Ontario City Council
October 15, 2024

(a) Density Bonus — As part of the Development Plan application, the Applicant is requesting a density bonus for the Project. Pursuant to the Ontario Development Code Section 6.01.010 H (Residential Zoning Districts, Density Bonus and Other Incentives) and California Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonuses and Other Incentives), applicants can request additional density beyond what the local General Plan and Development Code permits. The State Density Bonus Law ( "SDBL") applies to multiple-family projects that provide on -site affordable housing and provides for: increased residential density over the maximum density that otherwise would be allowed under local law; incentives, concessions, and waivers; and certain specified maximum vehicular parking ratios.

T
he Project site is 3.1 acres and is currently developed with a church and ancillary buildings and improvements. The Applicant proposes to demolish these existing improvements and develop 70 residential units, together with associated parking and open space. Seven of the units (i.e., 10% of the total 70 units) are proposed to be offered for sale at levels affordable to moderate income households (i.e., households earning 80% to 120% of the area median family income). The Project's provision of 70 units, which results in a density of 22.6 dwelling units per acre, is consistent with the MDR (Medium Density Residential) Land use designation of TOP and is consistent with the MDR -25 (Medium Density Residential 18.1 to 25.0 DU/Acre) zoning district.

Although a density bonus is not needed, or proposed, to accommodate the proposed number of units, the Project 's provision of 10% of the total units at levels affordable to moderate income households would entitle the project to one incentive or concession (Gov. Code Section 65915 (d)(2)(A)), an unlimited number of waivers (Gov. Code Section 65915(e)(1)), and a reduced parking ratios (Gov. Code Section 65915(p)).

An incentive or concession is a reduction in development standards or modifications of zoning or architectural requirements, or any other regulatory incentive or concession proposed by the applicant, that results in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs. The Applicant has not identified or proposed any incentives or concessions, although they have reserved the right to do so during the development review process.

In addition to any incentives or concessions, an applicant may request a waiver of any development standard that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development at the density, or with the incentives or concessions, permitted by the SDBL (Gov. Code Section 65915(e)(1)). A development standard includes any site or construction condition including, but not limited to, a height limitation, a setback requirement, a floor area ratio, an onsite open-space requirement, a minimum lot area per unit requirement, or a parking ratio that applies to a residential development pursuant to any ordinance, general plan element, specific plan, charter, or other local condition, law, policy, resolution, or regulation (Gov. Code Section 65915(o)(2)).

The City can deny a waiver only in certain limited circumstances. The only reasons to deny a waiver are: (i) the waiver would have a specific, adverse impact on health or 865
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

safety and there is no feasible way to mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact; (ii) the waiver would have an adverse impact on any real property listed in the California Register of Historical Resources; or (iii) the waiver would be contrary to state or federal law (Gov Code Section 65915(e)(1)). Based on applicable State law, the A pplicant is proposing the following waivers from the development standards of the MDR-25 (Medium Density Residential – 18.1 to 25.0 DU/Acre) zoning district:

• Reduce the minimum street setback from 20 feet to 10 feet. o Absent this waiver the Project unit count would be reduced by 8 units. • Reduce the minimum front to front and minimum side to side building separation requirements from 30 feet and 15 feet to 19.5 and 10 feet, respectively. o Absent this waiver the Project unit count would be reduced by 12 units. • Reduce the minimum private open space requirement from 150 square feet to 134 square feet per unit.
o Absent this waiver the Project unit count would be reduced by 8 units. • Reduce the minimum common open space requirement from 250 square feet to 170 square feet per unit.
o Absent this waiver the Project unit count would be reduced by 8 units. • Reduce the major recreation facility requirements for recreation buildings, swimming pools, water play fountains, tennis courts, and childcare facilities and instead provide a barbeque seating area and activity lawn. o Absent this waiver the Project unit count would be reduced by 16 units. • Reduce the parking requirement from 192 to 131 parking spaces. o Absent this waiver the Project unit count would be reduced by 16 units.

Additionally, approval of the requested density bonus will require the Applicant to enter into an Affordable Housing Regulatory Agreement with the City. Conditions of Approval require the Applicant to enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City for 7 Moderate Income Affordable Units prior to the issuance of building permits. The term of the Affordable Housing Agreement is 55 years.

(b) S
ite Design/Building Layout — The Project proposes the construction of 12 detached buildings consisting of: 4-, 5-, 6-, and 8 -Plex buildings. Building B400 (Building Nos. 1, 5, 8, & 12) have 4 units each, Building B500 (Building Nos. 2 & 11) have 5 units each, Building B600 (Building Nos. 4 & 9) have 6 units each, Building B800 (Building Nos. 3 & 10) have 8 units each, and Building B810 (Building Nos. 6 & 7) have 8 units each for a total of 70 units at a density of 22.6 dwelling units per acre. The site design and building locations are depicted in Exhibit C : Site Plan. The proposed walk -up row town style buildings all have 3-story units with an overall height of 39 feet. The buildings are arranged with private garages oriented towards a 2 4-foot-wide drive aisle that circulates throughout the site.

The buildings are oriented with front entries facing West 5th Street Avenue, a common walkway, or an amenity.

T
he buildings facing West 5th Street are set back 10 feet from the street right-of-way on either side of the central driveway to the Project site. All other buildings are oriented either north/south or east/west and are equally divided on the site by a 2 -way 24-foot private 866
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

drive aisle. The centrally located recreation area is situated between 2 8 -Plex buildings, with guest parking located at each end. Buildings that are adjacent to the side property lines are setback 10 to 13 feet from the property line. Buildings that are adjacent to the rear property line are setback approximately 15 feet from the property line. Building entries that front onto the recreation area are setback a minimum of 10 feet and building separation is a minimum of 15 feet. Where front -to-front building orientation is provided, units are set back approximately 20 feet, and where side -to-side building orientation is provided, units are setback approximately 10 feet.

The units will provide 3- and 4-bedroom units with 2.5, 3, and 4 bathrooms, as depicted in Exhibit F: Floorplans. All units will have private balconies, approximately 50 square feet in area and a main level private open space area that is approximately 60 square feet in size. Private garages are located at the rear of the units on the ground floor and will have direct access to the unit. The primary living space is located on the second floor and are equipped with kitchen, dining , and living areas. Bedrooms are located on the upper floors.

(c) S
ite Access/Circulation — Project vehicular access is provided by a 24-foot- wide driveway located off West 5th Street. The driveway access leads to a central 24 - foot-wide two -way private drive aisle connecting to garages and off- street parking.

Pedestrian access to the site is taken from West 5th Street via a 5 -foot-wide sidewalk adjacent to the northwest corner of the Project boundary. Additionally, units fronting onto West 5 Street have direct sidewalk access to their individual units. The proposed on- site and public right-of-way improvements will assist towards creating walkable and safe areas for pedestrians to access the Project site.

(d) Pa rking — The Project has provided off- street parking pursuant to the parking standards specified in the State Density Bonus Law “ SDBL” (Gov. Code Section 65915(p)(1)). The SDBL identifies that parking requirements cannot exceed 1.5 parking spaces for 2- and 3- bedroom units and 2.5 parking spaces for 4 and more bedroom units.

The number of off -street parking spaces required for the Project is 131 parking spaces , and project proposes 163 parking spaces that exceeds the minimum parking requirement. Each unit will be provided with a 2-car garage ( 42 units with side -by-side parking and 28 units with tandem parking ). The off -street parking calculations for the Project are summarized in the Technical Appendix, Table 3: SDBL Parking Requirement Summary.

(e) A rchitecture — The architectural style proposed is a contemporary design with gabled roofs. The three -story buildings feature a stucco exterior finish with a fiber cement accent material at select locations on the ground level. Two color scheme s utilizing three colors are proposed to provide variety for both primary and accent finish colors. The Project illustrates the type of high-quality residential architecture promoted by the City's Development Code (see Exhibit C : Building Elevations). Project architecture is exemplified through the use of:

• A
rticulation in the building's roof line;
867
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

• Stucco with a light sand finish;
• Contrasting stucco color along the building base;
• Stucco foam trim;
• Accent fiber cement siding;
• Asphalt shingle roof;
• Metal and railings at all balconies along the second floor; • Decorative exterior lighting;
• Vinyl ground level privacy fencing;
• Decorative trims around doors and windows; and
• Incorporation of a color pallet appropriate to the proposed architecture.

(f) L andscaping — Pursuant to Ontario Development Code Sections 6.01.010 and 6.05, all areas of a multiple -family development project not covered by structures, drive aisles, off -street parking facilities, or hardscape shall be fully landscaped and provided with a permanent automatic irrigation system prior to Certificate of Occupancy issuance. Landscaping is provided for these unpaved areas, including the full length of the Project street frontages, along pedestrian walkways and recreation areas, and throughout the parking lot, for a total of 18,880 square feet (14.0 percent) of landscape coverage for the Project site. A variety of accent and shade trees in 15 -gallon, 24-inch, 36-inch, and 48 -inch box sizes, as well as 1 -gallon, 5 -gallon and 15 -gallon size shru bs, groundcovers, and vines, will be planted throughout the site. Decorative paving and lighting will be provided at entries, pedestrian walkways, and other key locations throughout the Project site (see Exhibit G: Landscape Plan).

(g) O pen Space/Amenities — The Development Code requires a total of 17,500 square feet of common open space (250 square feet per unit) and 10,500 square feet of private open space (150 square feet per unit) for a total open space requirement of 28,000 square feet (400 square feet per unit). The Applicant is requesting a waiver to reduce the total common open space to 11,900 square feet (170 square feet per unit) and private open space to 9,380 square feet (134 square feet per unit) for a total of 21,280 square feet of open space (304 square feet per unit) and is being provided in the form of:

• Bar
beque seating area centrally located;
• Activity lawn centrally located;
• Requested waiver of not providing any major amenity, as this will result in a loss of affordable housing units.

(h) Si gnage — All project signage is required to comply with sign regulations provided in Ontario Development Code Division 8.1. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the installation of any new on-site signage, the Applicant is required to submit Sign Plans for Planning Department review and approval.

(i) U tilities (drainage, sewer) — Public utilities (water and sewer) are available to serve the Project. Furthermore, the Applicant has submitted a Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan ( "PWQMP"), which establishes the Project 's compliance with 868
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

storm water discharge/water quality requirements. The PWQMP includes site design measures that capture runoff and pollutant transport by minimizing impervious surfaces and maximizes low impact development ( "LID") best management practices ( "BMPs"), such as retention and infiltration, biotreatment, and evapotranspiration. The PWQMP proposes the use of underground storm water retention chambers to receive, retain, and treat storm water runoff. Any overflow drainage will be conveyed to the public street by way of parkway drains and culverts.

NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING: A neighborhood meeting regarding the proposed Project was held at the Anthony Muñoz Community Center on Ju ly 17 , 2024. There were 18 persons in attendance, representing 16 of the surrounding properties. Questions from those in attendance focused on traffic and safety impacts along West 5th Street and how this project will add to congestion, SB 330 applicability and how it effects the project, clarification of the existing project zoning district, on-site parking – both how it’s designed and managed, the number of bedrooms per unit, poten tial impact to schools, and the price of market and moderate -income units. City staff responded to all questi ons presented at the community meeting and indicated that this report would provide additional information as needed.

Most of the questions presented by the community (i.e., SB 330, existing zoning, parking, and the number of bedrooms per unit) are addressed in the report above, impacts to schools are addressed through the payment of impact fees to the applicable school districts, and questions regarding the price of units was answered by the applicant. The remaining question focuse d on traffic and safety impacts along West 5th Street . In response, Staff contacted the Ontario Police Department ("OPD") and reviewed the Trip Generation and VMT [Vehicle Miles Traveled] Screening analysis prepared for the project and summarized below:

• The OPD evaluated the number of calls for the general area north and south of West 5 th Street between Benson Avenue and Mountain Avenue over the past year. Their analysis identified 712 calls for service received, with 303 related to traffic issues (i.e., illegal parking, abandoned vehicle, repossession, attempted grand theft, etc.). Additionally, during that same time the OPD issued 280 traffic/parking citations (i.e., parking in a fire lane, restricted area, expired registration, exceeding a 72 -hour limit, etc.). OPD identified that there were 2 reported vehicle accidents along this section of West 5th Street during the past 12 months.
• The Trip Generation and VMT Screening analysis determined that the proposed project is projected to generate 472 daily trips, with 28 AM and 36 PM peak hour trips. Per the City's Engineering Department Traffic Division, the projected number of trips generated by the Project site would not warrant conditioning the Project for any traffic related improvements.

Under applicable State law, the City must approve a project that complies with the objective standards of the general plan and zoning ordinance, unless the City is able to make written findings based on the preponderance of the evidence that there is an 869
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

impact to the public health and safety and this impact cannot be mitigated.

Government Code Section 65589.5(j) allows a City to disapprove a housing development project that would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety; and a "specific, adverse impact" means a significant quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. These standards would need to have been codified within the City's Development Code at the time the Preliminary Application was determined to have been submitted , and Staff is not aware of any identified specific, adverse impacts (i.e., active fault line setback requirements, flood zones, high fire hazard severity zones, etc.) as a result of the proposed Project that would allow the City to deny the Project based on the above des cribed State definition of an adverse impact to the public health or safety.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: T he subject application was advertised as a public hearing in at least one newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ontario (the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper). In addition, the Project site was posted with one large public notification sign and notices were mailed to all owners of real property located within a minimum of 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property that is the subject of the hearing, as shown on the records of the County Assessor.

C
ORRESPONDENCE: As of the preparation of this Agenda Report, Planning Department staff has not received any written or verbal communications from the owners or occupants of properties surrounding the Project site or from the public in general, regarding the subject application.

AGENCY/DEPARTMENT REVIEWS: Each City agency/department has been provided the opportunity to review and comment on the subject application and recommend conditions of approval to be imposed upon the application. At the time of the Resolution preparation, recommended conditions of approval were provided and are appended to the attached Resolutions as "Attachment A."

AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN (ALUCP) COMPLIANCE: The California State Aeronautics Act (Public Utilities Code Section 21670 et seq.) requires that an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan be prepared for all public use airports in the State; and requires that local land use plans and individual development proposals must be consistent with the policies set forth in the adopted Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.

On April 19, 2011, the City Council of the City of Ontario approved and adopted the ONT ALUCP, establishing the Airport Influence Area for Ontario International Airport, which encompasses lands within parts of San Bernardino, Riverside, and Los Angeles Cou nties, and limits future land uses and development within the Airport Influence Area, as they relate to noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight impacts of current and future airport activity. As the approving body for the Project, the Planning C ommission Board has reviewed and considered the facts and information contained in the Application and supporting documentation against the ONT ALUCP compatibility factors, including [1] Safety Criteria (ONT ALUCP Table 2 -2) and Safety Zones (ONT ALUCP Map 2 -2), 870
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

[2] Noise Criteria (ONT ALUCP Table 2-3) and Noise Impact Zones (ONT ALUCP Map 2-3), [3] Airspace protection Zones (ONT ALUCP Map 2-4), and [4] Overflight Notification Zones (ONT ALUCP Map 2 -5). As a result, the Planning Commission , therefore, finds and determines that the Project, when implemented in conjunction with the conditions of approval, will be consistent with the policies and criteria set forth within the ONT ALUCP.

COMPLIANCE WITH THE ONTARIO PLAN: The proposed P roject is consistent with the principles, goals and policies contained within the Vision, Governance, Policy Plan (general plan), and City Council Priorities components of The Ontario Plan ("TOP"). More specifically, the goals and policies of TOP that are furthered by the proposed project are as follows:

(1) C
ity Council Goals .

 Operate in a Businesslike Manner
 Focus Resources in Ontario's Commercial and Residential Neighborhoods  Invest in the City's Infrastructure (Water, Streets, Sewers, Parks, Storm Drains and Public Facilities)

(2) V ision .

Distinctive Development:

 Commercial and Residential Development

 Development quality that is broadly recognized as distinctive and not exclusively tied to the general suburban character typical of much of Southern California.

(3) G overnance.

Decision Making:

 Go al G1 : Sustained decision-making that consistently moves Ontario towards its Vision by using The Ontario Plan as a framework for assessing choices.

 G 1 -2 . Long-term Benefit . We require decisions to demonstrate and document how they add value to the community and support the Ontario Vision.

(4) Po
licy Plan (General Plan)

Land Use Element:

 G oal LU -1 Balance: A community that has a spectrum of housing types and price ranges that match the jobs in the City and that make it possible for people to live and work in Ontario and maintain a quality of life.

871
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

 LU-1.1 Strategic Growth. We concentrate growth in strategic locations that help create place and identity, maximize available and planned infrastructure, foster the development of transit, and support the expansion of the active and multimodal transportation networks throughout the City.

 L
U -1.3 Adequate Capacity . We require adequate infrastructure and services for all development.

 L U -1.6 Complete Community. We incorporate a variety of land uses and building types in our land use planning efforts that result in a complete community where residents at all stages of life, employers, workers, and visitors have a wide spectrum of choices of where they can live, work, shop and recreate within Ontario.

 G
oal LU -2 Compatibility : Compatibility between a wide range of uses and resultant urban patterns and forms.

 L U -2.6 Infrastructure Compatibility . We require infrastructure to be aesthetically pleasing and in context with the community character.

H
ousing Element:

 G oal H -2 Housing Supply & Diversity : Diversity of types of quality housing that are affordable to a range of household income levels, accommodate changing demographics, and support and reinforce the economic sustainability of Ontario.

 H
- 2.5 Housing Design . We require architectural excellence through adherence to City design guidelines, thoughtful site planning, environmentally sustainable practices, and other best practices.

C
ommunity Economics Element:

 G oal CE -1 Complete Community: A complete community that provides for all incomes and stages of life.

 CE-1 .6 Diversity of Housing . We collaborate with residents, housing providers, and the development community to provide housing opportunities for every stage of life; we plan for a variety of housing types and price points to encourage the development of housing supportive of our efforts to attract business in growing sectors of the community while being respectful of existing viable uses.

 G oal CE -2 Placemaking: A City of distinctive neighborhoods, districts, corridors, and centers where people choose to be.

 CE-2. 1 Development Projects . We require new development and redevelopment to create unique, high-quality places that add value to the community.

872
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

 CE-2.2 Development Review . We require those proposing new development and redevelopment to demonstrate how their projects will create appropriately unique, functional, and sustainable places that will compete well with their competition within the region.

 CE-2.
4 Protection of Investment . We require that new development and redevelopment protect existing investment by providing architecture and urban design of equal or greater quality.

 CE-2. 5 Private Maintenance. We require adequate maintenance, upkeep, and investment in private property because proper maintenance on private property protects property values.

S
afety Element:

 G oal S -1 Seismic & Geologic Hazards : Minimized risk of injury, loss of life, property damage, and economic and social disruption caused by earthquake-induced and other geologic hazards.

 S - 1.1 Implementation of Regulations and Standards. We require that all new habitable structures be designed in accordance with the most recent California Building Code adopted by the City, including provisions regarding lateral forces and grading.

C
ommunity Design Element:

 G oal CD -1 Image & Identity : A dynamic, progressive city containing distinct and complete places that foster a positive sense of identity and belonging among residents, visitors, and businesses.

 CD-1. 1 City Identity. We take actions that are consistent with the City being a leading urban center in Southern California while recognizing, enhancing, and preserving the character of our existing viable neighborhoods.

 CD-1. 3 Existing Neighborhoods. We require the existing character of viable residential and non-residential neighborhoods be preserved, protected, and enhanced.

 G oal CD -2 Design Quality : A high level of design quality resulting in neighborhoods, public spaces, parks, and streetscapes that are attractive, safe, functional, human-scale, and distinct.

 CD-2 .1 Quality Building Design and Architecture . We encourage all development projects to convey visual interest and character through:

• B
uilding volume, massing, and height to provide context -appropriate scale and proportion;
873
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

• A true architectural style which is carried out in plan, section, and elevation through all aspects of the building and site design and appropriate for its setting; and
• Exterior building materials that are articulated, high quality, durable, and appropriate for the architectural style.

 CD-2
.8 Safe Design . We incorporate defensible space design into new and existing developments to ensure the maximum safe travel and visibility on pathways, corridors, and open space and at building entrances and parking areas by avoiding physically and visually isolated spaces, maintaining visibility and accessibility, and using lighting.

 CD-2.
9 Landscape Design . We encourage durable, sustainable, and drought-tolerant landscaping materials and designs that enhance the aesthetics of structures, create and define public and private spaces, and provide shade and environmental benefits.

 CD-

2.10 Parking Areas. We require all development, including single-family residential, to minimize the visual impact of surface, structured, and garage parking areas visible from the public realm in an aesthetically pleasing, safe and environmentally sensitive manner. Examples include:

• Su
rface parking: Shade trees, pervious surfaces, urban run -off capture and infiltration, and pedestrian paths to guide users through the parking field; and • Garage parking: providing access to single -family residential garages through alley access, recessing garages from the frontage to emphasize front doors or active living spaces.

 CD-2.
11 Entry Statements . We encourage the inclusion of amenities, signage, and landscaping at the entry to neighborhoods, commercial centers, mixed use areas, industrial developments, and public places that reinforce them as uniquely identifiable places.

 G
oal CD -5 Protection of Investment : A sustained level of maintenance and improvement of properties, buildings, and infrastructure that protects the property values and encourages additional public and private investments.

 CD-5. 1 Maintenance of Buildings and Property . We require all public and privately-owned buildings and property (including trails and easements) to be properly and consistently maintained.

 CD-5. 2 Maintenance of Infrastructure . We require the continual maintenance of infrastructure.

H
OUSING ELEMENT COMPLIANCE: The project is consistent with the Housing Element of the Policy Plan (general plan) component of The Ontario Plan, as the project site is not 874
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

one of the properties in the Housing Element Sites contained in Tables B -1 and B -2 (Housing Element Sites Inventory) of the Housing Element Technical Report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: As the approving body for the Project, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the administrative record for the Project, including all written and oral evidence provided during the comment period. Based upon the facts and information contained in the administrative record, including all written and oral evidence presented to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission finds as follows:

(1) The Project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15332 ( Class 32, In -fill Development Projects) of the CEQA Guidelines, and meets all of the following conditions:

(a) The proposed Project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations. The proposed Project is located within the LDR (Low Density Residential) land use designation of the Policy Plan (general plan) Land Use Map; however, pursuant to SB 330 and Government Code Section 65941.1, the Project vested under the MDR -25 (Medium Density Residential —18.1 to 25.0 DUs/Acre) zoning district.

The proposed Project is consistent with all applicable Policy Plan policies, as well as with the requirements of the MDR -25 (Medium Density Residential —18.1 to 25.0 DUs/Acre) zoning district.

(b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. The Project is proposed within the established boundaries of the City of Ontario, on a project site totaling 3.1 - acres of land, which is surrounded by established development on all sides and consists of a mix of multiple-family and single-family residential land uses.

(c) The Project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species. The site is located in an urbanized area, is developed with an existing church, related parking, and ornamental landscaping. The entire Project site has been disturbed by previous development and does not contain any sensitive habitat, endangered, rare, or threatened species or habitat that could support sensitive species.

(d) Approval of the Project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. The residential development is similar to, and of no greater impact than other allowed uses and development projects within the MDR - 25 (Medium Density Residential—18.1 to 25.0 DUs/Acre) zoning district. The Project would not result in any significant impac ts through implementation of required state, regional, and local development and performance standards, and as demonstrated in th e Air Quality, GHG, Noise, Trip Generation and vehicle miles traveled ("VMT") analysis, and the Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan ("PWQMP") prepared for the Project.

875
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

(e) The site is adequately served by all required utilities and public services. All necessary wet and dry utilities are within the public street and are readily available for connection.

(2) The application of the categorical exemption is not barred by one of the exceptions set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

(3) The determination of CEQA exemption reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission.
876
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

TECHNICAL APPENDIX:

Table 1: Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses
Existing
Land Use
Policy Plan
Designation
Zoning
Designation
Site Church Low Density Residential LDR-5 (Low Density Residential — 2.1 to 5.0 Dus/Acre)
North
Single Family
Multiple Family
Residential
Low Density Residential and
Medium Density Residential
LDR-5 (Low Density Residential
— 2.1 to 5.0 Dus/Acre and
MDR-25 (Medium Density
Residential — 18.1 to 25.0
DUs/Acre)
South Single Family
Residential Low Density Residential LDR-5 (Low Density Residential — 2.1 to 5.0 Dus/Acre)
East Church Low Density Residential LDR-5 (Low Density Residential — 2.1 to 5.0 Dus/Acre)
West Church Low Density Residential LDR-5 (Low Density Residential — 2.1 to 5.0 Dus/Acre)

Table 2: General Site & Building Statistics
Item Required Min./Max. Provided (Ranges) Meets
Y/N
Project area (in acres): -- 3.1 N/A
Open space – common
and Private (in SF): 28,000 SF 21,280 SF Y*
Project area (in acres): 1.0 3.1 N/A
Maximum project density
(dwelling units/ac): 18.1 to 25.0 DU/AC 22.6 DU/AC Y**
Maximum height (in FT): 60 FT 39 FT Y
Open space – private: 150 sq ft 134 sq ft Y*
Total no. of dwelling units: 57 to 78 70 Y
* Identified waiver
** Based on SDBL

877
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Table 3: SDBL Parking Requirement Summary
Type of Use Units Parking Ratio
SDBL
Spaces
Required
Spaces
Provided
2 to 3 Bedroom Units 44 1.5 spaces / dwelling 66 88
4 and more Bedroom Units 26 2.5 spaces / dwelling 65 52 Guest N/A N/A 0 23
TOTAL 131 163

Table 4: Dwelling Unit Statistics:

Unit Type Number of
Units
Unit Size (in
SF)
No.

Bedrooms
No.

Bathrooms No. Stories
Plan 1 8 1,378 3 2.5 3
Plan 2 8 1,390 3 2.5 3
Plan 3 28 1,465 3 3 3
Plan 4 26 1,617 4 4 3
Total 70

878
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit A: PROJECT LOCATION MAP

879
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit B: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP

880
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit C: SITE PLAN

881
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit D: ELEVATIONS
Building B400, 4-Plex

882
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit D: ELEVATIONS
Building B400, 4-Plex

883
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit D: ELEVATIONS
Building B400, 4-Plex

884
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit D: ELEVATIONS
Building B500, 5-Plex

885
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit D: ELEVATIONS
Building B500, 5-Plex

886
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit D: ELEVATIONS
Building B600, 6-Plex

887
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit D: ELEVATIONS
Building B600, 6-Plex

888
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit D: ELEVATIONS
Building B800, 8-Plex

889
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit D: ELEVATIONS
Building B800, 8-Plex

890
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit D: ELEVATIONS
Building B810, 8-Plex

891
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit D: ELEVATIONS
Building B810, 8-Plex

892
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit E: COLOR BOARD

893
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit F: FLOOR PLAN
Building B400, 4-Plex

Building B500, 5-Plex

894
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit F: FLOOR PLAN
Building B600, 6-Plex

895
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit F: FLOOR PLAN
Building B800, 8-Plex

896
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit F: FLOOR PLAN
Building B810, 8-Plex

897
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit F: FLOOR PLAN

898
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit F : FLOOR PLAN

899
Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos. PMTT23-008 (TTM 20659) and PDEV23-037
August 27, 2024

Exhibit G: LANDSCAPE PLAN

900
Infill Development Project Exemption Report
Ontario Sunrise Project
Tentative Tract Map No. 20659

City of Ontario Planning Department
303 East B Street
Ontario, California 91764
Thomas Grahn, Senior Planner
[email protected]

Project Proponent

Warmington Residential, LLC
3090 Pullman Street
Costa Mesa, California 92626

CEQA Consultant

11801 Pierce Street, Ste. 200
Riverside, CA 92505

June 25, 2024
901
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Statutory Requirements

This report documents that the Project is eligible for a Class 32 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Categorical Exemption. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332, a Class 32 Categorical Exemption applies to projects characterized as in-fill development meeting the following conditions:
a. The Project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
b. The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres, substantially surrounded by urban uses. c. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.
d. Approval of the Project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
e. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

Additionally, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 stipulates that a Categorical Exemption cannot be approved if any of the following conditions apply:

(a) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place over time is significant.

(b) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.

(c) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR.

(d) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.

(e) Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. 902
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Substantial Evidence

CEQA requires that “substantial evidence” be provided to support the determination that the project qualifies for a Categorical Exemption. As defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.1 (b): “Substantial evidence shall include facts, reasonable assumptions predicated upon facts, and expert opinion supported by facts.”

This report relied in part on the following documents to support the determination that the Project qualifies for the Class 32 Infill Development Project exemption:

Appendix A Air Quality and GHG Technical Memorandum, KPC EHS Consultants, November 17, 2023
Appendix B Department of Parks And Recreation Primary Record, CRM Tech, November 17, 2023
Appendix C Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan
Appendix D Preliminary Hydrology Report, C& V Consulting, December 2023 Appendix E Noise Assessment, KPC EHS Consultants, December 15, 2023 Appendix F Trip Generation and VMT Memorandum, TJW Engineering Inc., August 29, 2023

Copies of these documents are available at the City of Ontario, Planning Department, and on the Planning Department’s webpage at: https://www.ontarioca.gov/Planning

This space intentionally left blank

903
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Project Proponent, Warmington Residential, proposes redeveloping the Sunrise Church facility at 1355 W. 5th Street and constructing 70 townhomes. The Project proposes four floorplans of three- and four-bedroom townhomes ranging from 1,378 to 1,617 square feet. Private open space of 138 square feet per home and common open space of 140 square feet per home is proposed in private patios, a shared barbecue seating area, and an activity lawn. (Refer to Figure 1, Site Plan).

The Project proposes selling seven of the 70 homes at levels affordable to moderate- income households. Under the State Density Bonus Law (SDBL), the project’s provision would entitle it to one incentive or concession (Gov. Code, § 65915(d)(2)(A)) and an unlimited number of waivers (id. § 65915(e)(1)).

The Project’s provision of 70 units, which results in a density of about 22.6 dwelling units per acre, is consistent with the Medium Density Residential (MDR) land use designation of the General Plan and would be consistent with the base zoning MDR-25 with development standard waivers per the State Density Bonus Law.

