the accumulation of local CO concentrations. The design or orientation of a transportation facility that may prevent CO emissions 4 TKJM. 2022. Trip Generation Study for 612 South Main Street, Milpitas, California, April 2, 2022 5 Fehr Peers. 2020. Draft Local Transportation Analysis. Website: https://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/AppendixG_Traffic-Data.pdf. Accessed May 25, 2022. 369
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 42 ends

dispersion includes tunnels, parking garages, bridge underpasses, natural or urban canyons, below-grade roadways, or other features where vertical or horizontal atmospheric mixing is substantially limited. The adjacent roadways are not located in an area where vertical or horizontal atmospheric mixing is substantially limited.

In addition, as the proposed project would result in a net decrease in vehicle trips when compared with existing land uses if they were operable at the time of development, the proposed project would be considered consistent with the region’s congestion management plan. Therefore, based on the above criteria, the proposed project would not exceed the CO screening criteria and would have a less than significant impact related to CO.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than significant impact. The BAAQMD defines sensitive receptors as the following: “Facilities or land uses that include members of the population that are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses. Examples include schools, hospitals, and residential areas.”
Project Construction
As previously mentioned, the proposed project would involve the development of 57 townhomes on a

2.35-acre site. In addition, construction of the small-scale proposed project would be of short duration and does not involve extensive site preparation or soil hauling. The closest sensitive receptor to the project site, located approximately 370 feet west of the project site, was identified as Multi-Family Residential Very High Density per the City of Milpitas Zoning & Land Use Map. 6 In addition, as shown in
Table 8, emissions generated during project construction would be well below the BAAQMD’s significance thresholds and are not anticipated to result in exposing receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Given the distance to closest sensitive receptor, the low intensity nature of proposed construction, and relatively small project site size, construction of the proposed project is not anticipated to result in a significant impact to nearby sensitive receptors.

Project Operation
Since the proposed project is a small residential development. As shown in Table 9, operational emissions would primarily be attributed to gasoline powered passenger vehicles, and overall operational emissions generated by the proposed project would be well below the BAAQMD’s significance thresholds. As described in the Trip Generation Study, the proposed project is expected to generate 259 daily vehicle trips.7 The proposed project would primarily generate trips from a mix of residents and employees traveling to and from the project site, which would primarily consist of passenger vehicles.

Because nearly all passenger vehicles are gasoline-fueled, the proposed project would not generate a significant amount of diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions during operation; however, gasoline6 City of Milpitas. 2021. Zoning & Land Use Map. Website:
https://milpitas.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=89ef3a70704844d18fd61f6e49b26715. Accessed April 15, 2022 7 TKJM. 2022. Trip Generation Study for 612 South Main Street, Milpitas, California, April 2, 2022 370
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 43 ends

fueled vehicles would still emit relatively small amounts of gasoline TACs such as benzene, isopentane, and toluene during project operation. Nonetheless, the potential cancer risks associated with non-diesel TACs emitted from gasoline vehicles in the San Francisco Bay Air Basin are substantially less than the potential cancer risks associated with DPM emissions8 and are therefore not included in this analysis.

Furthermore, these emissions would be dispersed throughout the local roadway network and would not solely be generated at the project site.

As discussed above under Air Quality Impact (b), the intersection to receive project-generated traffic that would experience the greatest traffic volumes would be the intersection of South Main Street and Montague Expressway with an estimated 9,597 vehicle trips during the PM peak-hour. This level of peakhour vehicle trips would not substantially add to nearby intersection traffic volumes causing an exceedance in the BAAQMD screening thresholds of 44,000 vehicles per hour or 24,000 vehicles per hour through an intersection with limited vertical and/or horizontal mixing. Therefore, the proposed project is not reasonably expected to exceed the BAAQMD’s CO screening criteria and would have a less than significant impact related to localized CO hotspots. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in significant health impacts to nearby sensitive receptors during operation. d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors or) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
As stated in the BAAQMD 2017 Air Quality Guidelines, odors are generally regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. The ability to detect odors varies considerably among the populations and is subjective. The BAAQMD does not have a recommended odor threshold for construction activities.

However, the BAAQMD recommends operational screening criteria based on the distance between receptors and types of sources known to generate odors.

The type of uses that are considered to have objectionable odors include wastewater treatments plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations (e.g., auto body shops), dairy farms, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing facilities. One such facility was identified within the applicable odor screening distances, a meat processing center. Nonetheless, public records retrieved from the BAAQMD show that no odor complaints were filed for these locations between January 1, 2018, and the time at which this analysis was prepared. Moreover, as the proposed project is a residential project, it is not anticipated to generate objectionable odors that may affect nearby sensitive receptors, the closest of which is a multi-family residential development located approximately 370 feet west of the project site.

Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Recommended Mitigation
None.
8 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. Health Risk Assessment for the Union Pacific Railroad Oakland Railyard. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//railyard/hra/up_oak_hra.pdf?_ga=2.229617876.913681903.1594937953- 503090677.1594937953. Accessed May 25, 2022.
371
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 44 ends

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IMPACT ANALYSIS
According to the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist, to determine whether impacts to GHG emissions are significant environmental effects, the following questions are analyzed and evaluated.

Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
The above questions are analyzed and evaluated below.
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Both construction and operational activities have the potential to generate GHG emissions. The proposed project would generate GHG emissions during temporary (short-term) construction activities such as demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating activities; running of construction equipment engines including movement of on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles; hauling materials to and from the project site; asphalt paving; coating, and construction worker 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 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 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).
372
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 45 ends

As such, to determine significance for GHG Impact(a), the proposed project’s GHG emissions are assessed against the following thresholds: 1,100 metric tons (MT) CO2e/year for the first operational year.

Construction Emissions
The proposed project would emit GHG emissions during construction from the use of off-road construction equipment, worker vehicles, vendor trucks, and haul trucks. Attachment A includes detailed construction assumptions used in estimating the construction GHG emissions. The BAAQMD does not presently provide a construction GHG generation threshold but recommends that construction GHG emissions be quantified and disclosed. Table 10 presents the total GHG emissions generated during all construction activities.

Table 10: Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Construction Activity
Construction
MT CO2e1
Demolition 31
Site Preparation 3
Grading 19
Building Construction 312
Paving 8
Architectural Coating 2
Total 375
Amortized Over 30 Years 13
Notes:

MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 1 Construction GHG emissions are amortized over the 30-year lifetime of the project.

Source: CalEEMod Output (Attachment A).

As shown in Table 10, the proposed project's construction is estimated to generate approximately 375 MT CO2e over the entire duration of project construction. As discussed above, neither the City of Milpitas nor BAAQMD has an adopted threshold of significance for construction GHG emissions. Because construction would be temporary and would not result in a permanent increase in emissions, construction of the proposed project would not interfere with the implementation of AB 32 or SB 32.

Nonetheless, to account for potential impacts related to construction, the total project construction GHG emissions were amortized over an assumed 30-year project life and added to the operational emissions to determine the total emissions from the project. As presented in Table 10, project construction emissions were estimated to be 375 MT CO2e for the entire construction duration. When amortized over 30 years, construction emissions equal 13 MT CO2e per year. 373
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 46 ends

Operational Emissions
Operational or long-term emissions occur over the life of a project. The major sources for operational GHG emissions include:

Motor Vehicles
These emissions refer to GHG emissions contained in the exhaust from the cars and trucks that would travel to and from the project site. Vehicle trips associated with project operations would primarily include residents and visitors traveling to and from the project site. Trip generation rates used in estimating mobile source emissions were consistent with those presented in the Transportation Analysis Report prepared for the proposed project by TJKM.9
Natural Gas
These emissions refer to the GHG emissions that occur when natural gas is burned on the project site.

Indirect Electricity
These emissions refer to those generated by off-site power plants to supply the electricity required for the proposed project. The proposed project would be required to incorporate rooftop solar; however, according to the calculations presented in Title 24, Part 6, Subchapter 8 of the 2019 California Building Code and contained in Attachment A of this analysis, the required solar system would not satisfy 100 percent of the proposed project’s electricity demand. Both Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and Silicon Valley Clean Energy are potential electricity suppliers to the proposed project for the electricity that is not covered by the required solar system. PG&E was chosen as the utility providing electricity and natural gas service to the proposed project for a conservative assessment. GHG emissions from energy consumption were calculated using PG&E’s energy intensity factors for CO2, N2O, and CH4.

Water Transport
These emissions refer to those generated by the electricity required to transport and treat the water to be used on the project site.

Waste
These emissions refer to the GHG emissions produced by decomposing waste generated by the project.

Attachment A provides a more detailed description of the assumptions used to estimate projectgenerated GHG emissions as well as detailed modeling results. Table 11 shows the operational GHG emissions by source including the amortized construction emissions.

The estimated total annual project emissions, including operational emissions and amortized construction emissions, were compared with the bright-line threshold of 1,100 MT CO2e/year to determine significance at project buildout assumed for the year 2022. As previously discussed, because the operative status of existing uses was unknown at the time this analysis was prepared, the emissions generated from operation of land uses currently on the project site were not quantified and considered 9 TJKM. April 2, 2022. Trip Generation Study for 612 South Main Street, Milpitas, California. 374
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 47 ends

when analyzing net emission generation from the proposed project. In addition, should project construction and the commencement of operation move to later years, emissions are likely to be less than what is disclosed here as a result of increasingly stringent requirements for emission control technology and vehicle and equipment fuel efficiency. As such, this approach represents a conservative assessment of the proposed project’s emissions generation.

Table 11: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions Source
Year 2022
(MT CO2e/Year)
Area 1
Energy 67
Mobile 208
Waste 8
Water 7
Total Operational Emissions 291
Amortized Construction Emissions 13
Total Project Emissions 304
Significance Threshold (MT CO2e/year) 1,100
Exceeds Threshold? No
Notes:

MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
1 Construction GHG emissions are amortized over the 30-year lifetime of the project.

Source: CalEEMod Output (Attachment A).

As shown in Table 11, the proposed project’s combined long-term net operational emissions and amortized construction emissions would not exceed the BAAQMD recommended thresholds for GHG emissions. Since total emissions do not exceed BAAQMD thresholds, this analysis would not include baseline emissions from existing land uses as a conservative approach. Therefore, the proposed project’s generation of GHG emissions would not significantly impact the environment. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less than significant impact. The Milpitas CAP was adopted on May 7, 2013. The CAP contains goals and policies that serve as actions to reduce GHG emissions.10 Project consistency with the Milpitas CAP is provided in Table 12. Significance for this impact is determined by project compliance with the City’s CAP, and project consistency with the ARB 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update. Goals and 10 City of Milpitas. 2013. Climate Action Plan. Adopted 2013. Website: https://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/_pdfs/Climate_ActionPlan.pdf.

Accessed November 10, 2021.
375
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 48 ends

policies of the City’s CAP which apply to the proposed project are listed below. A project consistency analysis with the ARB 2017 Scoping Plan Update is provided in Table 13.

Table 12: City of Milpitas Climate Action Plan
2013 Climate Action Plan Project Consistency
Measure 5.1: Increased Densities Consistent. This residential project is located in the Milpitas Midtown Specific Plan. The proposed project is a combination of one 5-plex, two 8-plex, and six 6-plex dense 3-story townhomes in the Transit Area Specific Plan Therefore, the proposed project would not require mixed use.

Measure 5.2: Urban Plazas Consistent. This residential project is located in the Midtown Milpitas Specific Plan which includes mixed uses within the area.

Measure 6.1: Transit Density Consistent. The proposed project are 3-story townhomes that are high in density and is located 1.1 miles from the nearest BART station.

Measure 12.1: Lawn And Garden Consistent. New proposed buildings have access to exterior electrical outlets to charge electric powered lawn and garden equipment.

Sources: 1 Midtown Specific Plan. 2010. Figure 1.1: Aerial View of Midtown Milpitas. https://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/_pdfs/plan_plan_midtown.pdf.