This space is intentionally left blank

904
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Figure 1. Site Location Map

The project site is located at 1355 West 5th Street and has a total land area of 3.06 acres (APN:1008-551-12-0000).
905
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Figure 2. Aerial View

906
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Figure 3. Site Plan

907
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

As noted above, under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332, a Class 32 Categorical Exemption applies to projects characterized as in-fill development meeting the following criteria:
a. The Project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
b. The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres, substantially surrounded by urban uses. c. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.
d. Approval of the Project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
e. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

The Project’s consistency with each of these criteria is discussed below.

Criterion (a) The Project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.

Consistency with General Plan Policies

The Medium Density Land Use Designation allows a density of 11.1 to 25 dwelling units per acre to accommodate single/multi-family attached and detached residences, including townhouses, stacked flats, courtyard homes, and small lot single-family subdivisions. Table 1, The Ontario Plan (TOP) Consistency Analysis, evaluates the Ontario Plan (General Plan) policies that are most relevant to the Project.
908
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Tab Table 1: The Ontario Plan (TOP) Consistency Analysis TOP Policies Consistency Analysis
Land Use Element
Policy LU-2.2 Buffers. We require new uses to provide
mitigation or buffers between existing uses where potential adverse impacts could occur. Additional mitigation is
required when new uses could negatively impact
environmental justice areas.

Consistent. The Project has a
comprehensive wall and fence
plan plus a landscaping plan to
provide adequate buffers from
adjacent land uses.

Policy LU-4.3 Infrastructure Timing. We require that the necessary infrastructure and services be in place prior to or concurrently with development.

Consistent. The Project will connect
to the existing infrastructure and
services adjacent to the site prior to
the issuance of occupancy permits
Housing Element
Policy H-2.5 Housing Design. We require architectural
excellence through adherence to City design guidelines, thoughtful site planning, environmentally sustainable
practices, and other best practices.

Consistent. As evidenced by the
plans submitted to the City, the
Project emphasizes high-quality
design and best practices
consistent with City design
standards.

Policy H-2.6 Infill Development. We support the
revitalization of neighborhoods through the construction of higher-density residential developments on underutilized residential and commercial sites.

Consistent. The Project site is
currently a church and proposes
constructing multi-family housing on
an infill site.

Policy H-3.2 Flexible Standards. We allow flexibility in the application of residential and mixed-use development
standards to gain benefits such as exceptional design
quality, economic advantages, sustainability, or other
benefits that would otherwise be unrealized.

Consistent. With the flexibility
allowed by the density bonus, the
Project can provide seven
affordable homes of exceptional
design quality to lower-income
homeowners who might not
otherwise have the opportunity to
live in a quality community.

Environmental Resources Element
Policy ER-1.6 Urban Run-off Quantity. We encourage the
use of low impact development strategies, including
green infrastructure, to intercept run-off, slow the
discharge rate, increase infiltration, and ultimately reduce discharge volumes to traditional storm drain systems.

Consistent. The drainage system is
designed to manage a 100-year
storm event to 80% of the existing
conditions. All tributary areas’
collected run-off will continue
downstream from the drainage
system following the City’s
requirements.
909
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

TOP Policies Consistency Analysis
Policy ER-1.7 Urban Run-off Quality. We require the control and management of urban run-off, consistent with
Regional Water Quality Control Board regulations.

Consistent. The grading of the
proposed development is designed
to route all on-site runoff via street
flow towards the modular wetland
system inlets located at low points
of the site. The proposed modular
wetland systems are designed to
treat low flows generated from the
proposed site per the water quality
management plan requirements.

Policy ER-1.8 Wastewater Management. We require the
management of wastewater discharge and collection
consistent with waste discharge requirements adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Consistent. The Project will connect
to the City’s sewer system and be
treated at the Regional Water
Recycling Plant No. 1 (RP-1)
located in the city of Ontario The
plant has undergone several
expansions to increase the design
hydraulic domestic sewage
(wastewater) treatment capacity
to 44 million gallons per day.

Policy ER-3.3 Building and Site Design. We require new
construction to incorporate energy efficient building and site design strategies, which could include appropriate solar orientation, maximum use of natural daylight, passive solar, and natural ventilation.

Consistent. The Project will
implement the latest Green Building
Code guidelines, which reduce
energy use and related greenhouse
gas emissions.

Community Economics Element
Policy CE-2.1 Development Projects. We require new
development and redevelopment to create unique, high-
quality places that add value to the community.

Consistent. As evidenced by the
plans submitted to the City, the
Project emphasizes high-quality
design and best practices
consistent with City design
standards.

Safety Element
Policy S-4.1 Noise Mitigation. We utilize the City’s Noise Ordinance, building, subdivision, and development codes to mitigate noise impacts.

Consistent. The City’s development
review process requires
compliance with the CBC and City
Noise Ordinance to minimize noise
impacts along the Euclid Avenue
corridor.

Policy S-5.1 Dust Control Measures. We require
implementing Best Management Practices for dust control at all excavation and grading projects.

Consistent. The Project will
implement TOP EIR Mitigation
Measures AQ 3-1 through AQ 3-3,
910
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

TOP Policies Consistency Analysis
which includes dust control
measures.

Community Design Element
Policy CD-2.1 Quality Building Design and Architecture.

We encourage all development projects to convey visual
interest and character through:

1. Building volume, massing, and height to provide
context-appropriate scale and proportion;

2. A true architectural style which is carried out in plan, section, and elevation through all aspects of the building and site design and appropriate for its setting; and

3. Exterior building materials that are articulated, high quality, durable, and appropriate for the architectural style.

Consistent. The Project has an
architectural design that conveys
interest and character with various
massing materials and colors.

Policy CD-2.9 Landscape Design. We encourage durable,
sustainable, and drought-tolerant landscaping materials and designs that enhance the aesthetics of structures,
create and define public and private spaces, and provide shade and environmental benefits.

Consistent. The Project has a
comprehensive Landscaping Plan
that will utilize native plants,
minimize water use, and be
attractive to project residents.

Policy CD-3.4 Context-Aware and Appropriate Design. We
require appropriate building and site design that
complements existing development, respects the intent
and identity of the Place Type, and provides appropriate transitions and connections between adjacent uses to
ensure compatibility of scale, maintain an appropriate
level of privacy for each use, and minimize potential
conflicts.

Consistent. The Project provides
appropriate transitions and
connections between adjacent
uses. The south-facing property
consists of single-family residential,
while the north-facing property
comprises higher-density
apartments. The proposed Project
consists of townhomes, creating an
appropriate connection.

Consistency with Zoning Regulations

Per the State Density Bonus Law, the Project would apply the standards and criteria of the MDR-25 zoning district, which provides for a density of 18.1 to 25.0 dwelling units per acre and is intended to implement the Medium Density Residential land use designation. (Development Code, § 5.01.005(A)(7).) The Project’s consistency with the Zoning Regulations is shown in Table 2, Summary of MDR-25 Development Standards with Density Bonus Applied.

911
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Table 2: Summary of MDR-25 Development Standards with Density Bonus Applied Development Standard Code Requirement Project
Density Range
Minimum and Maximum

18.1-25 22.6 dwelling
units per acre
Maximum Building Height by Number of Stories
Four Stories
Three Stories
60 ft.
50 ft.
41 ft
Building Setbacks – From Right-of-Way 20 ft. minimum 10 ft. minimum (1)
Setbacks
Interior Property Line
Buildings Adjacent to Residential
Buildings Adjacent to Non-Residential
50 ft. minimum
5 ft. minimum
5 feet minimum
Side to side 10’
Property line
setback 10’
Building Separation
Building to Building
Building to Drive Aisle or Parking Areas
Building to Carport
Patio to Patio
10 to 20 feet
5 ft. minimum
25 ft. minimum
15 ft. minimum
Building to
Building 10 ft to
20 ft
Minimum Number of Parking Spaces
Ratio for Residential Uses (1.2 spaces/bedroom)

189 parking spaces per
code
131 parking spaces per
State Density Bonus Law
131 total parking
spaces provided
per State Density
Bonus Law,
Residential Open Space and Common Amenities
Combined Minimum Ratio
Minimum Private Open Space Ratio
Minimum Common Amenity Ratio
400 sf/du combined
250 sf/du common
150 sf/du private
148 sf/du for
common
138 sf/du for
private
Allowed per
State Density
Bonus Law
Residential Storage Units 150 cubic feet/du
minimum
Ranges from 240
to 258 cubic
feet
Notes:
(1) Per density bonus allowed by state law.

912
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Finding: Based on the analysis above, the Project meets Criterion (a) for consistency with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.

Criterion (b): The proposed development occurs within city limits on a five-acre project site that is substantially surrounded by urban uses.

The Project site is within the boundaries of the City of Ontario and consists of 3.06 acres.

The Project site is surrounded by existing development as shown in Table 3, Surrounding Land Uses.

Table 3: Surrounding Land Uses
Location Existing
Land Uses
Project Site Church
North W. 5th Street followed by Multi-Family Residential South Single Family Residential
East Single Family Residential and a Church
West Single Family Residential followed by a Church
Source: Google Earth 2024

Finding: Based on the analysis above, the Project meets Criterion (b) because it occurs within city limits on a five-acre project site that is substantially surrounded by urban uses.

Criterion (c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.

The Project site contains 3 buildings. The main building, the church, is located along the northwest section of the site and is surrounded by an asphalt parking lot. The school and pantry building structures are located in the middle of the property, closer to the site's western boundary. They are bounded by asphalt to the north, east, and west and by grassy/undeveloped areas to the south. The deteriorated asphalt parking lot covers the east-southeast area of the property. A detached structure is located along the east side of the property; it appears to be used as a storage shed. Approximately 75 % of the Project site is covered by buildings and pavement, and the remaining 25% is covered by a lawn area with trees, which appears to be used as an outdoor gathering place for church activities, given its highly disturbed condition.

913
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Given the level of disturbance described above, no habitat supports endangered, rare, or threatened species. However, the Project contains several trees that could support nesting birds, particularly in the outdoor gathering area where several shade trees are located. The standard requirement to comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to avoid disturbing nesting birds during construction will help ensure that there will be no impacts on migratory birds.

Finding: Based on the analysis above, the Project meets Criterion (c) because it has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.

Criterion (d) Approval of the Project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air, or water quality.

Traffic Impact Analysis

Changes to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines were adopted in December 2018, which require all lead agencies to adopt Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as a replacement for automobile delay-based level of service (LOS) as the new measure for identifying transportation impacts for land use projects. This statewide mandate took effect July 1, 2020. Under CEQA, the term “traffic” now means “VMT”.

The City has developed its own “VMT Guidelines for CEQA Assessment of VMT Impacts” dated 2021. The City Guidelines state that certain projects that meet the following VMT screening criteria may be presumed to result in a less than significant transportation impact:
• Transit Priority Area Screening
• Low VMT Area Screening
• Project Type Screening
A land use project needs to meet only one of these screening criteria to have a less than significant impact as described below.

Transit Priority Screening. Projects located within a Transit Priority Area (i.e., within a half- mile of an existing “major transit stop.”1 or an existing stop along a “high-quality transit corridor.”2, may be presumed to have a less-than-significant VMT impact. The Project site is within a half-mile of a major transit stop or along a high-quality transit corridor (Euclid Avenue Bus Rapid Transit corridor). Therefore, the Transit Priority Screening criterion is met.

Low VMT Area Screening. The City Guidelines state that projects may be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact if located in an already low VMT generating traffic analysis zones (TAZs) that produce a VMT per service population (SP) that is 15%

1 Pub. Resources Code, § 21064.3 (“‘Major transit stop’ means a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.”). 2 Pub. Resources Code, § 21155 (“For purposes of this section, a high-quality transit corridor means a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.”). 914
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

below the County of San Bernardino Baseline VMT per SP. The Project site is located within a low VMT generating zone. Therefore, the low VMT area screening criterion is met.

Project Type Screening. The City Guidelines indicate that local-serving retail less than 50,000 square feet or other local serving essential services (e.g., daycare centers, public schools, medical/dental office buildings, etc.) are presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. The Project proposes residential uses. Therefore, the Project does not meet that portion of this criterion.

Finding: Based on the analysis above, the Project meets Criterion (d) for VMT because it is located within a Transit Priority Area and a Low VMT Area.

Noise Impact Analysis
Construction Noise
While the City establishes limits to the hours during which construction activity may occur, it does not identify specific noise level limits for construction noise levels. Therefore, to evaluate whether the Project will generate a substantial increase in the short-term noise levels at the offsite sensitive receptors (the nearby residences). Thus, this analysis relies upon the construction-related noise level threshold that limits noise exposure at 85 dBA, as an 8-hour time-weighted average (85 dBA – 8-hr TWA), recommended by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).

During the construction phase, the noise levels will be the highest during site preparation and grading as heavy equipment passes along the Project site boundaries. Equipment will not be stationary during the site preparation and grading phases, which produce the highest noise levels. Instead, equipment will move throughout the site at varying speeds and power levels and will not operate at the maximum noise level for the entire workday.

The potential noise impacts of the equipment operating simultaneously and in the same area at the center of the property to the closest residential uses the construction noise impacts would be 72.0 Leq dBA during site preparation and 72.5 Leq dBA during grading operations. These levels are all below the NIOSH REL of 85 dBA 8-hour TWA, as shown in Table 4, Worse Case Construction Noise Levels - Site Preparation & Grading (Center of Site to Nearest Receptor), and would be less than significant.

915
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Table 4: Worse Case Construction Noise Levels - Site Preparation & Grading (Center of Site to Nearest Receptor)
Phase Equipment Type Number
of
Units
Leq
dBA/unit
Leq dBA Total
Site Preparation Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 4 61.3 67.3
Site Preparation Rubber Tire Dozers 3 65.4 70.2
Site Preparation Total Noise Level 72.0
Grading Grader 1 68.8 68.8
Grading Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 3 61.3 66.1
Grading Rubber Tired Dozer 1 65.4 65.4
Grading Excavator 1 64.5 64.5
Grading Total Noise Level 72.5

Offsite Traffic Noise Impacts.

According to the Federal Highway Administration, Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance, the level of roadway traffic noise depends on three things: (1) the volume of the traffic, (2) the speed of the traffic, and (3) the number of trucks in the flow of the traffic. Generally, the loudness of traffic noise is increased by heavier traffic volumes, higher speeds, and more significant numbers of trucks.

According to Caltrans, the human ear can begin to detect sound level increases of 3 decibels(dB) in typical noisy environments3. A doubling of sound energy (e.g., doubling the volume of traffic on a highway) that would result in a 3-dBA increase in sound, would generally be barely detectable. Implementation of the Project will increase traffic volumes in the area, not to the extent that traffic volumes will be doubled, creating a +3dBAnoise increase or resulting in a perceivable noise increase. Therefore, the operational noise impacts would be less than significant. The roadway noise impacts from vehicular traffic were projected using a computer program that replicates the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model- FHWA- RD-77-108 (the “FHWA Model”). A vehicle’s noise level combines the noise produced by the engine, exhaust, and tires. As shown in Table 5, Noise Level Comparison Existing vs. Existing Plus Project, the Project does not increase existing ambient noise levels by more than 3 dBA.

3 Caltrans, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, April 2020, p.7-1. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot- media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/traffic-noise-protocol-april2020-a11y.pdf 916
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Table 5. Noise Level Comparison Existing vs. Existing Plus Project

Receptor
Existing Traffic
Noise Level
(dBA)
Existing Plus
Project
Noise Level
(dBA)
Noise
Level
Difference
(dBA)
Increase of
Exceeds 3
dBA?
Receptor 1 -
Project Site (south
side of W. 5th
Street)

59.8 60.0 0.2 No
Receptor 2 -
Anthony Munoz
Park (east of site)

60.7 61.0 0.3 No
Receptor 3 –
West Princeton
Street Cul de
Sac (south of
the site)

47.5 47.7

0.2 No
Source: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model- FHWA-RD-77-108, Appendix C.

Residential Activity

Typical operational sound levels generated by multi-family residential activities include everyday outdoor conversations, air conditioner units, and lawn care equipment with levels as indicated below:

▪ Normal conversation, air conditioner - 60 dBA
▪ Gas-powered lawnmowers and leaf blowers – 80 to 85 dBA.5

Noise generated from air conditioners and lawn care equipment is at different and consistent levels throughout the day. Lawn care is performed during daylight hours for short durations, and although air conditioners are operating both day and night, they are cycling on/off with windows closed conditions.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency identifies noise levels affecting health and welfare as exposure levels over 70 dBA over 24 hours. Noise levels for various levels are determined according to the use of the area. Levels of 45 dbA are associated with indoor residential areas, hospitals, and schools, whereas 55 dBA is identified for outdoor areas where typical residential human activity occurs. According to the USEPA, 55 dbA outdoors and 45 dbA indoors are identified as noise levels that permit spoken conversation and other activities such as sleeping, working, and recreation, which are part of the daily human condition.6 Levels exceeding 55 dbA in a residential setting are generally short in duration and insignificant in affecting residents' health and welfare. 917
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Finding: Based on the analysis above, the Project is consistent with criterion (d) relating to noise impacts because it does not increase the ambient noise levels above 3 dBA.

Air Quality Impact Analysis

Construction emissions were based on CalEEMOD Land Uses for a Residential Project consisting of 70 townhomes on 3.1 acres. Construction was estimated for a 20-day demolition period and a 279-day construction schedule, with default values used.

Default values were used for each construction phase, including demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, architectural coating, and defaults for off-road construction equipment. Peak emissions represent the highest value from the summer and winter modeling. SCAQMD significance thresholds were used for determining the project’s impacts. All construction emissions are below the SCAQMD thresholds.

Table 6: Summary of Peak Construction Emissions (No Mitigation)

Year/Season
Emissions (lbs/day)
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Construction 2024 (Winter) 3.73 36.1 34.0 0.05 9.49 5.47 Construction 2025 (Winter) 26.0 11.0 16.1 0.03 1.16 0.57 Construction 2024
(Summer)

1.47 11.7 17.5 0.03 1.22 0.63
Maximum Daily Emissions 26.0 36.1 34.0 0.05 9.49 5.47
SCAQMD Regional
Threshold
75 100 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 Datasheets. (Appendix A).

Operational Emissions:

Operations emissions include stationary (residence emissions), mobile (transportation emissions), and area (ongoing architectural coatings, consumer product use, landscaping maintenance emissions); default values were used. SCAQMD significance thresholds were used to determine the Project’s impacts. As shown in Table 7, Summary of Peak Operational Summer Emissions, and Table 8, Summary of Peak Operational Winter Emissions, all operations emissions are below the SCAQMD thresholds.

918
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Table 7: Summary of Peak Operational Summer Emissions
Source Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC/R
OG
NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Area Source 2.23 1.84 17.1 0.04 3.37 0.87
Energy Source 20.4 1.49 39.6 0.09 5.00 4.91
Mobile Source 0.02 0.33 0.14 <0.005 0.03 0.03
Total Maximum Daily
Emissions

22.6 3.66 56.8 0.13 8.40 5.81
SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 Datasheets. (Appendix A).

Table 8: Summary of Peak Operational Winter Emissions
Source Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC/R
OG
NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Mobile Source 2.06 1.97 14.5 0.04 3.37 0.87
Area Source 20.0 1.45 35.6 0.09 5.00 4.91
Energy Source 0.02 0.33 0.14 <0.005 0.03 0.03
Total Maximum Daily
Emissions

22.1 3.76 50.3 0.13 8.40 5.81
SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO

Source: CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 Datasheets. (Appendix A).

Finding: Based on the analysis above, the Project is consistent with criterion (d) for air quality impacts because it does not generate air pollutant emissions above SCAQMD thresholds.

Water Quality Impact Analysis

919
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

As required by Ontario Municipal Code Sec. 6-6.501. Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) “Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit, all qualifying land development/redevelopment projects shall submit and have approved a Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) to the City Engineer on a form provided by the City. The SWQMP shall identify all BMPs that will be incorporated into the project to control stormwater and non-stormwater pollutants during and after construction and shall be revised as necessary during the life of the project. The SWQMP submittal applies to construction projects covered by the NPDES General Construction Permit as well as construction projects of less than five (5) acres.” During construction, the Project Proponent would be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in compliance with the regional MS4 Permit and Statewide General Construction Permit and receive approval of these documents from the City before issuance of grading permits.

Post development, the grading of the proposed development is designed to route all on- site runoff via street flow towards the modular wetland system inlets located at low points of the site. The proposed modular wetland systems are designed to treat low flows generated from the proposed site per the Water Quality Management Plan requirements. as required by the Municipal Code section Sec. 6-6.501. Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SWQMP).

Finding: Based on the analysis above, the Project is consistent with criterion (d) relating to water quality.

Criterion (e) the site can adequately be served by all required utilities and public services.

Utility Impact Analysis

Adequate facilities exist to serve the Project site as described below:
▪ A 6-inch water line is located in W.th 5th Street adjacent to the Project site. ▪ An 8-inch sewer line is adjacent to the western property line, traversing southerly to W. Princeton Street.
▪ A storm drain is located southeast of the Project site at Princeton Street, and Benson Avenue serves the Project.
▪ Electricity and natural gas service are available to the site from W. 5th Street. ▪ Cable television facilities are available on W. 5th Street to serve the Project site.

Public Services Impact Analysis

920
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Fire protection
The Project site is in a developed area currently served by the Ontario Fire Department.

Ontario Fire Department #4 is the closest fire station, located at 1005 N Mountain Ave,

0.7 roadway miles from the Project site. Development of the Project would impact fire protection services by placing an additional demand on existing fire protection resources should its resources not be augmented. To offset the increased demand for fire protection services, the Project would be conditioned by the City to provide a minimum of fire safety and support fire suppression activities, including compliance with State and local fire codes, fire sprinklers, a fire hydrant system, paved access, and secondary access routes.

In addition, as required by the City’s Inter-Agency Project Review Request process, the Project plans were routed to the Fire Department for review and comment on the impacts of providing fire protection services. The Fire Department did not indicate that the Project would result in the need for new or physically altered fire facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Furthermore, the Municipal Code requires payment of the Development Impact Fee to assist the City in providing fire protection services. Payment of the Development Impact Fee would ensure that the Project provides fair share funds for the provision of additional public services, including fire protection services, which may be applied to fire facilities and equipment, to offset the incremental increase in the demand for fire protection services that would be created by the Project.

Police Protection
The site was previously developed and is in an area currently served by the Ontario Police Department, located 8.5 roadway miles away at 2500 S Archibald Avenue. The Project would increase the demand for police protection services. The Municipal Code requires payment of the Development Impact Fee to assist the City in providing public services, including police protection services44. Payment of the Development Impact Fee would ensure that the Project provides its fair share of funds for additional police protection services, which may be applied to 43 City of Jurupa Valley, Municipal Code Chapter

3.75, Development Impact Fee, June 10, 2020. Available at:
https://www.jurupavalley.org/168/Municipal-Code 44 Ibid. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration MA21272 Las Palmas 72 sheriff facilities and equipment to offset the incremental increase in the demand that would be created by the Project. In addition, as required by the City’s Inter-Agency Project Review Request process, the Project plans were routed to the Sheriff’s Department for review and comment on the impacts of providing police protection services. The Sheriff’s Department did not indicate that the 921
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Project would result in the need for new or physically altered sheriff facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives Schools
The Project proposes residential uses that are expected to generate school-aged students who require educational facilities or services. The Project site is located within the Ontario-Montclair Elementary School District and Chaffey Joint Union High School District. The nearest school is El Camino Elementary School, located 0.2 miles west of the Project site. The Project would be required to contribute fees to the Jurupa Unified School District by the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998 (Senate Bill 50). Under Senate Bill 50, payment of school impact
Parks
The site is in a developed area currently served by the City regarding parks and recreational services. The Project will provide onsite recreational amenities in the form of an approximately 8,000 sq ft open space area in the middle of the site. The Project proposes seventy new housing units that may increase the City's overall population by 230 persons (based on 3.29 persons per household4 and assuming that all residents will come from outside the city limits) and generate additional need for parkland. The payment of development impact fees will reduce any indirect Project impacts related to parks.

Other Public Facilities
The site is in a developed area. New public facilities are typically needed to serve the additional population new housing generates. The project will generate 70 new multi-family residential units, incrementally increasing the need for other public facilities in the future.

Due to its size, it is unlikely this Project will require the construction of any new public facilities or alteration of existing facilities or cause a decline in service levels, which could cause the need to construct new facilities.

Exceptions to Exemptions

State CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 outlines exceptions to the applicability of a Categorical Exemption, including cumulative impacts, significant effects due to unusual circumstances, scenic highways, hazardous waste sites, and historical resources.

For the reasons stated below, none of the exceptions that would prohibit granting an exemption apply to the Project.

4 California Department of Finance, Table 2: E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates, 1/1/2024. 922
Ontario Sunrise Residential Project
Infill Development Project Exemption Report

Location: The Project site is located on a particularly environmentally sensitive property.

The project site is developed with a church, and the adjacent properties are developed for residential and church use.

Cumulative Impact: The project's development is consistent with the general Plan and Zoning requirements. All impacts related to air quality, traffic, noise, water quality, and sensitive species either result in No Impact or a less than significant Impact with adherence to mandatory regulatory requirements. As such, the Project would not have cumulative impacts that are considerable.

Significant effect due to Unusual Circumstances: The Project is permitted use in the Medium-Density Land Use Designation zone. It is a residential use similar in character to the development in the area. No features distinguish it from others in the exempt class, such as its size or location.

Scenic Highways: The Project is not located within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway

Hazardous Waste Sites: The Project is not located on a site included on any list compiled according to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.

Historical Resources: According to the California Department of Parks and Recreation, the primary record was prepared for the property (Appendix B of this Addendum). The project site is developed with a church. The building site was constructed more than 50 years ago. However, there is no evidence that pastors identified in the history of the church or anyone else associated with the buildings have recognized historic significance. Additionally, the structure's architects, designers, or builders have yet to be identified as historically significant. The buildings are not known to represent important or notable examples of any style, type, period, region, or construction method. The buildings do not hold the potential for any critical data for studying local history. The existing church on the Project site is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historic Places.

CONCLUSION

The Project meets all criteria to qualify for the Infill Development Project exemption according to CEQA Guidelines §15332.
923
KPC EHS Consultants, LLC
Technical Memorandum

Kevin P. Carr, MS.

Date: November 17, 2023
Re: EPC 23-33 Ontario Sunrise Residential Project – Air Quality and GHG Technical Memorandum
______________________________________________________________________________

Purpose
The purpose of this memorandum is to document the results of the air quality (AQ) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions assessment as it relates to the potential environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed Residential Project on approximately 3.1 acres.

1.0 Project Location & Description

1.1 Project Location:

The proposed project site is located in the City of Ontario, San Bernardino County, California on the south side of West 5th Street west of the intersection with North Elderberry Avenue and east of the intersection with North Helen Avenue at 1355 West 5th Street also referred to as APN 1008- 551-12.

1.2 Description:

The Applicant is proposing 70 townhome residential units, utility infrastructure, internal roadways and sidewalks, utilities, open space, and landscaping on an approximately 3.1-acres.

2.0 Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Assessment

2.1 Determination of Significance:

The criteria used to determine the significance related to potential Project related air quality and greenhouse gas emission impacts is based on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Environmental Checklist, Appendix G Thresholds:

2.1.1 Air Quality / GHG Impacts:

Would the Project: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Would the Project: Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Would the Project: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Would the Project: Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Would the Project: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
924
Would the Project: Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

2.1.2 Air Quality Thresholds:

The City of Ontario uses the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds of significance. The SCAQMD was created by the state legislature to facilitate compliance with the federal Clean Air Act and to implement the state air quality program. Toward that end, SCAQMD develops regulations designed to achieve these public health standards by reducing emissions from business and industry. The Project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) which is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. Table 2.1-1 describes the regional significance thresholds established by the SCAQMD to meet national and state air quality standards.

Table 2.1-1: South Coast Air Quality Management District Regional Significance Thresholds Pollutant Emissions (Construction)
(pounds/day)
Emissions (Operational)
(pounds/day)
NOx 100 55
VOC 75 55
PM10 150 150
PM2.5 55 55
SOx 150 150
CO 550 550
Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Significance Thresholds, March 2015.

2.1.3 GHG Thresholds:

The City of Ontario adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2022 with development of a review process for determining the significance of a project’s GHG emissions impacts for CEQA purposes and includes the following:

(1) Utilizing Screening Tables in the CAP or
(2) Analysis of development projects through emissions calculations.

The City’s CAP requirements are covered in Section 3.3.

925

3.0 Environmental Impacts:

3.1 Construction Emissions:

Construction emissions for the Project were estimated by using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1.1.20, which is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies to quantify potential criteria pollutant emissions associated with both construction and operations emissions. CalEEMod is authorized for use to assess project emissions by the SCAQMD.

Construction emissions are summarized in Table 3.1-1.

Construction emissions were based on CalEEMod Land Uses for a Residential Project consisting of 70 townhomes on 3.1 acres. Construction was estimated for a 20-day demolition period and 279-day construction schedule, with default values used for the schedule. Default values were used for e ach construction phase including demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating as well as defaults for off-road construction equipment. Peak emissions represent the highest value from the summer and winter modeling.

SCAQMD significance thresholds were used for determining the project’s impacts. All construction emissions are below the SCAQMD thresholds.

Table 3.1-1 - Summary of Peak Construction Emissions (No Mitigation) Year/Season
Emissions (lbs/day)
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Construction 2024 (Winter) 3.73 36.1 34.0 0.05 9.49 5.47 Construction 2025 (Winter) 26.0 11.0 16.1 0.03 1.16 0.57 Construction 2024 (Summer) 1.47 11.7 17.5 0.03 1.22 0.63 Maximum Daily Emissions 26.0 36.1 34.0 0.05 9.49 5.47
SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 Datasheets. (Appendix A).

3.2 Operational Emissions:

Operational emissions for the Project were estimated by using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) which is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies to quantify potential criteria pollutant emissions associated with both construction and operations emissions. CalEEMod is authorized for use to assess project emissions by the SCAQMD. Operations emissions include stationary (residence emissions), mobile (transportation emissions), and area ( on-going architectural coatings, consumer product use, landscaping maintenance emissions), default values were used .

SCAQMD
significance thresholds were used for determining the project’s impacts Operation emissions are 926
summarized in Table 2.3-1 for Summer Emissions and Table 2.3-2 for Winter Emissions. All operations emissions are below the SCAQMD thresholds.

3.2.1 A REA SOURCE EMISSIONS
Architectural Coatings
Over a period of time the buildings that are part of this Project will be subject to emissions resulting from the evaporation of solvents contained in paints, varnishes, primers, and other surface coatings as part of Project maintenance. The emissions associated with architectural coatings were calculated using CalEEMod.

Consumer Products
Consumer products include, but are not limited to detergents, cleaning compounds, polishes, personal care products, and lawn and garden products. Many of these products contain organic compounds which when released in the atmosphere can react to form ozone and other photochemically reactive pollutants. The emissions associated with use of consumer products were calculated based on assumptions provided in CalEEMod. In the case of the commercial uses proposed by the Project, no substantive on-site use of consumer products is anticipated.

Landscape Maintenance Equipment
Landscape maintenance equipment would generate emissions from fuel combustion and evaporation of unburned fuel. Equipment in this category would include lawnmowers, shedders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chain saws, and hedge trimmers used to maintain the landscaping of the Project. The emissions associated with landscape maintenance equipment were calculated based on assumptions provided in CalEEMod.

3.2.2 E

NERGY SOURCE EMISSIONS
Combustion Emissions Associated with Natural Gas and Electricity Electricity and natural gas are used by almost every project. Criteria pollutant emissions are emitted through the generation of electricity and consumption of natural gas. However, because electrical generating facilities for the Project area are located either outside the region (state) or offset through the use of pollution credits (RECLAIM) for generation within the air basin, criteria pollutant emissions from offsite generation of electricity is generally excluded from the evaluation of significance and only natural gas use is considered. The emissions associated with natural gas use were calculated using CalEEMod.

3.2.3 M

OBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS
Vehicles
Project-related operational air quality impacts derive primarily from vehicle trips generated by the Project. CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1. 20 default values were used for the projects trip characteristics for operational truck and passenger vehicle totals.

927
Fugitive Dust Related to Vehicular Travel
Vehicles traveling on paved roads would be a source of fugitive emissions due to the generation of road dust inclusive of tire wear particulates. The emissions estimates for travel on paved roads were calculated using CalEEMod.

Table 3.2-1 - Summary of Peak Operational Summer Emissions

Source Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC/ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Area Source 2.23 1.84 17.1 0.04 3.37 0.87
Energy Source 20.4 1.49 39.6 0.09 5.00 4.91
Mobile Source 0.02 0.33 0.14 <0.005 0.03 0.03
Total Maximum Daily Emissions 22.6 3.66 56.8 0.13 8.40 5.81 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 Datasheets. (Appendix A).

Table 3.2-2 - Summary of Peak Operational Winter Emissions

Source Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC/ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Mobile Source 2.06 1.97 14.5 0.04 3.37 0.87
Area Source 20.0 1.45 35.6 0.09 5.00 4.91
Energy Source 0.02 0.33 0.14 <0.005 0.03 0.03
Total Maximum Daily Emissions 22.1 3.76 50.3 0.13 8.40 5.81 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Source: CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 Datasheets. (Appendix A).

928

3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG):

City of Ontario Climate Action Plan
The City of Ontario has adopted a Community Climate Action Plan (CAP) to demonstrate how the City will reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in compliance with AB32. To determine consistency with the CAP, the City of Ontario provided two (2) options either an analysis of the development project through emissions calculations using a model such as CalEEMod, or by using the CAP Screening Tables. Project’s that do not use the screen tables must follow the guidance contained in the CAP to demonstrate consistency with the City’s GHG reduction targets and reduction strategies adopted as part of the 2022 CAP.

The Screening Table are an aid in measuring the reduction of GHG emissions attributable to certain design and construction measures incorporated into development projects. The CAP establishes categories of GHG reduction measures to reduce GHG emissions generated by development projects. CAP GHG reduction measure categories for the Multi-Family Residential Development Screening Table include building electrification, green roofs, urban cooling, transit- oriented communities, increase transit ridership, vehicle electrification, active transportation, parking policy, electric construction equipment, waste, diversion, water conservation, and additional recommended measures. Within each category, individual sub-measures are assigned a point value under the city’s GHG Measures Screening Table. The point values are adjusted according to the intensity of GHG reduction measure. Those Projects that garner 100 points using the Screening Tables have provided the “fair share” contribution of reductions and are considered consistent with the GHG Plan. Those Projects that do not garner 100 points using the screening tables will need to provide additional analysis to determine the significance of GHG emissions. The following table provides a menu of performance standards/options related to GHG mitigation measures and design features that can be used to demonstrate consistency with the reduction measures and GHG reduction quantities in the GHG Plan.

As shown in Table 3.3-1 below, in many cases the Screening Table relies upon specific information related to the actual construction and operation of a project. Because the Project involves the subdivision of approximately 3.1 acres into 70 townhomes (multi-family residential units), and the future builder of the homes is unknown, it is speculative at this time to determine the ultimate number of points that can be accrued absent building plans for the development.

Although the construction of the Project is likely to achieve 100 points, it cannot be quantified at this time. Therefore, Mitigation Measure (MM) GHG-1 is required to ensure compliance with the 2022 CAP.
929

Table 3.3-1. Screening Table for Implementing GHG Performance Standards for Multi-family Residential Development 2030
Description Feature Project Points
Reduction Measure 1: Building Electrification
Replacement of
gas appliance with
efficient electric
appliance (select
all that apply)
Electric space heater 6
Electric water heater 8
Electric stove 5
Electric dryer 1
Additional electric
appliance
measures, if
applicable (select
all that apply)
Electric pool heater (if applicable) 1
Electric spa heater (if applicable) 1
Lack of natural gas
infrastructure
Project site does not have any natural gas
infrastructure.
10 Total for measure 20
Reduction Measure 2: Green Roofs
Installation of a
roof with a planted
layer of vegetation
over a waterproof
surface for multi-
family residential
buildings
Medium Green Roof – Total vegetated area
makes up 25% or more of combined multi-
family residential unit area (in square feet).
3 Total for measure 3
Reduction Measure 3: Urban Cooling
On-site tree
planting (select
one option)2
1 tree per each required on-site vehicle parking
space.
6 2 trees per each required on-site vehicle
parking space.
12 3 trees per each required on-site vehicle
parking space.
18 Total for measure 6
2 This strategy specifies the ratio of additional trees per required vehicle parking spaces . Based upon total on-site vehicle parking spaces required per the City of Ontario Development Code for the project, the Applicant will calculate the number of trees required to meet this measure and obtain points. The landscape plan will show onsite trees and the tree matrix shall identify all trees associated with the Urban Cooling Measure compliance. The City code requires trees onsite and within paved areas to reduce the associated heat build-up from development. The Landscape Planning Division will consider these trees in the calculation to be counted toward the Urban Cooling Measure.
930
City of Ontario

Description Feature Project Points
Reduction Measure 4: Transit Oriented Communities (TOCs) New development
is located in a
transit-oriented
community (TOC)
Development site is located within ½ mile radius
of one or more of the following: a Bus Rapid
Transit (BRT) stop, bus transit center, light rail
station, the intersection of two or more major
bus routes with a frequency of service interval
of 15 minutes or less during the morning and
afternoon peak commute periods, and/or High-
Quality Transit Corridor defined as a corridor
with fixed route bus service with service intervals
no longer than 15 minutes during peak
commute hours.3
10 Total for measure 10
Reduction Measure 5: Increase Transit Ridership
Provision of free
transit passes for
onsite residents or
tenants for a
period of 5 years
after completion of
construction
4 (select one option)
One 50% discounted annual transit pass for
every two parking spaces, or one per
residential unit, whichever is greater.
2 One 100% discounted (free) annual transit pass
for every two parking spaces or one per
residential unit, whichever is greater.
6 One 100% discounted (free) annual transit pass
per parking space or one per residential
bedroom, whichever is greater.
12 Total for measure 12
Reduction Measure 6: Vehicle Electrification5
Installation of EV
charging stations
for resident vehicle
parking spaces
(select one option)
Installation of Level 2 EV or higher charging
stations at a rate of 5-10% of required vehicle
parking spaces.
10 Installation of Level 2 EV or higher charging
stations at a rate of 11-29% of required vehicle
parking spaces.
20 Installation of Level 2 EV or higher charging
stations at a rate of 30% or more of required
vehicle parking spaces.
30 Total for measure 20
3 A project shall be considered to be within one-half mile of a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor if all parcels within the project have no more than 25 percent of their area farther than one-half mile from the stop or corridor and if not more than 10 percent of the residential units or 100 units, whichever is less, in the project are farther than one-half mile from the stop or corridor.
4 Provision for annual transit passes to be incorporated into CC&R’s/HOA bylaws, as appropriate . 5 EV charging station levels are defined in the California Green Building Standards or CALGreen Code, accessed at https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/CALGreen. Charging stations also refer to charging ports.
931
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Screening Tables

Description Feature Project Points
Reduction Measure 7: Active Transportation
Installation or
improvement of
bicycle facilities
(select all that
apply)
Bicycle parking facilities with 1:1 ratio of bicycle
parking to guest vehicle parking space.
3 Construct or improve a single bicycle lane
facility (only Class I, II, or IV) that 1) connects to
a larger existing bikeway network or 2) closes
an existing bikeway network gap that is at least

0.5 miles long.
6 Installation or
improvement of
pedestrian facilities
(select one option)
Two or three pedestrian infrastructure
improvements to street design on private
streets, including, but not limited to curb
extensions, raised crosswalks, speed
humps/bumps, street tree plantings in parkways
or street medians, and elevated pavement
markings.
3 Four or more pedestrian infrastructure
improvements to street design, including, but
not limited to curb extensions, raised crosswalks,
speed humps/bumps, street tree plantings in
parkways or street medians, and elevated
pavement markings.
6 Total for measure 15
Reduction Measure 8: Parking Policy
Require that some
or all of resident
vehicle parking
spaces be
purchased at an
additional cost.

This does not
include guest
vehicle parking
spaces (select one
option) 6
Unbundle, or separate, half (50%) of parking
costs of a residential project from property
costs, requiring those who wish to purchase an
additional parking space to do so at an
additional cost.
1 Unbundle, or separate, 100% of residential
project’s parking costs from property costs,
requiring those who wish to purchase parking
spaces to do so at an additional cost.
2 Total for measure 2
Reduction Measure 9: Electric construction equipment7
Use zero emission
or electric
construction
equipment (select
one option)
One-third (33%) of construction equipment
used for construction (during building phase,
not including grading phase), measured by
number of hours of operation, is zero emission
equipment.
4 6 Provision for unbundled parking to be incorporated into CC&R’s bylaws or separate parking agreement, as appropriate.
7 Electric construction equipment includes electric compact excavators, electric motors, electric generators, and mobile charging equipment.
932
City of Ontario

Description Feature Project Points
Half (50%) of construction equipment used for
construction (during the building phase, not
including the grading phase), measured by the
number of hours of operation, is zero emission
equipment.
8 Two-thirds (66%) or more of construction
equipment used for construction (during the
building phase, not including the grading
phase), measured by number of hours of
operation, is zero emission equipment.
12 Total for measure 12
Reduction Measure 10: Waste diversion
Design and plan
multi-family
housing
developments to
include onsite
areas for municipal
compost/green
waste and
recycling
bins/containers
Site design allocates sufficient space for
storage and collection of green waste, organic
waste, and recyclables.
33 Total for measure 33
Reduction Measure 11: Water conservation
Implement indoor
water efficiency
measures (select
all that apply)
Implement water efficient showerheads and
faucets.
1 Install on-demand water circulators on all
showers/baths8.
2 Incorporate
outdoor water
efficiency
measures
Design and plan outdoor landscapes planted
with drought-tolerant, low maintenance plants
with a 1) drip irrigation system or 2) sprinkler
irrigation system with a weather-based irrigation
controller.
4 Total for measure 6
Multi-family Total for all measures 174
Multi-family Project Points Subtotal
Additional Recommended Measures
AR-1: Meet
CalGreen
CalGreen Tier 1 compliance. 5
CalGreen Tier 2 compliance. 10
8 According to CALGreen, a hot water recirculation system is one which includes “a thermostat that will automatically shut off the recirculation pump when the water temperature reaches a preset level at the point of use.”
92 933
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Screening Tables

Description Feature Project Points
voluntary tiers
(select one option)
AR-2: Generate
energy from on-site
solar PV (4 stories
and higher
buildings only,
select one option)
Solar PV that generates 30%-49% of residential
energy needs on multifamily residential
buildings that are 4 stories in height or taller.
5 Solar PV that generates 50%-79% of residential
energy needs on multifamily residential
buildings that are 4 stories in height or taller.
10 Solar PV that generates 80% or more of
residential energy needs on multifamily
residential buildings that are 4 stories in height
or taller.
15 AR-3: Energy
Storage
If the building is 3 stories in height or less, install battery energy storage systems that meet the
same performance standards as an energy
storage system that would be required by the
building code in a comparable building 4
stories in height or taller.
5 AR-4: Recycled
Water
Use recycled water for at least 80% of outdoor
water needs.
4 AR-5: Reflective
Paving
Use high-reflectivity pavement for all
hardscaped areas, including parking areas,
walking paths, and patios.
4 AR-6: Building
Orientation
Orient the building along a north-south
alignment.
3 AR-7: Building
Shading
Shade at least 90% of south-facing glazing by
vegetation or overhangs at noon on June 21.
2 AR-8: Building
Daylight
Provide daylighting in all rooms. 1
Total additional recommended measures 11
Multi-family Project Points Subtotal
Total Multi-family Points Possible 218
MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT POINTS TOTAL 103
934
Mi3ga3on Measures

GHG-1 GHG Emissions Screening Table Review Measures: The project shall implement the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Screening Table Reduction Measures (GHG Screening Table) providing for a minimum 100 points per the City’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Screening Table Multi-family Residential Development 2030 form.

The City shall verify incorporation of the identified GHG Screening Table Reduction Measures or equivalent replacement measures within the Project building plans and site design prior to the issuance of building permit(s) and/or site plans as applicable.

3.4 Objectionable Odors:

According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The Project does not propose any of the above-described uses. Potential odor sources associated with the Project may result from construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities and the temporary storage of typical solid waste (refuse) associated with the proposed Project’s long-term operational uses.

The construction odor emissions would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction and is thus considered less than significant. It is expected that Project-generated refuse would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City’s solid waste regulations.

Additionally, the Project is required to comply with the provisions of SCAQMD Rule 402 “Nuisance” which was established to reduce odorous emissions into the atmosphere. Therefore, odors associated with the proposed Project construction and operations would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

3.5 Sensitive Receptors:

Some people, such as individuals with respiratory illnesses or impaired lung function because of other illnesses, persons over 65 years of age, and children under 14, are particularly sensitive to certain pollutants. Facilities and structures where these sensitive people live or spend considerable amounts of time are known as sensitive receptors. For the purposes of a CEQA analysis, the SCAQMD considers a sensitive receptor to be a receptor such as the following are land uses (sensitive sites) where sensitive receptors are typically located:
• Schools, playgrounds, and childcare centers
• Long-term health care facilities
• Rehabilitation centers
• Convalescent centers
• Hospitals
• Retirement homes
• Residences
935
Sensitive receptor locations are generally identified as facilities where it is possible that an individual could remain for 24 hours. Commercial and industrial facilities are not included in the definition of sensitive receptor because employees typically are present for shorter periods of time, such as eight hours.

The closest sensitive receptors to the Project site are include residential to the north, northeast, and south, as indicated in Table 3.5-1

Table 3.5-1 – Receptor Locations
Receptor Distance from Project
Site Boundary (feet)
Distance from Project
Construction Center (feet)
Church of God (west adjacent property) 40 225
Church of the Nazarene (east adjacent
property)
40 200
Residential (south closet structure) 70 280
5th Street followed by Multi-family
Residential (north)
85 305
Source: Google Earth Pro, October 13, 2023
The properties adjacent to the Project site include 5th Street followed by multi-family residential to the north, Church of God to the west, Church of the Nazarene to the east, and single-family residential to the south. The Project would be compatible with surrounding land uses and would not adversely impact sensitive receptors during operations.

Whenever a project would require use of chemical compounds that have been identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401; placed on CARB’s air toxics list pursuant to Assembly Bill 1807 (AB 1807), Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act (1983); or placed on the EPA’s National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, a health risk assessment (HRA) is required by the SCAQMD. Residential, commercial, and office uses do not use substantial quantities of TACs.

Guidance for conducting a Health risk Assessments (HRA), typically includes the following project types proposed for sites within the specified distance to an existing or planned (zoned) sensitive receptor land use must be evaluated:
• Any industrial project within 1,000 feet;
• A distribution center (40 or more trucks per day) within 1,000 feet; • A major transportation project (50,000 or more vehicles per day) within 1,000 feet; • A dry cleaner using perchloroethylene within 500 feet; and, • A gasoline dispensing facility within 300 feet.

The Project is a residential development and does not produce toxic air emissions such as those generated by industrial manufacturing uses or uses that generate heavy-duty diesel truck emissions.

936

3.6 Localized Air Quality Impacts

The South Coast Air Quality Management District has established Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) which are used to determine whether a project may generate significant adverse localized air quality impacts for both construction and on-site operations. For the purposes of a CEQA analysis, the SCAQMD considers a sensitive receptor to be to be a receptor such as residential, hospital, convalescent facility where it is possible that an individual could remain for 24 hours If the calculated emissions for the proposed construction or operational activities are below the LST emission thresholds then the proposed construction or operation activity is not significant for air quality. (SCAQMD) The nearest property where sensitive receptors are regularly present are residential homes located approximately 70 feet from the Project southern site boundary, 280 feet from the center of the site and .

The Project site is located in Source Receptor Area (SRA) #33 – Southwest San Bernardino Valley.

The Project site is approximately 3.1 acres, the LST for 5-acres was used as during grading multiple equipment passes will be required which would result in the daily acreage being disturbed greater than the 3.1 site acres. The closest receptor value available in the screening table of 25 meters ( 82 feet) was used for determining the maximum daily LSTs.

Table 3.6-1 identifies the maximum daily localized emissions thresholds that are applicable to the Project.

Table 3.6-1: Maximum Daily Localized Emissions Thresholds Pollutant Construction Operations
Localized Thresholds (pounds per day)
NOX 270 270
CO 2193 2193
PM10 16 4
PM2.5 9 2
Source: Localized Thresholds presented in this table are based on the SCAQMD Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, July 2008.

Localized Construction Emissions
As shown in Table 3.6-2, using the CalEEMod Mitigated Construction Emissions which incorporates Rule 403 dust control measures, the localized construction emissions would not exceed the app licable SCAQMD LSTs for emissions for construction activities with Rule 403 measures applied to the Project, including watering site 2 times per day, reducing speed on site, and street sweeping. Thus, a less than significant impact would occur for Project-related construction-source localized emissions and no mitigation is required.

937
Table 3.6-2: Summary of Localized Significance Construction Emissions

Grading Emissions
Emissions (lbs/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily Emissions 36.1 34.0 9.49 5.47
SCAQMD Localized Threshold 270 2193 16 9
Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO
Source: Air Quality Assessment, (Appendix A).

Localized On-Site Operational Emissions
According to the SCAQMD LST methodology, LSTs would apply to the operational phase of a project, if the project includes substantive stationary sources of emissions, or uses that attract mobile sources that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site (e.g., industrial uses, transfer facilities, and warehouses). The Project does not propose or require uses that would constitute substantive stationary sources of emissions; or uses that attract mobile emissions sources that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site. Accordingly, no operational- source emissions LST analysis is required.

3.7 CO “Hotspot” Analysis:

As discussed below, the Project would not result in potentially adverse CO concentrations or “hotspots.” Further, detailed modeling of Project-specific carbon monoxide (CO) “hot spots” is not needed to reach this conclusion.

The SSAB is designated attainment under the CAAQS and NAAQS for CO. An adverse CO hotspot would occur if an exceedance of the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm were to occur.

It has long been recognized that CO hotspots are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at congested intersections. Due to changing regulations vehicle emissions standards have become increasingly stringent in the last twenty years. Currently, the allowable CO emissions standard in California is a maximum of 3.4 grams/mile for passenger cars (there are requirements for certain vehicles that are more stringent). With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of increasingly sophisticated and efficient emissions control technologies, CO concentration in Basin have steadily declined.

The SCAQMD, as part of their 2003 AQMP, conducted modeling for CO Hotspot Analysis at multiple congested intersections in their South Coast Air Basin, including the intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, considered one of the most congested intersections in Southern California with an ADT of approximately 100,000 vehicles. The CO concentrations modeled by the SCAQMD’s analysis identified all traffic induced CO levels below Federal and State thresholds. As the CO hotspots were not modeled at an intersection that accommodates over 100,000 vehicles per day, it can be reasonably deduced that CO hotspots would not be experienced at any intersections in the vicinity of the proposed project.

Given the extremely low level of CO concentrations in the project area and no project-traffic 938
related impacts at any intersections, project-related vehicle emissions are not expected to result in the CO concentrations exceeding the State or federal CO standards.

3. 8 Cumulative Impacts:

The project area is designated as a non-attainment area for ozone and a non-attainment area for PM2.5 and PM10. The Project would comply with the mandatory requirements of SCAQMD’s Rule 403 (fugitive dust control) during construction, as well as all other adopted AQMP emissions control measures. The project also is required to comply with California Code of Regulations Title 13, Division 3, and specifically its Chapter 1, Article 4.5, Section 2025, “Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen and Other Criteria Pollutants, from In- Use Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles” and its Chapter 10, Article 1, Section 2485, “Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling.” Pe r SCAQMD rules and mandates, and California Code of Regulation requirements, as well as the CEQA requirement that significant impacts be mitigated to the extent feasible, these same requirements are imposed on all projects in the South Coast Air Basin.

In determining whether the project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors), the non-attainment pollutants of concern for this impact are ozone and PM10. In developing the thresholds of significance for air pollutants disclosed above the SCAQMD considered the emission levels for which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. If a project exceeds the identified significance thresholds, its emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions.

As shown in Tables 3.1-1, 3.2-1, 3.2-2, 3.3-1, and 3.6-2 above, the project does not exceed the identified significance thresholds, as such, emissions would not be cumulatively considerable.

3.9 Conformity and Consistency:

The following analysis is consistent with the preferred analysis approach recommended by the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook.

3.9.1 Conformity with Air Quality Management Plans: The Project is located within the SCAB and under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. Under the Federal Clean Air Act, the SCAQMD has adopted a variety of attainment plans (i.e., “Air Quality Management Plans”) for a variety of non-attainment pollutants. A complete list of the various air quality management plans is available from the SCAQMD on their website at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan

The SCAQMD is responsible for maintaining and ensuring compliance with the various Air Quality Management Plans. Conformity is determined based on the following criteria:
• A project is non-conforming if it conflicts with or delays implementation of any applicable attainment or maintenance plan. A project may also be non-conforming 939
if it increases the gross number of dwelling units, increases the number of trips, and/or increases the overall vehicle miles traveled in an affected area (relative to the applicable land use plan).

• A project is conforming if it complies with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, complies with all proposed control measures that are not yet adopted from the applicable plan(s), and is consistent with the growth forecasts in the applicable plan(s) (or is directly included in the applicable plan).

3.9.2 Consistency with Emission Thresholds : As shown in Tables 3.1-1, 3.2 -1,

3.2-2, 3.3-1, and 3.6-2 the Project would not exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds for any criteria pollutant during construction or during long-term operation. Accordingly, the Project’s air quality emissions are less than significant.

3.9.3 Consistency with Control Measures: The construction contractors are required to comply with rules, regulations, and control measures including but not limited to controlling Fugitive Dust (Rule 403), Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control Requirements for Coachella Valley Sources (Rule 403.1), and the application of architectural coatings during building construction (Rule 1113).

3.9.4 Consistency with Growth Forecasts: The Project site’s land use per the Ontario Plan 2050 Land Use is designated as Medium Density Residential (MDR), with a minimum density of 11.1 du/ac to 25 du/ac. The Project is proposing 22.6 du/ac. therefore, the current residential and planned land use land use designation is consistent with the land use density used by the SCAQMD to generate the growth forecasts for the air quality plans referenced above and would be consistent with the growth assumptions used in the SCAQMD plans.

4.0 Conclusion
Based on the assessment in Section 3.0 all estimated Project emissions for construction and operations are below the SCAQMD significance threshold levels and with the implementation of MM-GHG-1 for compliance with the Ontario CAP impacts to the environment for Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases are less than significant. Additionally, the proposed Project will not conflict with any air quality or GHG plans.

940
KPC EHS Consultants, LLC

APPENDIX A
941
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
1 / 61
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated

2.3. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Mitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2024) - Unmitigated

3.2. Demolition (2024) - Mitigated
942
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
2 / 61

3.3. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated

3.4. Site Preparation (2024) - Mitigated

3.5. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated

3.6. Grading (2024) - Mitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated

3.8. Building Construction (2024) - Mitigated

3.9. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.10. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated

3.11. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated

3.12. Paving (2025) - Mitigated

3.13. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated

3.14. Architectural Coating (2025) - Mitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.1.2. Mitigated

4.2. Energy
943
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
3 / 61

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.3.2. Mitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.4.2. Mitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.5.2. Mitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.6.2. Mitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
944
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
4 / 61

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.7.2. Mitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.2.2. Mitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.3.2. Mitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving
945
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
5 / 61

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.9.2. Mitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.11.2. Mitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.12.2. Mitigated
946
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
6 / 61

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.13.2. Mitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.14.2. Mitigated

8. User Changes to Default Data 947
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
7 / 61

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Ontario Sunrise Residential
Construction Start Date 1/2/2024
Operational Y ear 2025
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.80
Precipitation (days) 2.40
Location 1355 W 5th St, Ontario, CA 91762, USA
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Ontario
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5233
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.20

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq
ft)
Population Description
948
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
8 / 61
Condo/Townhouse 70.0 Dwelling Unit 3.10 74,200 18,000 — 232 —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Construction C-2* Limit Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicle Idling Construction C-11 Limit Vehicle Speeds on Unpaved Roads Construction C-12 Sweep Paved Roads
* Qualitative or supporting measure. Emission reductions not included in the mitigated emissions results.