Accessed April 15, 2022
2 City of Milpitas. Milpitas Specific Plan. Adopted 2002. Updated 2010.Website:
https://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/_pdfs/plan_plan_midtown.pdf. Accessed April 15, 2022.

As shown above, the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable policies and measures contained in the City’s CAP. The proposed project is also evaluated below for its consistency with the ARB-adopted 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update addressing the SB 32 targets was adopted on December 14, 2017.11 Table 13 provides an analysis of the project’s consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan Update measures. As shown therein, none of the measures apply to the proposed project.

Table 13: 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, however, purchase electricity from a utility provider subject to the SB 350 and SB 100 RPS requirements for any operational electricity demand that is not satisfied with the required solar system.
11 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 April 15, 2022. 376
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 49 ends

2017 Scoping Plan Update Reduction Measure Project Consistency 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. The proposed project would involve new development and
remodeling that would meet the latest applicable building code standards.

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 accessing the proposed building 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 Zero Emission 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 building at the project site would benefit from the increased availability of cleaner technology and fuels.

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 a residential
development that would not support freight operations.

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.

Not applicable. The proposed project would not include
major sources of black carbon. In compliance with BAAQMD Regulation 6, Rule 3,1 the proposed project would not include installing any woodstoves or fireplaces.

SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategies. Requires
Regional Transportation Plans to include a Sustainable
Communities Strategy for reduction of per capita Vehicle Miles Traveled (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-andTrade 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 project.

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:
1 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2015. Regulation 6 Particulate Matter and Visible Emissions, Rule 3 Wood Burning Devices. October 21. Website: http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/dotgov/files/rules/reg-6-rule-3- woodburning-devices/documents/rg0603.pdf?la=en. Accessed April 15, 2022.

Source of 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 April 15, 2022. 377
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
May 27, 2022

Page 50 ends

Summary
As presented in Table 13, the proposed project is consistent with the ARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan Update.

Additionally, as previously discussed, the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable policies of the City’s CAP and SB 32 Scoping Plan. Considering this information, the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted to reduce the emissions of GHGs.

Recommended Mitigation
None.

CONCLUSION
Based on the project understanding described above, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to air quality after incorporation of Milpitas Midtown Specific Plan Mitigation Measure Air-1.

The analysis further determined that the proposed project would not generate criteria pollutant, TAC, or GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment or surrounding receptors; nor would the proposed project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. 378
Item # 17.

Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
December 28, 2021

Page 51 ends

Thank you for the opportunity to conduct an air quality, GHG emissions, and energy impacts analysis.

Please feel free to contact Phil Ault (559.930.6191 or [email protected]) or Lance Park (805.535.5412 or [email protected]) should you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Lance Park, Air Quality Specialist Philip Ault, Director of Noise and Air Quality FirstCarbon Solutions FirstCarbon Solutions
1350 Treat Boulevard, Suite 380 1350 Treat Boulevard, Suite 380 Walnut Creek, CA 94597 Walnut Creek, CA 94597
Attachment A: Air Quality Modeling Results and Supporting Calculations Attachment B: Transportation Generation Analysis
379
Item # 17.

Attachment A:

Air Quality Modeling Results and Supporting Calculations 380
Item # 17.

Attachment A: Air Quality Supporting Information
and Modeling Results
Table of Contents
Demolition Calculations........................................................................................................... 1 Vehicle Trip Generation Adjustments...................................................................................... 2 Project Construction AQ Emissions.......................................................................................... 3 Project Operational AQ Emissions........................................................................................... 4 Project GHG Emissions............................................................................................................. 5 CalEEMod Modeling Notes...................................................................................................... 6 CalEEMod Modeling Annual Output ........................................................................................ 8 381
Item # 17.

Demolition Debris Calculations
1 building st 10 cf building volume
1 cf building volume 0.25 cf waste volume1 cf 0.037 cy
1 cy waste volume 0.5 ton waste weight
1sf 0.04625 ton waste material
Existing Description square feet2 height/ depth (ft)3 density (lbs/cf)4 Demolition Weight
(pounds) Demolition Weight (tons)
Building gsf Buildings 29,000 1,341.25
Hardscape Pavement 41,278 0.5 150 3,095,850 1,547.93
Totals 3,095,850 2,889
Notes:cy = cubic yard
gsf = gross square feet
sf = square feetcf = cubic feet1 Source: California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2017. Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod. October.2 Source: Aerial imagery retrieved from GoogleEarth.

Parameters1
3 Source: DC Construction Services. 2017. How Thick Is Parking Lot Asphalt? Website: https://dccpaving.com/how‐thick‐is‐parking‐lot‐asphalt/.

Accessed December 21, 2021.
4 Source: SFGate. 2019. How to Calculate Asphalt Weight Per Yard. Website: https://homeguides.sfgate.com/calculate‐asphalt‐weight‐per‐yard‐ 81825.html. Accessed December 21, 2021.

Attachment A Page 1
382
Item # 17.

Trip‐Generating CalEEMod Land Use Size Metric Size
Weekday Saturday Sunday Weekday Saturday Sunday
City Park Acre 0.57 0.78 1.96 2.19 0.00 0.00 0.00
Condo/Tonwhouse Dwelling Unit 57 7.32 8.14 6.28 4.54 5.05 3.89 Parking Lot Space 124 000 0.00 0.00 0.00
Notes/Sources:

Operational Vehicle Trip Generation Rate Adjustments
Default Trip Generation Rates1
Adjusted Trip Generation Rates
(Based on proportional change to weekday trips)
1 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2021. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2020.4.0.

Attachment
A Page 2
383
Item # 17.

File Name: TTLC Milpitas Project ‐ Santa Clara County, Annual Timestamp: Date: 05/24/22 10:00 AM
ROG NOx
PM10
(Exhaust)
PM2.5
(Exhaust)
on site 0.01 0.14 0.01 0.01 off site 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 Demolition 0.02 0.16 0.01 0.01 on site 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 off site 0.00 0.00 ‐ ‐ Site Preparation 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 on site 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 off site 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 Grading 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 on site 0.18 1.42 0.06 0.06 off site 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.00 Building Construction 0.20 1.51 0.06 0.06 on site 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.00 off site 0.00 0.00 ‐ ‐ Paving 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.00 on site 0.85 0.01 0.00 0.00 off site 0.00 0.00 ‐ ‐ Architectural Coating 0.85 0.01 0.00 0.00 On Site 1.05 1.67 0.07 0.07 Off Site 0.02 0.14 0.00 0.00 ROG NOx
PM10
(Exhaust)
PM2.5
(Exhaust)
Total Emissions (tons) 1.07 1.82 0.07 0.07 Total Emissions (lbs) 2,138.70 3,631.70 145.34 138.58 Average Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 7.95 13.50 0.54 0.52 Construction Phase Workdays
Demolition 20
Site Preparation 3
Grading 6
Building Construction 220
Paving 10
Architectural Coating 10
Total Nonoverlapping Workdays 269
Construction Emissions (tons)
Average Daily Construction Emissions (lbs/day)
Project Construction Emissions
Note: Values above which represent true zeros are represented with "‐" while values that are less than 0.005 are automatically rounded down to "0.00." Attachment A Page 3
384
Item # 17.

File Name: TTLC Milpitas Project ‐ Santa Clara County, Annual Timestamp: Date: 05/24/22 10:00 AM
ROG NOx
PM10
(Total)
PM2.5
(Total)
Area 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.00
Mobile 0.11 0.12 0.25 0.07
Waste ‐‐‐‐
Water ‐‐‐‐
Total 0.67 0.17 0.26 0.07
BAAQMD Significance Thresholds 10 10 15 10
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
Emissions/Thresholds ROG NOx
PM10
(Total)
PM2.5
(Total)
Total Emissions (tons) 0.67 0.17 0.26 0.07 Total Emissions (lbs) 1,349.80 338.76 510.44 147.24 Average Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 3.70 0.93 1.40 0.40 BAAQMD Significance Thresholds 54 54 82 54 Project Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
Average Daily Operational Emissions (lbs/day)
Project Operational Emissions
Emissions Source
Tons per Year
Note: All zeros displayed in the above table represent emission values which are below 0.005 tons per year and have subsequently rounded down. All true zero values are represented with "‐".

Attachment A Page 4
385
Item # 17.

Construction GHG Emissions
File Name: TTLC Milpitas Project ‐ Santa Clara County, Annual Timestamp: Date: 05/24/22 10:00 AM
Construction
MT CO2e
31 3
19 312
8 2
375
13 Operational GHG Emissions
File Name: TTLC Milpitas Project ‐ Santa Clara County, Annual Timestamp: Date: 05/24/22 10:00 AM
Year 2022
(MT CO2e/Year)
1 67
208
8 7
291
13 304
1,100
No
Significance Threshold (MT CO2e/year)
Waste
Water
Total Operational Emissions
Amortized Construction Emissions
Total Project Emissions
Project Operational GHG Emissions
Amortized Over 30 Years
Emissions Source
Note: Consistent with BAAQMD guidance, the GHG emission estimates shown above discount Emissions Source
Demolition
Site Preparation
Grading
Building Construction
Paving
Architectural Coating
Total
Exceeds Threshold?
Area
Energy
Mobile
Attachment A Page 5
386
Item # 17.
5647.0001 TTLC Milpitas Main St CalEEMod Notes
Note 1 Land uses and sizes associated with development of the proposed project are drawn the SDG Architects, Inc. Architectural Site Plans for South Main Street Milpitas, dated April 8, 2022. Land uses in the model represent the following:

Residential > Condo/Townhouse High Rise > 118,846 sqft = Proposed 57 attached townhomes. Total building footprint was identified as 38,782 square feet.

Recreational > City Park > 0.57 acre = Designated open space and landscaping.

Parking > Parking Lot > 124 spaces = Parking and other paved surfaces. Area assumed to be the balance of the 2.35‐acre project site after accounting for all other uses.

Note 2 According to information provided by the Applicant on October 2, 2021, approximately 3,430 cubic yards of fill material would be imported during grading activities.

Note 3 Square footage of existing building and hardscape were provided by the Applicant. The existing buildings and hardscape include approximately 29,000 square feet of building space for the Montessori School structure and 41,278 square feet of pavement. Therefore, an estimated 2,889 tons of building and pavement debris would be removed during demolition activities. Please see the demolition calculations contained in Attachment A for more information.

Note 4 According to the BAAQMD’s Regulation 6, Rule 3, new residential developments are prohibited from installing wood‐burning stoves and fireplaces. As a result, the model was adjusted to remove the inclusion of wood‐burning devices.

Note 5 Mitigation Measure Air‐1 of the Midtown Specific Plan EIR requires the implementation of various dust control measures. Therefore, BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation Measures Recommended For All Proposed Projects was applied to this project, which includes watering exposed areas at minimum twice per day and limiting construction vehicle speeds to 15 miles per hour on unpaved roads.

Note 6 According to project information provided by the project applicant, each dwelling unit would include solar panel electricity generation in compliance with the California Building Code. According to the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6, Subchapter 8 – Low‐ Rise Residential Building – Performance and Prescriptive Compliance Approaches, “[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 electrical output equal or greater than the dwelling’s annual electrical usage as determined by Equation 150.1‐C:”1
1 California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6, Subchapter 8. “Low‐Rise Residential Buildings”. Website:
https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CAEC2019/subchapter‐8‐low‐rise‐residential‐buildings‐performance‐and‐ prescriptive‐compliance‐approaches
Attachment A Page 6
387
Item # 17.

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
As the project is located in climate zone 4, the A adjustment factor mentioned above is identified as 0.586 and the B adjustment factor mentioned above is identified as 1.21. The conditioned floor area is based on the building square footage.

Therefore:
kWPV = (118,846 x 0.586)/1,000 + (57 x 1.21) = 153.24
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. Therefore, the total kW PV system was reduced to a per‐dwelling‐unit kW PV system to determine the expected annual production rate. 153.24 kW PV divided by 57 dwelling units results in an average 2.69 kW PV system per dwelling unit.