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.75 1.47 11.7 17.5 0.03 0.50 0.72 1.22 0.46 0.17 0.63 — 3,358 3,358 0.15 0.08 3.56 3,389 Mit. 1.75 1.47 11.7 17.5 0.03 0.50 0.72 1.22 0.46 0.17 0.63 — 3,358 3,358 0.15 0.08 3.56 3,389 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.43 26.0 36.1 34.0 0.05 1.60 7.89 9.49 1.47 3.99 5.47 — 5,527 5,527 0.23 0.15 0.09 5,548 Mit. 4.43 26.0 36.1 34.0 0.05 1.60 7.89 9.49 1.47 3.99 5.47 — 5,527 5,527 0.23 0.15 0.09 5,548 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
949
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
9 / 61
——————————————————Average
Daily
(Max)
Unmit. 1.36 1.34 9.61 12.5 0.02 0.41 0.67 1.08 0.38 0.20 0.58 — 2,428 2,428 0.11 0.06 1.02 2,450 Mit. 1.36 1.34 9.61 12.5 0.02 0.41 0.67 1.08 0.38 0.20 0.58 — 2,428 2,428 0.11 0.06 1.02 2,450 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.25 0.24 1.75 2.28 < 0.005 0.07 0.12 0.20 0.07 0.04 0.11 — 402 402 0.02 0.01 0.17 406 Mit. 0.25 0.24 1.75 2.28 < 0.005 0.07 0.12 0.20 0.07 0.04 0.11 — 402 402 0.02 0.01 0.17 406 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Daily
Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 75.0 100 550 150 — — 150 — — 55.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — Y es
Mit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — Y es
Exceeds
(Av
erage
Daily)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 75.0 100 550 150 — — 150 — — 55.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — Y es
Mit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — Y es
Exceeds
(Annual)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 3,000
Unmit. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — No
950
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
10 / 61
Mit. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — No

2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Y ear TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 1.75 1.47 11.7 17.5 0.03 0.50 0.72 1.22 0.46 0.17 0.63 — 3,358 3,358 0.15 0.08 3.56 3,389 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 4.43 3.73 36.1 34.0 0.05 1.60 7.89 9.49 1.47 3.99 5.47 — 5,527 5,527 0.23 0.15 0.09 5,548 2025 1.61 26.0 11.0 16.1 0.03 0.44 0.72 1.16 0.40 0.17 0.57 — 3,280 3,280 0.15 0.08 0.09 3,307 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 1.36 1.14 9.61 12.5 0.02 0.41 0.67 1.08 0.38 0.20 0.58 — 2,428 2,428 0.11 0.06 1.02 2,450 2025 0.08 1.34 0.52 0.81 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.03 — 138 138 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 139 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 0.25 0.21 1.75 2.28 < 0.005 0.07 0.12 0.20 0.07 0.04 0.11 — 402 402 0.02 0.01 0.17 406 2025 0.01 0.24 0.10 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 22.8 22.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 22.9

2.3. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Y ear TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 1.75 1.47 11.7 17.5 0.03 0.50 0.72 1.22 0.46 0.17 0.63 — 3,358 3,358 0.15 0.08 3.56 3,389 951
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
11 / 61
Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 4.43 3.73 36.1 34.0 0.05 1.60 7.89 9.49 1.47 3.99 5.47 — 5,527 5,527 0.23 0.15 0.09 5,548 2025 1.61 26.0 11.0 16.1 0.03 0.44 0.72 1.16 0.40 0.17 0.57 — 3,280 3,280 0.15 0.08 0.09 3,307 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 1.36 1.14 9.61 12.5 0.02 0.41 0.67 1.08 0.38 0.20 0.58 — 2,428 2,428 0.11 0.06 1.02 2,450 2025 0.08 1.34 0.52 0.81 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.03 — 138 138 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 139 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 0.25 0.21 1.75 2.28 < 0.005 0.07 0.12 0.20 0.07 0.04 0.11 — 402 402 0.02 0.01 0.17 406 2025 0.01 0.24 0.10 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 22.8 22.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 22.9

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 23.1 22.6 3.66 56.8 0.13 5.05 3.34 8.40 4.96 0.85 5.81 689 6,075 6,764 5.60 0.23 15.5 6,989 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 22.6 22.1 3.76 50.3 0.13 5.05 3.34 8.39 4.96 0.85 5.81 689 5,812 6,501 5.60 0.24 0.92 6,713 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 3.70 5.06 2.26 18.8 0.04 0.40 2.99 3.38 0.39 0.76 1.15 78.4 4,291 4,369 3.76 0.20 6.32 4,528 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.67 0.92 0.41 3.42 0.01 0.07 0.55 0.62 0.07 0.14 0.21 13.0 710 723 0.62 0.03 1.05 750 952
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
12 / 61
Exceeds
(Daily
Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 55.0 55.0 550 150 — — 150 — — 55.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Av
erage
Daily)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 55.0 55.0 550 150 — — 150 — — 55.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Annual)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 3,000
Unmit. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — No

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.43 2.23 1.84 17.1 0.04 0.03 3.34 3.37 0.03 0.85 0.87 — 4,044 4,044 0.21 0.19 15.0 4,120 Area 20.7 20.4 1.49 39.6 0.09 5.00 — 5.00 4.91 — 4.91 656 1,263 1,919 1.96 0.02 — 1,975 Energy 0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 747 747 0.07 < 0.005 — 750 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Total 23.1 22.6 3.66 56.8 0.13 5.05 3.34 8.40 4.96 0.85 5.81 689 6,075 6,764 5.60 0.23 15.5 6,989 953
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
13 / 61
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.26 2.06 1.97 14.5 0.04 0.03 3.34 3.37 0.03 0.85 0.87 — 3,791 3,791 0.21 0.20 0.39 3,856 Area 20.3 20.0 1.45 35.6 0.09 5.00 — 5.00 4.91 — 4.91 656 1,253 1,909 1.95 0.02 — 1,964 Energy 0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 747 747 0.07 < 0.005 — 750 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Total 22.6 22.1 3.76 50.3 0.13 5.05 3.34 8.39 4.96 0.85 5.81 689 5,812 6,501 5.60 0.24 0.92 6,713 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.01 1.83 1.80 13.5 0.03 0.02 2.99 3.01 0.02 0.76 0.78 — 3,430 3,430 0.19 0.18 5.78 3,494 Area 1.65 3.21 0.13 5.15 0.01 0.34 — 0.34 0.34 — 0.34 44.9 93.1 138 0.13 < 0.005 — 142 Energy 0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 747 747 0.07 < 0.005 — 750 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Total 3.70 5.06 2.26 18.8 0.04 0.40 2.99 3.38 0.39 0.76 1.15 78.4 4,291 4,369 3.76 0.20 6.32 4,528 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.37 0.33 0.33 2.46 0.01 < 0.005 0.55 0.55 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 — 568 568 0.03 0.03 0.96 578 Area 0.30 0.59 0.02 0.94 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 7.44 15.4 22.8 0.02 < 0.005 — 23.5 Energy 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 124 124 0.01 < 0.005 — 124 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.93 3.44 4.36 0.10 < 0.005 — 7.43 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 4.62 0.00 4.62 0.46 0.00 — 16.2 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.09 0.09
Total 0.67 0.92 0.41 3.42 0.01 0.07 0.55 0.62 0.07 0.14 0.21 13.0 710 723 0.62 0.03 1.05 750 954
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
14 / 61

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.43 2.23 1.84 17.1 0.04 0.03 3.34 3.37 0.03 0.85 0.87 — 4,044 4,044 0.21 0.19 15.0 4,120 Area 20.7 20.4 1.49 39.6 0.09 5.00 — 5.00 4.91 — 4.91 656 1,263 1,919 1.96 0.02 — 1,975 Energy 0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 747 747 0.07 < 0.005 — 750 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Total 23.1 22.6 3.66 56.8 0.13 5.05 3.34 8.40 4.96 0.85 5.81 689 6,075 6,764 5.60 0.23 15.5 6,989 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.26 2.06 1.97 14.5 0.04 0.03 3.34 3.37 0.03 0.85 0.87 — 3,791 3,791 0.21 0.20 0.39 3,856 Area 20.3 20.0 1.45 35.6 0.09 5.00 — 5.00 4.91 — 4.91 656 1,253 1,909 1.95 0.02 — 1,964 Energy 0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 747 747 0.07 < 0.005 — 750 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Total 22.6 22.1 3.76 50.3 0.13 5.05 3.34 8.39 4.96 0.85 5.81 689 5,812 6,501 5.60 0.24 0.92 6,713 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.01 1.83 1.80 13.5 0.03 0.02 2.99 3.01 0.02 0.76 0.78 — 3,430 3,430 0.19 0.18 5.78 3,494 Area 1.65 3.21 0.13 5.15 0.01 0.34 — 0.34 0.34 — 0.34 44.9 93.1 138 0.13 < 0.005 — 142 Energy 0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 747 747 0.07 < 0.005 — 750 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9955 Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
15 / 61
Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Total 3.70 5.06 2.26 18.8 0.04 0.40 2.99 3.38 0.39 0.76 1.15 78.4 4,291 4,369 3.76 0.20 6.32 4,528 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.37 0.33 0.33 2.46 0.01 < 0.005 0.55 0.55 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 — 568 568 0.03 0.03 0.96 578 Area 0.30 0.59 0.02 0.94 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 7.44 15.4 22.8 0.02 < 0.005 — 23.5 Energy 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 124 124 0.01 < 0.005 — 124 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.93 3.44 4.36 0.10 < 0.005 — 7.43 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 4.62 0.00 4.62 0.46 0.00 — 16.2 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.09 0.09
Total 0.67 0.92 0.41 3.42 0.01 0.07 0.55 0.62 0.07 0.14 0.21 13.0 710 723 0.62 0.03 1.05 750

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

3.12 2.62 24.9 21.7 0.03 1.06 — 1.06 0.98 — 0.98 — 3,425 3,425 0.14 0.03 — 3,437 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.58 0.58 — 0.09 0.09 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 956
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
16 / 61
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.17 0.14 1.36 1.19 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.05 — 0.05 — 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 — 188 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.03 0.03 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.03 0.25 0.22 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 31.1 31.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 31.2 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.09 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 198 198 0.01 0.01 0.02 200 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.10 0.01 0.93 0.50 < 0.005 0.01 0.19 0.21 0.01 0.05 0.06 — 729 729 0.08 0.12 0.04 766 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.0 11.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 11.2 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 39.9 39.9 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 42.0 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.82 1.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.85 957
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
17 / 61
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.61 6.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.95

3.2. Demolition (2024) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

3.12 2.62 24.9 21.7 0.03 1.06 — 1.06 0.98 — 0.98 — 3,425 3,425 0.14 0.03 — 3,437 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.58 0.58 — 0.09 0.09 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.17 0.14 1.36 1.19 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.05 — 0.05 — 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 — 188 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.03 0.03 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.03 0.25 0.22 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 31.1 31.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 31.2 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
958
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
18 / 61
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.09 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 198 198 0.01 0.01 0.02 200 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.10 0.01 0.93 0.50 < 0.005 0.01 0.19 0.21 0.01 0.05 0.06 — 729 729 0.08 0.12 0.04 766 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.0 11.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 11.2 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 39.9 39.9 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 42.0 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.82 1.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.85 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.61 6.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.95

3.3. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
959
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
19 / 61
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Off-Road
Equipment

4.34 3.65 36.0 32.9 0.05 1.60 — 1.60 1.47 — 1.47 — 5,296 5,296 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 Dust
From
Mater
ial
Movement
— — — — — — 7.67 7.67 — 3.94 3.94 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.06 0.05 0.49 0.45 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 72.5 72.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 72.8 Dust
From
Mater
ial
Movement
— — — — — — 0.11 0.11 — 0.05 0.05 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.09 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 12.0 12.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.1 Dust
From
Mater
ial
Movement
— — — — — — 0.02 0.02 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
960
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
20 / 61
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.10 0.09 0.10 1.12 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 231 231 0.01 0.01 0.03 234 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.21 3.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.25 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.53 0.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.54 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.4. Site Preparation (2024) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

4.34 3.65 36.0 32.9 0.05 1.60 — 1.60 1.47 — 1.47 — 5,296 5,296 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 961
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
21 / 61
———————3.943.94—7.677.67——————Dust
From
Mater
ial
Movement
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.06 0.05 0.49 0.45 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 72.5 72.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 72.8 Dust
From
Mater
ial
Movement
— — — — — — 0.11 0.11 — 0.05 0.05 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.09 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 12.0 12.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.1 Dust
From
Mater
ial
Movement
— — — — — — 0.02 0.02 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.10 0.09 0.10 1.12 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 231 231 0.01 0.01 0.03 234 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00962 Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
22 / 61
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.21 3.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.25 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.53 0.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.54 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.26 1.90 18.2 18.8 0.03 0.84 — 0.84 0.77 — 0.77 — 2,958 2,958 0.12 0.02 — 2,969 Dust
From
Mater
ial
Movement
— — — — — — 2.76 2.76 — 1.34 1.34 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.05 0.04 0.40 0.41 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 64.8 64.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 65.1 963
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
23 / 61
Dust
From
Mater
ial
Movement
— — — — — — 0.06 0.06 — 0.03 0.03 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 10.7 10.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.8 Dust
From
Mater
ial
Movement
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.09 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 198 198 0.01 0.01 0.02 200 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.40 4.40 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.46 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.73 0.73 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.74 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00964 Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
24 / 61
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.6. Grading (2024) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.26 1.90 18.2 18.8 0.03 0.84 — 0.84 0.77 — 0.77 — 2,958 2,958 0.12 0.02 — 2,969 Dust
From
Mater
ial
Movement
— — — — — — 2.76 2.76 — 1.34 1.34 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.05 0.04 0.40 0.41 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 64.8 64.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 65.1 Dust
From
Mater
ial
Movement
— — — — — — 0.06 0.06 — 0.03 0.03 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 10.7 10.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.8 965
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
25 / 61
Dust
From
Mater
ial
Movement
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.09 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 198 198 0.01 0.01 0.02 200 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.40 4.40 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.46 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.73 0.73 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.74 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
966
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
26 / 61
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.44 1.20 11.2 13.1 0.02 0.50 — 0.50 0.46 — 0.46 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.44 1.20 11.2 13.1 0.02 0.50 — 0.50 0.46 — 0.46 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.89 0.74 6.94 8.11 0.01 0.31 — 0.31 0.28 — 0.28 — 1,483 1,483 0.06 0.01 — 1,488 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.16 0.14 1.27 1.48 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.05 — 0.05 — 245 245 0.01 < 0.005 — 246 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.29 0.26 0.24 4.26 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.15 0.15 — 726 726 0.03 0.03 2.90 737 Vendor 0.02 0.01 0.27 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 235 235 0.02 0.03 0.65 246 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 967
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
27 / 61
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.27 0.25 0.29 3.22 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.15 0.15 — 665 665 0.03 0.03 0.08 673 Vendor 0.02 0.01 0.28 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 235 235 0.02 0.03 0.02 246 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.17 0.15 0.18 2.09 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.10 0.10 — 417 417 0.02 0.02 0.77 423 Vendor 0.02 < 0.005 0.17 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 145 145 0.01 0.02 0.17 152 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 69.1 69.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 70.0 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 24.0 24.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 25.2 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.8. Building Construction (2024) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.44 1.20 11.2 13.1 0.02 0.50 — 0.50 0.46 — 0.46 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
968
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
28 / 61
Off-Road
Equipment

1.44 1.20 11.2 13.1 0.02 0.50 — 0.50 0.46 — 0.46 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.89 0.74 6.94 8.11 0.01 0.31 — 0.31 0.28 — 0.28 — 1,483 1,483 0.06 0.01 — 1,488 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.16 0.14 1.27 1.48 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.05 — 0.05 — 245 245 0.01 < 0.005 — 246 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.29 0.26 0.24 4.26 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.15 0.15 — 726 726 0.03 0.03 2.90 737 Vendor 0.02 0.01 0.27 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 235 235 0.02 0.03 0.65 246 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.27 0.25 0.29 3.22 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.15 0.15 — 665 665 0.03 0.03 0.08 673 Vendor 0.02 0.01 0.28 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 235 235 0.02 0.03 0.02 246 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.17 0.15 0.18 2.09 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.10 0.10 — 417 417 0.02 0.02 0.77 423 Vendor 0.02 < 0.005 0.17 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 145 145 0.01 0.02 0.17 152 969
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
29 / 61
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 69.1 69.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 70.0 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 24.0 24.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 25.2 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.02 0.14 0.18 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 32.8 32.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 33.0 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.44 5.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.46 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 970
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
30 / 61
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.24 0.22 0.24 2.96 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.15 0.15 — 651 651 0.03 0.03 0.07 659 Vendor 0.02 0.01 0.27 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 231 231 0.02 0.03 0.02 242 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.05 9.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 9.17 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.16 3.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.32 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.50 1.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.52 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.52 0.52 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.55 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.10. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
971
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
31 / 61
Off-Road
Equipment

1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.02 0.14 0.18 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 32.8 32.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 33.0 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.44 5.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.46 Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.24 0.22 0.24 2.96 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.15 0.15 — 651 651 0.03 0.03 0.07 659 Vendor 0.02 0.01 0.27 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 231 231 0.02 0.03 0.02 242 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.05 9.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 9.17 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.16 3.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.32 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.50 1.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.52 972
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
32 / 61
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.52 0.52 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.55 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.11. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.85 0.71 6.52 8.84 0.01 0.29 — 0.29 0.26 — 0.26 — 1,351 1,351 0.05 0.01 — 1,355 Paving — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.04 0.32 0.44 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 66.6 66.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 66.8 Paving — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.06 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 11.0 11.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.1 Paving — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 973
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
33 / 61
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.10 0.09 0.10 1.17 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 — 258 258 0.01 0.01 0.03 262 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.9 12.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 13.1 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.14 2.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.17 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.12. Paving (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
974
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
34 / 61
Off-Road
Equipment

0.85 0.71 6.52 8.84 0.01 0.29 — 0.29 0.26 — 0.26 — 1,351 1,351 0.05 0.01 — 1,355 Paving — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.04 0.32 0.44 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 66.6 66.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 66.8 Paving — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.06 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 11.0 11.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.1 Paving — 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.10 0.09 0.10 1.17 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 — 258 258 0.01 0.01 0.03 262 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.9 12.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 13.1 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 975
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
35 / 61
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.14 2.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.17 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.13. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.15 0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 25.8 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.04 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 6.58 6.58 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.61 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 1.27 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 976
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
36 / 61
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.09 1.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.09 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.23 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 130 130 0.01 0.01 0.01 132 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.51 6.51 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.60 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.08 1.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.09 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.14. Architectural Coating (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 977
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
37 / 61
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.15 0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 25.8 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.04 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 6.58 6.58 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.61 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 1.27 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.09 1.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.09 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.23 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truc
k

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
978
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
38 / 61
——————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 130 130 0.01 0.01 0.01 132 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.51 6.51 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.60 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.08 1.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.09 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
979
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
39 / 61
Condo/T 2.43 2.23 1.84 17.1 0.04 0.03 3.34 3.37 0.03 0.85 0.87 — 4,044 4,044 0.21 0.19 15.0 4,120 Total 2.43 2.23 1.84 17.1 0.04 0.03 3.34 3.37 0.03 0.85 0.87 — 4,044 4,044 0.21 0.19 15.0 4,120 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e

2.26 2.06 1.97 14.5 0.04 0.03 3.34 3.37 0.03 0.85 0.87 — 3,791 3,791 0.21 0.20 0.39 3,856 Total 2.26 2.06 1.97 14.5 0.04 0.03 3.34 3.37 0.03 0.85 0.87 — 3,791 3,791 0.21 0.20 0.39 3,856 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e

0.37 0.33 0.33 2.46 0.01 <

0.005 0.55 0.55 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 — 568 568 0.03 0.03 0.96 578 Total 0.37 0.33 0.33 2.46 0.01 < 0.005 0.55 0.55 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 — 568 568 0.03 0.03 0.96 578

4.1.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e

2.43 2.23 1.84 17.1 0.04 0.03 3.34 3.37 0.03 0.85 0.87 — 4,044 4,044 0.21 0.19 15.0 4,120 Total 2.43 2.23 1.84 17.1 0.04 0.03 3.34 3.37 0.03 0.85 0.87 — 4,044 4,044 0.21 0.19 15.0 4,120 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e

2.26 2.06 1.97 14.5 0.04 0.03 3.34 3.37 0.03 0.85 0.87 — 3,791 3,791 0.21 0.20 0.39 3,856 Total 2.26 2.06 1.97 14.5 0.04 0.03 3.34 3.37 0.03 0.85 0.87 — 3,791 3,791 0.21 0.20 0.39 3,856 980
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
40 / 61
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e

0.37 0.33 0.33 2.46 0.01 <

0.005 0.55 0.55 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 — 568 568 0.03 0.03 0.96 578 Total 0.37 0.33 0.33 2.46 0.01 < 0.005 0.55 0.55 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 — 568 568 0.03 0.03 0.96 578

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — — 324 324 0.03 <

0.005 — 326
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 324 324 0.03 < 0.005 — 326 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — — 324 324 0.03 <

0.005 — 326
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 324 324 0.03 < 0.005 — 326 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — — 53.7 53.7 0.01 <

0.005 — 54.0
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 53.7 53.7 0.01 < 0.005 — 54.0 981
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
41 / 61

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — — 324 324 0.03 <

0.005 — 326
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 324 324 0.03 < 0.005 — 326 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — — 324 324 0.03 <

0.005 — 326
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 324 324 0.03 < 0.005 — 326 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — — 53.7 53.7 0.01 <

0.005 — 54.0
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 53.7 53.7 0.01 < 0.005 — 54.0

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
982
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
42 / 61
424—< 0.0050.04423423—0.03—0.030.03—0.03< 0.0050.140.330.020.04Condo/T ownhous
Total 0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 423 423 0.04 < 0.005 — 424 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e

0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 <

0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 423 423 0.04 < 0.005 — 424 Total 0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 423 423 0.04 < 0.005 — 424 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e

0.01 <

0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 70.0 70.0 0.01 < 0.005 — 70.2 Total 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 70.0 70.0 0.01 < 0.005 — 70.2

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e

0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 <

0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 423 423 0.04 < 0.005 — 424 Total 0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 423 423 0.04 < 0.005 — 424 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e

0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 <

0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 423 423 0.04 < 0.005 — 424 983
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
43 / 61
Total 0.04 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 423 423 0.04 < 0.005 — 424 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e

0.01 <

0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 70.0 70.0 0.01 < 0.005 — 70.2 Total 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 70.0 70.0 0.01 < 0.005 — 70.2

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 20.3 18.3 1.45 35.6 0.09 5.00 — 5.00 4.91 — 4.91 656 1,253 1,909 1.95 0.02 — 1,964 Consum
er
Products
— 1.59 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.13 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.38 0.36 0.04 3.96 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 10.6 10.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.7 Total 20.7 20.4 1.49 39.6 0.09 5.00 — 5.00 4.91 — 4.91 656 1,263 1,919 1.96 0.02 — 1,975 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 20.3 18.3 1.45 35.6 0.09 5.00 — 5.00 4.91 — 4.91 656 1,253 1,909 1.95 0.02 — 1,964 984
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
44 / 61
————————————————1.59—Consum
er
Products
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.13 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 20.3 20.0 1.45 35.6 0.09 5.00 — 5.00 4.91 — 4.91 656 1,253 1,909 1.95 0.02 — 1,964 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.25 0.23 0.02 0.44 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 7.44 14.2 21.6 0.02 < 0.005 — 22.3 Consum
er
Products
— 0.29 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.05 0.04 < 0.005 0.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.20 1.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.21 Total 0.30 0.59 0.02 0.94 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 7.44 15.4 22.8 0.02 < 0.005 — 23.5

4.3.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 20.3 18.3 1.45 35.6 0.09 5.00 — 5.00 4.91 — 4.91 656 1,253 1,909 1.95 0.02 — 1,964 Consum
er
Products
— 1.59 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.13 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
985
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
45 / 61
Landsca
Equipment

0.38 0.36 0.04 3.96 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 10.6 10.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.7 Total 20.7 20.4 1.49 39.6 0.09 5.00 — 5.00 4.91 — 4.91 656 1,263 1,919 1.96 0.02 — 1,975 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 20.3 18.3 1.45 35.6 0.09 5.00 — 5.00 4.91 — 4.91 656 1,253 1,909 1.95 0.02 — 1,964 Consum
er
Products
— 1.59 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.13 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 20.3 20.0 1.45 35.6 0.09 5.00 — 5.00 4.91 — 4.91 656 1,253 1,909 1.95 0.02 — 1,964 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.25 0.23 0.02 0.44 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 7.44 14.2 21.6 0.02 < 0.005 — 22.3 Consum
er
Products
— 0.29 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.05 0.04 < 0.005 0.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.20 1.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.21 Total 0.30 0.59 0.02 0.94 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 7.44 15.4 22.8 0.02 < 0.005 — 23.5

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 986
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
46 / 61
CO2eRN2OCH4CO2TNBCO2BCO2PM2.5TPM2.5DPM2.5EPM10TPM10DPM10ESO2CONOxROGTOGLand Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.93 3.44 4.36 0.10 <

0.005 — 7.43
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.93 3.44 4.36 0.10 < 0.005 — 7.43

4.4.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9 987
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
47 / 61
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 5.59 20.8 26.4 0.58 0.01 — 44.9 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.93 3.44 4.36 0.10 <

0.005 — 7.43
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.93 3.44 4.36 0.10 < 0.005 — 7.43

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7 988
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
48 / 61
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.62 0.00 4.62 0.46 0.00 — 16.2
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 4.62 0.00 4.62 0.46 0.00 — 16.2

4.5.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 0.00 27.9 2.79 0.00 — 97.7 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.62 0.00 4.62 0.46 0.00 — 16.2
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 4.62 0.00 4.62 0.46 0.00 — 16.2

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
989
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
49 / 61

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.09 0.09
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.09 0.09

4.6.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
990
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
50 / 61

0.530.53————————————————Condo/T
ownhous
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.53 0.53
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/T
ownhous
e
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.09 0.09
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.09 0.09

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
991
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
51 / 61
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 1/2/2024 1/30/2024 5.00 20.0 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/31/2024 2/7/2024 5.00 5.00 — Grading Grading 2/8/2024 2/19/2024 5.00 8.00 —
Building Construction Building Construction 2/20/2024 1/7/2025 5.00 230 — Paving Paving 1/8/2025 2/2/2025 5.00 18.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 2/3/2025 2/28/2025 5.00 18.0 — 992
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
52 / 61

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel A verage 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel A
verage 2.00 6.00 10.0 0.56
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
993
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
53 / 61
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48

5.2.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel A verage 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel A
verage 2.00 6.00 10.0 0.56
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
994
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
54 / 61
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 10.3 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 50.4 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 7.48 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
995
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
55 / 61
Paving Worker 20.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 10.1 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.3.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 10.3 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
996
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
56 / 61
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 50.4 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 7.48 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 20.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 10.1 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq
ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 150,255 50,085 0.00 0.00 —

5.6. Dust Mitigation
997
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
57 / 61

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Building Square F
ootage)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 18,000 —
Site Preparation — — 7.50 0.00 —
Grading — — 8.00 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 —

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 2 61% 61%
Water Demolished Area 2 36% 36%

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Condo/Townhouse — 0%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Y ear and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Y ear kWh per Y ear CO2 CH4 N2O
2024 0.00 349 0.03 < 0.005
2025 0.00 349 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
998
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
58 / 61
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear Condo/Townhouse 512 570 440 186,223 4,237 4,712 3,635 1,540,016

5.9.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear Condo/Townhouse 512 570 440 186,223 4,237 4,712 3,635 1,540,016

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)
Condo/Townhouse —
Wood Fireplaces 4
Gas Fireplaces 60
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 7
Conventional Wood Stoves 0
Catalytic Wood Stoves 4
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 4
Pellet Wood Stoves 0

5.10.1.2. Mitigated
Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)
Condo/Townhouse —
999
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
59 / 61
Wood Fireplaces 4
Gas Fireplaces 60
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 7
Conventional Wood Stoves 0
Catalytic Wood Stoves 4
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 4
Pellet Wood Stoves 0

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
150255 50,085 0.00 0.00 —

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
1000
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
60 / 61

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Condo/Townhouse 339,400 349 0.0330 0.0040 1,318,961

5.11.2. Mitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Condo/Townhouse 339,400 349 0.0330 0.0040 1,318,961

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Condo/Townhouse 2,917,682 353,301

5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Condo/Townhouse 2,917,682 353,301

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Condo/Townhouse 51.8 —
1001
Ontario Sunrise Residential Custom Report, 10/13/2023
61 / 61

5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Condo/Townhouse 51.8 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Condo/Townhouse Average room A/C &
Other residential
A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Condo/Townhouse Household refrigerators
and/or freez
ers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00

5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Condo/Townhouse Average room A/C &
Other residential
A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Condo/Townhouse Household refrigerators
and/or freez
ers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Acreage per site plan
1002
State of California--The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date

P1. Other Identifier: Sunrise Church
*P2. Location: √ Not for Publication Unrestricted *a. County San Bernardino and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5’ Quad Ontario, Calif. Date 1981
T1S; R8W; SW 1/4 of Section 13 ; S.B. B.M.
c. Address 1355 W. Fifth Street City Ontario Zip 91762 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11; 437,566 mE/ 3,771,360 mN UTM Derivation: ☐ USGS Quad ☒ Google Earth
e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, etc., as appropriate) APN 1008-551-12; on the south side of Fifth Street, approximately 1,200 feet east of Benson Avenue
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries): Buildings on the Sunrise Church property at 1355 W. 5th Street , in the northwestern portion of the City of Ontario , include a rectangular- shaped church that faces the street to the north and an irregularly shaped school complex that is oriented east-west and connected to the rear of the church by a covered breezeway supported by metal poles . Both buildings are wood-frame structures resting on concrete slab foundations, and both have tan stucco exterior coatings and light brown composition shingle roofs.

The church is a tall one -story building with touches of Modernis t influence in the design. It is surmounted by a low-pitched front-gable roof with wide rake overhang in the front and narrow eaves on the front portions of the flanks. About 10 feet back, the eaves widen on both sides over “wedge” extensions, each sporting a tall smoked-glass window and an overhead light fixture. The primary façade features four massive cut -stone columns framing (Continued on p. 4)
*P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP16: Religious building *P4. Resources Present: ☒ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☐ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other (isolates, etc.)
P5a. Photograph or Drawing (Photograph required for buildings, structures, and objects.)

P5b. Description of Photo (view, date,
accession number): 11/17/2023;
view to the southwest (also
see p. 5)
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources:
☒ Historic ☐ Prehistoric ☐ Both
1958-1960
*P7. Owner and Address: Sunrise
Church, 1355 W. Fifth
Street, Ontario, CA 91762
*P8.Recorded by (Name, affiliation, &
address): Terri Jacquemain,
CRM TECH, 1016 East Cooley
Drive, Suite A/B, Colton,
CA 92324
*P9. Date Recorded: 11/17/2023
*P10.Survey Type (describe): Building evaluation for CEQA compliance *P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") Bai “Tom” Tang and Terri Jacquemain (2023): Historic Building Evaluation: Sunrise Church, 1355 W. Fifth Street, City of Ontario, San Bernardino, California

*Attachments: ☐None ☒Location Map ☐Sketch Map ☒Continuation Sheet ☒Building, Structure, and Object Record ☐Archaeological Record ☐District Record ☐Linear Resource Record ☐Milling Station Record ☐Rock Art Record ☐Artifact Record ☐Photograph Record ☐Other (List):

DPR 523A (9/2013) [adapted] *Required information*Required information 1003
State of California--The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD

*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) CRM TECH 4077-1H

B1. Historic Name: Community Baptist Church; Westpark Baptist Church B2. Common Name: Sunrise Church
B3. Original Use: Church and school B4. Present Use: Same *B5. Architectural Style: Modern
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) The church and the eastern portion of the school complex , originally used as a fellowship hall, Sunday School, and offices, were built in 1958 as the new home to Community Baptist Church. The western portion of the rear complex was added in 1960 as a n elementary-level school. It became Westpark Baptist Church around 1987, with Pastor Bill Rice at the helm for many years. Around 2007, the church was merged with two other Sunrise Church congregations i n Rialto and Montclair, led by Pastors David Gaunt and David King. Small improvements have been added to the buildings or replaced since the initial construction , such as the covered breezeways to connect the buildings. Building permit records on file included those issued for reroofs in 1998 and 2006 and for HVAV installation in 1999. *B7. Moved? √ No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: See Item P3a.

B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown
*B10. Significance: Theme Post-WWII suburban development Area Ontario Period of Significance 1945-1970
Property Type Church and school Applicable Criteria N/A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope.

Also address integrity.) Since its creation in the 1880s as “the Model Colony,” Ontario has gradually grown from a primarily agrarian settlement to a typical southern California suburban community predicated on residential and commercial development. The subur ban transition and the subsequent rapid growth of the city was a part of the nationwide post-World War II boom in population and prosperity, at a time when regular church attendance was a vital part of community life. While this relatively modest church compound dates to that period and is relatable to the theme, it does not demonstrate a particularly (Continued on p. 4)
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes)
B12. References: See p. 4
B13. Remarks:
*B14. Evaluator: Terri Jacquemain
*Date of Evaluation: December 16, 2023

(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)

(This space reserved for official comments.)

DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information
1004
State of California--The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
LOCATION MAP Trinomial

*Map Name: Ontario, Calif. *Scale: 1:24,000 *Date of Map: 1981

DPR 523J (1/95) *Required information
1005
State of California--The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Recorded by: Terri Jacquemain *Date: November 17, 2023 √ Continuation Update

*P3a. Description(continued): two sets of plain metal double doors , each with a row of three small rectangular glazing near the top, and the doors are separated by a portion of the exterior wall built of similar stone blocks. Above the doors and separated by a stucco band molded in shiplap pattern, a large smoked-glass window fills the gable peak. The rest of the primary façade, between the pair of stone columns on each side, consists of blind stucco wall surface accompanied by low concrete stoops that are edged with matching stone blocks. The front entrance to the church is accessed by a wide concrete approach scored in a decorative pattern. Three slender metal crosses are arranged in a group on the eastern slope of the roof and near the front. A monument bearing a blue “Sunrise Church” sign stands on a stone pedestal near the northeastern corner of the building.

The school complex to the rear consists of two distinctive masses, one L-shaped and the other rectangular. Both masses have low -pitched gable roofs with broad overhangs extending over walkways where needed. Fenestration on the rectangular mass on the east side features untrimmed tripart windows, each with a fixed center sash flanked by ripple -glass casements. The L -shaped mass on the west side has mainly aluminum-framed sliding windows. Doors are mostly unglazed single doors, many of them on the western portion painted in bright colors. A set of wood-framed glass double doors are found at the eastern end of the rectangular mass, sheltered by a flat wood shade supported by four metal poles and bearing the weight of two large HVAC units. The buildings are situated in the front portion of a large lot, surrounded by paved driveways and parking spaces that are secured by wrought iron fences and gates. The southern one- third of the parcel is an open field with grass and trees.

*B10. Significance (continued): close or important association in comparison to the numerous other church buildings of similar vintages.

Historical sources have yielded no evidence that the pastors identified in the history of the church or anyone else associated with the buildings have attained a high level of recognized historic significance, nor have any prominent architects, designers, or builders been identified in their construction. In terms of architectural or engineering qualities, the buildings are not known t o represent important or notable example s of any style, type, period, region, or method of construction.

As late-historic-period building s of common design and construction practice, the buildings do not hold the potential for any important data for the study of local history, which is well documented in both historical literature and contemporary publications. Based on these considerations, the Sunrise Church at 1355 W. Fifth Street does not appear eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources.

B12. References:

City of Ontario
1998-2006 Building permit records for 1355 W. Fifth Street. On file, City of Ontario Community Development Department.
n.d. Ontario’s History. https://www.ontarioca.gov/Planning/HistoricPreservation.

Flexser, Debbie (local resident and longtime congregation member) 2023 Oral historical interview on site, November 17.

San Bernardino County Assessor
n.d. Property Information Management System database. https://www.sbcounty.gov/ assessor/pims/PIMSINTERFACE.ASPX.

DPR 523L (1/95) (Word 9/2013) *Required information
1006
State of California--The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial

Recorded by: Terri Jacquemain
*Date: November 17, 2023 √ Continuation Update

P5b. Additional Photos:

East side of the church, view to the southwest.

From top left: south (rear) and west sides of the church, view to the northeast; between the church and the school complex, view to the west; eastern portion of the school complex, view to the northwest; western portion of the school complex, view to the northwest.

DPR 523L (1/95) (Word 9/2013) *Required information
1007
1 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan
(PWQMP)
For compliance with Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Order Number R8-2010-0036 (NPDES Permit No. CAS618036)
Submittal Date:

Project Name:

Ontario Project #:

Applicant Name:

Applicant Address:

Project Address:

Project Size (acres):

Project Description:

Engineering Department
1008
2 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (PWQMP)

1. Introduction

The Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (PWQMP) is a planning tool to improve integration of required water quality elements, stormwater management, water conservation, rainwater harvesting and re-use, and flood management in land use planning and the City’s development process. The Preliminary WQMP will assist project applicants and planners in properly designing and laying out project sites so that water quality may be incorporated in the most effective manner and at the lowest cost for the developer.

The San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit (MS4 Permit) requires project-specific Water Quality Management plans (WQMP) to be prepared for all priority new development and significant redevelopment projects listed in Section 2 of this document. The MS4 Permit stipulates that the City of Ontario require priority project applicants to submit a Preliminary project-specific WQMP, as early as possible, during the environmental review or planning phase of a development project and that the Preliminary WQMP be approved prior to the issuance of land use entitlement.

2. Priority Projects (requiring a Preliminary WQMP)

Land Use entitlement shall not be issued for any of the listed projects, below, until a Preliminary WQMP has been approved by the City’s Engineering Department. For construction projects not going through entitlement, a Preliminary and Final project specific WQMP shall be approved, prior to the issuance of construction permits:

Check the appropriate project category below, for this project:

Check
below Project Categories

1. All significant re-development projects. Significant re-development is defined as the addition or replacement of 5,000 or more square feet of impervious surface on an already developed site subject to discretionary approval of the Permittee. Redevelopment does not include routine maintenance activities that are conducted to maintain original line and grade, hydraulic capacity, original purpose of the facility, or emergency redevelopment activity required to protect public health and safety. Where redevelopment results in an increase of less than fifty percent of the impervious surfaces of a previously existing developed site, and the existing development was not subject to WQMP requirements, the numeric sizing criteria discussed below applies only to the addition or replacement, and not to the entire developed site. Where redevelopment results in an increase of fifty percent or more of the impervious surfaces of a previously existing developed site, the numeric sizing criteria applies to the entire development (new and existing).

2. New development projects that create 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site) including commercial, industrial, residential housing subdivisions (i.e., detached single family home subdivisions, multi -family attached subdivisions or townhomes, condominiums, apartments, etc.), mixed- use, and public projects. This category includes development projects on public and private land, which fall under the planning and building authority of the permitting agency. 1009
3 Check
below Project Categories

3. Automotive repair shops (with SIC codes 5013, 5014, 5541, 7532- 7534, 7536-7539).

4. Restaurants and Food Service Establishments where the land area of development is 5,000 square feet or more.

5. Developments of 2,500 square feet of impervious surface or more adjacent to (within 200 feet) or discharging directly into environmentally sensitive areas (ESA’s) such as areas designated in the Ocean Plan as areas of special biological significance or waterbodies listed on the CWA Section 303(d) list of impaired waters.

6. Parking lots of 5,000 square feet or more exposed to storm water. Parking lot is defined as land area or facility for the temporary storage of motor vehicles.

7. Retail Gasoline Outlets (RGOs) that are either 5,000 sq ft or more or have a projected average daily traffic of 100 or more vehicles per day.

8. *This project is not covered under any of the categories listed above.

* If the development is not covered under any of the project categories listed in Section 2, the project is not required to design and install Site Design/LID BMPs or Treatment Control BMPs to treat the design storm event (Design Capture Volume) described in Section 4.

3. Preliminary WQMP Objectives

Through a combination of Site Design/LID BMPs (where feasible), Source Control, and/or Treatment Control BMPs, project-specific WQMPs shall address all identified pollutants and hydrologic conditions of concern from new development and significant re-development projects for the categories of projects (priority projects) listed in Section 2. Under each type of BMP, listed below, please indicate which BMPs are planned to be implemented and included in the Final WQMP for the project:

A. Site Design/LID (Low Impact Design) for Reducing Stormwater Runoff:

The MS4 Permit requires each priority development project to infiltrate, harvest and use, evapotranspire, or bio-treat the runoff from a 2-yr, 24-hour storm event (Design Capture Volume). If site conditions do not permit infiltration, harvest and use, evapotranspiration, and/or bio-treatment of the entire Design Capture Volume, at the project site, Site Design/LID techniques are required to be implemented to the Maximum Extent Practicable, at the project site, and the remainder of the DCV shall be infiltrated, harvested, bio-treated or treated by alternative measures. Project applicants shall submit a Preliminary WQMP that documents the LID/Site Design BMPs, proposed for the project. Please indicate, in the table below, which Site Design/LID BMPs will be utilized on this project to accomplish this requirement:
1010
4 Site Design/LID Practice

Planned

Not
Planned
Provide at least the minimum effective area required for LID BMPs, to comply with the WQMP (see Table 3-1 below).

Grade parking lot areas/drive aisles/roof drains to sheet flow runoff into landscaped swales, via curb cuts or zero-face curbs or otherwise disconnect direct drainage from MS4.

Design landscaped areas as swales and grade to accept
runoff from building roofs, parking lots and project roadways.

Install surface retention basins or infiltration trenches to receive impervious area runoff.

Install pervious pavement in parking stalls, alleys, driveways, gutters, walkways, trails or patios.

Install underground stormwater retention chambers where downstream landscaped areas are limited.

Install approved Stormwater Drywells in detention areas.

Construct streets, sidewalks, and parking lot stalls to the minimum widths necessary.

Install on-site Biotreatment basins/trenches with underdrains, where soil type is poorly draining.

Install “Engineered Soil” to increase uptake/soil storage capacity and/or evapotranspiration.

Install Rainwater Harvesting/Use Equipment.

Regional LID BMP facilities are installed, off-site, with the capacity and conveyances to accept post-development storm water runoff from this project and reserved capacity allocation credits have been assigned to the project, in a Certificate or other legally binding document, attached herein

Table 3-1 Minimum Effective Area1 Required for LID BMPs (surface + subsurface facilities) for Project WQMP to Demonstrate Infeasibility2 (% of site)

Project Type New
Development
Re-
Development
SF/MF Residential < 7 du/ac 10% 5%
SF/MF Residential < 7 - 18 du/ac 7% 3.5%
SF/MF Residential > 18 du/ac 5% 2.5%
Mixed Use, Commercial/Industrial w/FAR< 1.0 10% 5%
Mixed Use, Commercial/Industrial w/FAR 1.0-2.0 7% 3.5%
Mixed Use, Commercial/Industrial w/FAR> 2.0 5% 2.5%
Podium (parking under > 75% of project) 3% 1.5%
Zoning allowing development to property lines 2% 1%
Transit Oriented Development3 5% 2.5%
Parking 5% 2.5%
1011
5 1 “Effective area” is defined as land area which 1) is suitable for a retention/infiltration BMP (based on infeasibility criteria) and 2) is located down-gradient from building roof or paved areas, so that it may receive gravity flow runoff.
2 Criteria only required if the project WQMP seeks to demonstrate that the full DCV cannot be feasibly managed on-site.
3 Transit oriented development is defined as a project with development center within one half mile of a mass transit center.

Key: du/ac = dwelling units/acre, FAR = Floor Area Ratio = ratio of gross floor area of building to gross lot area, MF = Multi Family, SF = Single Family

B. Source Control BMPs – The following BMPs are designed to control stormwater pollutants and runoff water at the location where it is generated. Please indicate which of the listed BMPs are planned to be implemented for the project:

Source Control BMPs Planned Not
Planned
Minimize non-stormwater site runoff through efficient
irrigation system design and controllers.

Minimize trash and debris in storm runoff through a regular parking lot, storage yard and roadway sweeping program.

Provide proper covers/roofs and secondary containment for outside material storage & work areas.

Provide solid roofs over all trash enclosures.

Site Owner(s)/Property Manager/HOA or POA will be
familiar with the project WQMP and stormwater BMPs.

Owner or HOA or POA to provide Education/Training of site occupants and employees on stormwater BMPs.

Install stormwater placards/stenciled messages with a “No Dumping” message on all on-site/off-site storm drain inlets.

Provide contained equipment/vehicle wash rack areas that discharge to sanitary sewer.

C. Treatment Control BMPs – The following BMPs are designed to control stormwater pollutants where it is not feasible to install on-site or off-site Site Design/LID BMPs, with the requisite capacity to treat the Design Capture Volume for identified Pollutants of Concern or where pretreatment of stormwater runoff is required, ahead of infiltration BMPs. Please indicate which of the listed BMPs are planned to be implemented for the project:

Treatment Control BMP Planned Not
Planned
Gravity Separator devices for pretreatment of sediment, trash/litter or Oil & Grease

Proprietary Biofiltration vaults/devices
Media Cartridge Filtration Vaults
Proprietary Filter Inserts for on-site storm drain inlets or retention basin/trench overflow drains

1012
6 4. Volume-based calculation (approximate) for sizing on-site or off-site Stormwater Retention/Infiltration, Harvest & Re-Use or Biotreatment facilities

1) After calculating the “Watershed Imperviousness Ratio”, i, which is equal to the percent of impervious area in each Drainage Management Area, divided by 100, calculate the composite runoff coefficient CBMP for the Drainage Area above using the following equation:

3 2
CBMP = 0.858i – 0.78i + 0.774i + 0.04

where: CBMP = composite runoff coefficient; and,
i = watershed imperviousness ratio.

3) Determine the area-averaged “6-hour Mean Storm Rainfall”, P6, for the Drainage Area.

This is calculated by multiplying the area averaged 2-year 1-hour value (0.5”-0.6”) by the appropriate regression coefficient (1.4807). The 2-yr, 1-hr value for southern Ontario is approximately to 0.5” (P6 = 0.5*1.4807 = 0.74 and northern Ontario is approximately 0.6” in/hr (P6 = 0.6*1.4807 = 0.89).
4) Determine the appropriate drawdown time. Use the regression constant a = 1.582 for 24 hours and a = 1.963 for 48 hours. Note: Regression constants are provided for both 24 hour and 48-hour drawdown times; however, 48-hour drawdown times should be used in most areas of California. Drawdown times in excess of 48 hours should be used with caution as vector breeding can be a problem after water has stood in excess of 72 hours. (Use of the 24-hour drawdown time should be limited to drainage areas with coarse soils (Class ‘A’ soils that readily drain.) 5) Calculate the “Maximized Detention Volume”, P0, using the following equation:

P0 = a · CBMP · P6

where: P0 = Maximized Detention Volume, in inches
a = 1.582 for 24 hour and a = 1.963 for 48-hour drawdown, CBMP = composite runoff coefficient; and,
P6 = 6-hour Mean Storm Rainfall, in inches

6) Calculate the “Target Capture Volume”, V0, using the following equation:

V0 = (P0 · A) / 12

where: V0 = Target Capture Volume, in acre-feet
P0 = Maximized Detention Volume, in inches; and,
A = BMP Drainage Area, in acres
1013
7 Project Volume-based calculation (approximate) for planned on-site or off-site Stormwater Retention/Infiltration, Harvest & Re-Use or Biotreatment facilities:

Variable Factor/Formula DA1,
DMA A
DA1
DMA B
DA2
DMA A
DA2
DMA B
Impervious
surface/total
surface, ratio
(i)
CBMP= runoff
coefficient
3 2

0.858i –0.78i +0.774i+

0.04 P6 **P6 = 2-yr,1-hr
depth*1.4807 =
Detention Volume
(acre inches)
P0 = a * CBMP * P6 =
Drawdown rate of
basin/trench (a)

1.963 for 48-hr
drawdown =
Project Total Area
(acre)
(A)
Design Capture
Volume in cu. ft.

V0 = [(P0 * A)/12]
*43560 =
Retention Volume Retention capacity of
provided in cubic basins, trenches,
feet. underground storage or
biotreatment basin
**For P6 value, use site coordinates and NOAA website to determine project’s average 2-yr, 1-hr rainfall depth, at: http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/sa/sca_pfds.html .

5. Flow-Based calculation (approximate) for sizing on-site or off-site Biotreatment facilities and proprietary treatment technology BMPs:
1) After calculating the “Watershed Imperviousness Ratio”, i, which is equal to the percent of impervious area in each Drainage Management Area divided by 100, calculate the composite runoff coefficient CBMP for the Drainage Area above using the following equation:
3 2
CBMP = 0.858i – 0.78i + 0.774i + 0.04
where: CBMP = composite runoff coefficient; and,
i = watershed imperviousness ratio.
1014
8 2) Determine BMP design rainfall intensity, IBMP, using the project site geo-coordinates and the NOAA website to determine project’s average 2-yr, 1-hr rainfall intensity, at:
http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/sa/sca_pfds.html .Multiply this value by 0.2787 (regression coefficient for Ontario) and a minimum safety factor of 2. 4) Calculate the t arget BMP flowrate, Q, using the following formula (for each DMA <50 acres*):

Q = CBMP · IBMP · A

Where: Q = flow in cfs (Cubic feet per second)
IBMP = BMP design rainfall intensity, in/hr
A = Drainage Area in acres

*For DMAs >50 acres, with CBMP <0.5, the project applicant shall use the unit hydrograph method specified in the San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual, using the design storm pattern with rainfall return frequency such that the peak 1-hr rainfall intensity equals the 85th percentile 1-hr rainfall, multiplied by 2.

Project Flow-based calculation (approximate) for planned on-site or off-site flow-based Biotreatment facilities or Stormwater Treatment BMPs:

Variable Factor/Formula DA1
DMA A
DA1
DMA B
DA2
DMA A
DA2
DMA B
Impervious surface/
total surface, ratio
(i)
CBMP= composite
runoff coefficient
3 2

0.858i +0.78i +0.774i
+0.04

IBMP IBMP = 2-yr,1-hr storm
intensity*0.2787*safety
factor

Drainage area (ac) A = DMA sq ft/43,560
Target BMP flowrate Q = CBPM* IBMP * A

6. Hydrologic Conditions of Concern (HCOC) and use of the on-line San Bernardino County HCOC Map for determining necessary mitigation steps necessary if there are HCOCs downstream of a project:

Project applicants may access the on-line HCOC Map at:
http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/WAP/. The map will indicate any hydrology concerns with downstream waterways that are hydraulically connected to the project and will indicate if there are any approved regional projects downstream that could be utilized for off-site mitigation of HCOCs. Please indicate here if the project will or will not be able to retain/infilter, harvest and use or biotreat and detain the DCV, on-site, as calculated in Section 4 and if there are HCOCs identified downstream of the project:
1015
9 Retain or Harvest/Use the DCV on site? Yes No
Biotreat the DCV but not infilter the runoff? Yes No
HCOCs identified downstream of site? Yes No
If the entire DCV will not be retained on site, the DCV is biotreated but not infiltered or additional detention capacity is needed to address identified HCOCs, downstream of the site, please list here, what additional mitigation measures will be utilized (on-site or off-site) to address HCOCs (see Section 4.2.1-4.2.3 of the SB County WQMP Technical Guidance):

7. Site Plan and Conceptual Grading/Drainage Plan requirements for submission with the Preliminary WQMP:

Prov
ide a Site Plan and Conceptual Grading/Drainage Plan along with this Preliminary WQMP, which conceptually shows the proposed locations of buildings, homes, parking lots, parks, new paved roadways, landscaped areas, drainage patterns and drainage sub-areas, methods of conveyance, proposed retention/infiltration, harvest & use or biotreatment facilities that are planned for installation. Where it is determined to be infeasible to capture and detain design storm runoff volumes, on-site, please include other design features, as described in Section 3, above. Include numbered or lettered notes on the Site Plan with a legend detailing other BMPs, as described in Section 3.

8. BMP Mai
ntenance and Funding Mechanism & Description:

9. Acknowledgment:

As
the property owner or developer, I understand that this project is required to install and implement permanent LID Storm Water Best Management Practices pursuant to the requirements of the San Bernardino County MS4 Permit and to document those BMPs in the submittal of a Water Quality Management Plan, which is binding on any current or successive owners of this property.

10. Ex
emption Signature:

As
the property owner or developer, I understand that this project is not required by the San Bernardino County MS4 Permit to install and implement permanent LID Storm Water Best Management Practices and will not be required to submit a Water Quality Management Plan.

Signature of Owner or Developer Date
Yes No

1016
0 WARM-013
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
WH
UP
16R
WH
RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
RWH
UP
16R
WH
RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R WH
UP
16R
WH
R O
UP
16R
WH T
WHO
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
TR OWH
UP
16R
WHT
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
R O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH

T RO WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP16R
WH
O
T
R
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH
WHO
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
WH
WHO
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T
RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R WH
UP
16R
WH
R O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
R O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
WH
35 1017
1018
1019

PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY STUDY
Tentative Tract No. 20659
City of Ontario, County of San Bernardino

Project Address:
1355 West 5th Street
Ontario, California 91762

Prepared For:

Warmington Residential California
3090 Pullman Street
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Contact: Moses Kim
(877) 708-3454

Prepared By:

C&V Consulting, Inc.
9830 Irvine Center Drive
Irvine, CA 92618
Contact: Dane P. McDougall, P.E.
(949) 916-3800

Prepared: December 2023
1020

Preliminary Hydrology Study
For
TTM No. 20659

Acknowledgement and Signature Page

This Preliminary Hydrology Study was prepared by C&V Consulting, Inc. under the supervision of Dane P. McDougall, P.E.

___________________________________________ _________________ Dane P. McDougall P.E. 80705 Date
C&V Consulting, Inc.

1021

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Purpose .................................................................................................................................... 1 II. Site Description .................................................................................................................... 1 III. Existing Conditions .............................................................................................................. 1 IV. Proposed Conditions ............................................................................................................ 2 V. Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 2 VI. Design Assumption .............................................................................................................. 3 VII. Hydrology Analysis ............................................................................................................. 4 Detention/ Routing Analysis ....................................................................................................... 5 VIII. Hydraulics Analysis ......................................................................................................... 6 Pipe Sizing .................................................................................................................................. 6 Catch Basin Inlet Sizing ............................................................................................................. 6 100-Year Water Surface Elevation (WSE) ................................................................................. 6 IX. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 7 X. References ............................................................................................................................ 7

APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Maps and Exhibits
Existing Conditions Hydrology Map
City of Ontario Master Plan Drainage
Proposed Conditions Hydrology Map
NOAA Precipitation Data
USDA Soil Map
FEMA Flood Map
APPENDIX B Hydrology Analysis
Exiting Conditions AES Rational Method Output
Proposed Conditions AES Rational Method Output
APPENDIX C Detention Analysis
APPENDIX D Hydraulics Analysis
APPENDIX F Reference Documents
TTM No. 20659

1022
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County
1 | P a g e
I. Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide quantitative information to verify the design of the storm drain infrastructure and hydrologic methodology of the project site. The values and statements within the confirm the subject site is designed and planned in accordance with the San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual and the City of Ontario drainage requirements.

II. Site Description
The project site is located at 1355 West 5th Street, in the City of Ontario with a total land area of

3.06 acres (APN: 1008-551-12-0000). The total drainage management boundary of 3.50 acres includes upstream drainage areas from two offsite adjacent lots. The project site is bounded by 5th Street to the north, First Church of the Nazarene to the east, Church of God to the west and single- family residential units to the south.

According to the federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) FIRM rate map number 06071C8608H, effective date August 28, 2008, the site is located within flood Zone X, area of minimal flood hazard.

The project site is a portion of a Master Drainage P lan in the City of Ontario. The project site is located within drainage area VI, subarea ‘A5.3’ of the City of Ontario Master Plan of Drainage.

Refer to Appendix A for additional information.

III. Existing Conditions
The existing site currently consists of a church building with a paved parking area. There are two offsite adjacent residential lots located north of the site drain along the project site downstream as upstream run-on drainage areas. The existing conditions drainage generally sheet flows from the northeast corner to the south westerly boundary of the site. The southerly existing site boundary wall conditions of adjacent residential limits flow from continuing southerly into the residential lots and the onsite landscape areas appears to direct runoff westerly to exit the site near the southwesterly corner to the adjacent pervious landscape areas of the adjacent Church. The runoffs outlet then continues to follow the general south westerly direction of the Master Plan Drainage and confluence downstream at a catch basin inlet at Princeton Street and Benson Avenue . The confluence flow continues through the public storm drain system which is routed through San Antonio Creek to enter the Prado Dam which ultimately en ters the Santa Ana River to Pacific Ocean.

Per City of Ontario Master Plan of Drainage, the project site is located between the drainage node of 104 to 105. All tributary flow from subarea A5.3 was planned to be intercepted by drain inlets along Benson Avenue and enter the 42-inch public storm drain. Onsite drainage is intended to be collected within the same public storm drain system to continue downstream and confluence with collected runoffs at node 105.

Refer to Master Plan of Drainage in Appendix A for additional information. 1023
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County
2 | P a g e
IV. Proposed Conditions
The project proposes the construction of 12 condominium buildings with 70 dwelling units along with private garages, private drive aisles, sidewalks, and common landscaped areas. The project site will be accessible with a street entrance and exit on West 5th Street. The two offsite adjacent residential lots located upstream of the site drain confluence with the project site runoff, and it is routed downstream run-on drainage areas per historical drainage pattern. The site will be designed with drainage swal es to capture the upstream flows and routes along the project site. All offsite drainage areas run-on is accounted for within the drainage analysis for mitigation measures.

Grading of the proposed development is designed to route all on -site generated runoff via street flow towards the modular wetland system inlets located at low points of the site. The proposed modular wetland systems are design the treat low flows generated from the proposed site per water quality management plan requirements. Treated stormwater is directed to the proposed pump station for outflow mitigation via culvert connection offsite. The modular wetland systems are equipped with an internal bypass for high flows to be routed offsite. Per City of Ontario review comment, the proposed development 100-year storm event mitigated peak flow should be limited to 80% of the existing conditions 100-year storm event peak flow . The pump station is designed to limit higher generated peak flow from proposed site, along with the proposed detention to provide storage meet ing the mitigation requirement. All tributary areas’ c ollected run -off will continue downstream from the drainage system following the planned master plan drainage pattern.

The proposed drainage condition of the site follows the general direction of the existing and master plan drainage conditions southwesterly towards the adjacent property’s development. During a high storm event, the site is graded to sheet flow southwesterly which continues to outflow offsite in the direction of historical drainage conditions.

Refer to Hydrology Map in Appendix A for additional information.

V. Methodology
The project site’s drainage was analyzed per the San Bernardino Hydrology Manual. The runoff tributary area through the proposed project site is separated to multiple subareas and analyzed with acreage, land-use, soil type, peak flow rate and time of conce ntration according to the Rational Method and Hydrograph Method as described in the Hydrology Manual. Advance Engineering Software (AES) was utilized for the Rational Method analysis to obtain the confluence runoff through the project site from the upstream tributary areas.

The existing and proposed conditions of the site were analyzed for peak flow rate and time of concentration for the 2 -, 10-, 25- and 100-storm events to determine if detention and mitigation methods are required. As the proposed conditions were determined to generate a higher peak flow rate, proposed conditions hydrographs of the site were analyzed for peak flow rate mitigation for the 2- and 100-storm events to ensure proper drainage were provided. 1024
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County
3 | P a g e
VI. Design Assumption

1. The Advance Engineering Software (AES) Program was used to determine Peak run -off flow rate, time of concentration and run-off volume for subarea.

2. Precipitation Frequency Data was obtained through NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 6, Version 2 in Ontario, California referenced in Appendix A.

3. The site is in the soil classification of “A” per USDA Soil Map referenced in Appendix A.

4. Existing conditions onsite drainage areas are assumed as School/ Church and upstream offsite drainage area assumed as 3 -4 dwellings per acres based existing conditions perviousness and San Bernardino Hydrology Manual.

5. Proposed condition s onsite drainage areas are assumed as Apartment based planning conditions perviousness and San Bernardino Hydrology Manual.

6. Proposed onsite inlets are design with a capacity of the 100-year storm per streetways flood protection requirement from San Bernardino Hydrology Manual.

7. Proposed storm drains will be designed to convey the 100-year storm per mitigated runoff conforming to the drainage requirement.

8. All habitable structures must demonstrate the 100-year storm flood protection requirement per San Bernardino Hydrology Manual.

9. Proposed peak flow mitigation will be governed by the existing conditions of the project site as historical drainage patterns are preserved.
1025
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County
4 | P a g e
VII. Hydrology Analysis
Per existing conditions, the project site drains to the adjacent church and routes through Princeton Street to enter the existing 42-inch public storm drain along Benson Avenue. Proposed grading is designed to maintain the outlet to preserve existing and master plan planning conditions. A summary of the project site ’s proposed conditions peak runoff values for the outlet is provided below:

Existing conditions drainage summary at outlet:

Existing Conditions
Drainage Area Area (ac) Q2 (cfs) Q10 (cfs) Q25 (cfs) Q100 (cfs) DMA-Offsite 1 0.22 0.32 0.63 0.80 1.09
DMA-Offsite 2 0.22 0.32 0.63 0.80 1.09
DMA-XA-1 0.65 0.93 1.86 2.36 3.23
DMA-XA-2 2.41 2.61 5.73 7.37 10.29
Total Onsite Flowrate 3.06 3.54 7.59 9.73 13.52
Total Confluence Peak
Flowrate 3.50 3.79 8.32 10.70 14.94

Proposed conditions drainage summary at outlet:

Proposed Conditions
Drainage Area Area (ac) Q2 (cfs) Q10 (cfs) Q25 (cfs) Q100 (cfs) DMA-Offsite 1 0.22 0.32 0.63 0.80 1.09
DMA-Offsite 2 0.22 0.32 0.63 0.80 1.09
DMA-A-1 0.68 1.32 2.22 2.74 3.60
DMA-A-2 2.38 3.83 6.66 8.31 11.03
Total Onsite Flowrate 3.06 5.15 8.88 11.05 14.63
Total Confluence Peak
Flowrate 3.50 5.42 9.64 12.06 16.11
Refer to Appendix B for additional information on AES analysis outputs. 1026
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County
5 | P a g e
Detention/ Routing Analysis
As the proposed conditions of the site generate a higher peak flowrate compared to existing conditions at the outlet of the site and the proposed development 100-year storm event mitigated peak flow should be limited to 80% of the existing conditions 100-year storm event peak flow per City of Ontario review comment; a detention system is proposed for hydrologic mitigation.

The detention is designed with sufficient storage to retain the design storm event runoff volume while controlling outflow with a pump station and culvert to the design limits set per existing drainage conditions. Refer to summary of detention sizing below:

Detention summary of the project site:

Proposed Condition
Drainage Area Area (ac) Proposed Detention
Volume (cu-ft)
Total Drainage
Management Area 3.50
180 lf of 60” pipe
(3,684 cu-ft)

Drainage routing summary of the entire project site:

Area (ac) Q2 (cfs) Q100 (cfs)
Existing Conditions Confluence
Peak Flowrate 3.50 3.79 14.94
Proposed Conditions Generated
Runoff Peak Flowrate 3.50 5.15 16.11
Proposed Conditions Mitigated
Outflow 3.50 3.50 11.80
Proposed routing conditions are designed to preserve the existing conditions as described within the report.

Refer to Appendix C for additional Storage Information and Detention Routing Calculations. 1027
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County
6 | P a g e
VIII. Hydraulics Analysis
Pipe Sizing
Pipe Sizing is analyzed using WSPG software to verify 100-year storm hydraulic grade line (HGL) based on the 100-year storm event peak flow rates provides 1 feet of freeboard below the buildings on the street water surface elevation. The onsite storm drain is established with the proposed routing depth elevation per routing analysis of the 100-year storm event to simulate the storm drain system detaining storm runoff during the 100-year storm event and outflowing.

WSPG analysis will be provided during final engineering.

Catch Basin Inlet Sizing
Catch Basin inlets are designed based on the 100-year storm event to conform with San Bernardino Hydrology Street travel ways and catch basin sump conditions capacity.