According to TheEcoExperts.com2
, a 2 kW PV system has an average annual production rate of 1,750 kWh/year. The below equation proportionally applies the same average annual production rate to the calculated 2.69 kW system per each dwelling unit. (2.69/2) * 1,750 kWh/year = 2,352 kWh/year
Therefore, the proposed project is expected to result in an average on‐site electricity generation rate of 2,352 kWh per dwelling unit per year. As such, after multiplying by 57 dwelling units, the proposed project would generate an estimated 134,084 kWh annually.

Note 7 TJKM prepared a Trip Generation Study (Attachment B) for the proposed project that analyzes the trip generation rates for the proposed project. As disclosed therein, the proposed project would result in an average 4.54 vehicle trips per day per dwelling unit. As such, the model was adjusted to account for this trip generation rate and adjusted the Saturday and Sunday trip generation rates consistent with the same proportional change experienced during the weekday generation rate adjustments. 2 TheEcoExperts. 2016. “Solar Panel Output.” Website: http://www.theecoexperts.com/solar‐panel‐output/.

Accessed June 9, 2021.

Attachment A Page 7
388
Item # 17.

Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - CalEEMod Note 5 Energy Mitigation - CalEEMod Note 6Demolition - CalEEMod Note 3Grading - CalEEMod Note 2Vehicle Trips - CalEEMod Note 7Woodstoves - CalEEMod Note 4

0.004

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default DataProject Characteristics - Land Use - CalEEMod Note 1 CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.033 N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Climate Zone 4 Operational Year 2024
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
163

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 58 Condo/Townhouse 57.00 Dwelling Unit 0.89 118,846.00
0 City Park 0.57 Acre 0.57 24,859.00 0
Parking Lot 124.00 Space 0.89 38,725.00
TTLC Milpitas Project
Santa Clara County, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/24/2022 10:00 AM
TTLC Milpitas Project - Santa Clara County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Attachment
A Page 8
389
Item # 17.

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/24/2022 10:00 AM
TTLC Milpitas Project - Santa Clara County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 582.40 0.00
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 7.32 4.54
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 14.12 0.00
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.28 3.89
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 0.78 0.00tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.14 5.05tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 2.19 0.00tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 86.00 100.00tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.96 0.00tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 11.00 0.00tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 3.00 0.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 1.12 0.89tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.56 0.89tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 24,829.20 24,859.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 57,000.00 118,846.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 3,430.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 49,600.00 38,725.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceHourDay 3.50 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 228.80 0.00
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblFireplaces FireplaceDayYear 11.14 0.00
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
Attachment
A Page 9
390
Item # 17.

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/24/2022 10:00 AM
TTLC Milpitas Project - Santa Clara County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Highest 0.5692 0.5692
4 7-30-2024 9-30-2024 0.3472 0.34723 4-30-2024 7-29-2024 0.5016 0.50162 1-30-2024 4-29-2024 0.5031 0.50311 10-30-2023 1-29-2024 0.5692 0.5692 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 22.31 0.00 14.50 22.70 0.00 7.89 0.00

0.0438 6.0900e-003 299.1712
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2
Maximum 1.0323 1.4429 1.6772 3.4600e-003 0.0676 0.0579 0.1255 0.0182 0.0554 0.0736 0.0000 296.2600 296.2600 296.2600 296.2600 0.0438 6.0900e-003 299.1712

0.0122 3.9100e-003 76.2725
2024 1.0323 1.4429 1.6772 3.4600e-003 0.0676 0.0579 0.1255 0.0182 0.0554 0.0736 0.00002023 0.0371 0.3729 0.3182 8.3000e-004 0.0373 0.0148 0.0520 0.0103 0.0139 0.0242 0.0000 74.8017 74.8017 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

0.0438 6.0900e-003 299.1715
Mitigated Construction
Maximum 1.0323 1.4429 1.6772 3.4600e-003 0.0676 0.0579 0.1255 0.0187 0.0554 0.0736 0.0000 296.2603 296.2603 296.2603 296.2603 0.0438 6.0900e-003 299.1715

0.0122 3.9100e-003 76.2726
2024 1.0323 1.4429 1.6772 3.4600e-003 0.0676 0.0579 0.1255 0.0182 0.0554 0.0736 0.00002023 0.0371 0.3729 0.3182 8.3000e-004 0.0674 0.0148 0.0821 0.0187 0.0139 0.0326 0.0000 74.8018 74.8018 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.1 Overall ConstructionUnmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

2.0 Emissions Summary
Attachment
A Page 10
391
Item # 17.

0.44 1.74 4.04
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 4.30 4.21 Fugitive PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO SO2
275.7854 282.2962 0.4533 0.0136 297.6770

0.1215 2.9100e-003 7.9205
Total 0.6749 0.1695 1.4794 2.5400e-003 0.2477 7.5900e003 0.2552 0.0661 7.4800e- 003 0.0736 6.5108 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.1782 2.8374 4.0156

0.0000 5.3326 0.3152 0.0000 13.2112

0.0126 9.4300e-003 208.4630
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.3326

1.4600e003 2.2300e-003 0.2477 1.5700e- 0.0676 0.0000 205.3370 205.3370 003 Mobile 0.1054 0.1192 1.0359 0.2492 0.0661

66.9174 66.9174 3.3400e003 1.2500e-003 67.3720

6.7000e004 0.0000 0.7103
Energy 5.3000e003 0.0453 0.0193 2.9000e-004 3.6700e- 003 3.6700e-003 3.6700e- 003 3.6700e-003 0.0000

2.3500e003 2.0000e-005 2.3500e- 2.3500e-003 0.0000 0.6936 0.6936 003 Area 0.5642 4.8800e-003 0.4242 2.3500e-003 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
288.1914 294.7022 0.4553 0.0138 310.2057

0.1215 2.9100e-003 7.9205
Total 0.6749 0.1695 1.4794 2.5400e-003 0.2477 7.5900e003 0.2552 0.0661 7.4800e- 003 0.0736 6.5108 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.1782 2.8374 4.0156

0.0000 5.3326 0.3152 0.0000 13.2112

0.0126 9.4300e-003 208.4630
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.3326

1.4600e003 2.2300e-003 0.2477 1.5700e- 0.0676 0.0000 205.3370 205.3370 003 Mobile 0.1054 0.1192 1.0359 0.2492 0.0661

79.3234 79.3234 5.3500e003 1.4900e-003 79.9006

6.7000e004 0.0000 0.7103
Energy 5.3000e003 0.0453 0.0193 2.9000e-004 3.6700e- 003 3.6700e-003 3.6700e- 003 3.6700e-003 0.0000

2.3500e003 2.0000e-005 2.3500e- 2.3500e-003 0.0000 0.6936 0.6936 003 Area 0.5642 4.8800e-003 0.4242 2.3500e-003 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.2 Overall OperationalUnmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
Attachment
A Page 11
392
Item # 17.

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/24/2022 10:00 AM
TTLC Milpitas Project - Santa Clara County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Acres of Paving: 0.89
Residential Indoor: 240,663; Residential Outdoor: 80,221; Non-Residential Indoor: 2; Non-Residential Outdoor: 1; Striped Parking Area: 2,324 510
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 4.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 6
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 10/25/2024 11/7/2024 5 220
5 Paving Paving 10/11/2024 10/24/2024 5 10
4 Building Construction Building Construction 12/8/2023 10/10/2024 53 3 Grading Grading 11/30/2023 12/7/2023 5 6
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 11/25/2023 11/29/2023 Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 10/30/2023 11/24/2023 5 20
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Attachment
A Page 12
393
Item # 17.

0.37 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97

0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 132

0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9

0.37 Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97

0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74Building Construction Forklifts 2 7.00 89

0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 8.00 231 0.29
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 7.00 97

0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40Grading Graders 1 8.00 187

0.48 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37 Site Preparation Scrapers 1 8.00 367

0.37 Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97

0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Attachment
A Page 13
394
Item # 17.

9.3485 9.3485 3.1000e004 1.3800e-003 9.7675

2.0000e005 2.0000e-005 0.7920
Total 6.2000e004 0.0197 7.4100e-003 1.0000e-004 3.4600e- 003 1.7000e- 004 3.6200e-003 9.4000e- 004 1.5000e- 004 1.1000e-003 0.0000

1.0000e-005 1.0300e- 0.0000 2.8000e-004 0.0000 0.7849 0.7849 003

1.0000e005 1.0400e-003 2.7000e- 004 Worker 3.2000e- 004 2.3000e-004 2.9000e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.9000e004 1.3600e-003 8.9755
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

1.5000e004 9.0000e-005 2.4300e- 8.2000e-004 0.0000 8.5636 8.5636 003 1.6000e- 004 2.5800e-003 6.7000e- 004 Hauling 3.0000e- 004 0.0194 4.5100e-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

5.3500e003 0.0000 21.2202
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

6.3300e003 2.4000e-004 0.0309 6.7700e- 0.0110 0.0000 21.0866 21.0866 003 0.0377 4.6800e- 003 Total 0.0147 0.1432 0.1346

21.0866 21.0866 5.3500e003 0.0000 21.2202

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0147 0.1432 0.1346 2.4000e-004 6.7700e003 6.7700e-003 6.3300e- 003 6.3300e-003 0.0000

0.0309 0.0000 0.0309 4.6800e- 0.0000 4.6800e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003
Fugitive Dust
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 ConstructionWater Exposed AreaReduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads

3.2 Demolition - 2023
Architectural Coating 1 14.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 8 68.00 17.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 4 10.00 0.00 429.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix Vendor Vehicle
Class
Hauling Vehicle
Class
Demolition 5 13.00 0.00 286.00 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
Attachment
A Page 14
395
Item # 17.

1.0500e003 7.5000e- 0.0000 3.2578 004 4.0000e-005 2.3900e- 1.0100e-003 0.0000 3.2317 3.2317 003 8.1000e- 004 3.2000e-003 2.6000e- 004 Total 1.9500e- 003 0.0214 0.0147

3.2317 3.2317 1.0500e003 0.0000 3.2578

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.9500e003 0.0214 0.0147 4.0000e-005 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e-004 7.5000e- 004 7.5000e-004 0.0000

2.3900e- 0.0000 2.6000e-004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
003

0.0000 2.3900e-003 2.6000e004 Fugitive Dust
N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

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

9.3485 9.3485 3.1000e004 1.3800e-003 9.7675

2.0000e005 2.0000e-005 0.7920
Total 6.2000e004 0.0197 7.4100e-003 1.0000e-004 3.4600e- 003 1.7000e- 004 3.6200e-003 9.4000e- 004 1.5000e- 004 1.1000e-003 0.0000

1.0000e-005 1.0300e- 0.0000 2.8000e-004 0.0000 0.7849 0.7849 003

1.0000e005 1.0400e-003 2.7000e- 004 Worker 3.2000e- 004 2.3000e-004 2.9000e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.9000e004 1.3600e-003 8.9755
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

5.3500e003 0.0000 21.2202
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

6.3300e003 2.4000e-004 0.0139 6.7700e- 8.4400e-003 0.0000 21.0865 21.0865 003 0.0207 2.1100e- 003 Total 0.0147 0.1432 0.1346

21.0865 21.0865 5.3500e003 0.0000 21.2202

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0147 0.1432 0.1346 2.4000e-004 6.7700e003 6.7700e-003 6.3300e- 003 6.3300e-003 0.0000

0.0139 0.0000 0.0139 2.1100e- 0.0000 2.1100e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003
Fugitive Dust
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
Attachment
A Page 15
396
Item # 17.

0.0725 0.0725 0.0000 0.0000 0.0731

0.0000 0.0000 0.0731
Total 3.0000e005 2.0000e-005 2.7000e-004 0.0000 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 1.0000e-004 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.0000e-005 0.0000

0.0000 1.0000e- 0.0000 3.0000e-005 0.0000 0.0725 0.0725 004

0.0000 1.0000e-004 3.0000e005 Worker 3.0000e- 005 2.0000e-005 2.7000e-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

1.0500e003 0.0000 3.2578
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

7.5000e004 4.0000e-005 1.0700e- 8.7000e-004 0.0000 3.2317 3.2317 003 8.1000e- 004 1.8800e-003 1.2000e- 004 Total 1.9500e- 003 0.0214 0.0147

3.2317 3.2317 1.0500e003 0.0000 3.2578

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.9500e003 0.0214 0.0147 4.0000e-005 8.1000e- 004 8.1000e-004 7.5000e- 004 7.5000e-004 0.0000

1.0700e- 0.0000 1.2000e-004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
003

0.0000 1.0700e-003 1.2000e004 Fugitive Dust
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

0.0725 0.0725 0.0000 0.0000 0.0731

0.0000 0.0000 0.0731
Total 3.0000e005 2.0000e-005 2.7000e-004 0.0000 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 1.0000e-004 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.0000e-005 0.0000

0.0000 1.0000e- 0.0000 3.0000e-005 0.0000 0.0725 0.0725 004

0.0000 1.0000e-004 3.0000e005 Worker 3.0000e- 005 2.0000e-005 2.7000e-004

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

1.7600e003 1.6700e- 0.0000 5.4751 003 6.0000e-005 9.6500e- 6.3100e-003 0.0000 5.4312 5.4312 003 1.8100e- 003 0.0115 4.6400e- 003 Total 4.0000e- 003 0.0434 0.0261

5.4312 5.4312 1.7600e003 0.0000 5.4751

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.0000e003 0.0434 0.0261 6.0000e-005 1.8100e- 003 1.8100e-003 1.6700e- 003 1.6700e-003 0.0000

9.6500e- 0.0000 4.6400e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
003

0.0000 9.6500e-003 4.6400e003 Fugitive Dust
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

13.0265 13.0265 4.5000e004 2.0500e-003 13.6460

1.0000e005 1.0000e-005 0.1828
Total 5.2000e004 0.0292 7.4300e-003 1.3000e-004 3.8800e- 003 2.4000e- 004 4.1200e-003 1.0600e- 003 2.3000e- 004 1.2900e-003 0.0000

0.0000 2.4000e- 0.0000 6.0000e-005 0.0000 0.1811 0.1811 004

0.0000 2.4000e-004 6.0000e005 Worker 7.0000e- 005 5.0000e-005 6.7000e-004

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

4.4000e004 2.0400e-003 13.4632
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.3000e004 1.3000e-004 3.6400e- 1.2300e-003 0.0000 12.8454 12.8454 003 2.4000e- 004 3.8800e-003 1.0000e- 003 Hauling 4.5000e- 004 0.0292 6.7600e-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

1.7600e003 0.0000 5.4751
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

1.6700e003 6.0000e-005 0.0214 1.8100e- 0.0120 0.0000 5.4312 5.4312 003 Total 4.0000e- 0.0233 0.0103 003 0.0434 0.0261

5.4312 5.4312 1.7600e003 0.0000 5.4751

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.0000e003 0.0434 0.0261 6.0000e-005 1.8100e- 003 1.8100e-003 1.6700e- 003 1.6700e-003 0.0000 Fugitive Dust 0.0214 0.0000 0.0214 0.0103 0.0000 0.0103 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 - 2023Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
Attachment
A Page 17
398
Item # 17.

5.9887 5.9887 1.5000e004 4.9000e-004 6.1382

9.0000e005 9.0000e-005 3.3143
Total 1.5100e003 7.0100e-003 0.0141 7.0000e-005 5.2100e- 003 6.0000e- 005 5.2700e-003 1.4100e- 003 5.0000e- 005 1.4600e-003 0.0000

2.0000e005 4.0000e-005 4.3100e- 1.1700e-003 0.0000 3.2846 3.2846 003 2.0000e- 005 4.3400e-003 1.1500e- 003 Worker 1.3600e- 003 9.5000e-004 0.0121

2.7041 2.7041 6.0000e005 4.0000e-004 2.8239

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 1.5000e004 6.0600e-003 1.9100e-003 3.0000e-005 9.0000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 9.3000e-004 2.6000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 2.9000e-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

16.6162 16.6162 3.1400e003 0.0000 16.6947

3.1400e003 0.0000 16.6947
Total 0.0137 0.1090 0.1137 2.0000e-004 4.9100e003 4.9100e-003 4.7000e- 003 4.7000e-003 0.0000

4.7000e003 2.0000e-004 4.9100e- 4.7000e-003 0.0000 16.6162 16.6162 003 Off-Road 0.0137 0.1090 0.1137 4.9100e-003 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.5 Building Construction - 2023Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

13.0265 13.0265 4.5000e004 2.0500e-003 13.6460

1.0000e005 1.0000e-005 0.1828
Total 5.2000e004 0.0292 7.4300e-003 1.3000e-004 3.8800e- 003 2.4000e- 004 4.1200e-003 1.0600e- 003 2.3000e- 004 1.2900e-003 0.0000

0.0000 2.4000e- 0.0000 6.0000e-005 0.0000 0.1811 0.1811 004

0.0000 2.4000e-004 6.0000e005 Worker 7.0000e- 005 5.0000e-005 6.7000e-004

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

4.4000e004 2.0400e-003 13.4632
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0395 0.0000 212.8547
Total 0.1629 1.3080 1.4382 2.5500e-003 0.0549 0.0549 0.0526 0.0526 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1629 1.3080 1.4382 2.5500e-003 0.0549 0.0549 0.0526 0.0526 0.0000 211.8682 211.8682 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.5 Building Construction - 2024Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

5.9887 5.9887 1.5000e004 4.9000e-004 6.1382

9.0000e005 9.0000e-005 3.3143
Total 1.5100e003 7.0100e-003 0.0141 7.0000e-005 5.2100e- 003 6.0000e- 005 5.2700e-003 1.4100e- 003 5.0000e- 005 1.4600e-003 0.0000

2.0000e005 4.0000e-005 4.3100e- 1.1700e-003 0.0000 3.2846 3.2846 003 2.0000e- 005 4.3400e-003 1.1500e- 003 Worker 1.3600e- 003 9.5000e-004 0.0121

2.7041 2.7041 6.0000e005 4.0000e-004 2.8239

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 1.5000e004 6.0600e-003 1.9100e-003 3.0000e-005 9.0000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 9.3000e-004 2.6000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 2.9000e-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

16.6162 16.6162 3.1400e003 0.0000 16.6947

3.1400e003 0.0000 16.6947
Total 0.0137 0.1090 0.1137 2.0000e-004 4.9100e003 4.9100e-003 4.7000e- 003 4.7000e-003 0.0000

4.7000e003 2.0000e-004 4.9100e- 4.7000e-003 0.0000 16.6162 16.6162 003 Off-Road 0.0137 0.1090 0.1137 4.9100e-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
Attachment
A Page 19
400
Item # 17.

74.5106 74.5106 1.8200e003 6.0700e-003 76.3646

1.1000e003 1.0900e-003 40.8921
Total 0.0181 0.0881 0.1684 7.9000e-004 0.0664 7.2000e004 0.0671 0.0179 6.8000e- 004 0.0186 0.0000

2.4000e004 4.4000e-004 0.0550 2.6000e- 0.0149 0.0000 40.5405 40.5405 004 Worker 0.0162 0.0108 0.1445 0.0553 0.0146

33.9701 33.9701 7.2000e004 4.9800e-003 35.4725

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 1.8500e003 0.0773 0.0239 3.5000e-004 0.0114 4.6000e- 004 0.0119 3.3000e- 003 4.4000e- 004 3.7400e-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
211.8680 211.8680 0.0395 0.0000 212.8545

0.0395 0.0000 212.8545
Total 0.1629 1.3080 1.4382 2.5500e-003 0.0549 0.0549 0.0526 0.0526 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1629 1.3080 1.4382 2.5500e-003 0.0549 0.0549 0.0526 0.0526 0.0000 211.8680 211.8680 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

74.5106 74.5106 1.8200e003 6.0700e-003 76.3646

1.1000e003 1.0900e-003 40.8921
Total 0.0181 0.0881 0.1684 7.9000e-004 0.0664 7.2000e004 0.0671 0.0179 6.8000e- 004 0.0186 0.0000

2.4000e004 4.4000e-004 0.0550 2.6000e- 0.0149 0.0000 40.5405 40.5405 004 Worker 0.0162 0.0108 0.1445 0.0553 0.0146

33.9701 33.9701 7.2000e004 4.9800e-003 35.4725

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 1.8500e003 0.0773 0.0239 3.5000e-004 0.0114 4.6000e- 004 0.0119 3.3000e- 003 4.4000e- 004 3.7400e-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
Attachment
A Page 20
401
Item # 17.

2.4600e003 1.8300e- 0.0000 7.8188 003 9.0000e-005 1.9800e- 1.8300e-003 0.0000 7.7573 7.7573 003 Total 5.3800e- 1.9800e-003 003 0.0405 0.0585

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.4600e003 0.0000 7.8188
Paving 1.1700e003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

1.8300e003 9.0000e-005 1.9800e- 1.8300e-003 0.0000 7.7573 7.7573 003 Off-Road 4.2100e- 1.9800e-003 003 0.0405 0.0585 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

0.4384 0.4384 1.0000e005 1.0000e-005 0.4422

1.0000e005 1.0000e-005 0.4422
Total 1.8000e004 1.2000e-004 1.5600e-003 0.0000 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 6.0000e-004 1.6000e- 004 0.0000 1.6000e-004 0.0000

0.0000 5.9000e- 0.0000 1.6000e-004 0.0000 0.4384 0.4384 004

0.0000 6.0000e-004 1.6000e004 Worker 1.8000e- 004 1.2000e-004 1.5600e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.4600e003 0.0000 7.8188
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

1.8300e003 9.0000e-005 1.9800e- 1.8300e-003 0.0000 7.7574 7.7574 003 Total 5.3800e- 1.9800e-003 003 0.0405 0.0585

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

2.4600e003 0.0000 7.8188
Paving 1.1700e003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

1.8300e003 9.0000e-005 1.9800e- 1.8300e-003 0.0000 7.7574 7.7574 003 Off-Road 4.2100e- 1.9800e-003 003 0.0405 0.0585 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.6 Paving - 2024Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
Attachment
A Page 21
402
Item # 17.

0.4092 0.4092 1.0000e005 1.0000e-005 0.4127

1.0000e005 1.0000e-005 0.4127
Total 1.6000e004 1.1000e-004 1.4600e-003 0.0000 5.6000e- 004 0.0000 5.6000e-004 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.5000e-004 0.0000

0.0000 5.6000e- 0.0000 1.5000e-004 0.0000 0.4092 0.4092 004

0.0000 5.6000e-004 1.5000e004 Worker 1.6000e- 004 1.1000e-004 1.4600e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

7.0000e005 3.0000e- 0.0000 1.2784 004 1.0000e-005 3.0000e- 3.0000e-004 0.0000 1.2766 1.2766 004 Total 0.8456 6.0900e-003 9.0500e-003 3.0000e-004

1.2766 1.2766 7.0000e005 0.0000 1.2784

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.4384 0.4384 1.0000e005 1.0000e-005 0.4422

1.0000e005 1.0000e-005 0.4422
Total 1.8000e004 1.2000e-004 1.5600e-003 0.0000 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 6.0000e-004 1.6000e- 004 0.0000 1.6000e-004 0.0000

0.0000 5.9000e- 0.0000 1.6000e-004 0.0000 0.4384 0.4384 004

0.0000 6.0000e-004 1.6000e004 Worker 1.8000e- 004 1.2000e-004 1.5600e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0126 9.4300e-003 208.4630
208.4630
Unmitigated 0.1054 0.1192 1.0359 2.2300e-003 0.2477 1.5700e003 0.2492 0.0661 1.4600e- 003 0.0676 0.0000 205.3370 205.3370

0.0000 205.3370 205.3370 0.0126 9.4300e-003
CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrMitigated 0.1054 0.1192 1.0359 2.2300e-003 0.2477 1.5700e003 0.2492 0.0661 1.4600e- 003 0.0676 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 - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10

0.4092 0.4092 1.0000e005 1.0000e-005 0.4127

1.0000e005 1.0000e-005 0.4127
Total 1.6000e004 1.1000e-004 1.4600e-003 0.0000 5.6000e- 004 0.0000 5.6000e-004 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.5000e-004 0.0000

0.0000 5.6000e- 0.0000 1.5000e-004 0.0000 0.4092 0.4092 004

0.0000 5.6000e-004 1.5000e004 Worker 1.6000e- 004 1.1000e-004 1.4600e-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-005 3.0000e- 3.0000e-004 0.0000 1.2766 1.2766 004 Total 0.8456 6.0900e-003 9.0500e-003 3.0000e-004

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 0.8447 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
Attachment
A Page 23
404
Item # 17.

0.000914 0.002776
Parking Lot 0.572464 0.055653 0.187060 0.115672 0.020329 0.005102 0.007934 0.006404 0.000900 0.000380 0.024412 0.000914 0.002776

0.000380 0.024412 0.000914 0.002776
Condo/Townhouse 0.572464 0.055653 0.187060 0.115672 0.020329 0.005102 0.007934 0.006404 0.000900 0.000380 0.024412 City Park 0.572464 0.055653 0.187060 0.115672 0.020329 0.005102 0.007934 0.006404 0.000900 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2
Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
Condo/Townhouse 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 100 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 670,159

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Total 258.78 287.85 221.73 670,159
670,159
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Condo/Townhouse 258.78 287.85 221.73 670,159
Annual VMT
City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Attachment
A Page 24
405
Item # 17.

52.4992 1.0100e-003 9.6000e004 3.6700e- 52.8112 003 0.0193 2.9000e- 3.6700e-003 0.0000 52.4992 004 3.6700e-003 3.6700e- 003 Total 5.3000e- 003 0.0453

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

9.6000e004 52.8112
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

3.6700e-003 0.0000 52.4992 52.4992 1.0100e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Condo/Townhouse 983798 5.3000e003 0.0453 0.0193 2.9000e- 004 3.6700e-003 3.6700e- 003 3.6700e- 003 City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 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

1.0100e003 9.6000e-004 52.8112

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGasUnmitigated

3.6700e003 2.9000e-004 3.6700e- 3.6700e-003 0.0000 52.4992 52.4992 003 NaturalGas 3.6700e-003 Unmitigated 5.3000e- 003 0.0453 0.0193

52.4992 52.4992 1.0100e003 9.6000e-004 52.8112

4.3400e003 5.3000e-004 27.0894
NaturalGas
Mitigated

5.3000e003 0.0453 0.0193 2.9000e-004 3.6700e- 003 3.6700e-003 3.6700e- 003 3.6700e-003 0.0000

14.5608
Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 26.8242 26.8242

0.0000 14.4182 14.4182 2.3300e003 2.8000e-004
CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O

5.0 Energy Detail
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures EnergyKilowatt Hours of Renewable Electricity Generated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Attachment
A Page 25
406
Item # 17.

4.2000e-004 21.6468
Parking Lot -31140.9 -2.8813 -0.0005 -0.0001 -2.9098
Condo/Townhouse 231668 21.4348 3.4700e-003
Land Use kWh/yr t
o
MT/yr
City Park -44694.7 -4.1353 -0.0007 -0.0001 -4.1762

5.2000e-004 27.0894
Mitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Total 26.8242 4.3400e-003

5.0000e-004 25.8230
Parking Lot 13553.8 1.2540 2.0000e-004 2.0000e-005 1.2664 Condo/Townhouse 276363 25.5701 4.1400e-003
Land Use kWh/yr t
o
MT/yr
City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

52.4992 1.0100e-003 9.6000e004 52.8112

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity

3.6700e003 0.0193 2.9000e- 3.6700e-003 0.0000 52.4992 004 3.6700e-003 3.6700e- 003 Total 5.3000e- 003 0.0453

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

9.6000e004 52.8112
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

3.6700e-003 0.0000 52.4992 52.4992 1.0100e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Condo/Townhouse 983798 5.3000e003 0.0453 0.0193 2.9000e- 004 3.6700e-003 3.6700e- 003 3.6700e- 003 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
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
Mitigated
NaturalGas
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Attachment
A Page 26
407
Item # 17.

6.7000e004 2.3500e- 0.0000 0.7103 003 2.0000e-005 2.3500e- 2.3500e-003 0.0000 0.6936 0.6936 003 Total 0.5642 4.8800e-003 0.4242 2.3500e-003

0.6936 0.6936 6.7000e004 0.0000 0.7103

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0128 4.8800e-003 0.4242 2.0000e-005 2.3500e003 2.3500e-003 2.3500e- 003 2.3500e-003 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 0.4669 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

0.0845
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

6.7000e004 0.0000 0.7103
Mitigated

2.3500e003 2.0000e-005 2.3500e- 2.3500e-003 0.0000 0.6936 0.6936 003 Total 0.5642 4.8800e-003 0.4242 2.3500e-003

0.6936 0.6936 6.7000e004 0.0000 0.7103

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer Products 0.4669 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

0.0845
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

6.7000e004 0.0000 0.7103

6.2 Area by SubCategoryUnmitigated

0.7103
Unmitigated 0.5642 4.8800e-003 0.4242 2.0000e-005 2.3500e003 2.3500e-003 2.3500e- 003 2.3500e-003 0.0000 0.6936 0.6936

0.0000 0.6936 0.6936 6.7000e004 0.0000
CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yrMitigated 0.5642 4.8800e-003 0.4242 2.0000e-005 2.3500e003 2.3500e-003 2.3500e- 003 2.3500e-003 Exhaust Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total

6.0 Area Detail

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Attachment
A Page 27
408
Item # 17.

2.9100e-003 7.6984
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Condo/Townhouse 3.71378 /

2.3413

3.7957 0.1214
Land Use Mgal t
o
MT/yr
City Park 0 /

0.679144

0.2199 4.0000e-005 0.0000 0.2221

2.9100e-003 7.9205
Mitigated
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Total 4.0156 0.1215

2.9100e-003 7.6984
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Condo/Townhouse 3.71378 /

2.3413

3.7957 0.1214
Land Use Mgal t
o
MT/yr
City Park 0 /

0.679144

0.2199 4.0000e-005 0.0000 0.2221

7.9205

7.2 Water by Land UseUnmitigated
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated 4.0156 0.1215 2.9100e-003
CO2e
Category t
o
MT/yr
Mitigated 4.0156 0.1215 2.9100e-003 7.9205
Total CO2 CH4 N2O

7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
Attachment
A Page 28
409
Item # 17.

0.0000 13.1861
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Condo/Townhouse 26.22 5.3224 0.3146
Land Use tons t
o
MT/yr
City Park 0.05 0.0102 6.0000e-004 0.0000 0.0252

0.0000 13.2112
Mitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Total 5.3326 0.3152

0.0000 13.1861
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Condo/Townhouse 26.22 5.3224 0.3146
Land Use tons t
o
MT/yr
City Park 0.05 0.0102 6.0000e-004 0.0000 0.0252

13.2112

8.2 Waste by Land UseUnmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated 5.3326 0.3152 0.0000
CO2e
to
MT/yr
Mitigated 5.3326 0.3152 0.0000 13.2112
Total CO2 CH4 N2O

8.0 Waste Detail

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Category/Year
Attachment
A Page 29
410
Item # 17.

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
Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day
Attachment
A Page 30
411
Item # 17.

Attachment B:

Transportation Generation Analysis
412
Item # 17.

April 2, 2022
Leah Beniston
Vice President‐Entitlements
The True Life Companies
12657 Alcosta Boulevard, Suite 470
San Ramon, CA 94583
Re: Trip Generation Study for 612 South Main Street, Milpitas, California Dear Ms. Beniston:

At your request, TJKM has prepared this trip generation analysis of the proposed development located at 612 South Main Street in Milpitas, California. The site is currently occupied by a 6,413 square feet (sf) Montessori School for preschool aged students and an 11,700 gymnastics facility. The project also incorporates an adjacent vacant lot. The project site will consist of 57 three‐story townhouse style dwelling units with two‐car garage and seven on‐site guest parking spaces.

To determine the proposed project trips, the following trip rates are applicable, based on the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) Trip Generation, 11th Edition. The land use for Multi‐ family Housing, Mid‐Rise (code 221) was used because it has three or more stories and are connected by three or more dwelling units. Trip Generation for the school is based on the number of students. Because there is no ITE land use for the gymnastics facility, trip generation was estimated based on information provided by the tenant. The net trips for proposed use is shown in the table below:

Land Use (ITE Code) Size
Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Rate Trips Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total
Proposed
Multifamily Housing,
Mid‐ Rise (221) 57 DU 4.54 259 0.37 4 17 21 0.39 13 10 23 Existing
Montessori
School/Day Care
(565)
72 Students 4.09 294 0.78 30 26 56 0.79 27 30 57
Gymnastics 11.7 ksf 80 12 12 24
Net Total Trips ‐115 ‐26 ‐9 ‐35 ‐26 ‐32 ‐58
Notes: DU‐ Dwelling Units; ksf: thousand square feet
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021, Gymnastics tenant operations The proposed project will not generate any net new trips during the daily, a.m. peak hour (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.) trips or p.m. peak hour (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.). 413
Item # 17.
612 South Main Street
April 2, 2022

Page 2 of 2 ends

Please contact me if there are questions on this matter.

Very truly yours,
Chris D. Kinzel, P.E.

Vice President
414
Item # 17.

Exhibit 3, Part 5:

Preliminary Stormwater Quality Control Plan for South Main Street Milpitas 600 & 612 South Main Street prepared by MacKay & Somps dated June 2022.
415
Item # 17.

PRELIMINARY

STORMWATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN
For

SOUTH MAIN STREET MILPITAS
600 & 612 South Main Street
June 2022
Prepared by:

MacKay & Somps
5142 Franklin Drive, Suite B
Pleasanton, CA 94588
(925) 225-0690
Mariana Mena
416
Item # 17.

South Main Street Property June 2022

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Project Setting ..............................................................................................................1 I.A. Project Description ......................................................................................................................................... 1 I.B. Site Features and Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 1 I.C. Opportunities and Constraints for Stormwater Control ......................................................................... 1 I.D. Hydromodification Management Requirements ....................................................................................... 1 II. Measures to Limit Imperviousness ..............................................................................1 II.A. Measures to Make Development More Compact ..................................................................................... 1 II.B. Measures to Limit Directly Connected Impervious Area ........................................................................ 2 II.B.1. Selection of Paving Materials
II.B.2. Self Treating Areas
III. Selection and Preliminary Design of Stormwater Treatment BMPs ...........................2 III.A. Hydrology ......................................................................................................................................................... 2 III.B. Recommended Permanent BMPs ................................................................................................................ 2 IV. Source Control Measures .............................................................................................3 IV.A. Structural Control Measures ......................................................................................................................... 3 IV.B. Operational Control Measures ..................................................................................................................... 3 V. Permitting and Code Compliance Issues .....................................................................4 VI. BMP Maintenance Requirements .................................................................................5 VI.A. Recommended BMP Maintenance .............................................................................................................. 5 VII. CERTIFICATIONS ..........................................................................................................6 TABLES
Table 1. Site Data
Table 2. Proposed Drainage Areas
Table 3. Estimated Runoff Coefficients during Small Storms

FIGURES
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Aerial Photo
Figure 3: Hydromodification Management Control Area Map Figure 4: Existing Conditions
Figure 5: Proposed Conditions
Figure 6: Stormwater Control Plan with BMP sizing
Figure 7: Bioretention Area
Figure 8: Zoeller Submersible Sewage Pump
Figure 9: Zoeller Z-Rail System and Lifting Cable
417
Item # 17.

South Main Street Property Page 1 of 6 June 2022
I. PROJECT DATA
I.A. Project Description
The site consists of two parcels located at 600 and 612 South Main Street in the city of Milpitas within Santa Clara County. The 0.70-acre parcel at 600 S. Main Street is a vacant lot and the 2.35- acre parcel at 612 is occupied by a commercial building. The project proposes to redevelop the combined 2.35 acres into 9 buildings resulting in 57 townhome units. The project also includes a landscape common area, one main drive aisle with two access driveways entrances and three private alleys. Walkways and landscaped areas make up the remainder of the site.

I.B. Site Features and Conditions
The 2.35 -acre rectangular site is currently operating as a commercial site and vacant lot. Grades across the site range from an elevation of 23.8± to 25±and drain East to West of the property. The site is relatively flat, and it drains to the north corner off-site into South Main Street where drainage is picked up along existing storm drain curb inlets. The site is bordered by commercial developments across South Main Street and to the North and South edges. To the East the project is adjacent to the UPRR parcel.

I.C. Opportunities and Constraints for Stormwater Control Opportunities:
• Landscape areas – A 5-to-10-foot setback along the perimeter of the project will be landscaped and used as self-treating areas. The common landscape open space area is vastly large and is an ideal location for the water quality bioretention basin to be located. In addition, this project proposes a 29% landscape area, exceeding the minimum 25% residential open space requirement.
• Existing SD system - There is an existing 12" storm drain system along South Main Street that serves as the main storm drain connection point to discharge treated water to the public storm drain system.

Constraints:
• Land use – Due to the project density it is difficult to provide dispersed bioretention swales for treatment.
• Topography - Generally flat topography can make it difficult to grade parking lots and driveways to drain into planters or swales located at the site perimeter.

I.D. Hydromodification Management Requirements
The project is exempt from Hydromodification Management Plan requirements since the project is located outside the HM applicability map (green area), see figure 3.

II. MEASURES TO LIMIT IMPERVIOUSNESS
II.A. Measures to Make Development more compact
The site density is 24 DU/acre, which is above the minimum 21 DU/acre required for high density residential development. The site has also been designed to maximize open space and 418
Item # 17.

South Main Street Property Page 2 of 6 June 2022
provide landscape buffer areas with a minimum 10’ setback along the perimeter of the project.

II.B. Measures to Limit Directly Connected Impervious Area.

II.B.1. Selection of paving materials
Conventional concrete and conventional asphalt are used throughout the site.

II.B.2. Self-Treating Areas
The project includes three self-treating areas located along the eastern and southern boundaries. As shown in the Stormwater Control Plan Exhibit as DMA 2. Since these self-treating areas do not receive any runoff from impervious areas, runoff will discharge directly to the storm drain system onsite via area drains. Area DMA 2 is shown in the Stormwater BMP Exhibit (figure 6).

III. SELECTION AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF STORMWATER TREATMENT BMPS III.A. Hydrology
Runoff coefficients for existing and proposed on-site conditions were based on the C.3 Stormwater Handbook Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPPP) June 2016 shown in Table 3.

The water quality bioretention basin has been designed to treat the flow of the resultant surface drainage for this project. The basin is sized per the SCVURPPP Appendix B – Section IV “Sizing for Flow and Volume-Based Treatment Measure” natural method A rainfall intensity value of 0.2 inches per hour is used for treatment flows based on the uniform intensity approach. The weighted runoff coefficient is based on the imperviousness percentage for the drainage area.

The basin includes treatment soil and a rock gallery beneath it to function as a bioretention facility to mitigate stormwater quality impacts. Runoff from building, walkways, and alleys will surface drain and/or be conveyed by a storm drain system and then pumped into the bioretention basin for treatment by a ¼ horsepower non-automatic pump with lockable simplex controller that has an audible and visual alarm system and HOA switch. The prefabricated pump system will be installed on a rail system that will allow it to be raised and lowered for maintenance and service, refer to figure 8 and 9. Treated stormwater will drain thru outlet pipe in basin to the existing public storm drain system in South Main Street.

III.B. Recommended Permanent BMPs
The water quality bioretention basin is the best method to fulfill on-site treatment requirements and the recommended BMP solutions are shown in Figures 5, 6, and 7. These BMPs will provide a level of treatment that meets the C.3 requirements for the runoff generated by the project improvements. • DMA 1:
o Pavement totaling 24,443 square feet drains to basin via proposed SD system o Building Roofs totaling 42,239 square feet drains to basin via proposed SD system o Walkway totaling 9,113 square feet drains to basin via proposed SD system o Driveway totaling 3,900 square feet drains to basin via proposed SD system o Pervious totaling 19,624 square feet drains to basin via proposed SD system 419
Item # 17.

South Main Street Property Page 3 of 6 June 2022
• DMA 2:
o Self-Treating Areas consisting of the vegetated landscape buffers on the eastern edge of the project boundary, totaling 3,086 square feet.

DMA 1 will be treated by the bioretention basin located in the common area and will be sized to maximize treatment for tributary area. Runoff will infiltrate through a minimum of 18” of biotreatment soil (as identified in the SCVURPPP Handbook). The treatment soil and the planting material to be used within the bioretention treatment areas must have an infiltration rate of 5 inches per hour to meet the minimum infiltration criteria as described in the SCVURPPP bioretention design and sizing guidelines from appendix B. The mean annual precipitation for the proposed project site is determined from the SCVURPPP Appendix B, Figure B-1 Soil Texture and Mean Annual Precipitation Depths for the Santa Clara Basin. The design calculations were performed for Flow and Volume based treatment Measures per section IV. The combined runoff from streets, alleys, sidewalks, and walkways will be routed through gutter and storm drain system to the water quality bioretention basin.

IV. SOURCE CONTROL MEASURES
IV.A. Structural Control Measures
This project will create a few potential sources of stormwater pollutants.

Sources to be controlled include:
• On-site storm drain inlets
• Need for future indoor and structural pest control
• Interior Floor Drains
• Landscape/outdoor pesticide use
• Vehicle and equipment cleaning
• Vehicle/equipment repair and maintenance
• Fire sprinkler test water
IV.B. Operation Control Measures Table
All areas where these activities occur will drain to stormwater treatment facilities. To further reduce the potential for pollutants to enter runoff, permanent and operational BMPs will be implemented as described below.

Sources and Source Control BMPs
Potential Source Permanent BMPs Operational BMPs
On-Site Storm Drain
Inlets
Inlets that are accessible from
driveways will be marked with city
approval “No Dumping – Drains to
Creek” curb markers
Inlet markings will be inspected
annually and replaced or
renewed as needed.
420
Item # 17.

South Main Street Property Page 4 of 6 June 2022
Need for Future Indoor
and Structural Pest
Control
Standard building design minimizes
potential need for future pest control.

Buyers will receive integrated
pest management information.

Interior Floor Drains All interior floor drains shall be plumbed to the sanitary sewer system
and shall not connect to storm drains
Landscape/Outdoor
Pesticide Use
Any native trees, shrubs, and ground
cover on the site will be preserved to
the maximum extent possible.

Landscaping will be designed to
minimize required irrigation and
runoff, to promote surface infiltration,
and to minimize the use of fertilizers
and pesticides that can contribute to
storm water pollution. Where possible,
pest-resistant plants will be selected,
especially for locations adjacent to
hardscape. Plants will be selected
appropriate to site soils, slopes, climate,
sun, wind, rain, land use, air
movement, ecological consistency, and
plant interactions.

All open space landscaping is to
be maintained by a professional
landscaping contractor utilizing
integrated management methods.

Pesticides will only be applied by
appropriately licensed
contractors.

Vehicle and Equipment
Cleaning
Car washing on-site is
discouraged. Car washing will be
deferred to car wash outlets.

Vehicle/Equipment
Repair and Maintenance
Vehicle/equipment repair on-site
is prohibited.

Construction Related
Pollutants
Regular street sweeping to
control pollutants. Controlled
construction wash down areas.

Washwater containing any
cleaning agent or degreaser shall
be collected and discharged to
the sanitary sewer and shall not
be discharged to a storm drain.

V. PERMITTING AND CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUES
There are no known conflicts between the proposed stormwater control plan and City of Milpitas ordinances or policies. Any conflicts that are found will be resolved through the design review process or during subsequent permitting.
421
Item # 17.

South Main Street Property Page 5 of 6 June 2022
VI. BMP OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
VI.A. Recommended BMP Maintenance
Ownership and maintenance responsibility for the stormwater facility lies with the resident Homeowner’s Association. Operation and Maintenance Agreement and Plan will be recorded with to the recording of the Final Map.

The applicant will prepare and submit, for the City’s review, an acceptable Stormwater Control Operation and Maintenance Plan prior to completion of construction and will execute a Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement before sale, transfer, or permanent occupancy of the site. The applicant accepts responsibility for maintenance of stormwater management facilities until such responsibility is transferred to another entity.

The bioretention basin removes pollutants primarily by filtering runoff slowly through an active layer of soil. Routine maintenance is needed to ensure that flow is unobstructed, that erosion is prevented, and that soils are held together by plant roots and are biologically active. Typical routine maintenance consists of the following:
 Inspect inlets for channels, exposure of soils, or other evidence of erosion. Clear any obstructions and remove any accumulation of sediment. Examine rock or other material used as a splash pad and replenish if necessary.  Inspect outlets for erosion or plugging.
 Inspect side slopes for evidence of instability or erosion and correct as necessary.  Observe soil in the swale or planter for uniform percolation throughout. If portions of the swale or filter do not drain within 48 hours after the end of a storm, the soil should be tilled and replanted. Remove any debris or accumulations of sediment.  Examine the vegetation to ensure that it is healthy and dense enough to provide filtering and to protect soils from erosion. Replenish mulch as necessary, remove fallen leaves and debris, prune large shrubs or trees, and mow turf areas. Confirm that irrigation is adequate and not excessive. Replace dead plants and remove invasive vegetation.
 Abate any potential vectors by filling holes in the ground in and around the swale and by ensuring that there are no areas where water stands longer than 48 hours following a storm. If mosquito larvae are present and persistent, contact the Santa Clara County Vector Control District for information and advice. Mosquito larvicides should be applied only when absolutely necessary and then only by a licensed individual or contractor.
422
Item # 17.

South Main Street Property Page 6 of 6 June 2022
VII. CERTIFICATIONS
The selection, sizing, and preliminary design of stormwater treatment and other control measures in this plan meet the requirements of Regional Water Quality Control Board Order R2-2015-0049.

By
Print Name

423
Item # 17.

TABLE 1 - Site Data
Surface Type Area (ac) Percentages C
Impervious
Roof 0.63 27% 0.9
Streets/Parking/Walkway 0.83 35% 0.8
Total Impervious 1.46 62% 0.43
Pervious
Landscape 0.89 38% 0.1
Total Pervious 0.89 38% 0.1
Total 2.35 100% 0.78
Surface Type Area (ac) Percentages C
Impervious
Roof 0.97 41% 0.9
Streets/Parking 0.56 24% 0.8
Walkways 0.21 9% 0.8
Driveway Aprons 0.09 4% 0.8
Total Impervious 1.83 78% 0.83
Pervious
Landscape 0.52 22% 0.1
Total Pervious 0.52 22% 0.1
Total 2.35 100% 0.61

PROPOSED CONDITIONS

EXISTING CONDITIONS
424
Item # 17.

TABLE 2 - Proposed Drainage Area
Drainage
Management Area
(DMA)
Tributary Area
(SF)
Existing Imp.

Area
(Remaining)
(SF)
New/Replaced
Imp. Area
(SF)
Landscape
Area
(SF)
1 99,319 0 79,695 19,624
2 3,086 0 0 3,086
Total 102,405 0 79,695 22,710
425
Item # 17.

TABLE 3 - Estimated Runoff Coefficients During Small Storms (From SCVURPPP, June 2016)
426
Item # 17.

DRAWN BY: MM 29086.000 NTS

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE 1-VICINITY MAP

SOUTH MAIN STREET
JOB NO: DATE: 04-07-2022 REV. DATE: SCALE:

PARKWAY

SOUTH ABEL STREET HAMMOND WAY

CURTIS AVENUE SITE

SOUTH MAIN STREET

GREAT MALL
427
Item # 17.

DRAWN BY: MM 29086.000 1" = 60' MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 2 - AERIAL PHOTO SOUTH MAIN STREET JOB NO: DATE: 04-07-2022 REV. DATE: SCALE: 428 Item # 17.

FIGURE 3 429
Item # 17.

DRAWN BY: MM 29086.000 1" = 60'

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE 4 - EXISTING CONDITIONS

SOUTH MAIN STREET
JOB NO: DATE: 04-07-2022 REV. DATE: SCALE:

IMPERVIOUS AREA (1.46 AC)
PERVIOUS AREA (0.89 AC)

SITE BOUNDARY
LEGEND:

SOUTH MAIN STREET
430
Item # 17.

PRIVATE ALLEY D PRIVATE STREET A PRIVATE ALLEY C PRIVATE ALLEY E

PRIVATE STREET B PRIVATE STREET B
DRAWN BY: MM 29086.000 1" = 60'

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE 5 - PROPOSED CONDITIONS

SOUTH MAIN STREET
JOB NO: DATE: 06-30-2022 REV. DATE: SCALE:

IMPERVIOUS AREA (1.83 AC)
PERVIOUS AREA (0.52 AC)

SITE BOUNDARY
LEGEND:

SOUTH MAIN STREET
431
Item # 17.

PRIVATE STREET B PRIVATE ALLEY D PRIVATE STREET A PRIVATE ALLEY C PRIVATE ALLEY E

PRIVATE STREET B

C C DRAINAGE SHED BOUNDARY
DMA 1DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA NUMBER

TREATMENT AREA -

BIORETENTION BASIN
LEGEND:

IMPERVIOUS AREA - PAVEMENT

IMPERVIOUS AREA - BUILDING

INCLUDING PORCHES

IMPERVIOUS AREA - WALKWAY

AND DRIVEWAYS

SELF TREATING AREA
DRAWN BY: MM 29086.000 1" = 60'

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE 6 - STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN W/BMP SIZING

SOUTH MAIN STREET
JOB NO: DATE: 06-30-2022 REV. DATE: SCALE:

SOUTH MAIN STREET
NOTES:

1. BIORETENTION BASIN SIZING IS PER THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY URBAN RUNOFF POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM(SCVURPPP) C.3 STORMWATER HANDBOOK DATED JUNE 2016 APPENDIX B - BIORETENTION BASIN SIZING SECTION IV.B SIZING FOR FLOW AND VOLUME BASED TREATMENT MEASURES BASED ON UNIFORM INTENSITY APPROACH.

2. PER THE SCVURPPP C.3 DATA FORM, THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM HYDROMODIFICATION SINCE THE PROJECT IS LOCATED OUTSIDE THE HM APPLICABILITY MAP (GREEN AREA).
432
Item # 17.

FIGURE 6-5 OF THE SCVURPPP C.3 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT DATED JUNE 2016

BIORETENTION AREA

BIOTREATMENT SOIL REQUIREMENTS

PRIOR TO ORDERING THE BIOTREATMENT SOIL MIX

OR DELIVERY TO THE PROJECT SITE, CONTRACTOR

SHALL PROVIDE A BIOTREATMENT SOIL MIX

SPECIFICATION CHECKLIST, COMPLETED BY THE SOIL
MIX SUPPLIER AND CERTIFIED TESTING LAB.

DRAWN BY: MM 29086.000 NTS

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE 7 - BIORETENTION AREA

SOUTH MAIN STREET
JOB NO: DATE: 04-07-2022 REV. DATE: SCALE:
433
Item # 17.
© Copyright 2020 Zoeller® Co. All rights reserved.
502-778-2731 | 800-928-7867 | 3649 Cane Run Road | Louisville, KY 40211-1961 | zoellerpumps.com SECTION: 2.20.050
FM2791
0620
Supersedes
1019

TECHNICAL DATA SHEET

HIGH HEAD WASTE-MATE SERIES
Models 282/4282, 284/4284
Submersible Sewage Pumps
SK1414

SINGLE SEAL

DOUBLE SEAL
SK1023
5”
(127 mm)
6 5/16”
(160 mm)
8 9/16”
(217 mm)
5” (127 mm)
5” (127 mm)
6 1/4” (159 mm)
21 7/16”
(545 mm)
2" NPT
OR
3" NPT

FLANGE AVAILABLE
19-9/16”
(497 mm)
5”
(127 mm)
6-5/16”
(160 mm)
8-9/16”
(217 mm)
6-1/4” (159 mm)
5” (127 mm)
2" NPT
OR
3" NPT

FLANGE AVAILABLE

PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS
MOTOR
Horse Power 1/2 (282/4282) or 1 (284/4284)
Voltage 115 - 575
Phase 1 or 3 Ph
Hertz 60 Hz
RPM 1750
Type Permanent split capacitor or 3 Ph
Insulation Class B
Amps 1.4 - 10.3
PUMP
Operation Automatic or nonautomatic
Auto On/Off Points 16-1/2" (40.6 cm) / 5-1/4" (13 cm)
Discharge Size 2" or 3" NPT female, flanged vertical
Solids Handling 2" (50 mm) spherical solids
Cord Length 10' (3 m) automatic, 15' (5 m) nonautomatic Cord Type 1 Ph-UL listed 3-wire neoprene cord and plug
3 Ph-4 wire with no plug
Max. Head 35' (10.7 m)
Max. Flow Rate 179 GPM (678 LPM)
Max. Operating Temp. 130 °F (54 °C)
Cooling Oil filled
Motor Protection Auto reset thermal overload (1 Ph)

MATERIALS
Upper Bearing Ball bearing
Lower Bearing Ball bearing
Mechanical Seals Carbon and ceramic
Impeller Type Non-clogging vortex
Impeller Cast iron
Hardware Stainless steel
Motor Shaft 1117 carbon steel or 416 stainless steel*
Gasket Neoprene square ring and gasket
Product information presented
here reflects conditions at time
of publication. Consult factory
regarding discrepancies or
inconsistencies.

NOTE: The sizing of effluent systems normally requires variable level float(s) controls and properly sized basins to achieve required pumping cycles or dosing timers with nonautomatic pumps.

Tested to Standard UL778 and
Certified to CSA
Standard C22.2 No. 108
NOTE: See model comparison chart for specific details.
*Single seal models are built with a carbon steel motor shaft, and double seal models are built with a stainless steel motor shaft.

SELECTION GUIDE

1. Integral float-operated mechanical switch, no external control required.

2. For automatic use single piggyback variable level float switch or double piggyback variable level float switch. Refer to FM0477.

3. See FM1228 for correct model of simplex control panel.

4. See FM0712 for correct model of duplex control panel.

5. Variable level control switch 10-0743 used as a control activator, specify simplex (3) float or duplex (4) float system. Refer to FM0526. * no molded plug Additional cord lengths are available in 15' (5 m), 25' (8 m), 35' (11 m) and 50' (15 m). 009927
Model MODEL COMPARISON CERTIFICATIONS
Seal Mode Volts Ph Amps HP Hz Lbs Kg Simplex Duplex cCSAus M282 Single Auto 115 1 10.3 1/2 60 82 37 1 --- Y
N282/N4282 Single / Dbl Non 115 1 10.3 1/2 60 82 / 88 37 / 40 2 or 3 4 Y BN282 Single Auto 115 1 10.3 1/2 60 83 38 --- --- Y
D282 Single Auto 230 1 5.0 1/2 60 82 37 1 --- Y
E282/E4282 Single / Dbl Non 230 1 5.0 1/2 60 82 / 88 37 / 40 2 or 3 4 Y * H282 Single Auto 200 1 6.1 1/2 60 82 37 1 --- Y
* I282/I4282 Single / Dbl Non 200 1 6.1 1/2 60 82 / 88 37 / 40 3 4 Y * J282/J4282 Single / Dbl Non 200 3 3.6 1/2 60 82 / 88 37 / 40 3 4 Y * F282/F4282 Single / Dbl Non 230 3 3.0 1/2 60 82 / 88 37 / 40 3 4 Y BE282 Single Auto 230 1 5.0 1/2 60 83 38 --- --- Y
* CF282 Single Auto 230 3 3.0 1/2 60 82 37 1 --- N
* G282/G4282 Single / Dbl Non 460 3 1.7 1/2 60 82 / 88 37 / 40 3 4 Y * BA282/BA4282 Single / Dbl Non 575 3 1.4 1/2 60 82 / 88 37 / 40 3 4 Y D284 Single Auto 230 1 8.9 1 60 85 39 1 --- Y
E284/E4284 Single / Dbl Non 230 1 8.9 1 60 85 / 91 39 / 41 2 or 3 4 Y * H284 Single Auto 200 1 9.3 1 60 85 39 1 --- Y
* I284/I4284 Single / Dbl Non 200 1 9.3 1 60 85 / 91 39 / 41 3 4 Y * J284/J4284 Single / Dbl Non 200 3 5.5 1 60 85 / 91 39 / 41 3 4 Y * F284/F4284 Single / Dbl Non 230 3 5.0 1 60 85 / 91 39 / 41 3 4 Y BE284 Single Auto 230 1 8.9 1 60 85 39 --- --- Y
* CF284 Single Auto 230 3 5.0 1 60 85 39 1 --- N
* G284/G4284 Single / Dbl Non 460 3 2.6 1 60 85 / 91 39 / 41 3 4 Y * BA284/BA4284 Single / Dbl Non 575 3 2.2 1 60 85 / 91 39 / 41 3 4 Y All installation of controls, protection devices and wiring should be done by a qualified licensed electrician. All electrical and safety codes should be followed including the most recent National Electrical Code (NEC) and the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA). CAUTION

TOTAL DYNAMIC HEAD

FLOW PER MINUTE

PUMP PERFORMANCE CURVE
MODELS 282/4282/284/4284
282
284
4284
4282
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0 0
5 10
15 20
25 30
40 2
4 6
8 10
80 160 240 320 400 480 560 640 720 LITERS

GALLONS METERS FEET

FLOW PER MINUTE

TOTAL DYNAMIC HEAD
35 12
282/4282 284/4284
Gal. Liters
127 481
96 363
64 242
34 129
6 23
-- --
26 ft. (7.9m)
Feet
MODELS
Meters Gal. Liters
5 1.5 179 678
10 3.0 157 594
15 4.6 133 503
20 6.1 106 401
25 7.6 73 276
30 9.1 42 159
Shut-off Head 35 ft. (10.7m)

TOTAL DYNAMIC HEAD/FL

PER MINUTE

SEWAGE AND DEWATERING
ATTACHMENT F-1

14.5' HEAD 62.8 GPM
FIGURE 8
435
Item # 17.
1 © Copyright 2020 Zoeller® Co. All rights reserved.
1 SECTION: 2.70.020
FM0787
1120
Supersedes
0418
Product information presented
here reflects conditions at time
of publication. Consult factory
regarding discrepancies or
inconsistencies.

MAIL TO: P.O. BOX 16347 • Louisville, KY 40256-0347
SHIP TO: 3649 Cane Run Road • Louisville, KY 40211-1961 TEL: (502) 778-2731 • 1 (800) 928-PUMP • FAX: (502) 774-3624 Visit our website:
zoellerpumps.com
Z-RAIL® DISCONNECT SYSTEMS (1-1/4" - 3" NPT Discharge Pumps)

FEATURES
• Sewage, storm water and effluent pump systems
• For concrete, steel, or fiberglass tanks
• Allows for removal of pumps from ground level
• No confined space entry to service pump
• No pull rods or hold down rods
• Disconnect fitting with positive machine fit and o-ring seal provides a reliable seal. • Seals up to 160 psi, supports a weight up to 300 lbs. • Guide rails direct the pump to and from the disconnect fitting. Systems are supplied complete with disconnect fitting, guide plate, rail guide, and upper rail support bracket. • All systems use 3/4" schedule 40 pipe rails (not included). * Disconnect fitting, guide rail plate, rail guide and upper rail support bracket SS lifting bail for 160, 180, 280, 290, 810/815 and 818/819/820 series ** Lifting bails are required on these models to balance pump and rail plate evenly. Other models already include proper lifting device.

SK2486
SK2697
P/N 10-3560, 10-3561,
10-2316 & 10-3829
P/N 10-0789
2" Z-Rail® Disconnect
System

SPECIFICATIONS
Rail System Pump
Discharge
Rail System
Discharge Materials of Construction* Weight Type
39-0134 1-1/4" V 2" V powder coated, ductile iron 41 Z-Rail® 39-0135 1-1/4" V 2" V powder coated, ductile iron w/ SS upper rail support bracket 43 Z-Rail® 39-0136 1-1/4" V 2" V powder coated, ductile iron w/ brass for non-sparking 44 Z-Rail® 39-0143 1-1/4" V 2" V powder coated, ductile iron w/ SS upper rail support/ brass for non-sparking 44 Z-Rail® 39-0137 1-1/4" H 1-1/4" V powder coated, ductile iron (810/815 only) 41 Z-Rail® 39-0138 1-1/4" H 1-1/4" V powder coated, ductile iron w/ SS upper rail support bracket (810/815 only) 43 Z-Rail® 39-0131 1-1/2" V 2" V powder coated, ductile iron 41 Z-Rail® 39-0132 1-1/2" V 2" V powder coated, ductile iron w/ SS upper rail support bracket 43 Z-Rail® 39-0133 1-1/2" V 2" V powder coated, ductile iron w/ brass for non-sparking 44 Z-Rail® 39-0142 1-1/2" V 2" V powder coated, ductile iron w/ SS upper rail support/ brass for non-sparking 43 Z-Rail® 39-0128 2" V 2" V powder coated, ductile iron 42 Z-Rail® 39-0129 2" V 2" V powder coated, ductile iron w/ SS upper rail support bracket 43 Z-Rail® 39-0130 2" V 2" V powder coated, ductile iron w/ brass for non-sparking 45 Z-Rail® 39-0141 2" V 2" V powder coated, ductile iron w/ SS upper rail support/ brass for non-sparking 44 Z-Rail® 39-0122 3" V 3" V powder coated, ductile iron 47 Z-Rail® 39-0123 3" V 3" V powder coated, ductile iron w/ SS upper rail support bracket 47 Z-Rail® 39-0124 3" V 3" V powder coated, ductile iron / brass for non-sparking 47 Z-Rail® 39-0125 3" V 3" V powder coated, ductile iron w/ SS upper rail support/ brass for non-sparking 47 Z-Rail®

ACCESSORIES
Intermediate rail brackets are required for each 12’ of basin depth. 39-0139 intermediate rail bracket 1-1/4", 1-1/2" and 2" discharge - SS 4 Z-Rail® 39-0140 intermediate stabilizer, SS, for 3" system 4 Z-Rail® ** 10-3560 SS lifting bail for 50, 90 & 150 series 1 Z-Rail® ** 10-3561 SS lifting bail for 140 series 1 Z-Rail®
** 10-2316 SS lifting bail for 130, 260 & 270 series 1 Z-Rail® ** 10-3829 SS lifting bail for 803, 805 & 807 series 1 Z-Rail® ** 10-0789 SS lifting bail for 160, 180, 280, 290, 810/815 and 818/819/820 series (see above) 1 Z-Rail® ATTACHMENT F-2 FIGURE 9
436
Item # 17.
2 © Copyright 2020 Zoeller® Co. All rights reserved.

FLYGT GUIDE RAIL SYSTEM ADAPTER PLATE

EXISTING FLYGT RAIL FITTING
CHOKER CABLE *
15' MAX.

INTERMEDIATE

GUIDE RAIL

BRACKET

UPPER GUIDE RAIL BRACKET

LIFTING CABLE

MOUNTING PLATE
**
*
2" SCHEDULE 40
RAIL PIPE *

DISCHARGE ELBOW
FLANGED RAIL SYSTEMS (3" & 4") - FIELD ASSEMBLED
Guide rail system is for removal and installation of flanged, horizontal discharge pumps without getting in or removing fluid from pit.
* Not included
** One intermediate guide rail bracket is required for every 20 ft. for 3" system or
15 ft. for 4" system, of basin depth. See chart for part number.

DESIGN FEATURES:

Cast iron construction
Flange conforms to ANSI B16.10 fully flat. MSS SP-6
For use with all 400, 600 & 700 series pumps with 3" or 4" discharge and 2" rail pipe.

Flange gasket and stainless steel bolts included.

All installation of controls, protection devices and wiring should be done by a qualified licensed electrician. All electrical and safety codes should be followed including the most recent National Electrical Code (NEC) and the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA).

CAUTION

FLYGT GUIDE RAIL SYSTEM ADAPTERS
Adapter plates for retrofitting 3" & 4" horizontal ANSI flange discharge pumps to existing Flygt rail systems. *Not Included ZEPA0601
ZEPA0304

SPECIFICATIONS
Part
Number Description Pump Discharge
Guide
Rails*
39-0094 3" guide rail
system SS
3" horizontal
flange 2" SS or galv.
39-0154 4" guide rail
system SS bracket
4" horizontal
flange 2" SS or galv.
39-0095
3" guide rail
system SS nonsparking for Class
I Group C and /or
Group D Division
1 Installation
3" horizontal
flange 2" SS or galv.
39-0155
4" guide rail
system, nonsparking for class
I Group C and/or
Group D Division
1 Installation
4" horizontal
flange 2" SS or galv.
39-0096 Intermediate bracket for 3" rail systems
39-0014 Intermediate bracket for 4" rail systerms (SS)
Pump Discharge Part Number
3" 6039-0070
4" 6039-0048
ATTACHMENT F-2 ATTACHMENT F-2 FIGURE 8
437
Item # 17.
3 © Copyright 2020 Zoeller® Co. All rights reserved.

ZEPA0191A ZEPA0191B

PUMP LIFTING CABLES
Lifting Cables for Pump
Model: 611 - 661 and X611 - X661

PERMANENT
PERMANENT CABLE.

INCLUDED WITH

CHOKER CABLE
APPROX. 18"
10'
P/N Description Material Wt. Lbs.
6039-0026
6039-0027
Choker Cable
Choker Cable
Stainless Steel
Galvanized Steel
1 1
6039-0028
6039-0029
Permanent Cable 10’
Permanent Cable 10’
Stainless Steel
Galvanized Steel
4 4
6039-0030
6039-0031
Removable Cable 10’
Removable Cable 10’
Stainless Steel
Galvanized Steel
5 5
6039-0032 Permanent Cable 15’ Stainless Steel 6
6039-0061
6039-0062
Permanent Cable 25’
Permanent Cable 20’
Stainless Steel
Stainless Steel
8 7
10'
APPROX. 18"
CABLE.

REMOVABLE

REMOVABLE LIFTING

INCLUDED WITH

REMOVABLE LIFTING

INCLUDED WITH

CABLE CONNECTOR

CHOKER CABLE
CABLE. 3"
Additional lengths available. Consult Factory.
1/8" Stainless Steel Lifting Cable*
Part Number Length
39-0031 8'
39-0032 12'
39-0033 16'
39-0034 20'
39-0035 24' SKA1335
* Limited to 150 lbs.

SHUT-OFF VALVE

DISCONNECT

CHECK VALVE

VENT HOLE
Disconnect fitting: used for shallow systems where guide rails are not necessary. (pull rod not included)
COMPLETE SYSTEMS (1-1/2" & 2" Discharge)
Rail and disconnect system for effluent or sewage pumps:
used forremoval and reinstallation of pumps without getting in or removing fluid from the pit. (2 standoffs included)

DISCONNECT & RAIL SYSTEMS
• Economical: reduces time and cost of removing pump.
• Safety: keeps personnel out of pits and out of contact with contaminants. • Inspections made are fast and easy.
39-0053, 1-1/4" NPT
39-0001, 1-1/2" NPT
39-0002, 2 NPT
DISCONNECT ONLY (1-1/4", 1-1/2" & 2" Discharge)
Intermediate Guide Rail Bracket
One intermediate guide rail bracket is
required for every 10 feet of rail.

Use 39-0022 with 39-0003 & 39-0004.
39-0022
39-0003, 1-1/2" NPT
39-0004, 2" NPT
Pipe rails, pull rods and
intermediate brackets not included.

SK1853
SK731
SK1260
SK730
10' MAX.

SHUT-OFF VALVE

DISCONNECT

CHECK VALVE

GUIDE RAIL

BRACKET

VENTHOLE

INTERMEDIATE

SPECIFICATIONS
Part Number 39-0053 39-0001 39-0002 39-0003 39-0004
Pipe size 1-1/4" NPT 1-1/2" NPT 2" NPT 1-1/2" NPT 2" NPT Disconnect material brass brass brass brass brass
Disconnect weight 1.6 lbs. 2.0 lbs. 2.5 lbs. 10.1 lbs. 12 lbs.

Centerline of rails
from wall-in 30"
basin (minimum)
_____ _____ _____ 2.75" 2.75"
Travel to disengage 33/4" 3" 3-1/2" 3-3/8" 3-7/8"
Pressure rating 150 PSI 150 PSI 150 PSI 150 PSI 150 PSI Pull rods thread size 3/8" - 16
UNC
3/8" - 16
UNC
3/8" - 16
UNC
3/8" - 16
UNC
3/8" - 16
UNC
Support weight All pumps should be supported underneath with concrete blocks or basin floor.

Guide rail size &
material _____ _____ _____
3/4" IPS Pipe (S.S./Gal.)
(recommended) or PVC
Scd. 80
(optional). Supplied
by customer.

L
005264
Stainless Steel Pull Rods
3/8”-16 UNC
Part Number Length
39-0069 1'
39-0006 2-1/2'
39-0007 3-1/2'
39-0008 4-1/2'
39-0009 5-1/2'
39-0018 7'
39-0010 8'
4 ATTACHMENT F-2 FIGURE 8
439
Item # 17.

AGENDA ITEM: VIII-2

MILPITAS PLANNING COMMISSION

STAFF REPORT
February 22, 2023
APPLICATION: TRUE LIFE TOWNHOMES – 612 S MAIN ST – P-SD22-0007, P-UP22-0003, P-MT22-0003, P-DB22-0002, P-TR22-0014,
AND P-EA22-0005. A Site Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Vesting Tentative Map, Density Bonus Permit, Tree Removal Permit, and Environmental Assessment to allow
demolition of a multi-tenant commercial and office building, removal and replacement of 13 ordinance-size trees, and development of a multi-family residential project with 57 townhomes. The residential development will consist of nine multifamily residential buildings up to 37 feet in height (three stories), surface parking for up to with 123 vehicle parking stalls, and associated site improvements on a 2.35-acre site located in the Mixed Use (MXD) Zoning District at 612 South Main Street. The Project is located within the Midtown Specific Plan Area and submitted under California Senate Bill 330 (Housing Crisis Act of 2019).

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open and close the public hearing, consider and determine the Project is exempt from environmental review in accordance with CEQA, and
adopt Resolution No. 23-004, recommending that the City Council approve Site Development Permit No. SD22-0007,
Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0003, Vesting Tentative Map MT22-0003, Density Bonus Permit No. DB22-0002, Tree
Removal Permit No. TR22-0014 and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0005, subject to the Conditions of Approval.

PROJECT LOCATION:

Addresses and Assessor's
Parcel Number (APN): 612 South Main Street (086-25-027, 028) Area of City: Midtown Specific Plan
PEOPLE:

Project Applicant: Leah Beniston, Senior Vice President of Entitlements The True Life Companies, San Ramon, CA
Consultant(s): Architect: SDG Architects, Inc., Brentwood, CA Civil Engineer: MacKay & Somps, Pleasanton, CA
Landscape Architect: R3 Studios, Oakland, CA
Property Owner: TTLC Milpitas – S Main St, LLC, San Ramon, CA 440
Item # 17.

Page 2 of 27 ends

Milpitas City CouncilApril 4, 2023

Milpitas City Council
April 4, 2023