Additional inlet sizing analysis will be provided during final engineering. 100-Year Water Surface Elevation (WSE)
The elevations of the 100-year storm event water surface are analyzed at local low point to determine the proper flood protection of the buildings. Building finished floors near sump collection point are to be set above the 100-year storm event water surface elevation or proper overflow mitigation is provided that storm runoff continues downstream to ensure buildings are not susceptible to flooding as storm runoff are determined to be contained within the street.

WSE analysis will be provided during final engineering.

1028
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County
7 | P a g e
IX. Conclusion
The results from the hydrologic analysis demonstrate that the design proposed conditions of the site satisfies the City of Ontario design standards. Per existing and master plan drainage conditions, the project site drains to the public 42 -inch storm drain along Benson Avenue downstream.

Proposed grading is designed to maintain the outlet to preserve existing and master plan drainage conditions.

The proposed drainage condition of the site follows the general direction of the development planning southwesterly towards the adjacent property’s development. During a high storm event, the site is graded to sheet flow which continues to outflow off -site in the direction of historical drainage conditions.

X. References

1. San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual, August 1986.

2. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOAA Precipitation Frequency Estimate, NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 6, Version 2.

3. United States Department of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey. May 8, 2023.

4. National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Data refreshed October, 2020.

5. Advance Engineering Software (AES) Program 2014 was utilized to determine peak flow rates and time of concentrations.

6. Urban Drainage Design Manual. United States Department of Transportation. Revised August 2013.

7. Hydraulic Toolbox 5.0. Federal Highways Administration. Build: 21 Aug 2021

8. WSPGW - CIVILDesign Version 14.11, Water Surface Pressure Gradient for Pipe Analysis.

9. Master Plan of Drainage. City of Ontario. Prepared by Hunsaker & Associates. March 2012.
1029
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

APPENDIX A
Maps and Exhibits

1030
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

Existing Conditions Hydrology Map

1031
0 WARM-013
Ʃ
35 Ʃ
Ʃ
Ʃ
Ʃ
1032
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

City of Ontario Master Plan Drainage

1033
IV
V
VI
VII
IX
XIV
VIII
30"
36" 42"
36"
42"
42"
36"
48"66"
36"
30"
30"
42"
84"96"2-6x6
36"
72"
72"84"90"
30"
90"
42"
36"
48"108"108"
30"
30"
108"
13x9
2-9x7
24"
10X9
108"
42"
24"36"42"66"84"84"
24"
84"
24"
54"
60"66"
24"
24"
78"
36"
24"
24"
24"
66"
66"
36"
42"
60"
24"
66"
24"
54"
84"84"
42"
36"
54"
60"
42"
84"96"102"
42"
72"
96"
36"
30"
72"78"
30"
60"
36"
54"
36"
48"
42"
66"
30"54"72"
30"48"
120"
78"
54"
30"
36"
36"
42"
42"
90"
60"
60"
96"102"9x7.5
48"
36"
60"66"
24"
42"
36"66" 42"54"
30"
48"
30"
42"
30"
60"
72"78"84"
60" 36"48"
48"
42"
36"60"
72"
60"
78"
72"78"
42"
54"
42"48"60"
48"
66"
72"
60"
60"
66"
66"
42"
30" 36"
48"
60"66"
120"132" (P) 108"
60"
30"42"
30"
30"
48"
60"
36"
48"66"
42"48"54"
72"
48"
48"54"
72"
54"
48"
66"
48"
72"
60"
36"
96"
96"
60"
36"
36"
36"
78"96"102"
54"
66"
96"
48"
132"
84"
54" 48"
54"
90"
36"
24"
48"
90"108"
60"
78"
24"
54"
36"
30"
24"24"24"24"24"
30" 54" 54"
72"
84"
42" 48"
30"
9x7.5 9x7.5
30"
36"
36"
42"
36"
84"
30"48"
36"
120"
120"
24"
87"
54"
24"
48"66"
66"
42"
78"
48"
54"48"
42"
66"
8th ST
BASINS

GROVE AVE
BASIN

ELY BASINS

RIVERSIDE DR
STORM DRAIN 2

ELY BASINS

EAST STATE ST

STORM DRAIN

EAST STATE ST

STORM DRAIN

FRANCIS ST

STORM DRAIN

WEST STATE STREETSTORM DRAIN

CHINO STORM DRAIN

MAGNOLIA

STORM DRAIN

CYPRESS

CHANNEL

SULTANACYPRESSSTORM DRAIN

EAST STATE STREETSTORM DRAIN
RIVERSIDE DRSTORM DRAIN 1
RIVERSIDE DRSTORM DRAIN 1
LOWER

CUCAMONGA

SPREADING

GROUNDS
X"
X

PROPOSED

PROJECT
SITE
1034
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

Proposed Conditions Hydrology Map

1035
0 WARM-013
Ʃ
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
WH
UP
16R
WH
RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
RWH
UP
16R
WH
RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R WH
UP
16R
WH
R O
UP
16R
WH T
WHO
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
TR OWH
UP
16R
WHT
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
R O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH

T RO WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP16R
WH
O
T
R
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH
WHO
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
WH
WHO
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T
RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R WH
UP
16R
WH
R O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
R O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
WH
35 Ʃ
Ʃ
Ʃ
Ʃ
1036
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

NOAA Precipitation Data

1037
NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 6, Version 2
Location name: Ontario, California, USA*
Latitude: 34.0783°, Longitude: -117.6738°
Elevation: m/ft**
* source: ESRI Maps
** source: USGS

POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES
Sanja Perica, Sarah Dietz, Sarah Heim, Lillian Hiner, Kazungu Maitaria, Deborah Martin, Sandra Pavlovic, Ishani Roy, Carl Trypaluk, Dale Unruh, Fenglin Yan, Michael Yekta, Tan Zhao, Geoffrey Bonnin, Daniel Brewer, Li-Chuan Chen, Tye Parzybok, John Yarchoan NOAA, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland PF_tabular | PF_graphical | Maps_&_aerials
PF tabular
PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches)1 Duration
Average recurrence interval (years)
1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000
5-min 0.120
(0.100‑0.146)

0.159
(0.132‑0.192)

0.209
(0.174‑0.254)

0.250
(0.206‑0.307)

0.307
(0.244‑0.389)

0.350
(0.273‑0.455)

0.395
(0.300‑0.527)

0.442
(0.326‑0.606)

0.507
(0.358‑0.726)

0.558
(0.380‑0.828)
10-min 0.172
(0.144‑0.209)

0.227
(0.189‑0.276)

0.299
(0.249‑0.364)

0.358
(0.295‑0.440)

0.439
(0.350‑0.558)

0.502
(0.391‑0.652)

0.567
(0.430‑0.755)

0.634
(0.467‑0.869)

0.727
(0.513‑1.04)

0.800
(0.544‑1.19)
15-min 0.208
(0.174‑0.252)

0.275
(0.229‑0.333)

0.362
(0.301‑0.440)

0.434
(0.357‑0.532)

0.531
(0.423‑0.675)

0.607
(0.473‑0.788)

0.685
(0.520‑0.913)

0.767
(0.565‑1.05)

0.879
(0.620‑1.26)

0.967
(0.658‑1.44)
30-min 0.308
(0.257‑0.373)

0.406
(0.338‑0.492)

0.535
(0.445‑0.651)

0.641
(0.528‑0.786)

0.785
(0.625‑0.997)

0.898
(0.699‑1.17)

1.01 (0.769‑1.35)

1.13 (0.835‑1.55)

1.30 (0.916‑1.86)

1.43 (0.973‑2.12)
60-min 0.459
(0.383‑0.556)

0.605
(0.504‑0.734)

0.797
(0.662‑0.969)

0.955
(0.786‑1.17)

1.17 (0.931‑1.49)

1.34 (1.04‑1.74)

1.51 (1.15‑2.01)

1.69 (1.24‑2.32)

1.94 (1.37‑2.77)

2.13 (1.45‑3.16)
2-hr 0.693
(0.578‑0.839)

0.906
(0.755‑1.10)

1.18 (0.982‑1.44)

1.41 (1.16‑1.73)

1.71 (1.36‑2.17)

1.94 (1.51‑2.52)

2.18 (1.65‑2.90)

2.42 (1.79‑3.32)

2.76 (1.95‑3.95)

3.02 (2.06‑4.48)
3-hr 0.875
(0.730‑1.06)

1.14 (0.950‑1.38)

1.48 (1.23‑1.80)

1.76 (1.45‑2.16)

2.13 (1.70‑2.71)

2.42 (1.88‑3.14)

2.71 (2.06‑3.61)

3.01 (2.22‑4.12)

3.41 (2.41‑4.88)

3.73 (2.54‑5.53)
6-hr 1.25
(1.04‑1.51)

1.62 (1.35‑1.96)

2.10 (1.74‑2.55)

2.49 (2.05‑3.05)

3.01 (2.39‑3.82)

3.40 (2.65‑4.42)

3.81 (2.89‑5.07)

4.22 (3.11‑5.79)

4.78 (3.37‑6.84)

5.22 (3.55‑7.74)
12-hr 1.64
(1.37‑1.99)

2.14 (1.78‑2.59)

2.79 (2.32‑3.39)

3.31 (2.73‑4.06)

4.02 (3.20‑5.10)

4.56 (3.55‑5.92)

5.11 (3.88‑6.81)

5.68 (4.19‑7.79)

6.45 (4.55‑9.24)

7.05 (4.80‑10.5)
24-hr 2.22
(1.96‑2.56)

2.92 (2.59‑3.38)

3.85 (3.40‑4.46)

4.61 (4.03‑5.38)

5.64 (4.78‑6.80)

6.44 (5.34‑7.93)

7.26 (5.88‑9.15)

8.11 (6.39‑10.5)

9.26 (7.01‑12.5)

10.2 (7.44‑14.2)
2-day 2.73
(2.42‑3.15)

3.67 (3.24‑4.23)

4.91 (4.33‑5.68)

5.94 (5.19‑6.93)

7.36 (6.23‑8.87)

8.47 (7.02‑10.4)

9.62 (7.79‑12.1)

10.8 (8.52‑14.0)

12.5 (9.44‑16.8)

13.8 (10.1‑19.2)
3-day 2.97
(2.63‑3.42)

4.04 (3.57‑4.66)

5.47 (4.82‑6.33)

6.66 (5.83‑7.77)

8.32 (7.04‑10.0)

9.62 (7.98‑11.8)

11.0 (8.89‑13.8)

12.4 (9.77‑16.1)

14.4 (10.9‑19.4)

16.0 (11.7‑22.3)
4-day 3.20
(2.84‑3.69)

4.40 (3.89‑5.07)

6.00 (5.29‑6.94)

7.33 (6.41‑8.55)

9.19 (7.78‑11.1)

10.7 (8.84‑13.1)

12.2 (9.86‑15.3)

13.8 (10.9‑17.9)

16.0 (12.1‑21.6)

17.8 (13.0‑24.9)
7-day 3.66
(3.24‑4.22)

5.09 (4.50‑5.87)

7.00 (6.17‑8.10)

8.60 (7.52‑10.0)

10.8 (9.16‑13.0)

12.6 (10.4‑15.5)

14.4 (11.7‑18.2)

16.3 (12.9‑21.1)

19.0 (14.4‑25.6)

21.1 (15.5‑29.5)
10-day 3.97
(3.51‑4.57)

5.55 (4.90‑6.40)

7.67 (6.76‑8.88)

9.44 (8.26‑11.0)

11.9 (10.1‑14.4)

13.9 (11.5‑17.1)

15.9 (12.9‑20.0)

18.0 (14.2‑23.4)

21.0 (15.9‑28.4)

23.4 (17.1‑32.7)
20-day 4.76
(4.21‑5.49)

6.72 (5.94‑7.75)

9.37 (8.26‑10.8)

11.6 (10.1‑13.5)

14.7 (12.5‑17.7)

17.2 (14.3‑21.2)

19.8 (16.0‑25.0)

22.6 (17.8‑29.2)

26.4 (20.0‑35.7)

29.5 (21.6‑41.2)
30-day 5.60
(4.96‑6.46)

7.89 (6.97‑9.10)

11.0 (9.71‑12.7)

13.7 (11.9‑15.9)

17.4 (14.7‑21.0)

20.4 (16.9‑25.1)

23.5 (19.1‑29.7)

26.9 (21.2‑34.8)

31.6 (23.9‑42.7)

35.5 (25.9‑49.5)
45-day 6.71
(5.94‑7.74)

9.35 (8.27‑10.8)

13.0 (11.5‑15.0)

16.1 (14.1‑18.8)

20.6 (17.4‑24.8)

24.2 (20.0‑29.7)

28.0 (22.7‑35.2)

32.1 (25.3‑41.5)

37.9 (28.7‑51.1)

42.7 (31.2‑59.5)
60-day 7.82
(6.92‑9.01)

10.7 (9.49‑12.4)

14.8 (13.1‑17.1)

18.3 (16.0‑21.4)

23.4 (19.8‑28.2)

27.5 (22.8‑33.8)

31.9 (25.9‑40.2)

36.7 (28.9‑47.5)

43.6 (33.0‑58.8)

49.2 (36.0‑68.7)
1 Precipitation frequency (PF) estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series (PDS).

Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90% confidence interval. The probability that precipitation frequency estimates (for a given duration and average recurrence interval) will be greater than the upper bound (or less than the lower bound) is 5%. Estimates at upper bounds are not checked against probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values.

Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information.

Back to Top
PF graphical
1038
Back to Top
Maps & aerials
Small scale terrain
1039
Large scale terrain
Large scale map
Large scale aerial
+
–
3km
2mi
+
–
100km
60mi
+
–
100km
60mi
1040
Back to Top
US Department of Commerce
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Weather Service
National Water Center
1325 East West Highway
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Questions?: [email protected]
Disclaimer
+
–
100km
60mi
1041
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

USDA Soil Map

1042
Soil Map—San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California (WARM-013_Soil Map)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
8/31/2023

3771230 3771250 3771270 3771290 3771310 3771330 3771350 3771370 3771390 3771410 3771230 3771250 3771270 3771290 3771310 3771330 3771350 3771370 3771390 3771410 437510 437530 437550 437570 437590 437610 437630 437650 437510 437530 437550 437570 437590 437610 437630 437650 34° 4' 54'' N
117° 40' 38'' W
34° 4' 54'' N
117° 40' 32'' W
34° 4' 47'' N
117° 40' 38'' W
34° 4' 47'' N
117° 40' 32'' WN
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 0 45 90 180 270
Feet
0 10 20 40 60
Meters
Map Scale: 1:998 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
1043

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.

Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:

Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.

Soil Survey Area: San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California
Survey Area Data: V
ersion 14, Sep 6, 2022
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 17, 2022—Jun 12, 2022
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Soil Map—San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California (WARM-013_Soil Map)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
8/31/2023

1044
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI TuB Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 5
percent slopes

5.0 100.0%
Totals for Area of Interest 5.0 100.0%
Soil Map—San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California WARM-013_Soil Map Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
8/31/2023

1045
San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California
TuB—Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2sx6y
Elevation: 650 to 3,110 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 25 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 62 to 65 degrees F
Frost-free period: 325 to 365 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition
Tujunga, loamy sand, and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Tujunga, Loamy Sand
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
A - 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand
C1 - 6 to 18 inches: loamy sand
C2 - 18 to 60 inches: loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 5 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R019XG912CA - Sandy Fan
Hydric soil rating: No
Map Unit Description: Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes---San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California
WARM-013_Soil Map_TuB
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
8/31/2023

1046
Minor Components
Tujunga, gravelly loamy sand
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Hanford, sandy loam
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California Survey Area Data: Version 14, Sep 6, 2022
Map Unit Description: Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes---San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California
WARM-013_Soil Map_TuB
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
8/31/2023

1047
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

FEMA Flood Map

1048
National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250
Feet
Ü

S E E F I S R E P O R T F O R D E T A I L E D L E G E N D A N D I N D E X M A P F O R F I R M P A N E L L A Y O U T

S P E C I A L F L O O D

H A Z A R D A R E A S
W i t h o u t B a s e F l o o d E l e v a t i o n ( B F E ) Z o n e A , V , A 9 9
W i t h B F E o r D e p t hZ o n e A E , A O , A H , V E , A R R e g u l a t o r y F l o o d w a y
0 . 2 % A n n u a l C h a n c e F l o o d H a z a r d , A r e a s o f 1 % a n n u a l c h a n c e f l o o d w i t h a v e r a g e d e p t h l e s s t h a n o n e f o o t o r w i t h d r a i n a g e a r e a s o f l e s s t h a n o n e s q u a r e m i l eZ o n e X F u t u r e C o n d i t i o n s 1 % A n n u a l
C h a n c e F l o o d H a z a r dZ o n e X
A r e a w i t h R e d u c e d F l o o d R i s k d u e t o L e v e e . S e e N o t e s .Z o n e X
A r e a w i t h F l o o d R i s k d u e t o L e v e eZ o n e D N O S C R E E NA r e a o f M i n i m a l F l o o d H a z a r dZ o n e X A r e a o f U n d e t e r m i n e d F l o o d H a z a r dZ o n e D C h a n n e l , C u l v e r t , o r S t o r m S e w e r L e v e e , D i k e , o r F l o o d w a l l
C r o s s S e c t i o n s w i t h 1 % A n n u a l C h a n c e 1 7 . 5W a t e r S u r f a c e E l e v a t i o n
C o a s t a l T r a n s e c t
C o a s t a l T r a n s e c t B a s e l i n e
P r o f i l e B a s e l i n e
H y d r o g r a p h i c F e a t u r e
B a s e F l o o d E l e v a t i o n L i n e ( B F E ) E f f e c t i v e L O M R s
L i m i t o f S t u d y
J u r i s d i c t i o n B o u n d a r y
D i g i t a l D a t a A v a i l a b l e
N o D i g i t a l D a t a A v a i l a b l e
U n m a p p e d
T h i s m a p c o m p l i e s w i t h F E M A 's s t a n d a r d s f o r t h e u s e o f d i g i t a l f l o o d m a p s i f i t i s n o t v o i d a s d e s c r i b e d b e l o w .

T h e b a s e m a p s h o w n c o m p l i e s w i t h F E M A 's b a s e m a p a c c u r a c y s t a n d a r d s
T h e f l o o d h a z a r d i n f o r m a t i o n i s d e r i v e d d i r e c t l y f r o m t h e a u t h o r i t a t i v e N F H L w e b s e r v i c e s p r o v i d e d b y F E M A . T h i s m a p w a s e x p o r t e d o n 4 / 1 8 / 2 0 2 3 a t 4 : 3 0 P M a n d d o e s n o t r e f l e c t c h a n g e s o r a m e n d m e n t s s u b s e q u e n t t o t h i s d a t e a n d t i m e . T h e N F H L a n d e f f e c t i v e i n f o r m a t i o n m a y c h a n g e o r b e c o m e s u p e r s e d e d b y n e w d a t a o v e r t i m e .

T h i s m a p i m a g e i s v o i d i f t h e o n e o r m o r e o f t h e f o l l o w i n g m a p e l e m e n t s d o n o t a p p e a r : b a s e m a p i m a g e r y , f l o o d z o n e l a b e l s , l e g e n d , s c a l e b a r , m a p c r e a t i o n d a t e , c o m m u n i t y i d e n t i f i e r s , F I R M p a n e l n u m b e r , a n d F I R M e f f e c t i v e d a t e . M a p i m a g e s f o r u n m a p p e d a n d u n m o d e r n i z e d a r e a s c a n n o t b e u s e d f o r r e g u l a t o r y p u r p o s e s .

Legend

O T H E R A R E A S O F

F L O O D H A Z A R D

O T H E R A R E A S

G E N E R A L

S T R U C T U R E S

O T H E R

F E A T U R E S

M A P P A N E L S
8 B 2 0 . 2
T h e p i n d i s p l a y e d o n t h e m a p i s a n a p p r o x i m a t e p o i n t s e l e c t e d b y t h e u s e r a n d d o e s n o t r e p r e s e n t a n a u t h o r i t a t i v e p r o p e r t y l o c a t i o n . 1:6,000
1 1 7 ° 4 0 '5 3 " W 3 4 ° 5 '4 " N
1 1 7 ° 4 0 '1 5 " W 3 4 ° 4 '3 4 " N
B a s e m a p : U S G S N a t i o n a l M a p : O r t h o i m a g e r y : D a t a r e f r e s h e d O c t o b e r , 2 0 2 0 1049
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

APPENDIX B
Hydrology Analysis

1050
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

Exiting Conditions AES Rational Method Output

1051
____________________________________________________________________________ ****************************************************************************

RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE
(Reference: 1986 SAN BERNARDINO CO. HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580
Analysis prepared by:

************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * ONTARIO SUNRISE * * 1355 WEST 5TH STREET * * EXISTING Q2 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: WA13X2.DAT
TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 18:21 09/26/2023
============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION:
============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*--
USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 2.00
SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00
SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *USER-DEFINED LOGARITHMIC INTERPOLATION USED FOR RAINFALL* SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE(LOG(I;IN/HR) vs. LOG(Tc;MIN)) = 0.6000 USER SPECIFIED 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 0.6050
*ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) I ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING

WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS:

1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET
as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb)

2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S)
*SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN
OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.*
1052
*USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<<
>>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 122.00
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1110.40 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 1107.80 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20
SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 6.077
* 2 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2.390
SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC I ):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) SCHOOL A 0.65 1.33 0.600 17 6.08 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.93
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.65 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.93 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 6.08
* 2 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2.390
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC I ):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 1.33 0.600 17 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.32 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.87 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.80 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.9 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.25 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 6.08
* 2 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2.390
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC I ):
1053
DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 1.33 0.600 17 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.32 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.09 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.80 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.1 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.56 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.20 IS CODE = 52 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW<<<<<
>>>>>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<<
============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1107.80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 1101.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 306.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0222 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 1.56
FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 2.44 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.09 Tc(MIN.) = 8.17
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.20 = 428.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.20 TO NODE 1.20 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 8.17
* 2 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2.002
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC I ):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN SCHOOL A 2.41 1.33 0.600 17 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2.41 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.61 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.80 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.79 ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY:

TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 TC(MIN.) = 8.17 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.80 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.600 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.79
============================================================================ ============================================================================

END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS
1054
____________________________________________________________________________ ****************************************************************************

RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE
(Reference: 1986 SAN BERNARDINO CO. HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580
Analysis prepared by:

************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * ONTARIO SUNRISE * * 1355 WEST 5TH STREET * * EXISTING Q10 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: WA13X10.DAT
TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 16:06 09/01/2023
============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION:
============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*--
USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 10.00
SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00
SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *USER-DEFINED LOGARITHMIC INTERPOLATION USED FOR RAINFALL* SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE(LOG(I;IN/HR) vs. LOG(Tc;MIN)) = 0.6000 USER SPECIFIED 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 0.9550
*ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) II ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING

WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS:

1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET
as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb)

2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S)
*SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN
OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.*
1055
*USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<<
>>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 122.00
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1110.40 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 1107.80 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20
SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 6.077
* 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.773
SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) SCHOOL A 0.65 0.98 0.600 32 6.08 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.97 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.86
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.65 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.86 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 6.08
* 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.773
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 0.98 0.600 32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.63 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.87 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.58 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.97 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.9 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.50 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 6.08
* 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.773
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):
1056
DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 0.98 0.600 32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.63 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.09 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.58 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.97 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.1 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.13 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.20 IS CODE = 52 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW<<<<<
>>>>>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<<
============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1107.80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 1101.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 306.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0222 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 3.13
FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 2.82 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.81 Tc(MIN.) = 7.88
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.20 = 428.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.20 TO NODE 1.20 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 7.88
* 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.228
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN SCHOOL A 2.41 0.98 0.600 32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2.41 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.73 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.59 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 8.32 ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY:

TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 TC(MIN.) = 7.88 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.59 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.600 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 8.32
============================================================================ ============================================================================

END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS
1057
____________________________________________________________________________ ****************************************************************************

RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE
(Reference: 1986 SAN BERNARDINO CO. HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580
Analysis prepared by:

************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * ONTARIO SUNRISE * * 1355 WEST 5TH STREET * * EXISTING Q25 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: WA13X25.DAT
TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 16:07 09/01/2023
============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION:
============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*--
USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 25.00
SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00
SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *USER-DEFINED LOGARITHMIC INTERPOLATION USED FOR RAINFALL* SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE(LOG(I;IN/HR) vs. LOG(Tc;MIN)) = 0.6000 USER SPECIFIED 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.1700
*ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) II ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING

WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS:

1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET
as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb)

2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S)
*SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN
OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.*
1058
*USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<<
>>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 122.00
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1110.40 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 1107.80 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20
SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 6.077
* 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.622
SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) SCHOOL A 0.65 0.98 0.600 32 6.08 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.97 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.36
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.65 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.36 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 6.08
* 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.622
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 0.98 0.600 32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.80 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.87 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.58 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.97 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.9 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.16 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 6.08
* 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.622
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):
1059
DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 0.98 0.600 32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.80 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.09 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.58 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.97 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.1 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.96 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.20 IS CODE = 52 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW<<<<<
>>>>>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<<
============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1107.80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 1101.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 306.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0222 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 3.96
FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 2.98 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.71 Tc(MIN.) = 7.79
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.20 = 428.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.20 TO NODE 1.20 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 7.79
* 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.983
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN SCHOOL A 2.41 0.98 0.600 32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2.41 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.37 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.59 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 10.70 ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY:

TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 TC(MIN.) = 7.79 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.59 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.600 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 10.70
============================================================================ ============================================================================

END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS
1060
____________________________________________________________________________ ****************************************************************************

RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE
(Reference: 1986 SAN BERNARDINO CO. HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580
Analysis prepared by:

************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * ONTARIO SUNRISE * * 1355 WEST 5TH STREET * * EXISTING Q100 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: WA13X100.DAT
TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 16:04 09/01/2023
============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION:
============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*--
USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00
SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00
SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *USER-DEFINED LOGARITHMIC INTERPOLATION USED FOR RAINFALL* SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE(LOG(I;IN/HR) vs. LOG(Tc;MIN)) = 0.6000 USER SPECIFIED 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.5100
*ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) III ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING

WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS:

1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET
as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb)

2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S)
*SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN
OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.*
1061
*USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<<
>>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 122.00
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1110.40 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 1107.80 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20
SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 6.077
* 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.965
SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) SCHOOL A 0.65 0.74 0.600 52 6.08 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.23
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.65 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.23 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 6.08
* 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.965
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 0.74 0.600 52 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.09 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.87 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.45 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.9 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4.32 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 6.08
* 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.965
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III):
1062
DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 0.74 0.600 52 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.09 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.09 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.45 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.1 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.42 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.20 IS CODE = 52 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW<<<<<
>>>>>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<<
============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1107.80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 1101.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 306.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0222 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 5.42
FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 3.20 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.59 Tc(MIN.) = 7.67
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.20 = 428.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.20 TO NODE 1.20 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 7.67
* 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.188
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN SCHOOL A 2.41 0.74 0.600 52 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2.41 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.29 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.45 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 14.94 ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY:

TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 TC(MIN.) = 7.67 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.45 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.600 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 14.94
============================================================================ ============================================================================

END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS
1063
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

Proposed Conditions AES Rational Method Output

1064
____________________________________________________________________________ ****************************************************************************

RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE
(Reference: 1986 SAN BERNARDINO CO. HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580
Analysis prepared by:

************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * ONTARIO SUNRISE * * 1355 WEST 5TH STREET * * PROPOSED Q2 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: WA13P2.DAT
TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 18:22 09/26/2023
============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION:
============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*--
USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 2.00
SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00
SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *USER-DEFINED LOGARITHMIC INTERPOLATION USED FOR RAINFALL* SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE(LOG(I;IN/HR) vs. LOG(Tc;MIN)) = 0.6000 USER SPECIFIED 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 0.6050
*ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) I ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING

WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS:

1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET
as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb)

2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S)
*SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN
OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.*
1065
*USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<<
>>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 176.00
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1110.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 1107.90 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20
SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.955
* 2 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2.420
SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC I ):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS A 0.68 1.33 0.200 17 5.95 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.32
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.68 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.32 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 5.95
* 2 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2.420
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC I ):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 1.33 0.600 17 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.32 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.90 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.40 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.30 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.9 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.64 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 5.95
* 2 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2.420
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC I ):
1066
DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 1.33 0.600 17 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.32 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.12 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.47 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.36 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.1 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.96 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.20 IS CODE = 61 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<<
>>>>>(STANDARD CURB SECTION USED)<<<<<
============================================================================ UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 1107.90 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 1103.20 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 322.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 6.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 23.00
DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 18.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020
OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020
SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1
Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0150 **TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 3.88 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW:

STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.35
HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.12
AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.87
PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.00
STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.87 Tc(MIN.) = 7.83 * 2 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2.053
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC I ):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN APARTMENTS A 2.38 1.33 0.200 17 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.83 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.33 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.25 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.42 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS:

DEPTH(FEET) = 0.38 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 12.71 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.13 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.19 1067
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.20 = 498.00 FEET. ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY:

TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 TC(MIN.) = 7.83 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.33 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 1.33 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.250 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.42
============================================================================ ============================================================================

END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS

1068
____________________________________________________________________________ ****************************************************************************

RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE
(Reference: 1986 SAN BERNARDINO CO. HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580
Analysis prepared by:

************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * ONTARIO SUNRISE * * 1355 WEST 5TH STREET * * PROPOSED Q10 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: WA13P10.DAT
TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 18:28 09/25/2023
============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION:
============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*--
USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 10.00
SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00
SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *USER-DEFINED LOGARITHMIC INTERPOLATION USED FOR RAINFALL* SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE(LOG(I;IN/HR) vs. LOG(Tc;MIN)) = 0.6000 USER SPECIFIED 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 0.9550
*ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) II ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING

WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS:

1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET
as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb)

2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S)
*SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN
OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.*
1069
*USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<<
>>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 176.00
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1110.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 1107.90 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20
SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.955
* 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.819
SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS A 0.68 0.98 0.200 32 5.95 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.22
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.68 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.22 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 5.95
* 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.819
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 0.98 0.600 32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.64 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.90 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.29 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.30 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.9 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.86 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 5.95
* 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.819
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):
1070
DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 0.98 0.600 32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.64 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.12 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.35 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.36 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.1 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.50 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.20 IS CODE = 61 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<<
>>>>>(STANDARD CURB SECTION USED)<<<<<
============================================================================ UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 1107.90 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 1103.20 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 322.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 6.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 23.00
DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 18.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020
OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020
SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1
Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0150 **TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 6.83 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW:

STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.41
HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 13.97
AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.30
PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.34
STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.63 Tc(MIN.) = 7.58 * 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.304
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN APARTMENTS A 2.38 0.98 0.200 32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.97 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.66 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.24 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.25 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 9.64 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS:

DEPTH(FEET) = 0.45 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 16.07 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.57 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.60 1071
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.20 = 498.00 FEET. ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY:

TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 TC(MIN.) = 7.58 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.24 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.250 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 9.64
============================================================================ ============================================================================

END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS

1072
____________________________________________________________________________ ****************************************************************************

RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE
(Reference: 1986 SAN BERNARDINO CO. HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580
Analysis prepared by:

************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * ONTARIO SUNRISE * * 1355 WEST 5TH STREET * * PROPOSED Q25 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: WA13P25.DAT
TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 18:31 09/25/2023
============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION:
============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*--
USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 25.00
SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00
SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *USER-DEFINED LOGARITHMIC INTERPOLATION USED FOR RAINFALL* SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE(LOG(I;IN/HR) vs. LOG(Tc;MIN)) = 0.6000 USER SPECIFIED 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.1700
*ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) II ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING

WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS:

1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET
as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb)

2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S)
*SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN
OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.*
1073
*USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<<
>>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 176.00
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1110.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 1107.90 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20
SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.955
* 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.679
SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS A 0.68 0.98 0.200 32 5.95 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.74
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.68 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.74 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 5.95
* 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.679
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 0.98 0.600 32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.81 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.90 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.29 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.30 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.9 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.55 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 5.95
* 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.679
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):
1074
DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 0.98 0.600 32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.81 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.12 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.35 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.36 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.1 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4.37 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.20 IS CODE = 61 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<<
>>>>>(STANDARD CURB SECTION USED)<<<<<
============================================================================ UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 1107.90 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 1103.20 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 322.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 6.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 23.00
DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 18.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020
OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020
SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1
Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0150 **TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 8.53 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW:

STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.43
HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 15.32
AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.46
PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.50
STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.55 Tc(MIN.) = 7.51 * 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.072
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN APARTMENTS A 2.38 0.98 0.200 32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.97 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.31 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.24 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.25 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 12.06 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS:

DEPTH(FEET) = 0.48 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 17.58 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.76 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.80 1075
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.20 = 498.00 FEET. ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY:

TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 TC(MIN.) = 7.51 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.24 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.98 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.250 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 12.06
============================================================================ ============================================================================

END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS

1076
____________________________________________________________________________ ****************************************************************************

RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE
(Reference: 1986 SAN BERNARDINO CO. HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580
Analysis prepared by:

************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * ONTARIO SUNRISE * * 1355 WEST 5TH STREET * * PROPOSED Q100 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: WA13P100.DAT
TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 18:32 09/25/2023
============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION:
============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*--
USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00
SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00
SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *USER-DEFINED LOGARITHMIC INTERPOLATION USED FOR RAINFALL* SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE(LOG(I;IN/HR) vs. LOG(Tc;MIN)) = 0.6000 USER SPECIFIED 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.5100
*ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) III ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING

WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS:

1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET
as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb)

2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S)
*SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN
OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.*
1077
*USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<<
>>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 176.00
ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1110.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 1107.90 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20
SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.955
* 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.039
SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS A 0.68 0.74 0.200 52 5.95 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.60
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.68 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.60 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 5.95
* 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.039
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 0.74 0.600 52 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.11 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.90 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.22 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.30 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.9 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4.71 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<<
============================================================================ MAINLINE Tc(MIN.) = 5.95
* 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.039
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III):
1078
DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN

RESIDENTIAL
"3-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE" A 0.22 0.74 0.600 52 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.600
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.11 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.12 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.26 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.36 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.1 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.82 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.20 IS CODE = 61 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<<
>>>>>(STANDARD CURB SECTION USED)<<<<<
============================================================================ UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 1107.90 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 1103.20 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 322.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 6.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 23.00
DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 18.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020
OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020
SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1
Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0150 **TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 11.35 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW:

STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.47
HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 17.16
AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.70
PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.74
STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.45 Tc(MIN.) = 7.40 * 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.299
SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III):

DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS

LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN APARTMENTS A 2.38 0.74 0.200 52 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200
SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.03 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.19 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.25 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 16.11 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS:

DEPTH(FEET) = 0.52 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 19.60 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.07 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 2.11 1079
LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.20 = 498.00 FEET. ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY:

TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.5 TC(MIN.) = 7.40 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 3.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.19 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.74 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.250 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 16.11
============================================================================ ============================================================================

END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS

1080
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

APPENDIX C
Detention Analysis

1081
Inflow Runoff (peak=16.11cfs)
Routed Runoff (peak=11.80cfs)
1082
Hydraulic Analysis Report
Project Data
Project Title: WARM-013 Detention Sizing
Designer: C&V Consulting, Inc.

Project Date: Friday, December 22, 2023
Project Units: U.S. Customary Units
Notes:

Detention Basin Analysis: Q100 Hydrograph Routing
Notes:

Storage Input Parameters
Storage Capacity: Known volume
Elevation ft Volume acre-ft

0.00 0.00

1.00 0.01

2.00 0.03

3.00 0.05

4.00 0.07

5.00 0.08

6.00 0.08
Discharge Input Parameters
Known Discharge: Pump Outflow
Discharge cfs

0.00 0.00

1.00 3.50

2.00 3.50

3.00 3.50

4.00 3.50

5.00 3.50

6.00 0.00
Riser: Culvert
Rectangular Opening
Opening Width: 4.0000 ft
1083
Opening Height: 1.0000 ft
Weir Coefficient: 3.3300
Orifice Coefficient: 0.6000
Height above Base Elev to Bottom of Opening: 5.0000 ft
Base Elevation: 0.0000 ft
Storage & Discharge Input Parameters
Elevation - Storage - Discharge
Elevation ft Storage acre-ft Discharge cfs

0.00 0.00 0.00

1.00 0.01 3.50

2.00 0.03 3.50

3.00 0.05 3.50

4.00 0.07 3.50

5.00 0.08 3.50

6.00 0.08 13.32
Detention Basin Input Parameters
Inflow Hydrograph
Peak Inflow Discharge: 16.110 cfs, Time to Peak: 967.20 (min), Total Inflow Volume:
91211.94 ft^3
Time (min) Discharge cfs

5.40 0.48

12.60 0.48

20.40 0.48

27.60 0.49

34.80 0.49

42.60 0.49

49.80 0.49

57.00 0.49

64.80 0.50

72.00 0.50

79.20 0.50

87.00 0.50

94.20 0.51
101.40 0.51
109.20 0.51
116.40 0.51
123.60 0.52
131.40 0.52
138.60 0.52
145.80 0.52
1084
153.60 0.53
160.80 0.53
168.00 0.53
175.80 0.53
183.00 0.54
190.20 0.54
198.00 0.54
205.20 0.54
212.40 0.55
220.20 0.55
227.40 0.55
234.60 0.56
242.40 0.56
249.60 0.56
256.80 0.57
264.60 0.57
271.80 0.57
279.00 0.57
286.80 0.58
294.00 0.58
301.20 0.59
309.00 0.59
316.20 0.59
323.40 0.59
331.20 0.60
338.40 0.60
345.60 0.61
353.40 0.61
360.60 0.62
367.80 0.62
375.60 0.62
382.80 0.63
390.00 0.63
397.80 0.63
405.00 0.64
412.20 0.64
420.00 0.65
427.20 0.65
434.40 0.66
442.20 0.66
449.40 0.67
456.60 0.67
464.40 0.68
471.60 0.68
478.80 0.69
486.60 0.70
493.80 0.70
501.00 0.71
508.80 0.72
516.00 0.72
1085
523.20 0.73
531.00 0.73
538.20 0.74
545.40 0.75
553.20 0.76
560.40 0.76
567.60 0.77
575.40 0.78
582.60 0.79
589.80 0.79
597.60 0.80
604.80 0.81
612.00 0.82
619.80 0.83
627.00 0.84
634.20 0.85
642.00 0.86
649.20 0.87
656.40 0.88
664.20 0.89
671.40 0.91
678.60 0.91
686.40 0.93
693.60 0.94
700.80 0.96
708.60 0.97
715.80 0.99
723.00 1.00
730.80 1.08
738.00 1.09
745.20 1.11
753.00 1.13
760.20 1.16
767.40 1.17
775.20 1.20
782.40 1.22
789.60 1.25
797.40 1.27
804.60 1.31
811.80 1.33
819.60 1.37
826.80 1.40
834.00 1.45
841.80 1.48
849.00 1.67
856.20 1.70
864.00 1.78
871.20 1.82
878.40 1.92
886.20 1.97
1086
893.40 2.09
900.60 2.16
908.40 2.33
915.60 2.43
922.80 2.71
930.60 3.09
937.80 3.64
945.00 4.00
952.80 4.96
960.00 6.61
967.20 16.11
975.00 4.09
982.20 3.34
989.40 2.55
997.20 2.24
1004.40 2.03
1011.60 1.87
1019.40 1.74
1026.60 1.55
1033.80 1.42
1041.60 1.35
1048.80 1.29
1056.00 1.23
1063.80 1.18
1071.00 1.14
1078.20 1.10
1086.00 1.05
1093.20 0.98
1100.40 0.95
1108.20 0.92
1115.40 0.90
1122.60 0.87
1130.40 0.85
1137.60 0.83
1144.80 0.81
1152.60 0.80
1159.80 0.78
1167.00 0.77
1174.80 0.75
1182.00 0.74
1189.20 0.72
1197.00 0.71
1204.20 0.70
1211.40 0.69
1219.20 0.68
1226.40 0.67
1233.60 0.66
1241.40 0.65
1248.60 0.64
1255.80 0.63
1087
1263.60 0.62
1270.80 0.61
1278.00 0.60
1285.80 0.60
1293.00 0.59
1300.20 0.58
1308.00 0.58
1315.20 0.57
1322.40 0.56
1330.20 0.56
1337.40 0.55
1344.60 0.55
1352.40 0.54
1359.60 0.53
1366.80 0.53
1374.60 0.52
1381.80 0.52
1389.00 0.51
1396.80 0.51
1404.00 0.50
1411.20 0.50
1419.00 0.50
1426.20 0.49
1433.40 0.49
1441.20 0.48
1448.40 0.00
Initial Storage = 0.0000 acre-ft
Detention Basin Result Parameters
Routed Hydrograph
Peak Outflow Discharge: 11.796 cfs, Time to Peak: 967.20 (min), Total Outflow Volume:
91351.62 ft^3
Time min Discharge cfs Storage acre-ft

0.00 0.00 0.000000

12.60 0.58 0.001907

20.40 0.46 0.002095

27.60 0.49 0.002097

34.80 0.49 0.002097

42.60 0.49 0.002097

49.80 0.49 0.002097

57.00 0.49 0.002097

64.80 0.50 0.002137

72.00 0.50 0.002129

79.20 0.50 0.002130

87.00 0.50 0.002130

94.20 0.51 0.002170
101.40 0.51 0.002162
1088
109.20 0.51 0.002164
116.40 0.51 0.002163
123.60 0.52 0.002203
131.40 0.52 0.002195
138.60 0.52 0.002197
145.80 0.52 0.002196
153.60 0.53 0.002236
160.80 0.53 0.002228
168.00 0.53 0.002230
175.80 0.53 0.002230
183.00 0.54 0.002269
190.20 0.54 0.002261
198.00 0.54 0.002263
205.20 0.54 0.002263
212.40 0.55 0.002303
220.20 0.55 0.002295
227.40 0.55 0.002296
234.60 0.56 0.002336
242.40 0.56 0.002328
249.60 0.56 0.002329
256.80 0.57 0.002369
264.60 0.57 0.002361
271.80 0.57 0.002362
279.00 0.57 0.002362
286.80 0.58 0.002402
294.00 0.58 0.002394
301.20 0.59 0.002435
309.00 0.59 0.002427
316.20 0.59 0.002429
323.40 0.59 0.002428
331.20 0.60 0.002468
338.40 0.60 0.002460
345.60 0.61 0.002502
353.40 0.61 0.002493
360.60 0.62 0.002535
367.80 0.62 0.002527
375.60 0.62 0.002528
382.80 0.63 0.002568
390.00 0.63 0.002560
397.80 0.63 0.002561
405.00 0.64 0.002601
412.20 0.64 0.002593
420.00 0.65 0.002634
427.20 0.65 0.002626
434.40 0.66 0.002667
442.20 0.66 0.002659
449.40 0.67 0.002701
456.60 0.67 0.002692
464.40 0.68 0.002734
471.60 0.68 0.002725
1089
478.80 0.69 0.002767
486.60 0.70 0.002798
493.80 0.70 0.002792
501.00 0.71 0.002833
508.80 0.72 0.002865
516.00 0.72 0.002858
523.20 0.73 0.002899
531.00 0.73 0.002891
538.20 0.74 0.002933
545.40 0.75 0.002964
553.20 0.76 0.002997
560.40 0.76 0.002991
567.60 0.77 0.003032
575.40 0.78 0.003063
582.60 0.79 0.003097
589.80 0.79 0.003090
597.60 0.80 0.003131
604.80 0.81 0.003163
612.00 0.82 0.003196
619.80 0.83 0.003229
627.00 0.84 0.003263
634.20 0.85 0.003296
642.00 0.86 0.003329
649.20 0.87 0.003362
656.40 0.88 0.003395
664.20 0.89 0.003428
671.40 0.90 0.003501
678.60 0.91 0.003487
686.40 0.92 0.003569
693.60 0.94 0.003592
700.80 0.95 0.003667
708.60 0.97 0.003692
715.80 0.98 0.003767
723.00 1.00 0.003792
730.80 1.05 0.004104
738.00 1.09 0.004082
745.20 1.10 0.004166
753.00 1.12 0.004229
760.20 1.15 0.004335
767.40 1.17 0.004354
775.20 1.19 0.004469
782.40 1.21 0.004526
789.60 1.24 0.004634
797.40 1.26 0.004692
804.60 1.30 0.004839
811.80 1.32 0.004889
819.60 1.35 0.005038
826.80 1.39 0.005128
834.00 1.43 0.005309
841.80 1.47 0.005392
1090
849.00 1.60 0.006130
856.20 1.70 0.006103
864.00 1.75 0.006426
871.20 1.81 0.006521
878.40 1.88 0.006899
886.20 1.96 0.007023
893.40 2.04 0.007475
900.60 2.14 0.007663
908.40 2.27 0.008301
915.60 2.40 0.008572
922.80 2.60 0.009630
930.60 2.96 0.010930
937.80 3.45 0.012857
945.00 3.50 0.017815
952.80 3.50 0.032295
960.00 3.50 0.063137
967.20 11.80 0.105922
975.00 8.63 0.082929
982.20 3.50 0.081342
989.40 3.50 0.071921
997.20 3.50 0.059425
1004.40 3.50 0.044846
1011.60 3.50 0.028681
1019.40 1.79 0.028209
1026.60 1.62 0.027548
1033.80 1.46 0.027163
1041.60 1.37 0.026961
1048.80 1.31 0.026763
1056.00 1.25 0.026564
1063.80 1.20 0.026405
1071.00 1.15 0.026277
1078.20 1.11 0.026144
1086.00 1.07 0.025972
1093.20 1.00 0.025728
1100.40 0.96 0.025657
1108.20 0.93 0.025552
1115.40 0.91 0.025493
1122.60 0.88 0.025386
1130.40 0.86 0.025328
1137.60 0.84 0.025260
1144.80 0.82 0.025194
1152.60 0.80 0.025167
1159.80 0.79 0.025093
1167.00 0.77 0.025068
1174.80 0.76 0.024994
1182.00 0.74 0.024969
1189.20 0.73 0.024894
1197.00 0.71 0.024869
1204.20 0.70 0.024834
1211.40 0.69 0.024802
1091
1219.20 0.68 0.024768
1226.40 0.67 0.024735
1233.60 0.66 0.024702
1241.40 0.65 0.024669
1248.60 0.64 0.024636
1255.80 0.63 0.024603
1263.60 0.62 0.024570
1270.80 0.61 0.024536
1278.00 0.60 0.024503
1285.80 0.60 0.024510
1293.00 0.59 0.024469
1300.20 0.58 0.024437
1308.00 0.58 0.024444
1315.20 0.57 0.024403
1322.40 0.56 0.024371
1330.20 0.56 0.024377
1337.40 0.55 0.024336
1344.60 0.55 0.024344
1352.40 0.54 0.024303
1359.60 0.53 0.024272
1366.80 0.53 0.024278
1374.60 0.52 0.024237
1381.80 0.52 0.024245
1389.00 0.51 0.024204
1396.80 0.51 0.024212
1404.00 0.50 0.024171
1411.20 0.50 0.024179
1419.00 0.50 0.024177
1426.20 0.49 0.024138
1433.40 0.49 0.024146
1441.20 0.48 0.024104
1448.40 0.19 0.022205
1455.60 0.00 0.022205
1092
Inflow Runoff (peak=5.42cfs)
Routed Runoff (peak=3.50cfs)
1093
Detention Basin Analysis: Q2 Hydrograph Routing
Notes:

Storage Input Parameters
Storage Capacity: Known volume
Elevation ft Volume acre-ft

0.00 0.00

1.00 0.01

2.00 0.03

3.00 0.05

4.00 0.07

5.00 0.08

6.00 0.08
Discharge Input Parameters
Known Discharge: Pump Outflow
Discharge cfs

0.00 0.00

1.00 3.50

2.00 3.50

3.00 3.50

4.00 3.50

5.00 3.50

6.00 0.00
Riser: Culvert
Rectangular Opening
Opening Width: 4.0000 ft
Opening Height: 1.0000 ft
Weir Coefficient: 3.3300
Orifice Coefficient: 0.6000
Height above Base Elev to Bottom of Opening: 5.0000 ft
Base Elevation: 0.0000 ft
Storage & Discharge Input Parameters
Elevation - Storage - Discharge
Elevation ft Storage acre-ft Discharge cfs
1094

0.00 0.00 0.00

1.00 0.01 3.50

2.00 0.03 3.50

3.00 0.05 3.50

4.00 0.07 3.50

5.00 0.08 3.50

6.00 0.08 13.32
Detention Basin Input Parameters
Inflow Hydrograph
Peak Inflow Discharge: 5.420 cfs, Time to Peak: 967.80 (min), Total Inflow Volume:
31072.68 ft^3
Time (min) Discharge cfs

4.80 0.00

12.60 0.15

20.40 0.15

28.20 0.15

36.00 0.15

43.80 0.15

51.60 0.15

59.40 0.16

67.20 0.16

75.00 0.16

82.80 0.16

90.60 0.16

99.00 0.16
106.80 0.16
114.60 0.16
122.40 0.16
130.20 0.16
138.00 0.16
145.80 0.16
153.60 0.17
161.40 0.17
169.20 0.17
177.00 0.17
184.80 0.17
192.60 0.17
200.40 0.17
208.20 0.17
216.00 0.17
223.80 0.17
231.60 0.18
239.40 0.18
247.20 0.18
255.60 0.18
263.40 0.18
1095
271.20 0.18
279.00 0.18
286.80 0.18
294.60 0.19
302.40 0.19
310.20 0.19
318.00 0.19
325.80 0.19
333.60 0.19
341.40 0.19
349.20 0.19
357.00 0.20
364.80 0.20
372.60 0.20
380.40 0.20
388.20 0.20
396.00 0.20
403.80 0.21
411.60 0.21
420.00 0.21
427.80 0.21
435.60 0.21
443.40 0.21
451.20 0.22
459.00 0.22
466.80 0.22
474.60 0.22
482.40 0.22
490.20 0.23
498.00 0.23
505.80 0.23
513.60 0.23
521.40 0.23
529.20 0.24
537.00 0.24
544.80 0.24
552.60 0.24
560.40 0.25
568.80 0.25
576.60 0.25
584.40 0.26
592.20 0.26
600.00 0.26
607.80 0.27
615.60 0.27
623.40 0.27
631.20 0.28
639.00 0.28
646.80 0.28
654.60 0.29
1096
662.40 0.29
670.20 0.30
678.00 0.30
685.80 0.31
693.60 0.31
701.40 0.32
709.20 0.32
717.00 0.33
725.40 0.33
733.20 0.41
741.00 0.41
748.80 0.42
756.60 0.42
764.40 0.44
772.20 0.44
780.00 0.45
787.80 0.46
795.60 0.47
803.40 0.48
811.20 0.50
819.00 0.51
826.80 0.52
834.60 0.53
842.40 0.56
850.20 0.64
858.00 0.67
865.80 0.68
873.60 0.72
882.00 0.74
889.80 0.78
897.60 0.80
905.40 0.86
913.20 0.89
921.00 0.97
928.80 1.03
936.60 1.17
944.40 1.27
952.20 1.53
960.00 1.96
967.80 5.42
975.60 1.32
983.40 1.09
991.20 0.93
999.00 0.83
1006.80 0.75
1014.60 0.70
1022.40 0.66
1030.20 0.54
1038.60 0.51
1046.40 0.49
1097
1054.20 0.47
1062.00 0.45
1069.80 0.43
1077.60 0.41
1085.40 0.40
1093.20 0.32
1101.00 0.31
1108.80 0.30
1116.60 0.29
1124.40 0.29
1132.20 0.28
1140.00 0.27
1147.80 0.26
1155.60 0.26
1163.40 0.25
1171.20 0.25
1179.00 0.24
1186.80 0.24
1195.20 0.23
1203.00 0.23
1210.80 0.22
1218.60 0.22
1226.40 0.21
1234.20 0.21
1242.00 0.21
1249.80 0.20
1257.60 0.20
1265.40 0.20
1273.20 0.20
1281.00 0.19
1288.80 0.19
1296.60 0.19
1304.40 0.18
1312.20 0.18
1320.00 0.18
1327.80 0.18
1335.60 0.18
1343.40 0.17
1351.20 0.17
1359.60 0.17
1367.40 0.17
1375.20 0.17
1383.00 0.16
1390.80 0.16
1398.60 0.16
1406.40 0.16
1414.20 0.16
1422.00 0.16
1429.80 0.15
1437.60 0.15
1098
1445.40 0.15
1453.20 0.00
Initial Storage = 0.0000 acre-ft
Detention Basin Result Parameters
Routed Hydrograph
Peak Outflow Discharge: 3.500 cfs, Time to Peak: 967.80 (min), Total Outflow Volume:
31091.57 ft^3
Time min Discharge cfs Storage acre-ft

0.00 0.00 0.000000

12.60 0.09 0.000615

20.40 0.16 0.000542

28.20 0.15 0.000577

36.00 0.15 0.000568

43.80 0.15 0.000570

51.60 0.15 0.000570

59.40 0.16 0.000611

67.20 0.16 0.000601

75.00 0.16 0.000604

82.80 0.16 0.000603

90.60 0.16 0.000603

99.00 0.16 0.000603
106.80 0.16 0.000603
114.60 0.16 0.000603
122.40 0.16 0.000603
130.20 0.16 0.000603
138.00 0.16 0.000603
145.80 0.16 0.000603
153.60 0.17 0.000644
161.40 0.17 0.000634
169.20 0.17 0.000637
177.00 0.17 0.000636
184.80 0.17 0.000636
192.60 0.17 0.000636
200.40 0.17 0.000636
208.20 0.17 0.000636
216.00 0.17 0.000636
223.80 0.17 0.000636
231.60 0.18 0.000677
239.40 0.18 0.000668
247.20 0.18 0.000670
255.60 0.18 0.000669
263.40 0.18 0.000669
271.20 0.18 0.000669
279.00 0.18 0.000669
286.80 0.18 0.000669
294.60 0.19 0.000710
1099
302.40 0.19 0.000701
310.20 0.19 0.000703
318.00 0.19 0.000702
325.80 0.19 0.000703
333.60 0.19 0.000703
341.40 0.19 0.000703
349.20 0.19 0.000703
357.00 0.20 0.000744
364.80 0.20 0.000734
372.60 0.20 0.000736
380.40 0.20 0.000736
388.20 0.20 0.000736
396.00 0.20 0.000736
403.80 0.21 0.000777
411.60 0.21 0.000767
420.00 0.21 0.000769
427.80 0.21 0.000769
435.60 0.21 0.000769
443.40 0.21 0.000769
451.20 0.22 0.000810
459.00 0.22 0.000800
466.80 0.22 0.000802
474.60 0.22 0.000802
482.40 0.22 0.000802
490.20 0.23 0.000843
498.00 0.23 0.000833
505.80 0.23 0.000836
513.60 0.23 0.000835
521.40 0.23 0.000835
529.20 0.24 0.000876
537.00 0.24 0.000866
544.80 0.24 0.000869
552.60 0.24 0.000868
560.40 0.25 0.000909
568.80 0.25 0.000900
576.60 0.25 0.000902
584.40 0.26 0.000942
592.20 0.26 0.000933
600.00 0.26 0.000935
607.80 0.27 0.000975
615.60 0.27 0.000966
623.40 0.27 0.000968
631.20 0.28 0.001009
639.00 0.28 0.000999
646.80 0.28 0.001001
654.60 0.29 0.001042
662.40 0.29 0.001032
670.20 0.30 0.001075
678.00 0.30 0.001065
685.80 0.31 0.001109
1100
693.60 0.31 0.001098
701.40 0.32 0.001142
709.20 0.32 0.001131
717.00 0.33 0.001175
725.40 0.33 0.001165
733.20 0.38 0.001495
741.00 0.42 0.001417
748.80 0.41 0.001476
756.60 0.42 0.001462
764.40 0.43 0.001547
772.20 0.44 0.001527
780.00 0.45 0.001573
787.80 0.46 0.001603
795.60 0.47 0.001637
803.40 0.48 0.001670
811.20 0.49 0.001744
819.00 0.51 0.001768
826.80 0.52 0.001803
834.60 0.53 0.001836
842.40 0.55 0.001951
850.20 0.61 0.002252
858.00 0.67 0.002303
865.80 0.68 0.002332
873.60 0.71 0.002489
882.00 0.74 0.002534
889.80 0.77 0.002687
897.60 0.80 0.002733
905.40 0.84 0.002968
913.20 0.88 0.003035
921.00 0.94 0.003347
928.80 1.01 0.003519
936.60 1.12 0.004053
944.40 1.24 0.004336
952.20 1.44 0.005335
960.00 1.82 0.006861
967.80 3.50 0.027489
975.60 3.50 0.011600
983.40 1.13 0.011127
991.20 0.98 0.010583
999.00 0.86 0.010302
1006.80 0.77 0.010041
1014.60 0.71 0.009898
1022.40 0.67 0.009768
1030.20 0.58 0.009306
1038.60 0.51 0.009293
1046.40 0.50 0.009214
1054.20 0.48 0.009151
1062.00 0.46 0.009084
1069.80 0.44 0.009018
1077.60 0.42 0.008951
1101
1085.40 0.40 0.008926
1093.20 0.35 0.008604
1101.00 0.31 0.008639
1108.80 0.30 0.008590
1116.60 0.29 0.008561
1124.40 0.29 0.008568
1132.20 0.28 0.008525
1140.00 0.27 0.008494
1147.80 0.26 0.008460
1155.60 0.26 0.008468
1163.40 0.25 0.008425
1171.20 0.25 0.008436
1179.00 0.24 0.008392
1186.80 0.24 0.008402
1195.20 0.23 0.008359
1203.00 0.23 0.008369
1210.80 0.22 0.008326
1218.60 0.22 0.008336
1226.40 0.21 0.008293
1234.20 0.21 0.008303
1242.00 0.21 0.008301
1249.80 0.20 0.008260
1257.60 0.20 0.008270
1265.40 0.20 0.008268
1273.20 0.20 0.008268
1281.00 0.19 0.008227
1288.80 0.19 0.008237
1296.60 0.19 0.008234
1304.40 0.18 0.008194
1312.20 0.18 0.008203
1320.00 0.18 0.008201
1327.80 0.18 0.008202
1335.60 0.18 0.008202
1343.40 0.17 0.008161
1351.20 0.17 0.008170
1359.60 0.17 0.008168
1367.40 0.17 0.008169
1375.20 0.17 0.008168
1383.00 0.16 0.008128
1390.80 0.16 0.008137
1398.60 0.16 0.008135
1406.40 0.16 0.008135
1414.20 0.16 0.008135
1422.00 0.16 0.008135
1429.80 0.15 0.008094
1437.60 0.15 0.008104
1445.40 0.15 0.008102
1453.20 0.06 0.007487
1461.00 0.00 0.007487

1102
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

APPENDIX D
Hydraulics Analysis

(To be provided during Final Engineering)
1103
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

APPENDIX F
Reference Documents

1104
Preliminary Hydrology Study
City of Ontario, San Bernardino County

TTM No. 20659

1105
35 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 20659

IN THE CITY OF ONTARIO, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
LOT 1 FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES
1106

CATV TEL
CATV
TEL

CATVTEL
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
WH
UP
16R
WH
R O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
RWH
UP
16R
WH
RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP16R
WH
O
T
RWH
UP
16R
WH
RO
UP
16R
WHT
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH

T RO WH
UP
16R
WH T
WHO
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T R
O
WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH

T RO WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH
WHO
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
WH
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R WH
UP
16R
WH
R O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T
R O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH
35 1107
1108
CATV
TEL
CATV
TEL

CATVTEL
35 UP16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
WH
UP
16R
WH
R O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
RWH
UP
16R
WH
RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
RWH
UP
16R
WH
RO
UP
16R
WHT
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH

T RO WH
UP16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH T
WHO
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP16R
WH
TR
O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP16R
WH
T RO
WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH

T RO WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH
WHO
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
WH
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
WH
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R WH
UP
16R
WH
R O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
RO
UP16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP
16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
TR O
UP16R
WH
O
T
R
UP
16R
WH
T RO
WH
CATV
TEL
1109
35 1110
KPC EHS Consultants, LLC
Technical Memorandum

To: EPC Environmental, Inc. Ernest Perea
From: Kevin P. Carr, MS., KPC EHS Consultants
Date: December 15, 2023
Re: EPC 23-33 Ontario Sunrise Residential Project – Noise Assessment ______________________________________________________________________________

1.0 Purpose

The purpose of this memorandum is to document the impacts of construction, mobile, operational noise, and vibration as it relates to the potential environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed Residential Project on approximately 3.1 acres.

2.0 Project Location & Description

2.1 Project Location:

The proposed project site is located in the City of Ontario, San Bernardino County, California on the south side of West 5th Street west of the intersection with North Elderberry Avenue and east of the intersection with North Helen Avenue at 1355 West 5th Street also referred to as APN 1008-551-12.

2.2 Description:

The Applicant is proposing 70 townhome residential units, utility infrastructure, internal roadways and sidewalks, utilities, open space, and landscaping on an approximately 3.1-acres.

3.0 Noise Impacts

3.1 Ambient Noise:

The primary sources for existing ambient noise in the Project area is from traffic generated primarily from West 5th Street, north boundary of the project site, Benson Avenue ¼ mile to the west, and North Mountain Avenue 0.4 miles east, as well as residential noises from surrounding properties.

3.1.1 Existing Ambient Noise Level Measurements: To assess the existing noise level environment short-term noise measurements were obtained from 4 locations in the Project study area. Exhibit 3-A Noise Monitoring Map, provides the locations of the noise level measurements. Table 3.1.1 Ambient Noise Level Measurements provides the noise measurements. Ambient noise datasheets are included in Appendix A. 1111

Exhibit 3-A Noise Monitoring Map

Table 3-1 Ambient Noise Level Measurements
Location Distance to
Project
Center
Description Average
Noise Level
dBA (Leq)
Maimum
Noise Level
(Lmax)
#1 320 ft. Northwest Corner of Site 61.0 69.0
#2 925 ft El Camino Elementary School 57.8 66.8
#3 460 ft Southwest Corner of W.

Princeton & N. Oaks Avenue

58.6 65.8
#4 770 ft Northwest Corner of W. 5th &
N. Elderberry Avenue

61.8 70.6
Source: Ambient Noise Measurement Datasheets, Appendix A.

1112
The Bureau of Transportation Statistics provides the National Transportation Noise Map as a basis for understanding what-if scenarios and helping policy makers and planners to prioritize noise-related transportation investments. 1 The data on the noise map allows for viewing the potential exposure to aviation, highway, and rail noise. The current data for the roadways in the project area as well as Interstate 15 and State Route 91 near the Project site from the 2016 – 2018 noise map and is presented in Exhibit 3-B. The Noise Map contours are representative of the measured ambient noise measurements as presented in Table 3-1.

Exhibit 3-B National Transportation Noise Map: Project Area

1 Bureau of Transportation Statistics, National Transportation Noise Map: https://www.bts.gov/geospatial/national- transportation-noise-map accessed October 27, 2023.
1113

3.1.2 Sensitive Receptors (Noise Sensitive Land Uses): Noise-sensitive land uses are locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound could adversely affect the use of the land. Sensitive receptor locations are generally identified as facilities where it is possible that an individual could remain for 24 hours. Commercial and industrial facilities are not included in the definition of sensitive receptor because employees typically are present for shorter periods of time, such as eight hours.

Residences, schools, hospitals, guest lodging, libraries, nursing homes, auditoriums, concert halls, amphitheaters, playgrounds, and parks are considered noise sensitive . The closest sensitive receptors to the Project site are include residential to the north, northeast, and south, as indicated in Table 3-2.

The properties adjacent to the north across 5th Street are residential (single family residential, multi-family residential) and commercial, the Gibbs Park and El Camino Elementary School to the west, to the south are existing residential, and to the east is the Ontario First Nazarene Church and Anthony Munoz Park, followed by residential. The nearest school is the El Camino Elementary School approximately 725 feet west of the site boundary.

Table 3-2 Sensitive Receptors Locations
Receptor Distance from Project Site
Boundary (feet)
Distance from Project
Construction Center (feet)
El Camino Elementary School (West) 535 725
Residence – (closest adjacent south) 62 205
Residential (North across W 5th St) 82 345
Anthony Munoz Park (East) 345 510
Gibbs Park (West) 205 390
Source: Google Earth Pro, November 24, 2023

3.2 Construction Noise:

Construction activities that would create noise include site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. N oise l evels associat ed with the construction will vary with th e different types of construction equipment , the duration of the activity, and distance from the source. Construction no ise w ill have a tem porary or perio dic increase in the ambient n oise level above t he existin g levels within t he Project vicinity. The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are the residential uses to the south, multi-family residences located across 5th Street to the north, the El Camino Elementary School and Gibbs Park to the west, and Anthony Munoz Park to the east of the Project site. The closet southern adjacent residence is approximately 205 feet south of the property center and approximately 62 feet from the project site boundary and represents the closest receptors to the site. To estimate the potential impact of construction noise at the nearest sensitive receptors, equipment that is expected to be used during construction was input into the Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) version 1.1 to generate anticipated noise levels and included as Appendix B. The RCNM generates the maximum noise levels (Lmax) and the 1114
equivalent continuous sound level (Leq). The Leq is a calculation of the anticipated steady sound pressure level which, over a given time period (day, evening, night) has the same total energy as the actual fluctuating noise. The RCNM also uses an acoustical use factor in the noise calculations.

The acoustical use factor is the percentage of time each piece of construction equipment is assumed to be operating at the full power level and is used to estimate the Leq values from the Lmax values. For example, typical operating cycles for these ty pes of co nstruction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power o peration followed by three to f our minutes at lower power settings. Noise l evels w ill be loudest during the site preparation and grading phases. Table 3-3, Construction Equipment Noise Levels at the Nearest Receptor, identifies the level of noise generated by construction equipment.

Table 3-3 Construction Equipment Noise Levels at the Nearest Sensitive Receptor (Property line if Project Site to Northwest Residence)

Source
Approximate Distance
to Nearest Receptor 1
(Property Line of Construction Site
to Residence) (feet)
Sound Level at
Nearest Receptor
Lmax Acoustical Use
Factor (%)
Leq
Backhoe 62 75.7 40 71.7
Concrete Mixer Truck 62 76.9 40 73.0
Compressor (air) 62 75.8 40 71.8
Concrete Pump Truck 62 79.5 20 72.5
Crane 62 78.7 16 70.7
Dozer 62 79.8 40 75.8
Dump Truck 62 74.6 40 70.6
Excavator 62 78.8 40 74.9
Flat Bed Truck 62 72.4 40 68.4
Front End Loader 62 77.2 40 73.3
Generator 62 78.8 50 75.8
Grader 62 83.1 40 79.2
Man Lift 62 72.8 20 65.8
Paver 62 75.4 50 72.3
Pickup Truck 62 73.1 40 69.2
Pneumatic Tools 62 83.3 50 80.3
Roller 62 78.1 20 71.1
Scraper 62 81.7 40 77.7
Tractor 62 82.1 40 78.2
Welder / Torch 62 72.1 40 68.2
Source: FHWA – RCNM Version 1.1, Appendix B.

1115
Table 3-4 Construction Equipment Noise Levels at the Nearest Sensitive Receptor (Center of Project Site to Northwest Residence )

Source
Approximate Distance
to Nearest Receptor 1
(Center of Site to Residence) (feet)
Sound Level at
Nearest Receptor
Lmax Acoustical Use
Factor (%)
Leq
Backhoe 205 65.3 40 61.3
Concrete Mixer Truck 205 66.5 40 62.6
Compressor (air) 205 65.4 40 61.4
Concrete Pump Truck 205 69.1 20 62.2
Crane 205 68.3 16 60.3
Dozer 205 69.4 40 65.4
Dump Truck 205 64.2 40 60.2
Excavator 205 68.5 40 64.5
Flat Bed Truck 205 62.0 40 58.0
Front End Loader 205 66.9 40 62.9
Generator 205 68.4 50 65.4
Grader 205 72.7 40 68.8
Man Lift 205 62.4 20 55.5
Paver 205 65.0 50 62.0
Pickup Truck 205 62.7 40 58.8
Pneumatic Tools 205 72.9 50 69.9
Roller 205 67.7. 20 60.8
Scraper 205 71.3 40 67.3
Tractor 205 71.7 40 67.8
Welder / Torch 205 61.7 40 57.8
Source: FHWA – RCNM Version 1.1, Appendix B.

The highest anticipated construction noise levels would be from the use of pneumatic tools with a level of 83.3 dBA Lmax and 80.3 dBA Leq at 62 feet from the source to the receptor and 72.9 Lmax and 69.9 Leq at 205 feet from the source to the receptor.

The City of Ontario has set restrictions to control noise impacts from construction activities. The Corona Municipal Code 5-29.09 Construction Activity Noise Regulations prohibits construction noise except between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. weekdays and between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays.

While the City establishes limits to the hours during which construction activity may take place, it does not identify specific noise level limits for construction noise levels. Therefore, to evaluate whether the Project will generate a substantial increase in the short-term noise levels at the 1116
offsite sensitive receptors (residences), the construction-related noise level threshold is based on the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommended exposure limit (REL) for occupation noise exposure at 85 dBA, as an 8-hour time-weighted average (85 dBA – 8-hr TWA). Using the equipment from the Air Quality GHG Technical Memorandum CalEEMod data for the Site Preparation and Grading Phases, each piece of equipment operating at the same time in the same location for a full 8-hour period was calculated with results provided in Table 3- 5, Worse Case Construction Noise Levels (Site Preparation & Grading).

Table 3-5 Worse Case Construction Noise Levels - Site Preparation & Grading (Center of Site to Nearest Receptor)
Phase Equipment Type Number of
Units
Leq dBA/unit Leq dBA Total
Site Preparation Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 4 61.3 67.3
Site Preparation Rubber Tire Dozers 3 65.4 70.2
Site Preparation Total Noise Level 72.0
Grading Grader 1 68.8 68.8
Grading Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 3 61.3 66.1
Grading Rubber Tired Dozer 1 65.4 65.4
Grading Excavator 1 64.5 64.5
Grading Total Noise Level 72.5

During the construction phase the noise levels will be the highest during site preparation and grading as heavy equipment pass along the Project site boundaries. During the site preparation and grading phases, which produce the highest noise levels, equipment will not be stationary, rather equipment will be moving throughout the site at varying speeds and power levels and as a result not operating at the maximum noise level for the entire workday. Using the default equipment type and number for the site preparation and grading phases from the CalEEMod AQ report the potential noise impacts of the equipment operating simultaneously and in the same area at the center of the property to the closest residential uses the construction noise impacts would be 72.0 Leq dBA during site preparation and 72.5 Leq dBA during grading operations.

As the equipment will be moving during the site preparation and grading phases t he levels of noise at the nearest sensitive receptor are best represented by the levels from the center of the site as indicated in Table 3-4, and 3-5 are all below the NIOSH REL of 85 dBA 8-hour TWA and would be less than significant. Construction noise is of short-term duration and will not present any long-term impacts on the project site or the surrounding area.

In order to assure that the residences located within 62 feet of the property boundary are not significantly impacted by noise or vibration levels the following mitigation measure is recommended:

Mitigation Measure (MM) NOI-1 : Construction Noise Mitigation Plan

Prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, a note shall be provided on grading and building plans indicating that, during grading and construction, the property owner/developer 1117
shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to limit construction-related noise:

• The construction contractor shall ensure that all internal combustion engine- driven equipment is equipped with mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
• The construction contractor shall locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area. In addition, the Project contractor shall place such stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the Project site.
• The construction contractor shall prohibit unnecessary idling (no more than 5 minutes) of internal combustion engines.
• The construction contractor shall, to the maximum extent practical, locate on-site equipment staging areas to maximize the distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the Project site during all project construction.
• The construction contractor shall designate a “disturbance coordinator” who would be responsible for responding to any complaints about construction noise.

The disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., a bad muffler) and shall require that measures be implemented to correct the problem.
• These measures may only be granted an exception if an application for construction-related exception is made to and considered by the Building Official of the City

With implementation of the City’s mandatory restrictions on construction noise hours and MM- NOI-1 construction noise impacts would be less than significant.

3.3 Operational Noise:

3.3.1 Offsite Traffic Noise Impacts.

Vehicle noise is a combination of the noises produced by the engine, exhaust, and tires. The primary source of noise generated by the Project will be from the vehicle traffic generated by the vehicle ingress and egress to the Project site. Under existing conditions, the site does not generate any traffic noise that impacts the surrounding area.

According to the Federal Highway Administration, Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance, the level of roadway traffic noise depends on three things: (1) the volume of the traffic, (2) the speed of the traffic, and (3) the number of trucks in the flow of the traffic.

Generally, the loudness of traffic noise is increased by heavier traffic volumes, higher speeds, and greater numbers of trucks. These factors are discussed below.

1118
• The Volume of the Traffic
Upon buildout, the proposed Project is expected to generate approximately 472 average daily vehicle trips (ADT) during the weekdays.

According to the City’s Traffic Division Traffic Management Center Traffic Counts the current average daily vehicle trips along West 5th Street east of Benson Avenue in the Project area are approximately 6,381 ADT. 2
According to Caltrans, the human ear can begin to detect sound level increases of 3 decibels (dB) in typical noisy environments.3 A doubling of sound energy (e.g., doubling the volume of traffic on a highway) that would result in a 3-dBA increase in sound, would generally be barely detectable. Implementation of the Project will increase traffic volumes in the area occurring along 5
th Street but not to the extent that traffic volumes will be doubled creating a +3dBA noise increase or result in a perceivable noise increase. Therefore, operational noise impacts would be less than significant.
• The Speed of Traffic
West 5th Street is a 2-lane road with parking on both sides and has a posted speed limit of 35 mph.
• The Number of Trucks in the Flow of the Traffic
The Project is a residential development in a residential area. The residential land use will not routinely generate noise from large trucks.

Future Traffic Noise Levels along Existing Roadways Segments

The roadway noise impacts from vehicular traffic were projected using a computer program that replicates the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model- FHWA- RD-77-108 (the “FHWA Model”). The FHWA Model arrives at a predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to the Reference Energy Mean Emission Level (REMEL). Adjustments are then made to the REMEL to account for: the roadway classification (e.g., collector, seconda ry, major or arterial), the roadway active width (i.e., the distance between the center of the outermost travel lanes on each side of the roadway), the total average daily traffic (ADT), the travel speed, the percentages of automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks in the traffic volume, the roadway grade, the angle of view (e.g., whether the roadway view is blocked), the site conditions (“hard” or “soft” relates to the absorption of the ground, pavement, or landscaping), and the percentage of total ADT which flows each hour throughout a 24-hour period.

The Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is the 24-hour A-weighted average for sound, with corrections for evening and nighttime hours. The corrections require an addition of 5 decibels to sound levels in the evening hours between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. and an addition of 10

2 https://www.ontarioca.gov/TrafficEngineering Accessed: December 12, 2023 3 Caltrans, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, April 2020, p.7-1. 1119
decibels to sound levels at nighttime hours between 10 :00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. These additions are made to account for the increased sensitivity during the evening and nighttime hours when sound appears louder.

A vehicle’s noise level is a combination of the noise produced by the engine, exhaust, and tires.

The cumulative traffic noise levels along a roadway segment are based on three primary factors:
the amount of traffic, the travel speed of the traffic, and the vehicle mix ratio or number of medium and heavy trucks. The intensity of traffic noise is increased by higher traffic volumes, greater speeds, and increased number of trucks.

Future construction of the proposed Project would increase the ADT by approximately 472 trips on weekdays.

Figure 3.3-1 is the noise contour map generated from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Model 3.5 showing the estimated traffic noise that will be generated with the current traffic along 5th Street and with the Project. To determine the noise impacts traffic data from the City of Ontario Traffic Counts
4 were used which indicated a daily traffic volume of
6,381 vehicles per day. Average Daily Traffic counts were converted to peak hour estimates at a rate of 0.075 ADT or 479 peak hour trips. Traffic vehicle mix was estimated at 97 percent automobile, 2 percent light truck, and 1 percent heavy trucks at the posted 35 miles per hour roadway speed limit. Additionally, the highest number of peak hour trips generated by the proposed project at 36 PM Peak hour trips were included to provide for a worse case estimate the Project traffic noise impacts.

As indicated in Exhibit 3-C and 3-D the noise contours for West 5th Street shows the proposed Project’s impacts increase the noise levels less than 3 dBA. As indicated in the noise contour exhibits and Table 3-6 impacts along 5th Street in the Project Area will not result in new significant noise impacts.

4 https://www.ontarioca.gov/TrafficEngineering Accessed: December 12, 2023 1120
Exhibit 3-C Existing Traffic Noise Contours

Exhibit 3-D Existing Plus Project Traffic Noise Contours

1121
Table 3-6 Noise Level Comparison Existing vs. Existing Plus Project Receptor
Existing
Traffic Noise
Level (dBA)
Existing Plus
Project Noise
Level (dBA)
Noise Level
Difference
(dBA)
Receptor 1 - Project Site
(south side 5th Street) 59.8 60.0 0.2
Receptor 2 - Anthony
Munoz Park (east of site) 60.7 61.0 0.3
Receptor 3 – West
Princeton Street Cul de
Sac (south of site)

47.5 47.7 0.2
Source: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model - FHWA-RD-77-108, Appendix C.

3.3.2 Operations (Residential Activity).

Typical operational sound levels generated by multi-family residential activities include normal outdoor conversations, air conditioner units, and lawn care equipment with levels as indicated below:

• Normal conversation, air conditioner - 60 dBA
• Gas-powered lawnmowers and leaf blowers – 80 to 85 dBA. 5 Noise generated from air conditioners and lawn care equipment are not at constant and consistent levels throughout the day. Lawn care is performed during daylight hours for short durations and although air conditioners are operating both day and night they are cycling on/off with windows closed conditions. Stationary noise levels would be attenuated as with mobile noise sources with standard building construction and windows closed by approximately 25 dBA.

The USEPA identifies noise levels affecting health and welfare as exposure levels over 70 dBA over a 24-hour period. Noise levels for various levels are identified according to the use of the area. Levels of 45 dbA are associated with indoor residential areas, hospitals, and schools, whereas 55 dBA is identified for outdoor areas where typical residential human activity takes place. According to the USEPA levels of 55 dbA outdoors and 45 dbA indoors are identified as levels of noise considered to permit spoken conversation and other activities such as sleeping, working, and recreation, which are part of the daily human condition. 6 Levels exceeding 55 dbA
in a residential setting are normally short in duration and not significant in affecting health and welfare of residents.

5 Center for Disease Control, “Loud Noised Can Cause Hearing Loss”. ,https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/hearing_loss/default.html, accessed on December 12, 2023.
6 USEPA “EPA Identifies Noise Levels Affecting Health and Welfare” https://archive.epa.gov/epa/aboutepa/epa-identifies-noise- levels-affecting-health-and-welfare.html accessed December 12, 2023. 1122

3.4 Vibration
During construction the operation and movement of heavy equipment create seismic waves that radiate along the ground-surface in all directions. These waves are felt as ground vibrations.

Vibrations from construction can result in effects ranging from annoyance to people to structure damage. Vibration levels are impacted by geology, distance, and frequencies. According to the Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018
7, while ground vibrations from construction activities do not often reach the levels that can damage structures, construction vibration may result in building damage or prolonged annoyance from activities such as blasting, piledriving, vibratory compaction, demolition, and drilling or excavation near sensitive structures. The Project does not require these types of construction activities.

Vibration amplitude and impact decreases with distance and perceptible ground-borne vibration is generally limited to areas within one to two hundred feet of the construction activity.

The vibration standard used for to evaluate the Project’s vibration impacts is taken from the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (2020). Based on the Caltrans guidance construction vibration impacts would be considered significant if vibration levels exceed 0.2 in/sec. PPV, which is the limit at which vibration becomes distinctly perceptible.

Table 3-8 Vib ration Source Levels for Construction Equipment at 25 feet Equipment PPV (in/sec) at 25 feet RMS (in/sec) at 25 feet Small bulldozer 0.003 0.002
Jackhammer 0.035 0.025
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.054
Large bulldozer 0.089 0.063
Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, September 2018.

The closest sensitive receptor to the Project property line is minimally 25 feet from the property line. The estimated construction vibration level from a large bulldozer (worst case scenario) measured at 25-feet would create a vibration level of 0.089 in/sec PPV which does not exceed the 0.2 in/sec threshold and is below the Caltrans Guideline Vibration Annoyance Potential Criteria Strongly perceptible human response of 0.10 PPV in/sec continuous/frequent intermittent sources.
8 Therefore, the vibrations at the nearest sensitive receptor will remain well below the strongly perceptible annoyance criteria and potential residential vibration damage criteria thresholds listed in the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Induced Vibration Guidance Manual at or beyond the lot line. With the implementation of MM-NOI-1 the proposed Project therefore is not considered to result in exposure of people to excessive ground vibration.

7 https://www.transit.dot.gov/research-innovation/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-report-0123 8 CalTrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020. 1123
During operations of the Project following construction the primary source of vibration would be from vehicle traffic. Traffic vibration levels are dependent on vehicle characteristics, load, speed, and pavement conditions. Typical vibration levels from heavy truck activity at normal traffic speeds are in the order of 0.004 in/sec PPV at 25 feet based on the FTA’s Transit Noise Impact and Vibration Assessment (2018). As the proposed Project is a Worship Center truck traffic which would create the largest vibration impact will be limited. Traffic once on site will be travelling at very low speeds and it is expected that traffic and any truck vibration impacts off site would not exceed the 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold.

Ground-borne vibration levels from automobile traffic are generally overshadowed by vibration generated by heavy trucks that roll over the same uneven roadway surfaces. However, due to the rapid drop-off rate of ground-borne vibration and the short duration of the associated events, vehicular traffic-induced ground-borne vibration is rarely perceptible be yond the roadway right-of-way, a nd rarely results in vibration le vels that would cause annoyance to people or damage to buildings in the vicinity.

3.5 Airport Noise
The closest airport to the Project site is the Ontario International Airport approximately 3.45 miles southeast. As shown in Exhibit 3-E the Project site is located outside the Ontario Airport noise contour 60-65 dBA CNEL boundary and as such there will be less than significant airport noise impacts.

Exhibit 3-E

1124

4.0 Conclusion

Based on the assessment in Section 3.0 through compliance with mandatory City requirements and ordinances and MM-NOI-1 to reduce noise during construction, the Project’s construction noise impacts will not result in the generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project. In addition, the Project’s construction and operations vibration impacts as well as operational noise for mobile and operational noise impacts to the environment are less than significant.

1125

APPENDIX A
Ambient Noise Datasheets
1126
S
ession R
eport
Locat
ion #1
Informat
ion P
anel
Name
S082_BIJ050019_02112023_183630
St
art
Time
11/1/2023 1:12:56 PM
Stop Time
11/1/2023 1:27:56 PM
De
vice Name
BIJ050019
M
odel T
ype
SoundPr
o DL
De
vice Firm
w
ar
e R
e
v
R
.13H
Commen
t
s
Summary Dat
a P
anel
Descri
pt
i
on
Met
er
V
alue
Descri
pt
i
on
Met
er
V
alue
Leq
1 61 dB
Ex
chang
e Ra
t
e
1 3 dB
W
eigh
Ɵng
1 A
R
esponse
1 SL
O
W
Bandw
idt
h
1 OFF
Ex
chang
e Ra
t
e
2 5 dB
W
eigh
Ɵng
2 A
R
esponse
2 F
AS
T
St
at
ist
ics T
able
dB:

0.0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0.9
%
37:

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.03 0.07

0.08 0.16

0.14 0.35

0.84 38:

0.42 0.19

0.15 0.15

0.10 0.09

0.06 0.06

0.05 0.09

1.36 39:

0.23 0.11

0.23 0.27

0.27 0.20

0.22 0.13

0.19 0.23

2.08 40:

0.27 0.15

0.14 0.16

0.14 0.14

0.10 0.13

0.13 0.14

1.48 41:

0.17 0.20

0.31 0.22

0.19 0.23

0.17 0.30

0.30 0.34

2.42 42:

0.22 0.15

0.21 0.30

0.34 0.31

0.25 0.22

0.28 0.22

2.51 43:

0.13 0.10

0.11 0.13

0.13 0.14

0.17 0.16

0.15 0.15

1.39 44:

0.13 0.18

0.16 0.14

0.15 0.16

0.15 0.18

0.26 0.29

1.79 45:

0.24 0.23

0.21 0.23

0.30 0.30

0.25 0.27

0.33 0.32

2.69 46:

0.32 0.32

0.36 0.28

0.31 0.41

0.34 0.38

0.35 0.39

3.45 47:

0.33 0.40

0.37 0.23

0.26 0.28

0.27 0.27

0.22 0.24

2.87 48:

0.31 0.48

0.25 0.30

0.24 0.34

0.29 0.30

0.22 0.25

2.99 49:

0.21 0.22

0.23 0.22

0.18 0.21

0.22 0.22

0.29 0.22

2.22 50:

0.22 0.24

0.25 0.26

0.22 0.30

0.39 0.38

0.31 0.32

2.88 1127
51:

0.31 0.36

0.23 0.32

0.33 0.26

0.25 0.26

0.27 0.22

2.80 52:

0.23 0.23

0.29 0.26

0.34 0.24

0.20 0.21

0.26 0.25

2.50 53:

0.24 0.32

0.41 0.34

0.30 0.31

0.33 0.31

0.28 0.28

3.13 54:

0.30 0.34

0.19 0.26

0.29 0.27

0.30 0.38

0.44 0.29

3.06 55:

0.28 0.24

0.26 0.23

0.26 0.26

0.25 0.25

0.28 0.28

2.59 56:

0.27 0.25

0.31 0.32

0.37 0.32

0.34 0.43

0.36 0.38

3.35 57:

0.39 0.43

0.25 0.43

0.47 0.43

0.41 0.37

0.40 0.36

3.94 58:

0.37 0.36

0.34 0.37

0.37 0.38

0.39 0.41

0.36 0.35

3.69 59:

0.34 0.41

0.40 0.43

0.45 0.40

0.42 0.45

0.47 0.50

4.26 60:

0.51 0.53

0.35 0.53

0.59 0.50

0.46 0.51

0.46 0.45

4.87 61:

0.58 0.57

0.51 0.60

0.62 0.63

0.54 0.61

0.51 0.52

5.68 62:

0.55 0.60

0.64 0.65

0.77 0.59

0.66 0.58

0.63 0.75

6.42 63:

0.74 0.73

0.44 0.57

0.51 0.63

0.66 0.67

0.68 0.73

6.35 64:

0.62 0.59

0.57 0.63

0.60 0.53

0.53 0.62

0.59 0.64

5.92 65:

0.54 0.55

0.62 0.40

0.31 0.35

0.34 0.37

0.44 0.50

4.40 66:

0.39 0.38

0.21 0.19

0.16 0.17

0.26 0.25

0.28 0.22

2.51 67:

0.17 0.15

0.17 0.21

0.17 0.18

0.23 0.12

0.16 0.12

1.67 68:

0.10 0.11

0.06 0.07

0.07 0.07

0.06 0.09

0.13 0.07

0.81 69:

0.05 0.05

0.04 0.05

0.06 0.06

0.06 0.06

0.07 0.04

0.54 70:

0.02 0.02

0.01 0.01

0.01 0.01

0.01 0.01

0.00 0.00

0.09 71:

0.01 0.01

0.01 0.01

0.00 0.01

0.01 0.01

0.01 0.01

0.05 72:

0.00 0.01

0.01 0.00

0.01 0.01

0.01 0.01

0.01 0.01

0.07 73:

0.01 0.02

0.02 0.02

0.01 0.02

0.01 0.02

0.01 0.03

0.16 74:

0.05 0.02

0.01 0.01

0.01 0.00

0.01 0.01

0.01 0.06

0.18 1128
St
at
ist
ics Chart
S082_BIJ050019_02112023_183630: St
a
Ɵs
Ɵcs Chart
Ex
c
eedanc
e T
able
.
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
%7
%8
%9
0%
:

69.0 67.8

67.2 66.7

66.2 65.9

65.7 65.4

65.1 10%
:

64.9 64.8

64.6 64.4

64.2 64.1

63.9 63.8

63.6 63.5
20%
:

63.3 63.1

63.0 62.8

62.7 62.5

62.3 62.2

62.1 61.9
30%
:

61.7 61.5

61.3 61.2

61.0 60.8

60.6 60.4

60.2 60.0
40%
:

59.8 59.6

59.3 59.1

58.8 58.6

58.3 58.0

57.8 57.5
50%
:

57.3 57.0

56.7 56.5

56.2 55.8

55.5 55.1

54.7 54.4
60%
:

54.0 53.7

53.4 53.1

52.7 52.3

52.0 51.5

51.2 50.9
70%
:

50.6 50.2

49.8 49.4

48.9 48.5

48.2 47.9

47.5 47.1
80%
:

46.8 46.6

46.3 46.0

45.7 45.3

44.9 44.5

43.8 43.1
90%
:

42.6 42.2

41.8 41.4

41.0 40.3

39.7 39.2

38.6 37.9
100%
:

37.3 1129
Ex
c
eedanc
e Chart
S082_BIJ050019_02112023_183630: Ex
ceedance Chart
Logged Dat
a Chart
S082_BIJ050019_02112023_183630: Log
g
ed Da
t
a Chart
1130
S
ession R
eport

Locat
ion #2
Informat
ion P
anel
Name
S085_BIJ050019_02112023_183636
St
art
Time
11/1/2023 2:12:07 PM
Stop Time
11/1/2023 2:27:07 PM
De
vice Name
BIJ050019
M
odel T
ype
SoundPr
o DL
De
vice Firm
w
ar
e R
e
v
R
.13H
Commen
t
s
Summary Dat
a P
anel
Descri
pt
i
on
Met
er
V
alue
Descri
pt
i
on
Met
er
V
alue
Leq
1 57.8 dB
Ex
chang
e Ra
t
e
1 3 dB
W
eigh
Ɵng
1 A
R
esponse
1 SL
O
W
Bandw
idt
h
1 OFF
Ex
chang
e Ra
t
e
2 5 dB
W
eigh
Ɵng
2 A
R
esponse
2 F
AS
T
St
at
ist
ics T
able
dB: