zone change would not result in physical impacts to the environment. The Approved Project would also be consistent with the goals and policies of TOP 2050 Policy Plan and complied with SB 330 and SB 166, resulting in no net loss of residential units in the City. Moreover, the Approved Project would be consistent with SCAG’s Connect SoCal and the land use compatibility plans of ONT and the Chino Airport. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects: The Project site is designated for Hospitality by the TOP 2050 Land Use Plan and has Convention Center Support Commercial zoning designation. The Project Applicant would redevelop the Project site in accordance with the adopted land use and zoning designations. No General Plan Amendment or zone change would be required under the Modified Project. The Modified Project is consistent with the TOP 2050 Policy Plan and does not interfere with any policies for environmental protection. As such, no impacts are anticipated . The Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously consid ered and addressed in the Certified EIR . No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
12. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: T he Certified EIR concluded that the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area is within MRZ -3, where the significance of mineral deposits cannot be determined from the available data. Development in an MRZ-3 area would not result in significant impacts because mineral resources of statewide or local importance were not identified on the California Geological Survey’s Production -Consumption (P -C) Region maps. The ORSC site was not within an MRZ-2 area; therefore, the Approved Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource in Ontario.
Discussion of Effects: As discussed above, the Project site is designated as MRZ-3. Therefore, no impacts to mineral resources are anticipated. The Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
13. NOISE. Would the project result in:
The analysis in this section is based on the Noise & Vibration Technical Memorandum for Hotel Ontario Aloft + Residence Inn Project prepared by PlaceWorks dated November 17, 2025. This report is provided in its entirety as Appendix C of this Addendum.
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
857
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that nighttime construction noise impacts were predicted to occur for sensitive receptors . To reduce construction noise impacts during nighttime hours to below the significant impact threshold, Mitigation Measure N -1 required installation of temporary noise barriers around the work site that have sufficient heights to block the direct line -of-sight between the onsite construction areas and off -site noise sensitive receptors. Additional mitigation measures, including positioning of equipment away from sensitive receptors and minimizing equipment idling, would further reduce overall noise levels during construction activities. Therefore, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1, construction impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels.
During operation, t he Approved Project would result in potentially significant long -term increase in noise levels associated with traffic noise, and commercial noise. Traffic generated by the Approved Project would result in a substantial increase in noise levels in the vicinity of noise - sensitive land uses. However, there are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce traffic generated by vehicles associated with the Approved Project . Therefore, traffic noise impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
To ensure compliance with the more stringent overnight noise levels in the City’s Municipal Code (45 dBA at single -family residences from 10:00 pm to 7:00 am), Mitigation Measure N -2 required that HVAC equipment for the indoor athletic facility be designed and/or placed to yield a sound level less than 58 dBA at 50 feet and Mitigation Measure N -3 require d that HVAC equipment noise levels on all other structures, including the proposed hotel, retail spaces, Chicken N Pickle, community center, and pool building, be limited to 65 dBA at 50 feet to ensure compliance with nighttime limits at residences to the east along Plymouth Avenue. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures N-2 and N-3, commercial noise would reduce to less than significant noise levels.
Discussion of Effects:
Construction Noise Impacts
The Modified Project would redistribute the commercial/retail and hotel space within PAs 2 through 4 of the ORSC site, resulting in an overall reduction in building square footage across these PAs of the ORSC. Due to the overall decrease in building space under the Modified Project when compared to the Approved Project and corresponding decrease in the duration of construction activity, on-site construction activities and the associated construction noise levels during maximum activity days, which are used for measuring impact significance, would be similar to those of the Modified Project.
The Certified EIR concluded that the maximum daytime construction noise levels at the nearest receptor group to PAs 2 through 4, Recep tor Group 5 ( see Figure 9, Noise-Sensitive Receptor Groups ; residences east of the Cucamonga Creek Channel), would be 72 dBA, as shown in Table 5.13-14, Ontario Regional Sports Complex Daytime Cumulative Construction Noise, of the Certified EIR. These maximum noise levels were anticipated to occur during Phase 1A of the ORSC, which included mass grading of the ORSC site. Construction of the retail and hospitality uses of PA 2 through 4 was anticipated in Phases 1B and 2, when noise levels would reach a maximum of 68 dBA at Receptor Group 5. As shown in Table 5.13- 10, Source Noise Levels for Construction Equipment, of the Certified EIR, the average Lmax of the loudest piece of equipment used for construction of the ORSC is 92 dBA at 50 feet. The nearest sensitive receptor to the Modified Project in Receptor Group 5 is approximately 140 feet east of the boundary of PA 2. Noise levels from the loudest pieces of equipment would attenuate to 78 dBA at the outdoor activity areas of these residences, accounting for a 3 dBA reduction from the existing sound wall.
858
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
Therefore, conservatively assuming that the loudest pieces of equipment would be used at the boundary of the Project site, the maximum noise level of this activity would not exceed the FTA threshold of 80 dBA Leq for residential areas. Daytime construction impacts under the Modified Project would remain less than significant. Though construction of the retail and hospitality uses in PAs 2 through 4 was not anticipated to occur at night, the provisions of Mitigation Measure N-1 would apply to all construction under the ORSC, including the portion under the Modified Project. Compliance with this measure would result in a further reduction of construction noise. Therefore, nighttime construction impacts would also be less than significant. The Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Operational Noise Impacts
Traffic Noise
A project will normally have a significant effect on the environment related to traffic noise if it substantially increases the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas. Most people can detect changes in sound levels of approximately 3 dBA under normal, quiet conditions, and changes of 1 to 3 dBA under quiet, controlled conditions. Changes of less than 1 dBA are usually indiscernible. A change of 5 dBA is readily discernible to most people in an outdoor environment.
Based on this, a significant impact would occur if traffic noise increases by 3 dBA.
Table 6-2, Average Daily Trip Generation Comparison for the Approved Project and Modified Project, shows that trips to the ORSC would decrease on the typical weekday with a stadium event scenario and would increase on Saturdays under both the “one tournament, no baseball stadium event” and “baseball stadium event with no tournament” scenarios. A doubling in daily traffic trips due to the Modified Project would result in a 3 dBA increase. The increase of 114 trips on Saturdays under the Modified Project represents a 1.4 percent increase in Saturday average daily traffic trips. This increase would result in a noise level increase of less than 1 dBA due to the Modified Project. Therefore, traffic noise impacts under the Modified Project are expected to remain similar to those under the Approved Project. Though impacts would continue to remain significant and unavoidable, the Modified Project would not result in new or increase the severity of traffic-related noise impacts compared to the Certified EIR.
859
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
Figure 9: Noise-Sensitive Receptor Groups
860
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
Stationary Source Noise
The Modified Project would result in a reduction of building square footage across PAs 3 and 4, which would also reduce the amount of noise-producing stationary sources in these PAs, including HVAC equipment, loading docks , emergency generators, and maintenance equipment. The proposed hotel in PA 2 would result in an increase in hotel square footage in this PA when compared to the Approved Project. According to Project site plans, the distance from the footprint of the hotel complex to the nearest sensitive receptor (residences east of the ORSC in Receptor Group 5) is approximately 370 feet.
To ensure that noise levels associated with the proposed hotel meet the City’s Municipal Code standards for noise from HVAC equipment at sensitive receptor locations, in addition to other development within PAs 2 through 4, the Modified Project would be required to implement Mitigation Measure N -3. As noted in the Certified EIR, noise associated with loading docks at hotel uses in PAs 2 through 4 would not result in noise levels that exceed the City’s noise standards at sensitive receptor locations. The loudest potential noise source from loading dock activities would be movement alarms on trucks that result in noise levels of 74 dBA at 50 feet.
However, this activity would only occur in the daytime hours (7:00 am to 10:00 pm) , and noise levels would attenuate to 59 dBA at the nearest sensitive receptors. At 370 feet, the distance of the proposed hotel building to the nearest sensitive receptor, noise levels associated with loading dock activities would attenuate to 57 dBA. Similar to the Approved Project, potential stationary noise under the Modified Project would not exceed the City’s maximum allowable noise standards pursuant to Municipal Code Section 5-29.04.
With implementation of Mitigation Measure N-3, impacts would continue to remain less than significant, and the Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR . No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required. The following mitigation measure s from the Certified EIR are applicable to the Modified Project:
N-1 The construction contractor shall implement the following measures during construction activities on the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area.
These measures shall be identified on demolition, grading, and/or building permits.
• Prior to construction activities that warrant nighttime construction (e.g., infrastructure work, concrete pours, etc.), the construction contractor shall install noise pathway controls, including noise barriers and enclosures free from gaps and holes, which shall be placed as close as possible to construction areas. The temporary noise barrier shall be a sufficient height to block the direct line -of- sight between the on -site construction areas and off- site noise sensitive receptors and shall be a minimum of 6 feet tall and shall be constructed out of wood or other materials with a minimum surface weight of approximately 2.5 pounds per square foot.
• Construction equipment operating on a site shall be equipped with the appropriate manufacturer’s noise reduction devices, including but not limited to a manufacturer’s muffler (or equivalently rated material) that is free of rust, holes, and exhaust leaks. 861
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
• Noise from construction devices with internal combustion engines shall be mitigated by ensuring that the engine's housing doors are kept closed, and by using noise-insulating material mounted on the engine housing that does not interfere with the manufactu rer's guidelines for engine operation or exhaust.
• Portable compressors, generators, pumps, and other such devices shall be covered with noise-insulating fabric to the maximum extent possible that does not interfere with the manufacturer's guidelines for engine operation or exhaust, and shall further reduce noise by operating the device at lower engine speeds during the work to the maximum extent possible.
• Idling on -site of heavy -duty diesel vehicles with Gross Vehicle Weight Rating of 10,000 pounds shall be limited to no longer than five minutes while parking, standing, or stopping, as per 13 California Code of Regulations Section 2485, Airborne Toxic Contr ol Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling.
• Quieter back-up alarms on construction equipment shall be used whenever feasible.
• Construction vehicles shall be strategically positioned to minimize operation near receptors and avoiding tailgate slamming to the extent possible.
N-3 HVAC Equipment, Planning Areas 2, 3, 4, and 7 Buildings. An acoustics study shall be provided to the City of Ontario prior to building permit issuance for new structures with HVAC systems in Planning Areas 2, 3, 4, and 7 that documents compliance with the overnight noise levels in the City’s municipal code (45 dBA at single -family residences from 10:00 pm to 7:00 am). HVAC equipment for the indoor athletic facility shall be designed and/or placed to yield a sound level less than 65 dBA at 50 feet to en sure compliance would result in a noise level of approximately 44 dBA at residential land uses to the east along Plymouth Avenue. Noise associated with operation of heating and cooling equipment shall be minimized by the design and strategic placement of equipment.
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels ?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: T he Certified EIR concluded that vibration -inducing activities that we re proposed for construction of the Approved Project included the use of vibratory rollers, bulldozers, and dump trucks. The highest vibration level when evaluating for structural damage was 0.1601 Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) , which was below the Federal Transit Administration’s ( FTA’s) damage impact criteria. This level was predicted to occur at the commercial strip mall at 1919 East Riverside Avenue, which was approximately 32 feet from the ORSC site. Therefore, sensit ive structures farther away would also ha ve no damage impact from construction, and impacts would be less than significant.
Vibration annoyance predictions were calculated to estimate an approximate distance to impact for vibratory rollers, bulldozers, and dump trucks. For an annoyance impact to occur, a vibratory roller would need to be used closer than 27 feet; a large bulldozer would need to be 862
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
used closer than 12 feet; and a dump truck/loaded truck would need to be used closer than 12 feet. The nearest vibration -sensitive receptor to the proposed work areas was approximately 35 feet away. Therefore, no vibration annoyance is predicted to occur during construction, and impacts would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects: As previously stated, the closest off-site building to the ORSC noted in the Certified EIR is 32 feet north of the ORSC site. The closest buildings to PAs 2 through 4 are the residences east of the ORSC site along Plymouth Avenue, approximately 140 feet away. Since the Modified Project’s use of construction equipment would remain largely the same as that under the Approved Project, vibration impacts under the Modified Project would remain the same as under the Approved Project. Therefore, the Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: T he Certified EIR concluded that t he ORSC site was approximately 2.8 miles south of ONT and approximately 2.2 miles northeast of the Chino Airport.
The site was within the influence areas of both airports but outside the safety zones and noise contours of both airports. Therefore, the Approved Project would not expose people to substantial levels of airport-related noise, and impacts would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects : As discussed above, the Project site is located within the ONT and Chino Airport Influence Area, but outside of the safety and noise contours. Therefore, the Modified Project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels and impacts would be less than significant. The Modified Project would not res ult in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
14. POPULATION & HOUSING. Would the project:
a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of road or other infrastructure)?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that although the Approved Project would increase the number of jobs in the City, it was not expected to induce population growth and the jobs created by the Approved Project were expected to be filled by the existing local and regional labor pool. Additionally, the Approved Project did not include residential uses; however, the Approved Project would need to comply with SB 330 and SB 166 to offset the loss of housing potential identified in TOP 2050 for the ORSC site. To ensure compliance with State housing laws, the Approved Project would redesignate 94 acres along the Vineyard Corridor, south of the ORSC site, to a more intense land use designation—from LDR to MDR. This action is solely to replace the housing capacity designated for the ORSC site under TOP 2050 and to comply with State housing laws. The Approved Project would therefore not facilitate unplanned population growth due to the production of housing. Consequently, impacts would be less than significant . 863
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
Discussion of Effects: The Modified Project would result in the development of an 226-key hotel and does not include a residential component. As discussed previously, the proposed hotel would generate approximately 8 hotel staff. Total buildout of the Modified Project would result in a total of 212 employees 3, compared to the Approved Project ’s 505 employees in PAs 2 to 4 , resulting in a decrease of 293 employees. According to the California Employment Development Department (EDD), as of July 2025, the City of Ontario has a labor force of 95,000 persons and of that labor force, 5,3 00 are unemployed (unemployment rate of 5.6 percent) (EDD, 2025) .
According to SCAG’s 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, the City of Ontario is anticipated to employ approximately 187,700 persons by 2050 (SCAG, 2024).
Additionally, the TOP 2050 projected 296,002 employees in 2050. Therefore, the Modified Project is consistent with both the SCAG’s 2045 and TOP 2050 employment projections for the City. Project - generated jobs are negligible and well within the employment projections for the City of Ontario.
Operation of the Modified Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the Project area, either directly or indirectly and would not exceed regional or local growth projections. Therefore, no impac ts are anticipated . The Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: T he Certified EIR concluded that t he ORSC site wa s primarily utilized for agricultural use but contain ed some single-family homes, and development of the ORSC site would require the removal of these rural residential units , resulting in the displacement of one resident at the existing dairy . However, the City had a vacancy rate of 4.7 percent and therefore was expected to have adequate housing capacity to accommodate the displaced resident. Implementation of the Approved Pr oject would not result in the need to rebuild existing homes or construct replacement housing. Therefore, impacts with regard to displacement would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects : The Project site does not contain any housing and there are no people living at the Project site that would be displaced by the Modified Project. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated . The Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
15. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
3 Using a generation rate of 1 employee per 400 square feet for retail uses: 81,567.98 s.f./400 = 204 employees. 204 + 8 hotel staff = 212 employees
864
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
i. Fire protection?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: Fire prevention services were provided by the Ontario Fire Department (OFD) with Station 3 being the primary response station . T he Certified EIR concluded that the Approved Project would result in periodic and permanent increases in demand for fire protection and emergency medical services on the ORSC site due to t he increased activities onsite includ ing employees and attendees of games and events at the proposed baseball stadium, as well as daily employment and visitors of the proposed retail, hotel, and City park and community recreation center uses. While the Approved Project would result in increased activity on the ORSC site and would therefore increase the number of fire protection and emergency service calls when compared to existing site conditions, it would not require the construction or alteration of fire protection facilities for the purposes of maintaining service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for OFD fire protection services, as stated by correspondence with OFD. Project design plans would be reviewed by OFD, and potential fire protection and emergency service needs for high-attendance events on the ORSC site would be communicated to OFD. Additionally, development impact fees (DIF) would also be collected in order to build and supply necessary fire and emergency service needs . Therefore, impacts to fire protection services would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects : Although the Modified Project would involve an increased number of rooms within the proposed hotel than previously anticipated in the Certified EIR, overall buildout would result in an overall reduction in commercial uses compared to the buildout of the Approved Project previously analyzed under the Certified EIR. Accordingly, the development activities proposed by the Modified Project were planned by the Approved Project and, thus, the Modified Project’s demand for fire protection services was anticipated by the Certified EIR . The proposed building would be constructed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the adopted California Fire Code (CFC) and the City’s Municipal Code Section 4 -4.01, ordinances, and standard conditions regarding fire prevention and suppression measures related to water improvement plans, fire hydrants, fire access, and water availability. The Modified Project will not require the construction of any new fire protection facilities or alteration of any existing fire protection facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new fire protection facilities. Consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, DIF would also be collected in order to build and supply necessary infrastructure for fire protection services, as necessary. Therefore, t he Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
ii. Police protection?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: Police protection services were provided by the Ontario Police Department (OPD). The Certified EIR concluded that though the Approved Project would increase activity on the ORSC site, thereby increasing the number of potential service calls to the ORSC site when compared to existing conditions, the Approved Project would not require the construction or alternation of OPD facilities in order to maintain OPD’s performance objectives for police services. Additionally, OPD did not anticipate any concerns with providing service to the ORSC so long as the ORSC incorporate d the recommend lighting and security features required by the City’s Municipal Code and traffic -reduction measures in the event traffic management plan. Pursuant to the City’s existing permitting process, the City’s Building Department would review final site plans for the ORSC to ensure that crime prevention through design measures and other OPD recommendations are incorporated as part of the ORSC. Furthermore, the ORSC would 865
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
be required to pay DIFs to help offset costs associated with providing police services to the ORSC.
Therefore, impacts to police protection services would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects : Overall buildout of the Modified Project would result in an overall reduction in commercial uses compared to the buildout of the Approved Project previously analyzed under the Certified EIR. Accordingly, the development activities proposed by the Modified Project were planned by the Approved Project, thus, the Project’s demand for police protection services was anticipated by the Certified EIR . Exterior cameras will be mounted at building entrances, pool area, patio area, and parking lot. The Project plans would be reviewed and approved by the City’s Building and Police Departments, which would ensure that adequate safety and crime prevention measures are provided within the Project’s design. The Modified Project will not require the construction of any new police protection facilities or alteration of any existing police protection facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new police protection facilities. Consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, DIF would also be collected in order to build and supply necessary infrastructure for police protection services, as necessary. Therefore, t he Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
iii. Schools?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The ORSC site was the attendance areas of three public school districts, Chino Valley Unified School District for elementary, junior high, and high school (western portion of site); Mountain View School District (MVSD) for elementary and junior high school (eastern portion of site); and Chaffey Joint Union High School District (CJUHSD) for high school (eastern portion of site) . The Certified EIR concluded that the Approved Project did not include residential uses and therefore would not increase the student population in the school districts that serve the site. Additionally, MVSD stated that the change of planned use for the ORSC site from residential under the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan to stadium/commercial/recreation under the ORSC may reduce the need for an elementary school in the vicinity and would not result in impacts to MVSD’s long term plans. Therefore, impacts to school services would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects: The Project site is within the school boundaries of MVSD and CJUHSD.
The Project Applicant proposes to redevelop the site with a hotel and co mmercial us es.
Implementation of the Modified Project does not include residential uses with the potential to result in substantial direct growth in the population, nor an increase in student population. The Project Applicant would develop the Project site within the total buildout of the Approved Project and, thus, the Modified Project’s indirect demand for public school services was anticipated by the Certified EIR . Additionally, t he Modified Project would be required to pay school fees as prescribed by state law prior to the issuance of building per mits. Therefore, the Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
866
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
iv. Parks?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: Park service s were discussed under the Recreation section of the Certified EIR . The Certified EIR concluded that impacts to recreation would be less than significant. Details on the summary findings are discussed below in Section 16.
Discussion of Effects: The Modified Project does not include residential uses and would not introduce new residents to the City necessitating the need for additional parks. The Modified Project will not require the construction of any new parks or alteration of any existing parks or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new park facilities. Therefore, the Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR . No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
v. Other public facilities?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that the demand on libraries is based on the generation of a resident population and the Approved Project would not introduce any new permanent residents that may become patrons of the Ontario Library System.
Therefore, implementation of the Approved Project would not directly create a demand for public library facilities and would not directly result in the need to modify existing or construct new library and no impact would occur to library services or facilities.
Discussion of Effects: The Modified Project does not include residential uses and would not introduce new residents to the City necessitating the need for additional public facilities. The Modified Project will not require the construction of any new public facilities or alteration of any existing public facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new public facilities. Therefore, t he Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
16. RECREATION. Would the project:
a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that the Approved Project included a variety of multiuse sports and recreational facilities, including soccer fields, baseball fields, an indoor gymnasium for basketball and volleyball, an aquatics facility, a skate park, pickleball/tennis courts, trails and open space, and playgrounds, in addition to the baseball stadium and supporting hospitality and retail. These facilities would be available for use by the public and would increase the total parks and recreation land acreage in the city to 662.82 acres, which is an approximately 25 percent increase to the current 528.66 acres. The Approved Project did not involve residential uses and therefore would not contribute to population growth in the City that would increase the use of other existing parks and recreational facilities. Because the 867
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
Approved Project would increase the acreage of recreational amenities in the City, no impact would occur.
Discussion of Effects: The Modified Project is not proposing any new housing or large employment generator that would cause an increase in the use of neighborhood parks or other recreational facilities. The Modified Project would include recreation facilities such as outdoor pool, spa and kiddie pool, and multiple outdoor patios with an outdoor bar and fire pits that would serve future hotel patrons. Construction of these facilities are discussed through out this Addendum. Therefore, t he Modified Project does not require the expansion of recr eational facilities. Implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any adverse physical effects on the environment due to the construction of recreational facilities. The Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR . No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
17. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that the Approved Project included street widening and intersection improvements from half width to potentially full width along Vineyard Avenue, Riverside Drive, and Chino Avenue . None of the roadways immediately adjacent to the ORSC site had bike lanes (Class II) or designated bike routes (Class III). New roadways would include bicycle and pedestrian facilities in accordance with the City’s Circulation Plan and the proposed bicycle facilities on the internal and improved roadway segments would improve overall access throughout the ORSC site. The Approved Project would also enhance pedestrian facilities throughout the ORSC site by providing new sidewalks and enhanced lighting and landscaping in addition to bicycle lanes, which would enhance pedestrian safety. Moreover, the Approved Project did not include new transit service; however, existing transit system would continue to serve the site. Therefore, no significant impacts associated with conflicts with the City’s multimodal plans would occur, and impacts would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects:
Roadway Improvements
Roadway improvements surrounding the Project site was analyzed as part of the Certified EIR. The Modified Project would not require roadway improvements at nearby intersections. All proposed improvements within the public right -of-way of the Project site would be installed in conformance with City design standards. Therefore, the Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts related to roadway improvements, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
The Project site is not located along a bikeway. As concluded in the Certified EIR, new roadways would include bicycle and pedestrian facilities in accordance with the City’s Circulation Plan. As part of the Approved Project, bicycle infrastructure on roadways immediately adjacent to the ORSC site, including a Class I multiuse trail along the west side of Vineyard Avenue and Class II bike lanes along Riverside Drive between Vineyard Avenue and the Cucamonga 868
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
Channel. The Project would be confined to the Project site and would not conflict within the existing or planned bikeways. In addition, the Modified Project would provide bike racks to accommodate bicycle access to the Project stie.
The Project site features (buildings, parking areas, etc.) would be connected by ADA compliant sidewalks and striped crosswalks within the parking areas to the existing ensure pedestrian access throughout Project site. Additionally, the Modified Project would install sidewalks on C Street , A Street, South Champions /Hellman Avenue , and Riverside Drive .
Implementation of the Modified Project would not interfere with the City’s Active Transportation Plan. No impacts would occur.
Transit
Transit service to the City is provided by OmniTrans. The closest bus route to the Project site is Route 82 with a bus stop located at the northwestern corner of the Project site . The City of Ontario strives to provide a transit system that serves as a viable alternative to automobile travel.
The Project would support transit use by improving existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the Project area. The Project would not introduce new features to any public road that would affect transit in the Project area. As such, a less than significant impact would occur.
As demonstrated, the Modified Project would not conflict with the City’s Mobility Element, and impacts associated with conflict of an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle , and pedestrian facilities would be less than significant . Therefore, the Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that VMT would increase under the Approved Project . Mitigation Measures TRAF -1 and TRAF -2 would reduce potential impacts for future development projects to the extent feasible. Future development in the ORSC would need to consider transportation demand management (TDM) measures consistent with those identified in the Mobility Element. In addition, Mitigation Measure TRAF-2 would reduce VMT during events. Implementation of TDM measures could reduce VMT by up to 6,101,308 miles, or by up to approximately 10 percent ; however, annual average weekday VMT would continue to exceed the City’s threshold. Therefore, VMT impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
Discussion of Effects: Trip generation represents the amount of traffic that is attracted to and produced by a development project. As shown in Table 6-2, Average Daily Trip Generation Comparison for the Approved and Modified Project, three scenarios were considered in the trip generation estimates include a “typical weekday with a stadium event” scenario and two scenarios for Saturday trips —one accounts for a tournament at the athletic facilities and no baseball stadium event; the other accounts for a baseball stadium event and no tournaments. As shown in Table 6 -2, the Modified Project would result in an increase in trips during the scenarios modeled for events on Saturdays, but would result in a decrease in trips during the weekday scenario. Overall buildout of the Modified Project would result in an overall reduction in commercial uses compared to the buildout of the Approved Project previously analyzed under the Certified EIR. Accordingly, the development activities proposed by the Modified Project were planned by the Approved Project, thus, the Modified Project’s VMT would anticipated in the Certified EIR. Consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, Mitigation Measure TRAF -1 would be 869
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
applicable to the Modified Project and require the preparation of Transportation Demand Management measures. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure TRAF -1a, Project’s VMT impact would remain significant and unavoidable and would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required. Mitigation Measure TRAF-1a is applicable to the Modified Project.
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e. g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d. Result in inadequate emergency access?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR discussed thresholds c and d together and concluded that the traffic and circulation components of the Approved Project would be designed and constructed in accordance with all applicable City of Ontario design standards for emergency access to address fire and emergency access needs. During the building plan check and development review process, the City would coordinate with OFD and OPD to ensure that the necessary fire prevention and emergency response features are incorporated and that adequate circulation and access is provided. Therefore, impacts on emergency access would be less than significant. Additionally, all off-ramp queues are forecast to be contained within the available storage capacity and are not anticipated to affect the freeway mainline. Therefore, impacts to Caltrans facilities would be less than significant. Moreover, parking demand created by the events at the outdoor and indoor sports park would not create traffic hazards.
However, c onstruction activities would generate truck traffic that has the potential to generate traffic hazards, and events would generate substantial population at the ORSC site.
Mitigation Measure TRAF -3 would require preparation and implementation of a construction management plan. With implementation of Mitigation Measure TRAF -3, potential impacts associated with construction hazards would be reduced to a level that is less than significant.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-2 would require preparation of a Park ing and Event TMP to ensure that traffic on weekends with major events would not impede emergency operations or local traffic.
The TMP would be prepared to analyze traffic conditions during an event and provide recommendations to direct traffic operations. Therefore, no significant impacts relating to event traffic would remain, and impacts would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects : The Modified Project’s potential to increase hazards as a result of a geometric design feature has been assessed to provide adequate access/circulation. The Modified Project’s circulation plan has been designed to be compatible with all foreseeable vehicles. Vehicular access will be provided via a total of 3 driveways: one each on C Street, A Street, and South Champions /Hellman Aven ue. The Modified Project area is generally characterized by recreational uses. Traffic generated by the Modified Project would be typical of a hotel and be compatible with the type of traffic generated by the existing and surrounding development. In addition, all proposed improvements within the public right -of-way would be installed in conformance with City design standards. The City of Ontario Engineering Department reviewed the Modified Project’s application materials and determined that no hazardous transportation design features would be introduced by the Modified Project. At the time of final grading, landscape, and street improvement plans, the City will further review project access points to ensure adequate sight distance. Accordingly, the Modified Project would not create or substantially increase safety hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use and impacts would be a less than significant.
870
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
The Modified Project will be designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles and meet all applicable OFD and OPD access requirements to ensure that adequate access would be provided for emergency vehicles at Project build out. During construction activities that include road and sidewalk improvements, the Modified Project would provide adequate emergency access along abutting roadways during temporary construction activities within the public right-of-way. As concluded in the Certified EIR, Mitigation Measure TRAF-3 would require a construction management plan to ensure construction activities would not impair the City’s emergency response plan or evacuation plan. As a result, the Modified Project would not a less than significant impact to emergency access. The Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required. Mitigation Measure TRAF -3 is applicable to the Modified Project.
18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?
b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision(c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that results of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) check conducted through the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was negative and did not indicate the presence of known tribal cultural resources within or immediately adjacent to the ORSC site . In accordance with AB 52 and SB 18 requirements, the City sent invitation letters to the Native American contacts provided by the NAHC and two tribes, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians–Kizh Nation and the Cahuilla Band of Indians, responded.
Construction of the Approved Project would require excavation and grading of the ORSC site in addition to trenching along Vineyard Avenue for the off -site sewer extension that could lead to the potential to uncover tribal cultural resources during construction . Mitigation Measures TCR -1 through TCR-3 would reduce potential impacts associated with tribal cultural resources to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts relating to tribal cultural resources would remain.
Discussion of Effects : As analyzed in Response 5.a, there are no resources on the Project site that are eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources as defined by Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k). Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a listed historical resource. Additionally, the Certified EIR concluded that no resources were recorded in the OR SC site. However, since the Modified Project would require excavation for construction into previously un disturbed soils, there is a potential to uncover undiscovered prehistoric artifacts or tribal cultural resources during excavation. Therefore, while unlikely, the presence of subsurface tribal cultural resources on the Project site remains possible, 871
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
and these could be affected by ground -disturbing activities associated with construction at the Project site. As a result, consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR , implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR -1 through TCR-3 would ensure preclude potential impacts to tribal cultural resources as defined in Public Resources Code 5024.1(c). Therefore, the Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required. The following mitigation measure s from the Certified EIR are applicable to the Modified Project:
TCR-1 Tribal Cultural Resources Monitoring. The project archaeologist, in consultation with interested tribes and the City of Ontario, shall develop an archaeological monitoring plan (AMP) to address the details, timing, and responsibility of archaeological and cultural activities that will occur on the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area. Details in the AMP shall include:
1. Project-related ground disturbance (including, but not limited to, brush clearing, grading, trenching, etc.) and development scheduling;
2. The development of a rotating or simultaneous schedule in coordination with the developer and the project archeologist for designated Native American Tribal Monitors from the consulting tribes during grading, excavation, and ground-disturbing activities on the site:
including the scheduling, safety requirements, duties, scope of work, and Native American Tribal Monitors’ authority to stop and redirect grading activities in coordination with all project archaeologists. Tribes shall coordinate as to Tribal Monitoring concurrent with development;
3. The protocols and stipulations that the City, Tribes, and project archaeologist will follow in the event of inadvertent cultural resources discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation.
At least 30 days prior to application for a grading permit and before any brush clearance, grading, excavation, and/or ground -disturbing activities on the site, the developer shall retain a tribal cultural monitor to monitor all ground-disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources.
Pursuant to the AMP, a tribal monitor from the consulting tribes shall be present during the initial grading activities. If tribal resources are found during grubbing activities, the tribal monitoring shall be present during site grading activities.
TCR-2 Treatment and Disposition of Cultural Resources. In the event that Native American cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during the course of any ground -disturbing activities, including but not limited to brush clearance, grading, trenching, etc., at the ORSC site or Offsite Improvement Area, t he following procedures will be carried out for treatment and disposition of the discoveries:
872
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
1. Temporary Curation and Storage: During the course of construction, all discovered resources shall be temporarily curated in a secure location on-site or at the offices of the project archaeologist. The removal of any artifacts from the ORSC site and Offsite Improvement Area will need to be thoroughly inventoried with tribal monitor oversight of the process;
2. Treatment and Final Disposition: The landowner(s) shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods, and all archaeological artifacts and nonhuman remains as part of the required mitigation for impacts to cultural resources. The City shall relinquish the artifacts through one or more of the following methods:
a. Accommodate the process for on -site reburial of the discovered items with the consulting Native American tribes or bands. This shall include measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts. Reburial shall not occur until all cataloging, basic analysis, other analyses as recommended by the project archaeologist and approved by consulting tribes, and basic recordation have been completed; all documentation should be at a level of standard professional practice to allow the writing of a report of professional quality;
b. A curation agreement with an appropriate qualified repository in San Bernardino County that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79, and therefore the resource would be professionally curated and made available to other archaeologists/researchers for further study. The collections and associated records shall be transferred, including title, to an appropriate curation facility in San Bernardino County, to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation;
c. For purposes of conflict resolution, if more than one Native American tribe or band is involved with the project and cannot come to an agreement as to the disposition of cultural materials, materials shall be curated at the San Bernardino County Museum by default;
d. At the completion of grading, excavation, and ground -disturbing activities on the site, a Phase IV Monitoring Report shall be submitted to the City documenting monitoring activities conducted by the project archaeologist and Native Tribal Monitors within 6 0 days of completion of grading. This report shall document the impacts to the known resources on the property; describe how each mitigation measure was fulfilled; document the type of cultural resources recovered and the disposition of such resources; pro vide evidence of the required cultural sensitivity training for the construction staff held during the required pregrade meeting; and, in a confidential appendix, include the daily/weekly monitoring notes from the archaeologist. All reports produced will be submitted to the City, County Museum, and consulting tribes.
873
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
TRC-3 Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary or Ceremonial Objects. Native American human remains are defined in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code Se ction 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.
a) If Native American human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or recognized on the ORSC site or Offsite Improvement Area, then Public Resource Code 5097.9 as well as Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 shall be followed.
b) Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).
c) Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods.
d) Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.
19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that the Approved Project would result in an increase in wastewater generation with the addition of residential and nonresidential land uses to an existing property currently on septic systems. Additionally, the Approved Project would require the expansion of the existing sewer infrastructure and the sewer installations would be require to comply with the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 7, Section 6-7.707, Sanitary Sewer Installation Policy and the Setting of Sewer Connection Fees. Additionally, the OMUC regularly provides and prioritizes sewer projects for inclusion in the latest Capital Improvements Program (CIP), which includes a budget for wastewater infrastructure improvements over a five-year planning horizon. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts on wastewater infrastructure.
Additionally, the City’s potable water and recycled water distribution systems would be improved and expanded with completion of the Approved Project. Planned new construction and expansion of the water distribution system due to the Approved Project would not significantly impact water treatment nor the City’s water distribution system. Additionally, OMUC had capital improvement projects to monitor and upgrade their potable water and recycled water distribution systems, as described in their Water and Recycled Water Master Plans. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts on water infrastructure.
Development contemplated by the Approved Project would result in an increase in impervious surfaces, which in turn could result in an increase in stormwater runoff, higher peak discharges to drainage channels, and the potential to cause nuisance flooding in areas without adequate drainage facilities. The Approved Project would be required to comply with the City’s storm drain policies and the MS4 permit, which would require the preparation of hydrology reports and drainage plans for review and approval by t he City to ensure that there are no adverse impacts to the City’s storm drain system. Also, the Approved Project would need to prepare a 874
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
WQMP that addresses stormwater runoff and requires the construction of stormwater treatment facilities for temporary on -site retention of stormwater runoff. These requirements would minimize the amount of stormwater runoff from potential future development. Compliance with the City’s policies and programs that ensure adequate infrastructure and the regulatory provisions in the MS4 permit that limit runoff from new development would ensure that implementation of the Approved Project would not result in significant increases in runoff that would contribute to the construction or expansion of new storm drains beyond what is already planned. Therefore, impacts with respect to stormwater infrastructure would be less than significant.
The Approved Project included undergrounding electric transmission lines along Chino Avenue and may include undergrounding of transmission lines along Riverside Drive. SCE forecasts that it will have sufficient electricity supplies to meet demands in its service area. Additionally, electricity used on -site would be offset through solar panels required under Mitigation Measure GHG-2. Moreover, natural gas service would be extended to the ORSC site, provided by SoCalGas through connections to existing off -site gas distribution lines and new on -site infrastructure .
Furthermore, a number of franchised telecommunications providers are available in the region, and no significant expansion or construction of the telecommunications network is anticipated as a result of implementation of the Approved Project . T he Approved Project also included an extension of the City’s OntarioNet fiber optic network to the ORSC site . Although the dry utilities infrastructure to the ORSC site would be extended, the construction or relocation of these facilities would not cause significant environmental effects, and impacts would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects:
Water and Wastewater
The Modified Project would include the installation of water and wastewater lines within the Project site. Water would be accommodated via proposed 6 -inch water lines from the northeastern portion of the building to the existing 12-inch water main on C Street. Additionally, a proposed 2-inch recycled water line would extend from the southwestern portion of the proposed building to the existing12-inch recycled water main on South Champions/Hellman Avenue. Sewer would be accommodated via proposed 8- inch and 10-inch sewer lines that would extend from the northeastern and southeastern corners of the building to an existing 10-inch sewer mains on C Street and South Champions/Hellman Avenue.
Although the Modified Project would result in new water and wastewater line connections, these connections would occur on-site and would be part of the Modified Project’s construction phase, which is evaluated throughout this Addendum. The construction of the Modified Project’s water and wastewate r lines necessary to serve the Modified Project would not result in any significant physical effects on the environment that are not already identified and disclosed as part of this Addendum. Impacts would be less than significant.
Stormwater Drainage
Runoff from the site will sheet flow over the parking areas into the ribbon gutter and curb and gutter system. The runoff will then be intercepted by catch basins and conveyed further by storm drain system into the underground stormtech infiltration system located at the southeastern portion of the site. Using an 18-inch storm drain outlet structure, the excess runoff will be discharged into the curb inlet located offsite at the southeastern corner of the site along A-street. Refer to the analysis under Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, Threshold c.ii, above. As discussed, stormwater runoff would be treated on site and would not require relocation or construction of new or expanded storm water drainage infrastructure which could cause significant environmental effects. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
875
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
Dry Utilities
Electricity will be provided by the Southern California Edison (SCE), natural gas would be provided via Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas) and fiber optic would be provided by OntarioNet. Connections to the existing utility networks are available in the Project area and any offsite improvements would occur within improved rights -of-way, which are inherent to the Modified Project’s construction phase and have been evaluated throughout this Addendum.
Therefore, the Modified Project would not require or result in the construction or expansion of new facilities, and impacts would be less than significant.
Based on the preceding, the Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that the Approved Project would result in an increase in water demand with the addition of a Minor League Baseball Stadium, a community center and indoor athletic facility, and other nonresidential land uses to an existing property currently on private groundwater wells . T he total water demand for the Approved Project was estimated to be 215,748 gallons per day (gpd) or 242 acre-feet per year (afy). Based on the land use maps and future water demand and population projections provided in Appendix B of the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP ) and Appendix E of the 2020 UWMP, water demand for the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan, which encompassed the 199 -acre ORSC site, was included in both the 2015 and 2020 UWMP. The 2015 Water Supply Assessment (WSA) for the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan estimated a total water demand of 606 afy. The 2015 and 2020 UWMPs stated that the City’s available water supply would meet the projected water demands during normal, single dry and multiple dry years. The ORSC’s total water demand of 242 afy is less than the water demand of 606 afy assumed for the 199- acre ORSC site in the City’s UWMP. Therefore, the conclusions reached in the 2015 and 2020 UWMPs that the City can meet its future water demand during normal, single -dry, and multiple dry years over the next 25 -year period remains valid, and meet the water demand for the ORSC, and impacts would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects: OMUC is responsible for supplying potable water to the Project site.
The UWMP includes an analysis of water supply reliability projected through 204 5 under normal years, single dry year, and multiple dry years. OMUC’s total water demand for 20 20 was approximately 32,109 AF (OMUC, 2021) . As stated above, the City is anticipated to have adequate water supplies to meet all its demands from the implementation of the Approved Project at buildout over the next 25 years under a normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry years. As discussed under Response 10.b, the Modified Project would result in an nominal increase of 1,494 gpd in water demand. Howe ver, both the 2015 and 2020 UWMP anticipated a total of 606 afy for the ORSC site from the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan . As such, the increase in water demand associated with the Modified Project was accounted for in the demand anticipated by the UWMPs and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
876
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that wastewater from the ORSC site would ultimately flow to the south and to Regional Water Recycling Plan #5 (RP-5). The additional wastewater generation for the Approved Project of 0.06 million gallons per day (mgd) is well below the excess capacity of 14.3 mgd for RP-5. Therefore, the Approved Project would not exceed the capacity of the wastewater treatment provider. In addition, IEUA continually updates its Wastewater Facilities Master Plans RP-5 and includes plans for expansion of this facility to meet the growth within the service area through year 2060. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts on wastewater collection and treatment, and impacts would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects: The Project site is currently undeveloped and does not require wastewater treatment services. However, o verall buildout of the Modified Project would result in an overall reduction in commercial uses compared to the buildout of the Approved Project previously analyzed under the Certified EIR. The Project Applicant would redevelop the Project site with a use that is consistent with the site’s underlying land use designation; therefore, the wastewater generation associated with the Modi fied Project was considered in the demand anticipated by the Certified EIR. As such, the IEUA ’s existing wastewater treatment facilities are anticipated to have adequate capacity to serve the Modified Project’s project demand in addition to its existing commitments. Impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that the Approved Project would result in an increase in solid waste of approximately 18,768 pounds per day (ppd), or 3,425 tons per year. This net increase was about 0.1 percent of the combined residual capacity of the Badlands Sanitary Landfill and the El Sobrante Landfill’s excess capacity. With continued compliance with the applicable regulations such as CALGreen building code, AB 341, and AB 1826, leading to increased recycling and waste diversion, anticipated rates of solid waste disposal from the ORSC would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects: Solid waste generated during the operation of the Modified Project is anticipated to be collected by the City of Ontario and is anticipated to be hauled to Badlands Sanitary Landfill or El Sobrante Landfill. The Badlands Sanitary Landfill has a permitted disposal capacity of 5,000 tons per day with a remaining capacity of 4,900,000 cubic yards. The Badlands Sanitary Landfill is estimated to reach capacity, at the earliest time, in the year 2059. (CalRecycle, 2025a) The El Sobrante Landfill is permitted to received 16,054 tons of solid waste per day with a remaining capacity of 121,083,583 tons. The El Sobrante Landfill is estimated to reach capacity, at the earliest time, in the year 2051 (CalRecycle, 2025b).
Based on the generation rate of 15.1 ppd per employee, the Modified Project would result in approximately 3,201.2 ppd
4 (1.6 tons per day) , compared to the Approved Project’s 7,625.5 ppd ( 3.81 tons per day) . As previously stated, the Badlands Sanitary Landfill has a permitted
4 212 employees*15.1= 3,201.2 ppd
877
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
disposal capacity of 5,0 00 tons per day and the El Sobrante Landfill has a permitted disposal capacity of 16,054 tons per day. The Modified Project generated solid waste represents a nominal portion of the landfill’s capacity and would not contribute significantly to the daily landfill capacity, and the landfill facilities are sufficient. Moreover, the Modified Project would result in a decrease of 10,160.02 s.f. of commercial uses compared to the buildout of the Approved Project previously analyzed under the Certified EIR. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant.
The Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR . No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
e. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that the City’s per capita disposal rates of 15.1 ppd per employee is below the CalRecycle targets of 16.4 ppd for employees. In addition, the Approved Project would comply with Division 4.4, Material Conservation and Resource Efficiency, of the CALGreen Building Code , AB 341, and SB 1383. The City complied with all applicable federal, State, and local solid waste regulations, and solid waste, recycling, and green waste collection services were available to all commercial businesses in the City. Therefore, the A pproved Project would comply with all current and future regulatory requirements, and impacts would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects: The following federal and state laws and regulations govern solid waste disposal:
• AB 939 (Chapter 1095, Statutes of 1989), the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 required each city, county, and regional agency to develop a source reduction and recycling element of an integrated waste management plan that contained specified components, including a source reduction component, a recycling component, and a composting component.
With certain exceptions, the source reduction and recycling components were required to divert 50 percent of all solid waste from landfill disposal o r transformation by January 1, 2000, through source reduction, recycling, and composting activities.
• AB 32 (Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006), the California Global Warming Solutions Act, established mandatory recycling as one of the measures to reduce GHG emissions adopted in the Scoping Plan by the California Air Resources Board.
• AB 341 (Chapter 476, Statutes of 2011) requires that all “commercial” generators of solid waste (businesses, institutions, and multifamily dwellings) establish recycling and/or composting programs. AB 341 goes beyond AB 939 and establishes the new recycling goal of 75 percent by 2020.
• SB 1383 (Chapter 395, Statutes of 2016)requires all businesses and residents to divert organic materials (including food waste, yard waste, and soiled paper products) from the landfill.
The Modified Project would implement the requirements of the City’s Integrated Waste Department’s Refuse & Recycling Planning Manual on refuse and recycling storage and access 878
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
for service, as well as addressing the City's recycling goals. The requirements of Chapter 3, Integrated Waste Management, of the Municipal Code will also be implemented to ensure that the Modified Project complies with all applicable state and federal laws . Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. The Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR . No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
20. WILDFIRE.
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that the City’s Emergency Operations Plan provided a means to prepare and maintain systems, supplies, and other logistical items among City departments to support emergency/disaster response and recovery throughout the City. The number of people visiting and working at the ORSC site would fluctuate throughout the year and on a daily basis because the schedule of activities at the proposed baseball stadium and use of the proposed C ity recreation facilities would vary based on sport seasons.
Development of the Approved Project would also include construction activities that may also temporarily impact traffic on the ORSC site. Therefore, construction and operation of the Approved Project could impair an emergency response plan or evacuation plan. Implementation of Mitigation Measures TRAF-2 and TRAF-3 would require that the City prepare and implement a Parking and Event Traffic Management Plan (TMP) and a construction management plan to ensure that construction and operational activities do not interfere with emergen cy access .
Therefore, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure TRAF -2 and TRAF-3, impacts related to emergency access would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects: As concluded in the Certified EIR, the City is not located with a SRA.
According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s fire hazard map for the Local Responsibility Area (LRA), the Project site is not within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) (CAL FIRE, 2025) . Consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would be required to develop a construction management plan (Mitigation Measure TRAF -3) to ensure construction activities would not impair the City’s emergency response plan or evacuation plan. Additionally, during the building plan check and development review process, the City would coordinate with OFD and OPD to ensure that the necessary fire prevention and emergency response features are incorporated into the Modified Project and that adequate circulation and access (e.g., adequate turning radii for fire trucks) is provided . Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure TRAF-3. The Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required. Mitigation Measure TRAF -3 is applicable to the Modified Project.
879
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that the City wa s located outside of a State Responsibility Area (SRA) and did not contain areas subject to very high wildfire risk. However, the City recognized that even though fuel loading was light in Ontario and fire risk came primarily from urban fires, not wildfires, there was some risk related to wildfires.
Implementation of the Approved Project would not add wildland vegetation or change site topography (such as adding large slopes) so as to exacerbate the spread of wildfire ; therefore, it was unlikely that a wildfire would travel into the P roject area from adjacent areas and be exacerbated by the Approved Project. C onstruction of these infrastructure improvements would be required to comply with of the CFC Chapter 33’s fire safety precautions for construction and demolition of a project, therefore minimizing fire -related impacts associated with the installation of this infrastructure. Additionally, all project buildings would be constructed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the adopted CFC, the City’s Municipal Code, and standard conditions regarding fire prevention and suppression measures. Moreover, the ORSC site and the area surrounding the site were relatively flat and in areas of minimal flood hazard; therefore, would not increase the risk of landslides after a wildfire compared to existing condition and increase the risk of downslope or downstream flooding. With adherence to the building practices in the CAL FIRE’s 2019 Strategic Fire Plan for California, the California Fire Cod e, CBC, City’s LHMP, and fire services from OFD, development and infrastructure associated with the Approved Project would not exacerbate risk or result in post-wildfire hazards.
Discussion of Effects : As discussed above , the Project site is not located with a SRA or VHFHSZ in a LRA(CAL FIRE, 2025). Construction of the proposed infrastructure improvements would be required to comply with of the CFC Chapter 33’s fire safety precautions and Project buildings constructed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the adopted CFC and the City’s Development Code. Additionally, as discussed previously, the Project site is not located with an area of flood or landslide hazards. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. The Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat or a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
880
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that the Approved Project would result in less-than-significant impacts to sensitive plant and animal species as well as habitats with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO -1 through BIO-9. Additionally, the Approved Project concluded that the Approved Project would result in in less -than-significant impacts to historical resources.
Discussion of Effects: As discussed in Biological Resources Section of the Addendum, With the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO -9, impacts to sensitive plant and wildlife species would be less than significant . Additionally, as indicated in the Cultural Resources Section, the Project site is not included on the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources, or a local register of historical resources, nor is it eligible for listing .
Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. The Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously consid ered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current project, and the effects of probable future projects.)
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR addressed cumulative impacts for each of the environmental topics evaluated. The Certified EIR concluded that the Approved Project would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts regarding agricultural resources, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation (VMT).
Discussion of Effects: As identified through the analysis presented in this Addendum, with the implementation of Project-specific mitigation measures identified herein, the Modified Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified EIR. No changes or additions to the Certified EIR analyses are necessary . Therefore, there is no potential for the Modified Project to result in cumulatively considerable effects to the environment beyond those previously disclosed in the Certified EIR (and already disclosed throughout this analysis), and instead, the Modified Project’s impacts are generally less than the impacts assumed and analyzed in the Certified EIR .
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
c. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Summary of Certified EIR Finding: The Certified EIR concluded that with the implementation of the Mitigation Measures, compliance with existing laws, plans and regulations, the Approved Project does not have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
Discussion of Effects: The Modified Project’s potential to result in environmental effects that could adversely affect human beings, either directly or indirectly, has been discussed throughout this Addendum. The Modified Project would result in less than significant impacts related to air quality and associated effects on human health from air pollutants, GHG emissions, and construction-related noise and potential effects on hearing impairment . Implementation of the Modified Project would not result in environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse 881
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, beyond those disclosed in the Certified EIR , and instead, the Modified Project’s impacts are generally less than the impacts assumed by the Certified EIR.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
EARLIER ANALYZES
(Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D)):
1) Earlier Analyzes Used. Identify earlier analyses used and state where they are available for review.
a) Ontario Regional Sports Complex Final Environmental Impact Report
b) Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report
c) The Ontario Plan/Policy Plan
d) City of Ontario Municipal Code
All documents listed above are on file with the City of Ontario Planning Department, 303 East “B” Street, Ontario, California 91764, (909) 395-2036.
2) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of , and adequately analyzed in, an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards.
REFERENCES
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), 2025. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. March 24, 2025. Retrieved from https://fire-hazard-severity-zones- rollout-calfire-forestry.hub.arcgis.com/pages/access-map
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), 2025a. SWIS Facility Detail - Badlands Sanitary Landfill. Accessed on October 20, 2025. Retrieved from https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2245?siteID=2367
CalRecycle, 2025b. SWIS Facility Detail - El Sobrante Landfill. Accessed on October 20, 2025.
Retrieved from
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2280?siteID=2402
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2025. California Road System - Functional Classification. Accessed on October 20, 2025. Retrieved from https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=026e830c914c495 797c969a3e5668538
California Department of Conservation (DOC), 2020. California Important Farmland Finder .
Accessed on October 20, 2025. Retrieved from
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/
882
Addendum to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex Environmental Impact Report File No.: PDEV25-007
DOC, 2025. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Accessed on October 20, 2025.
Retrieved from https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), 2023. California Natural Community Conservation Plans. August 2023. Retrieved from
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=68626&inline
City of Ontario, 2016. Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report.
September 2016.
City of Ontario, 2022a. City of Ontario Policy Plan. August 2022. Retrieved from https://www.ontarioca.gov/Ontarioplan/Policyplan
City of Ontario, 2024a. Ontario Municipal Code. Adopted December 2024. Retrieved from https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/ontarioca/latest/ontario_ca/0-0-0-35678
City of Ontario, 2024b. Ontario Regional Sports Complex Final Environmental Impact Report.
June 2024. Retrieved from https://content.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/migrated- files/ORSC_FinalEIR_2024_0614.pdf
Employment Development Department (EDD), 2025. Labor Force and Unemployment Rate for Cities and Census Designated Places. July 2025. Retrieved from https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/labor-force-and-unemployment-for- cities-and-census-areas.html
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2008. FEMA Flood Map Service Center:
Search by Address - FIRM: 06071C8638H. August 28, 2008. Accessed on October 20, 2025.
Retrieved from https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search#searchresultsanchor
Hariya INC, 2025a. Water Quality Management Plan. October 2025. Technical Appendix B.1.
Hariya INC, 20252b. Hydrology and Hydraulic Study. October 7, 2025. Technical Appendix B.2.
Ontario Municipal Utilities Company (OMUC), 2021. 2020 UWMP. June 2021. Retrieved from https://content.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/migrated- files/FINAL%20City%20of%20Ontario%202020%20UWMP.pdf
PlaceWorks, 2025a. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum for Hotel Ontario Aloft + Residence Inn Project. November 17, 2025. Technical Appendix A.
PlaceWorks, 2025b. Noise & Vibration Technical Memorandum for Hotel Ontario Aloft + Residence Inn Project. November 17, 2025.Technical Appendix C.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), 2024. Demographics and Growth Forecast. April 4, 2024. Retrieved from https://scag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024 -05/23- 2987-tr-demographics-growth-forecast-final-040424.pdf
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2025. National Wetlands Inventory. Accessed on October 20, 2025. Retrieved from https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands- mapper/
883
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
DATE November 17, 2025
TO Tracy Chu, Project Manager
T&B Planning
ADDRESS 3200 El Camino Real, Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92602
FROM Nicole Vermilion, Principal
Lance Park, Senior Associate II
Lexie Zimny, Associate I
SUBJECT Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum for Hotel Ontario Aloft + Residence Inn Project
PROJECT NUMBER T&B-02
PlaceWorks’ technical staff has prepared an air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions memorandum to support the environmental documentation required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the proposed amendments to the Ontario Regional Sports Complex and Hotel Ontario Aloft + Residence Inn Project (together referred to as the “Proposed Project”) compared to the previously approved Ontario Regional Sport Complex (ORSC).
Project Background and Prior Environmental Analysis
This memorandum was prepared to support an Addendum to the previously approved ORSC Environmental Impact Report (Certified EIR) (State Clearinghouse [SCH] No. 2023110328) for the Proposed Project. The memorandum has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section 21166 of the CEQA statute and Sections 15162 and 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines.
The land use plan for the ORSC (Approved Project) designates land uses within seven planning areas (PA) —Baseball Stadium (PA 1); Commercial Retail (PA 2); Baseball Stadium Retail-Hospitality (PA 3), Baseball Stadium Retail- Hospitality South (PA 4); City Park–Active Fields (PA 5); City Park–Indoor Athletic Facility (PA 6); and Community Recreation Center (PA 7). The Approved Project allows for up to 540,750 square feet of commercial building space, 450,000 square feet of stadium space (110,000 square feet of conditioned space and 340,000 square feet of unconditioned space), and 272,000 square feet of parking structures within the 199 -gross-acre site. The EIR for the ORSC was certified in August 2024.
CERTIFIED EIR MITIGATION MEASURES
The Certified EIR determined that the following air quality and GHG mitigation measures would be applicable to future individual projects under the approved project.
884
November 17, 2025 | Page 2
AQ-1 The City of Ontario shall require the construction contractor to incorporate the following to reduce air pollutant emissions during construction activities:
Use construction equipment rated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as having Tier 4 (model year 2015 or newer) Final or stricter emission limits for all off-road construction equipment. If Tier 4 Final equipment is not commercially available for a specific piece of equipment, the applicant shall provide documentation (e.g., rental inventory requests), to the City’s satisfaction, or otherwise demonstrate its unavailability to the City of Ontario prior to the issuance of any construction permits and replacement equipment used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 3 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by the California Air Resources Board.
• If Tier 4 Final equipment is not available, the construction contractor(s) and subcontractor(s) shall use Tier 4 Interim equipment.
• If Tier 4 Interim equipment is not available, the construction contractor(s) and subcontractor(s) affected shall use then Tier 3 equipment outfitted with a level 3 diesel particulate filter.
• For purposes of this mitigation measure, “commercially available” shall mean the availability of Tier 4 engines similar to the availability of other large-scale construction projects in the City occurring at the same time and taking into consideration factors such as (i) potential significant delays to critical-path timing of construction and (ii) geographic proximity to the project site of Tier 4 equipment.
During construction, the construction contractor shall maintain a list of all operating equipment in use on the construction site for verification by the City of Ontario. The construction equipment list shall state the makes, models, Equipment Identification Numbers, Engine Family Numbers, and number of construction equipment on-site.
Use paints with a VOC content that meets the South Coast Air Quality Management District Super Compliant architectural coatings standard of 10 grams per liter (g/L) or less (i.e.,) for coating architectural surfaces.
Comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403, including the following measure:
• Provide National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)-approved respirators for workers with a prior history of Valley Fever.
• Half-face respirators equipped with a minimum N-95 protection factor for use during worker collocation with surface disturbance activities. Half-face respirators equipped with N-100 or P- 100 filters should be used during digging activities. Employees should wear respirators when working near earth-moving machinery.
• Post warnings onsite and consider limiting access to visitors, especially those without adequate training and respiratory protection.
• These identified measures shall be incorporated into all appropriate construction documents (e.g., construction management plans) submitted to and verified by the City.
AQ-2 All landscaping equipment (e.g., leaf blower) used for property management shall be electric powered only. The property manager/facility owner shall provide documentation (e.g., purchase, rental, and/or 885
November 17, 2025 | Page 3
services agreement) to the City of Ontario Planning Department to verify to the City’s satisfaction that all landscaping equipment utilized will be electric powered.
GHG-1 The City of Ontario shall require proposed buildings within the ORSC site to be all electric, with electricity to be the only permanent source of energy for all nonemergency building energy needs, including but not limited to water heating; mechanical equipment; and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) (i.e., space-heating and space cooling). All major appliances (e.g., dishwashers, refrigerators, and water heaters) provided/installed shall be electric-powered EnergyStar certified or an equivalent energy efficiency where applicable. The only exception to this measure shall be limited to commercial cooking uses. Prior to issuance of building permits for development projects, applicants shall provide plans that show the aforementioned requirements to the City of Ontario Planning Department. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the City of Ontario Building Department shall verify installation of the electric-powered EnergyStar or equivalent appliances.
GHG-2 The City of Ontario shall require proposed buildings and parking areas within the ORSC site to include on-site renewable energy generation systems. Proposed buildings shall include photovoltaic (PV) and battery energy storage systems compliant with the Prescriptive Requirements of the California Building Standards Code, Part 6, California Energy Code. Proposed buildings may substitute alternative renewable energy generation technology (e.g., wind) for PV systems; however, that alternative generation technology system shall be sized to provide annual electricity equal to what would be provided by a PV system for that building compliant with the Prescriptive Requirements of the California Building Standards Code, Part 6, California Energy Code. Proposed parking areas shall include a PV system or alternative renewable energy generation system (e.g., wind) to help offset electricity demand generated by electric vehicle charging. Prior to issuance of building permits for development projects, applicants shall provide plans that show the aforementioned requirements to the City of Ontario Planning Department. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the City of Ontario Building Department shall verify installation of the PV and battery energy storage system s or alternative renewable energy generation systems.
GHG-3 The City of Ontario shall require that the parking lots and parking structure install electric vehicle spaces in compliance with the voluntary Tier 2 standards under Section A5.106.5.3.2 of the Non - residential Voluntary Measures in the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code. All site plans submitted to the City of Ontario Planning Department shall illustrate compliance with Section A5.106.5.3.2.
GHG-4 The City of Ontario shall require applicants to design and construct buildings in Planning Areas 2, 3, and 4 to achieve a 100-point score with the 2022 Community Climate Action Plan (CCAP), Table 6, “Screening Table for Implementing GHG Performance Standards for Commercial, Office, Medical, Hotel, Industrial, and Retail Development, 2030.” Alternatively, the analysis of development projects can be done through emissions calculations to demonstrate equivalent reductions using CalEEMod or a similar tool. Projects that do not use the CCAP Screening Tables to demonstrate consistency with the 2022 CCAP must demonstrate that they will generate annual GHG emissions that do not exceed the following emission screening thresholds from the CCAP:
1. For residential development completed between 2020 and 2030, the project shall not produce GHG emissions greater than 5.85 MTCO
2e/dwelling unit.
2. For residential development completed after 2030, the project shall not produce GHG emissions greater than 1.53 MTCO
2e/dwelling unit.
886
November 17, 2025 | Page 4
3. For nonresidential developments of all types completed between 2020 and 2030, the project shall not produce GHG emissions greater than 8.84 MTCO2e/2,500 square feet of conditioned space.
4. For nonresidential developments of all types completed after 2030, the project shall not produce GHG emissions greater than 3.61 MTCO
2e/2,500 square feet of conditioned space.
For projects that include both residential and nonresidential space, the residential and nonresidential components must be assessed separately against their respective applicable thresholds.
Project Location
The ORSC is in the southern portion of Ontario, which is known as the Ontario Ranch. The ORSC site is bounded to the north by Riverside Drive, to the south by Chino Avenue, to the west by the unimproved right -of-way (ROW) for Vineyard Avenue, and to the east by the Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel. The Proposed Project, which covers PAs 2 through 4 of the ORSC, is largely concentrated in the northeastern portion of the ORSC. PA 2 and PA 3 border Riverside Drive; PA 2 borders the Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel; and PA 4 is bordered by PAs 2, 3, and 5.
The proposed hotel and retail building is in a 3.41-acre portion of PA 2 of the ORSC. The project site encompasses three assessor’s parcel numbers (APNs): 0218-111-12-0-000, 0218-111-49-0-000, and 0218-111-50-0-000. The site has a General Plan designation of Hospitability (HOS) and a zoning designation of Convention Center Support Commercial (CCS). The project site is bounded by Riverside Drive to the north, Hellman Avenue and the baseball stadium of PA 1 to the west, A Street and the Cucamonga Flood Control Channel to the east, and C Street to the south.
Project Description
The Proposed Project encompasses the amendments to the ORSC to relocate and reconfigure the hotel and retail building space across PAs 2 through 4 as well as construction and operation of the proposed Aloft & Residence Inn Hotel in PA 2. As shown in Table 1, Approved Project and Proposed Project Comparison, across all three PAs, the hotel space would increase from 70,000 square feet with 100 rooms to up to 170,000 square feet with 249 rooms, and the retail building space would diminish from 180,000 square feet to 72,144 square feet, resulting in a net decrease of building space—from 250,000 square feet to 242,144 square feet—across all retail and hotel uses in those three PAs.
The proposed Aloft & Residence Inn is a five-story hotel complex consisting of 249 rooms across the second through fifth floors and a retail/conference area on the first floor. The retail/conference area would include conference rooms, a “hall of fame” area, a Yogurtland, and a café. A courtyard on the first floor of the hotel would consist of a patio, three pool areas, and an event area with artificial turf. The total proposed Aloft & Residence Inn building is anticipated to consist of up to 195,700 square feet. The proposed Aloft & Residence Inn would also have two parking areas with a total of 197 parking stalls and an off-site sidewalk improvement.
887
November 17, 2025 | Page 5
Table 1 Approved Project and Proposed Project Comparison Land Use
Approved
Project Proposed Project Difference
PA 2 Commercial Retail
Retail/Commercial, East 45,000 Sq Ft 25,631 Sq Ft -19,369 Sq Ft Hotel 0 Sq Ft 170,000 Sq Ft
249 Rooms
170,000 Sq Ft
249 Rooms
PA 3 Baseball Stadium Retail Stadium Retail and Hospitality Retail/Commercial 21,000 Sq Ft 10,000 Sq Ft -11,000 Sq Ft Hotel 70,000 Sq Ft
100 Rooms
0 Sq Ft
0 Rooms
-70,000 Sq Ft
-100 Rooms
PA 4 Baseball Stadium Retail and Hospitality South
Retail/Commercial 114,000 Sq Ft 36,513 Sq Ft -77,487 Sq Ft TOTAL Retail Space 180,000 Sq Ft 72,144 Sq Ft -107,856 Sq Ft TOTAL Hotel Space 70,000 Sq Ft
100 Rooms
170,000 Sq Ft
249 Rooms
100,000 Sq Ft
149 Rooms
TOTAL Building Space PAs 2 to 4 250,000 Sq Ft
100 Rooms
242,144 Sq Ft
249 Rooms
-7,856 Sq Ft
149 Rooms
Modeling Methodology
Projected operation-related air pollutant emissions are calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2022.1. For the purposes of this analysis, operational emissions were calculated using the project-specific information for the proposed Aloft & Residence Inn portion of the Proposed Project in PA 2. In lieu of project-specific information for PAs 3 and 4, operational emissions for these portions of the Proposed Project were calculated based on the total projected building square footages shown in Table 1 in addition to the landscaping and parking square footage assumed under these PAs of the ORSC . The total emissions for these three PAs under the Proposed Project were compared to the operational emissions of these PAs under the Approved Project.
Operation-related mobile emissions modeled for both the Approved and Proposed Project are based on trip generation estimates from the 11th edition of the ITE manual compiled by the City of Ontario (see Attachment A, Approved Project and Proposed Project Trip Generation). The scenarios considered in these trip generation estimates include a “typical weekday with a stadium event” scenario and two scenarios for Saturday trips—one accounts for a tournament at the athletic facilities and no baseball stadium event; the other accounts for a baseball stadium event and no tournaments. For the purposes of this analysis, the average daily trips from the scenario with the highest number of trips across the three scenarios were used for modeling mobile emissions of the Approved Project and Proposed Project, respectively.
The calculated operational emissions of the Proposed Project are compared to the thresholds of significance for individual projects per the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (South Coast AQMD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993) as well as the emissions of the Approved Project. Because the Proposed Project would result in a net decrease in building space, construction-related air quality impacts are discussed qualitatively. 888
November 17, 2025 | Page 6
Thresholds of Significance
AIR QUALITY
The analysis of the proposed project’s air quality impacts follows the guidance and methodologies recommended in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook and the significance thresholds on South Coast AQMD’s website (South Coast AQMD 1993, 2023). CEQA allows the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district to be used to assess a project’s impacts on air quality. South Coast AQMD has established thresholds of significance for regional air quality emissions for construction activities and project operation. In addition to the daily thresholds, projects are also subject to the ambient air quality standards (AAQS). These are addressed through an analysis of localized carbon monoxide (CO) impacts and localized significance thresholds (LST).
Regional Significance Thresholds
South Coast AQMD has adopted regional construction and operational emissions thresholds to determine a project’s cumulative impact on air quality in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB). Table 2, South Coast AQMD Regional Significance Thresholds, lists thresholds that are applicable for all projects uniformly, regardless of size or scope.
There is growing evidence that although ultrafine particulates (PM
0.1) contribute a very small portion of the overall
atmospheric mass concentration, they represent a greater proportion of the health risk from particulate matter (PM). However, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and California Air Resources Board (CARB) have not yet adopted AAQS to regulate ultrafine particulates; therefore, South Coast AQMD has not developed thresholds for them.
Table 2 South Coast AQMD Regional Significance Thresholds Air Pollutant Construction Phase Operational Phase
Reactive Organic Gases (ROGs)/Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) 75 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) 100 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 lbs/day 550 lbs/day
Sulfur Oxides (SOX) 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day
Coarse Particulates (PM10) 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day
Fine Particulates (PM2.5) 55 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
Source: South Coast AQMD 2023.
Projects that exceed the regional significance thresholds contribute to the nonattainment designation of the SoCAB.
The attainment designations are based on the AAQS, which are set at levels of exposure that are determined to not result in adverse health effects. Exposure to fine particulate pollution and ozone causes myriad health impacts, particularly to the respiratory and cardiovascular systems, including:
» Increase in cancer risk (PM2.5, toxic air contaminants [TACs]) » Aggravation of respiratory disease (ozone [O3], PM2.5) » Increase in bronchitis (O3, PM2.5)
» Cause of chest discomfort, throat irritation, and increased effort to take a deep breath (O 3) » Reduction in resistance to infections and increases fatigue (O3) 889
November 17, 2025 | Page 7
» Reduction in lung growth in children (PM2.5)
» Contribution to heart disease and heart attacks (PM2.5) » Contribution to premature death (O3, PM2.5)
» Reduction in birth weight in newborns (PM2.5) (South Coast AQMD 2015a) Exposure to fine particulates and ozone aggravates asthma attacks and can amplify other lung ailments , such as emphysema and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Exposure to current levels of PM 2.5 is responsible for an estimated 4,300 cardiopulmonary-related deaths per year in the SoCAB. In addition, University of Southern California scientists responsible for a landmark children’s health study found that lung growth improved as air pollution declined for children aged 11 to 15 in five communities in the SoCAB (South Coast AQMD 2015b).
Mass emissions in Table 2 are not correlated with concentrations of air pollutants but contribute to the cumulative air quality impacts in the SoCAB. Therefore, regional emissions from a single project do not usually trigger a regional health impact. South Coast AQMD is the primary agency responsible for ensuring the health and welfare of individuals sensitive to elevated concentrations of air quality in the SoCAB. To achieve the health -based standards established by the EPA, South Coast AQMD prepares an air quality management plan (AQMP) that details regional programs to attain the AAQS.
CO HOTSPOTS
Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of carbon monoxide ( CO) called hot spots. These pockets have the potential to exceed the State’s one-hour standard of 20 parts per million (ppm) or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm. Because CO is produced in greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the atmosphere, adherence to ambient air quality standards is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO concentrations. Hot spots are typically produced at intersections where traffic congestion is highest because vehicles queue for longer periods and are subject to reduced speeds. With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of control technology on indu strial facilities, CO concentrations in the SoCAB and in the state have steadily declined.
In 2007, the SoCAB was designated in attainment for CO under both the California AAQS and National AAQS. The CO hotspot analysis conducted for attainment by South Coast AQMD did not predict a violation of CO standards at the busiest intersections in Los Angeles during the peak morning and afternoon periods. 1 As identified in South Coast
AQMD's 2003 AQMP and the 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan), peak carbon monoxide concentrations in the SoCAB in previous years were a result of unusual meteorological and topographical conditions and not a result of congestion at a particular intersection (South Coast AQMD 1992, 2003). The South Coast AQMD does not currently have adopted CO hotspot screening guidance, so guidance from the Bay Area Air District was used to determine whether the proposed project may result in potentially significant impacts related to CO hotspot generation. According to Bay Area Air District’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, to generate a significant CO impact under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour—or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix (Bay Area Air District 2023).2
1 The four intersections were: Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway; Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue; Sunset Bouleva rd and Highland Avenue; and La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard. The busiest intersection evaluated (Wilshire and Veteran) had a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day, with level of service (LOS) E in the morning peak hour and LOS F in the evening peak hour. 2 The CO hotspot analysis refers to the modeling conducted by the Bay Area Air District (formerly known as BAAQMD) for its 2022 CEQA Guidelines because it is based on newer data and considers the improvement in mobile -source CO emissions. Although meteorological conditions in the Bay Area differ from those in the SoCAB, the modeling conducted by Bay Area Air District demonstrates that the peak-hour traffic volumes at an intersection in a single hour would need to be substantial. This finding is consistent with the CO hotspot analysis South Coa st AQMD prepared as part of its 2003 AQMP to provide support in seeking CO attainment for the SoCAB. Based on that analysis, no CO hotspots were predicted for 890
November 17, 2025 | Page 8
LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS
South Coast AQMD developed LSTs for emissions of NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 generated at the project site (off-site mobile-source emissions are not included in the LST analysis). LSTs represent the maximum emissions at a project site that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent federal or S tate AAQS and are shown in Table 3, South Coast AQMD Localized Significance Thresholds.
Table 3 South Coast AQMD Localized Significance Thresholds Air Pollutant (Relevant AAQS) Concentration
1-Hour CO Standard (CAAQS) 20 ppm
8-Hour CO Standard (CAAQS) 9.0 ppm
1-Hour NO2 Standard (CAAQS) 0.18 ppm
Annual NO2 Standard (CAAQS) 0.03 ppm
24-Hour PM10 Standard – Construction (South Coast
AQMD)1 10.4 µg/m3
24-Hour PM2.5 Standard – Construction (South Coast
AQMD)1 10.4 µg/m3
24-Hour PM10 Standard – Operation (South Coast
AQMD)1 2.5 µg/m3
24-Hour PM2.5 Standard – Operation (South Coast
AQMD)1 2.5 µg/m3
Source: South Coast AQMD 2023.
ppm – parts per million; µg/m3 – micrograms per cubic meter 1 Threshold is based on South Coast AQMD Rule 403. Since the SoCAB is in nonattainment for PM10 and PM2.5, the threshold is established as an allowable change in concentration. Therefore, background concentration is il t
To assist lead agencies, South Coast AQMD developed screening-level LSTs to back-calculate the mass amount (lbs. per day) of emissions generated on-site that would trigger the levels shown in Table 3 for projects under 5 acres. In accordance with South Coast AQMD’s LST methodology, the screening-level construction LSTs are based on the acreage disturbed per day by equipment use, distance to sensitive receptors, and source receptor area (SRA).
Table 4, South Coast AQMD Screening-Level Localized Significance Thresholds, presents the screening-level construction LSTs for the project site in SRA 33, Southwest San Bernardino Valley. The screening-level thresholds are based on sensitive receptors within South Coast AQMD’s minimum reference distance of 82 feet (25 meters) for NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5.
the SoCAB. As noted in the preceding footnote, the analysis included some of Los Angeles’ busiest intersections, with daily t raffic volumes of 100,000 or more daily vehicle trips operating at LOS E and F. 891
November 17, 2025 | Page 9
Table 4 South Coast AQMD Screening-Level Localized Significance Thresholds Acreage Disturbed
Threshold (lbs/day)
Nitrogen
Oxides (NOX)
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
Coarse
Particulates
(PM10)
Fine
Particulates
(PM2.5)
5 Acres Disturbed per Day
(Construction) 270 2,193 16 9
5 Acres Disturbed per Day
(Operation) 270 2,193 4 2
Source: South Coast AQMD 2008, 2011, and 2023.
Notes: Screening-level LSTs for NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 are based on SRA 33 at the minimum reference distance of 82 feet (25 meters).
Air Quality Management Plan Consistency
The South Coast AQMD is the agency responsible for improving air quality in the SoCAB and ensuring that the National and California AAQS are attained and maintained. South Coast AQMD is responsible for preparing the air quality management plan (AQMP) for the SoCAB in coordination with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The AQMP is a regional strategy plan to achieve air quality standards by examining emissions, looking at regional growth projections, and the impact of existing and proposed control measures to provide healthful air in the long-term. Since 1979, a number of AQMPs have been prepared. The latest AQMP was adopted on December 22, 2022.
The regional emissions inventory for the SoCAB is compiled by South Coast AQMD and SCAG. Regional population, housing, and employment projections developed by SCAG are based in part on cities’ general plan land use designations. These projections form the foundation for the emissions inventory of the AQMP. These demographic trends are incorporated into SCAG’s 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategy (RTP/SCS), Connect SoCal, to determine priority transportation projects and vehicle miles traveled in the SCAG region (SCAG 2024). Because the AQMP strategy is based on projections from local general plans and SCAG’s regional growth forecasts, projects that are consistent with the local general plan are considered consistent with the air-quality-related regional plan.
Health Risk
Table 5 South Coast AQMD Toxic Air Contaminants Incremental Risk Thresholds Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk ≥ 10 in 1 million
Cancer Burden (in areas ≥ 1 in 1 million) > 0.5 excess cancer cases Hazard Index (project increment) ≥ 1.0
Source: South Coast AQMD 2023.
Whenever a project would require use of chemical compounds that have been identified in South Coast AQMD Rule 1401, placed on CARB’s air toxics list pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 1807, or placed on the EPA’s National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, a health risk assessment is required by the South Coast AQMD. 892
November 17, 2025 | Page 10
Table 5, South Coast AQMD Toxic Air Contaminants Incremental Risk Thresholds, lists the South Coast AQMD’s TAC incremental risk thresholds for operation of a project.
The purpose of this environmental evaluation is to identify the significant effects of the proposed project on the environment, not the significant effects of the environment on the proposed project (California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District [2015] 62 Cal.4th 369 [Case No. S213478]). Land uses that have the potential to generate substantial stationary sources of emissions include industrial projects that require a permit from South Coast AQMD, such as chemical processing, or warehousing projects where substantial truck idling could occur on-site (CARB 2005).
The primary sources of potential air toxics associated with project operations include diesel particulate matter (DPM) from delivery trucks (e.g., truck traffic on local streets and idling on adjacent streets) and , to a lesser extent, building operations (e.g., natural gas-fired boilers). However, the proposed project does not include the types of land uses that generate a substantial number of trucks or TAC emissions. Due to the type of land use proposed under the project, toxic or carcinogenic air pollutants are not expected in any meaningful amounts in conjunction with operation of the proposed project. Therefore, an analysis of the project’s operational TAC emissions is not warranted.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The CEQA Guidelines recommend that a lead agency consider the following when assessing the significance of impacts from GHG emissions on the environment.
1. The extent to which the project may increase (or reduce) GHG emissions compared to the existing environmental setting.
2. Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project.
3. The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement an adopted statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions. 3 Net Zero Threshold
Because the land use types associated with the ORSC are not identified by any air district’s GHG emissions methodology or the State’s Scoping Plan emissions inventory or forecast, the Certified EIR determined that market capture approach thresholds and efficiency thresholds derived from the State’s GHG emissions forecast would not be applicable to the ORSC. To provide a conservative analysis of the ORSC’s impacts in relation to carbon neutrality goals of AB 1279,4 the City identified a no net increase threshold of zero (0 MTCO2e). Appendix D of the CARB 2022 Draft Scoping Plan recognizes that achieving no net additional increase in GHG emissions, resulting in no contribution to GHG impacts, may be an appropriate overall objective (CARB 2022). Therefore, the zero -net increase
3 The Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) recommends a requirement that such a plan be adopted through a public review process and include specific requirements that reduce or mitigate the project’s incremental contribution of GHG emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a particular project are still cumulatively considerable, notwithstanding compliance with the adopted regulations or requirements, an environmental impact report (EIR) must be prepared for the project. 4 The 2022 Scoping Plan update includes statewide measures to achieve the state’s carbon neutrality goals under AB 1279, such as carbon dioxide removal, that are not applicable to local governments. Carbon neutrality goals are a “no impact” level and not a “less than significant” impact level for climate change effects. There are presently no reliable means of forecasting how future technological developments related to carbon dioxide removal may affect future emissions in a jurisdiction. Therefore, carbon neutrality targets are not directly applicable to local governments or CEQA projects to mitigate GHG emissions impacts of a proposed project.
893
November 17, 2025 | Page 11
threshold was used as a conservative threshold for GHG emissions impacts under CEQA for the Approved Project and is utilized to determine potential impacts resulting from the Proposed Project.
Consistency with a GHG Reduction Plan
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5, Tiering and Streamlining the Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, allows for lead agencies to analyze and mitigate the significant effects of GHG emissions at a programmatic level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5, later project-specific environmental documents may tier from and/or incorporate by reference the GHG reduction plan so long as they include the following plan elements. » Quantify greenhouse gas emissions, both existing and projected over a specified time period, resulting from activities within a defined geographic area.
» Establish a level, based on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to greenhouse gas emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be cumulatively considerable. » Identify and analyze the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from specific actions or categories of actions anticipated within the geographic area.
» Specify measures or a group of measures, including performance standards, that substantial evidence demonstrates, if implemented on a project -by-project basis, would collectively achieve the specified emissions level.
» Establish a mechanism to monitor the plan’s progress toward achieving the level and to require amendment if the plan is not achieving specified levels.
» Be adopted in a public process following environmental review.
The Ontario Community Change Action Plan (CCAP) was adopted in a public process following environmental review in August 2022. The CCAP included an updated a GHG inventory for Ontario based on the latest community protocols and global-warming potentials. It provided emissions forecasts for 2030 and 2050 and established GHG emissions targets for 2030 consistent with SB 32. It also identified State and local measures to reduce GHG emissions and quantified GHG reductions associated with these measures. With im plementation of the GHG reduction measures, the CCAP provides a flexible path to reduce the community’s GHG emissions to achieve the 2030 target pursuant to SB 32. While the CCAP includes a forecast with reductions for the 2050 horizon, it was based on the reductions needed to achieve Executive Order S-03-05 and predates the passage of AB 1279 for year 2045.
Consequently, the CCAP is a qualified GHG reduction plan through 2030. However, because emissions associated with the Approved Project were not included in the forecast for the CCAP, the ORSC’s GHG emissions impacts were not evaluated based on consistency with the CCAP. Similarly, emissions of the Proposed Project would not have been considered in the CCAP. To assess consistency with the CCAP, the Proposed Project would be required to comply with Mitigation Measure GHG-4.
Target Project-Level Efficiency Threshold
The work prepared for the CCAP includes levels of reduction from existing and new development and from residential and nonresidential development to achieve the adopted targets. Targets for projects completed by 2030 are separate from those completed between 2031 and 2050, consistent with the CCAP target years. 894
November 17, 2025 | Page 12
2030 TARGET EFFICIENCY THRESHOLDS
Nonresidential projects that do not use the CCAP Screening Tables (Ontario 2023) need to demonstrate that they will generate annual GHG emissions that do not exceed the following thresholds:
1. For residential development completed between 2020 and 2030, the project shall not produce GHG emissions greater than 5.85 MTCO
2e/dwelling unit.
2. For residential development completed after 2030, the project shall not produce GHG emissions greater than
1.53 MTCO
2e/dwelling unit.
3. For nonresidential developments of all types completed between 2020 and 2030, the project shall not produce GHG emissions greater than 8.84 MTCO
2e/2,500 square feet of conditioned space.
4. For nonresidential developments of all types completed after 2030, the project shall not produce GHG emissions greater than 3.61 MTCO
2e/2,500 square feet of conditioned space.
For projects that include both residential and nonresidential space, the residential and nonresidential components must be assessed separately against their respective applicable thresholds. The nonresidential thresholds assume that 2,500 square feet of conditioned space employs an average of 2.31 people by 2030 and 2.83 people by 2050 (Ontario 2022). For the purposes of the following analysis, emissions under the Proposed Project will be compared to the GHG efficiency metric for development projects completed before 2030, 8.84 MTCO 2e/2,500 square feet of
conditioned space, for consistency with the Ontario CCAP in accordance with Mitigation Measure GHG-4.
Environmental Impacts
AIR QUALITY
The Air Quality section addresses the impacts of the proposed project on ambient air quality and the exposure of people, especially sensitive individuals, to unhealthy pollutant concentrations. The results of the air quality modeling can be found in Attachment A, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Modeling.
The primary air pollutants of concern for which the AAQS have been established are ozone (O 3), carbon monoxide
(CO), coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM10), fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and lead (Pb). Areas are classified under the federal and California Clean Air Act as either in attainment or nonattainment for each criteria pollutant based on whether the AAQS have been achieved. The SoCAB, which is managed by the South Coast AQMD, is designated nonattainment for O3 and PM2.5 under the California and National AAQS, nonattainment for PM10 under the California AAQS, and nonattainment for lead (Los Angeles County only) under the National AAQS (CARB 2025).
The South Coast AQMD has identified regional thresholds of significance for criteria pollutant emissions and criteria air pollutant precursors, including VOC, CO, nitrogen oxides (NOX), SO2, PM10, and PM2.5. Development projects below the regional significance thresholds are not expected to generate sufficient criteria pollutant emissions to violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Where available, the significance criteria established by the South Coast AQMD may be relied upon to make the following determinations. The following describes project-related regional, localized, and odor impacts from construction and operational activities from implementation of the Proposed Project compared to impacts identified in the Certified EIR.
895
November 17, 2025 | Page 13
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE CERTIFIED EIR
The following summarizes the approved project’s environmental impacts related to air quality identified in the Certified EIR.
» Air Quality Management Plan Consistency. The Certified EIR determined that the ORSC would not result in resident or employment growth that outpaces the demographic growth forecasts underpin ning the South Coast AQMD’s 2022 Air Quality Management Plan . However, because the ORSC would result in exceedances of South Coast AQMD regional significance thresholds, it could contribute to existing or projected AAQS violations.
Mitigation Measures AQ -1 and AQ-2 would help to reduce regional air quality emissions to the extent feasible, but operational emissions would continue to exceed the South Coast AQMD significance thresholds due to vehicle emissions associated with operation of the ORSC. Impacts associated with Air Quality Management Plan consistency were considered significant and unavoidable. » Regional Air Quality Impacts. The Certified EIR determined that regional emissions from construction activities would exceed the South Coast AQMD regional significance thresholds for NOX and VOC due to the quantity of off- road construction equipment anticipated to be operating concurrently during multiple construction years.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, which requires the use of Tier 4 Final equipment for the entire off- road construction fleet and architectural coatings that contain no greater than 10 grams of VOC content per liter (g/L) of product, would reduce construction regional emissions impacts to less than significant .
Operational emissions associated with the ORSC were found to exceed the South Coast AQMD regional significance thresholds for VOC, CO, and PM
10 and cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SoCAB. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ -2, requiring use of electric landscaping equipment ; MMs GHG-1 through GHG-4; and MMs TRAF-1 and TRAF-2 would contribute to reducing operational air quality emissions associated with building energy consumption and mobile sources. However, regional operational emissions would continue to exceed the South Coast AQMD thresholds and therefore are considered significant and unavoidable.
» Localized Air Quality Impacts. The Certified EIR determined that construction and operational emissions would not exceed South Coast AQMD’s localized significance thresholds (LST) . The EIR also concluded that CO hotspot impacts were less than significant. Construction of the ORSC would exceed the South Coast AQMD health risk threshold of 10 cancer cases per one million people for the residential and daycare maximum exposed receptors (MER) without mitigation; however, implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 requiring Tier 4 Final equipment would reduce construction health risk impacts to less than significant. » Odors. The Certified EIR determined that construction and operation of the land uses allowed under the approved project would generate no significant odor impacts. Implementation of South Coast AQMD Rule 402 would ensure long-term objectionable odors are minimized.
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The Certified EIR determined that the Approved Project would not induce population growth in the City . However, because long-term emissions generated by the ORSC would exceed the South Coast AQMD regional significance thresholds, including after implementation of mitigation measures, impacts with respect to AQMP consistency were considered significant and unavoidable.
896
November 17, 2025 | Page 14
The Proposed Project would result in a net decrease of building space across the associated PAs. Though the amount of hotel space in PA 2 would increase by approximately 170,000 square feet, like all other uses under the Approved Project, the proposed hotel development would serve the existing demands for this use in the City and region. Since the Proposed Project would result in an overall decrease in building space when compared to the Approved Project, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to result in a significant increase in jobs beyond what was analyzed in the Certified EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not substantially affect housing, employment, or population projections within the region.
Additionally, as demonstrated in Impact b), when compared to the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would not result in new operational emissions impacts or substantially increase the severity of regional operational emissions impacts with respect to cumulatively contributing to the nonattainment designations of the SoCAB.
Therefore, though the Proposed Project would continue to have significant and unavoidable impacts with respect to consistency with the 2022 AQMP, the Proposed Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the severity of impacts when compared to the Certified EIR. b) 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? The following describes project-related impacts from short-term construction activities and long-term operation of the Proposed Project compared to the Approved Project.
Regional Short-Term Construction Impacts
With incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, the Certified EIR determined that impacts to regional air quality during construction activities under the Approved Project were less than significan t.
Typical construction activities would result in the generation of air pollutants. These emissions would primarily be (1) exhaust from off-road diesel-powered construction equipment; (2) dust generated by construction activities; (3) exhaust from on-road vehicles; and (4) off-gassing of VOCs from paints and asphalt. Similar to the Approved Project, construction activities under the Proposed Project would also produce combustion emissions from various sources, such as on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, vehicles hauling materials to and from the site, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew.
The Proposed Project would result in an overall decrease in building square footage across PAs 2 through 4. While the total acreage of disturbance within the PAs would remain similar between the Approved Project and Proposed Project, emissions sources commensurate to the level of building space constructed would decrease. For example, total pieces of construction equipment and the number of workers traveling to the site may decrease as a result of the reduction in building space, as would the amount of architectural coatings used for the buildings. Additionally, the Proposed Project would, like the Approved Project, comply with Mitigation Measure AQ -1, which would ensure that construction activities associated with the Proposed Project utilize construction equipment that meets Tier 4 Final emissions standards and architectural coatings with a VOC content of less than 10 grams per liter.
Overall, the Proposed Project’s decrease in building space would result in less maximum daily air pollutant emissions compared to what was analyzed in the Certified EIR. Consequently, the Proposed Project would not result in a new regional construction emissions impact or a substantial increase in the severity of regional construction emissions impacts when compared to the Certified EIR.
897
November 17, 2025 | Page 15
Long-Term Operation-Related Air Quality Impacts
The Certified EIR concluded that operation-related emissions during the “worst case Saturday with events” scenario would exceed South Coast AQMD’s significance thresholds for VOC, CO, and PM10, and impacts would be significant and unavoidable even with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-2.
Long-term air pollutant emissions associated with development of the uses under the Proposed Project typically include area sources (e.g., landscape fuel use, aerosols, architectural coatings, and asphalt pavement), energy use (natural gas), and mobile sources (i.e., on-road vehicles). When compared to the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would result in less overall building square footage. The primary source of operational emissions under the Proposed Project are mobile emissions associated with vehicle trips under the Proposed Project.
As shown in Table 6, Maximum Daily Regional Operational Phase Emissions, air pollutant emissions generated from operation-related activities would not exceed the South Coast AQMD regional significance threshold values, nor would the Proposed Project substantially exceed those of the Approved Project. Like the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would be required to implement Mitigation Measure AQ-2, requiring all landscaping equipment to be all-electric.
Table 6 Maximum Daily Regional Operational Phase Emissions Source
Maximum Daily Emissions (lbs/day)1
VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Approved Project
PAs 2 through 42 35 16 255 1 55 14
Total ORSC Emissions3 110 46 738 2 156 40
South Coast AQMD Regional
Threshold
55 55 550 150 150 55
Significant? Yes No Yes No Yes No
Proposed Project4
Mobile 28 15 257 1 56 14
Area 6 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Energy <1 2 1 <1 <1 <1
Total Maximum Daily Emissions 34 17 258 1 56 14
South Coast AQMD Regional
Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Regional Threshold? No No No No No No
Net Change (Proposed Project
minus Approved Project, PAs 2
through 4)
-1 1 4 <1 1 <1
With Project Increase (Net Change
plus Approved Project, Total ORSC) 109 47 742 2 157 40
South Coast AQMD Regional
Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Regional Threshold? Yes No Yes No Yes No
New Impact? No No No No No No
898
November 17, 2025 | Page 16
Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1. Highest winter or summer emissions are reported. South Coast AQMD 2023.
Notes: lbs = pounds
1 Both the Approved and Proposed Project modeling incorporate Mitigation Measure AQ-2 requiring all-electric landscaping equipment.
2 Emissions under the Approved Project are based on the inputs used for the modeling of PAs 2 through 4 of the ORSC in the Certified EIR. Trip generation for the Approved Project is based on the maximum trip generation scenario calculated by the City of Ontario in 2025 (see Attachment B, Approved and Proposed Project Trip Generation).
3 Operational emissions for all PAs under the ORSC, under the “Worst-Case Saturday” scenario as shown in Table
5.3-18 of the Certified EIR.
4 Proposed Project emissions for PA 2 incorporate the project-specific land use information for the proposed Aloft & Residence Inn. Land use inputs for PAs 3 and 4 are based on building square footages noted for the Proposed Project in PAs 3 and 4 in Table 1 and the landscaping and parking square footages assumed for the ORSC in PAs 3 and 4. Mobile emissions are based on the maximum trip generation scenario calculated by the City of Ontario in 2025 (see Attachment B). CalEEMod defaults were used for all other emissions sources unless otherwise noted in Attachment A.
As shown in Table 6, the majority of emissions under the Proposed Project are mobile source emissions. The Proposed Project would comply with Mitigation Measures TRAF-1 and TRAF-2 to reduce VMT associated with the Proposed Project to the extent possible. Like the Approved Project, no additional mitigation measures are available to reduce impacts associated with VMT. In addition, emissions from building energy use would be minimized because the new buildings would comply with the latest energy standards in addition to Mitigation Measures GHG-1 and GHG-2. The Proposed Project would not result in a substantial increase in operation-phase emissions compared to what was analyzed in the Certified EIR. While impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, t he Proposed Project does not identify or require adoption of any further mitigation measures beyond those in the Certified EIR.
The Proposed Project compared to the Approved Project would not result in any new regional operational emissions impacts or substantially increase the severity of regional operational emissions impacts with respect to cumulatively contributing to the nonattainment designations of the SoCAB. c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The proposed project could expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations if it causes or significantly contributes to elevated pollutant concentration levels. Unlike regional emissions, localized emissions are typically evaluated in terms of air concentration rather than mass so they can be more readily correlated to potential health effects.
Construction Phase
LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS
The Certified EIR concluded that localized on-site construction-related emissions would not exceed South Coast AQMD’s local significance thresholds and impacts would be less than significant.
LSTs are based on the California AAQS, which are the most stringent AAQS to provide a margin of safety in the protection of public health and welfare. They are designated to protect sensitive receptors most susceptible to further respiratory distress, such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease or illness, and people engaged in strenuous work or exercise. Screening- level LSTs are the amount of project-related emissions at which localized concentrations (ppm or µg/m3) could exceed the AAQS for criteria air pollutants for which the SoCAB is designated nonattainment. They are based on the size of the area disturbed, distance to the nearest sensitive receptor, and SRA.
899
November 17, 2025 | Page 17
Due to the decrease in building square footage, the Proposed Project would result in less overall construction activity compared the Approved Project, and maximum daily emissions would be less under the Proposed Project.
To evaluate localized air quality impacts from construction, the Approved Project utilized the LSTs that accounted for the maximum project size available (a project size of 5 acres) and the most conservative receptor distance (25 meters). Since the Proposed Project would also involve activities on a site larger than 5 acres within a 25 meter distance of sensitive receptors, it would be subject to the same LSTs as the Approved Project. Therefore, due to the relative reduction in construction activities under the Proposed Project from the overall reduction in proposed building square footage, project emissions would not exceed the applicable LSTs, and impacts would remain less than significant. The Proposed Project would not result in a new localized construction emissions impact or a substantial increase in the severity of localized construction emissions impacts when compared to the Certified EIR.
CONSTRUCTION HEALTH RISK
The Certified EIR found that the Approved Project would exceed the South Coast AQMD health risk threshold of 10 cancer cases per one million people for the maximally exposed residential and daycare receptors. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 requiring the use of equipment that meets Tier 4 Final emissions standards would reduce cancer risk to below the threshold for these receptors.
As noted, the Proposed Project would not increase the scale of construction activity at PAs 2 through 4 but would decrease the total amount of building space constructed. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would continue to be incorporated under the Proposed Project, ensuring that health risk impacts from construction activities remain less than significant, but the Proposed Project would not increase the health risks for nearby receptors. Therefore, project-related construction activities would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial TAC concentrations with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1. As such, Proposed Project would not result in a new construction health risk impact or substantial increase in the severity of construction health risk impacts when compared to the Certified EIR.
Operational Phase
The Certified EIR determined impacts to be less than significant in regard to operational localized emissions, CO hotspot analysis, and potential for long-term health risk impacts.
OPERATION-PHASE LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS
Operation of the Proposed Project would not generate substantial quantities of emissions from on-site stationary sources. Land uses that have the potential to generate substantial stationary sources of emissions that would require a permit from South Coast AQMD include industrial land uses, such as chemical processing and warehousing operations where substantial truck idling could occur on-site. Uses under the Proposed Project would be limited to commercial, retail, and hospitality, which would not involve the stationary source emissions common for industrial land uses.
As shown in Table 7, Proposed Project Localized On-Site Operational Emissions, on-site emissions sources from the Proposed Project would not exceed the operational LSTs used for the Approved Project, which continue to be applicable to the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would also not result in a substantial increase in on -site emissions when compared to the Approved Project. Therefore, on-site emissions generated from operation of the Proposed Project would not expose off-site sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and TACs.
Overall, the Proposed Project would not result in a new localized operational emissions impact or substantial increase in the severity of localized operational emissions impacts when compared to the Certified EIR. 900
November 17, 2025 | Page 18
Table 7 Proposed Project Localized On-Site Operational Emissions Source
On-Site Pollutants (lbs/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Approved Project
PAs 2 through 4 0.85 1 <1 <1
Total ORSC Emissions1 4 57 <1 <1
Proposed Project
Area Sources <1 <1 <1 <1
Energy Sources 2 1 <1 <1
Total 2 1 <1 <1
South Coast AQMD Screening-Level LST2 270 2,193 4 2
Exceeds Screening-Level LST? No No No No
Net Change (Proposed Project minus
Approved Project, PAs 2 through 4) 1 1 <1 <1
With Project Increase (Net Change plus
Approved Project, Total ORSC) 5 58 <1 <1
South Coast AQMD Screening-Level LST2 270 2,193 4 2
Exceeds Screening-Level LST? No No No No
Sources: CalEEMod Version 2022.1; South Coast AQMD 2009.
Notes: In accordance with South Coast AQMD methodology, only on-site stationary sources and mobile equipment on the ORSC site are included in the analysis. Modeling assumptions in this table for the Approved and Proposed Projects reflect those described in Table 6. 1 On-site operational emissions for all PAs under the ORSC, as shown in Table 5.3-16 of the Certified EIR. 2 Operational LSTs are based on a 5-acre site and sensitive receptors within 82 meters (25 feet) in SRA 33, consistent with the Certified EIR.
CO HOTSPOTS
Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of CO called hot spots. These pockets have the potential to exceed the state one-hour standard of 20 parts per million (ppm) or the eight-hour standard of 9.0 ppm. Because CO is produced in greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the atmosphere, adherence to AAQS is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO concentrations, typically produced at intersections where vehicles queue for longer periods and are subject to reduced speeds.
The Certified EIR demonstrated that the Approved Project would not generate CO hot spots, and nearby sensitive receptors would not be affected by project-related local air quality impacts. The SoCAB has been designated as attainment under both the national and California AAQS for CO. Under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour—or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited —to generate a significant CO impact (Bay Area Air District 2023). As mentioned previously, the South Coast AQMD does not currently have adopted CO hotspot screening guidance, so guidance from the Bay Area Air District was utilized to determine whether the Proposed Project could result in potentially significant impacts related to CO hotspot generation. 901
November 17, 2025 | Page 19
The Certified EIR noted that the Approved Project could generate up to 2,734 peak hour trips (midday peak hour) on a Saturday with concurrent events and a sold-out stadium event. As illustrated by the Proposed Project’s vehicle trip generation estimates provided by the City and included in Attachment B (Ontario 2025), the Proposed Project would result in the net addition of 278 trips during the midday peak hour under the scenario accounting for use of the baseball stadium on Saturday with no field tournaments, the traffic scenario for which the ORSC as a whole would experience the highest peak hour vehicle trips. Therefore, the total peak hour trips for the ORSC under this scenario with the addition of the Proposed Project would be 3,012 trips. The annual average daily vehicle trip volumes surrounding the ORSC site include Chino Avenue (east of Grove Avenue) with 6,420 daily trips and Riverside Drive (east of Vineyard Avenue) with 19,978 daily trips (Ontario 2024). Assuming that all 3,012 peak hour trips generated by the Approved and Proposed Projects would be along Riverside Drive, and assuming that all 19,978 daily trips along Riverside Drive occur during the same peak hour, the combined 22,990 daily trips would not exceed BAAQMD’s recommended screening criteria of greater than 44,000 vehicles per hour or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited.
Impacts with respect to localized CO hotspots would continue to less than significant under the Proposed Project, and the Proposed Project would not result in a new CO hotspot impact or substantial increase in the severity of CO hotspot impacts when compared to the Certified EIR.
d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The threshold for odor is if a project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to South Coast AQMD Rule 402, Nuisance , which states:
A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.
The type of facilities that are considered to have objectionable odors include wastewater treatments plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations (e.g., auto body shops), dairy farms, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing facilities. The Certified EIR identified that odors generated by the ORSC would not affect a substantial number of people, and impacts would be less than significant.
The Proposed Project consists of uses already anticipated under the Approved Project, which include retail, commercial and hospitality uses. As a result, operation of the Proposed Project would not fall within the types of land uses with objectionable odors. Emissions from construction equipment, such as diesel exhaust , and from volatile organic compounds associated with architectural coatings and paving activities, may generate odors.
However, these odors would be temporary and intermittent and are not expected to affect a substantial number of people. Similar to the Approved Project, land uses accommodated under the Proposed Project would be subject to South Coast AQMD Rule 402, which would contribute to minimizing odor-related nuisances. The Proposed Project would not introduce or require any new construction processes that would generate substantial odors compared with what was previously considered in the Certified EIR.
Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in a new odor impact or substantial increase in the severity of odor impacts when compared to the Certified EIR.
902
November 17, 2025 | Page 20
Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The following applicable mitigation measures were taken directly from the Certified EIR and would be incorporated as part of the Proposed Project. Any modifications to these mitigation measures are shown in strikethrough for deleted text and underline for new, inserted text.
AQ-1 The City of Ontario shall require the construction contractor to incorporate the following to reduce air pollutant emissions during construction activities:
Use construction equipment rated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as having Tier 4 (model year 2008 or newer) Final or stricter emission limits for all off-road construction equipment. If Tier 4 Final equipment is not available, the applicant shall provide documentation (e.g., rental inventory requests), to the City’s satisfaction, or otherwise demonstrate its unavailability to the City of Ontario prior to the issuance of any construction permits. During construction, the construction contractor shall maintain a list of all operating equipment in use on the construction site for verification by the City of Ontario. The construction equipment list shall state the makes, models, Equipment Identification Numbers, Engine Family Numbers, and number of construction equipment on-site.
Use paints with a VOC content that meets the South Coast Air Quality Management District Super Compliant architectural coatings standard of 10 grams per liter (g/L) or less (i.e.,) for coating architectural surfaces.
These identified measures shall be incorporated into all appropriate construction documents (e.g., construction management plans) submitted to and verified by the City.
AQ-2 All landscaping equipment (e.g., leaf blower) used for property management shall be electric powered only. The property manager/facility owner shall provide documentation (e.g., purchase, rental, and/or services agreement) to the City of Ontario Planning Department to verify to the City’s satisfaction that all landscaping equipment utilized will be electric powered.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Scientists have concluded that human activities are contributing to global climate change by adding large amounts of heat-trapping gases, known as GHGs, into the atmosphere. The primary source of these GHGs is fossil fuel use.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has identified four major GHGs —water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO
2), methane (CH4), and ozone (O3)—that are the likely cause of an increase in global average temperatures observed within the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Other GHGs identified by the IPCC that contribute to global warming to a lesser extent include nitrous oxide (N2O), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and chlorofluorocarbons. 5 Global climate change is not confined to a particular project area and is generally accepted as the consequence of global industrialization over the last 200 years. A typical project, even a very large one, does not generate enough greenhouse gas emissions on its own to influence global climate change significantly; hence, the issue of global climate change is, by definition, a cumulative environmental impact.
5 Water vapor (H2O) is the strongest GHG and the most variable in its phases (vapor, cloud droplets, ice crystals). However, water vapor is not considered a pollutant, but part of the feedback loop rather than a primary cause of change. 903
November 17, 2025 | Page 21
Information on manufacture of cement, steel, and other “life cycle” emissions that would occur as a result of the proposed project are not applicable and are not included in the analysis. 6 Black carbon emissions are not included in the GHG analysis because CARB does not include this short-lived climate pollutant in the state’s SB 32 and AB 1279 inventory but treats it separately.7
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE CERTIFIED EIR
The following summarizes the approved project’s environmental impacts related to greenhouse gases identified in the Certified EIR.
» GHG Emissions. The Certified EIR determined that the ORSC’s contribution of 21,777 MTCO 2e would result in a net increase of GHG emissions at the project site, resulting in significant impacts. While implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG- 1 and GHG- 2 would require all- electric building design and the installation of renewable energy generat ion systems on -site, impacts were considered significant and unavoidable due to the extent of emissions reductions being unknown.
» Applicable Plan, Policy or Regulation for Reducing GHGs. The Certified EIR analyzed the ORSC’s consistency with the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan, SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), and the Ontario CCAP. The EIR determined that the Approved Project would be inconsistent with all three Scoping Plan priority areas; however, implementation of GHG- 1 and GHG -3 requir ing all-electric building design and adherence to the strictest applicable CALGreen electric vehicle charging standards would ensure the ORSC’s compliance with these respective priority areas . TRAF-1 would contribute to reducing VMT under the ORSC but since the Approved Project would continue to exceed the City’s VMT threshold, impacts associated with Scoping Plan consistency remained significant and unavoidable.
Additionally, Mitigation Measure GHG -4 would require development under the ORSC to incorporate energy efficiency measures and other emission -reducing design features from the City’s CCAP, ensuring that development of the Approved Project is consistent with the City’s CCAP . Impacts associated with project consistency with the CCAP and SCAG RTP/SCS were considered less than significant.
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
6 Life cycle emissions include indirect emissions associated with materials manufacture. However, these indirect emissions involve numerous parties, each of which is responsible for GHG emissions of their particular activity. The California Resources Agenc y, in adopting the CEQA Guidelines Amendments on GHG emissions found that lifecycle analyses were not warranted for project- specific CEQA analysis in most situations, for a variety of reasons, including lack of control over some sources, and the possibility of double-counting emissions (CNRA 2018). Because the amount of materials consumed during the operation or construction of the proposed project is not known, the origin of the raw materials purchased is not known, and manufacturing information for those raw materials are also not known, calcula tion of life cycle emissions would be speculative. A life -cycle analysis is not warranted (LCI 2008).
7 Particulate matter emissions, which include black carbon, are analyzed in the Air Quality section. Black carbon emissions have sharply declined due to efforts to reduce on-road and off-road vehicle emissions, especially diesel particulate matter. The State's existing air quality policies will virtually eliminate black carbon emissions from on -road diesel engines within 10 years (CARB 2017).
904
November 17, 2025 | Page 22
Construction Emissions
Because the Proposed Project would involve a decrease in the overall building square footage across PA 2 through PA 4, equipment use during construction of the Proposed Project would be similar to or less than what was identified for PA 2 through PA 4 of the Approved Project, which would result in similar if not fewer construction GHG emissions generated for the Proposed Project when compared to the Approved Project . The Certified EIR noted that the South Coast AQMD does not have an adopted threshold for construction GHG emissions. Therefore, determination of significance for GHG emissions impacts in the Certified EIR was limited to those under operation of the Approved Project. The South Coast AQMD recommends that average annual construction emissions be amortized over 30 years and added to operational emissions to account for temporary GHG emissions from construction phases (South Coast AQMD 2009). However, because construction equipment use and subsequent construction GHG emissions would be similar or decrease under the Proposed Project, construction emissions from the Proposed Project would not contribute to a net increase in total ORSC construction GHG emissions, and the evaluation of GHG emissions under the Proposed Project is therefore limited to operational emissions.
Operation Emissions
The Certified EIR assessed the emissions of the Approved Project against a zero net increase threshold, consistent with the State’s carbon neutrality goals under AB 1279. Under this threshold, the Proposed Project in combination with the Approved Project would have a significant impact with respect to GHG emissions if its total emissions would exceed the no net increase threshold utilized in the Certified EIR. Proposed Project operation-phase GHG emissions compared to the Approved Project are shown in Table 8, Project-Related Operation GHG Emissions. As shown below, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in an increase in GHG emissions compared to what was analyzed in the Certified EIR primarily due to mobile source emissions (e.g., privately owned vehicles from visitors and employees traveling to the project site) which are not under the control of the City or project applicant.
However, as shown in Table 8, the increase in operational GHG emissions resulting from the Proposed Project would constitute an increase of an estimated 468 MT CO
2e per year, or an increase in total ORSC emissions by
approximately 2.1 percent. Therefore, the significant GHG effect identified in the Certified EIR would not be substantially more severe with implementation of the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project’s compliance with the Ontario CCAP efficiency threshold, as shown in Table 8, is discussed in Impact b).
Table 8 Project-Related Operation GHG Emissions
Source
Project GHG Emissions
(MTCO2e/Year)
Approved Project
PAs 2 thru 4 Emissions 9,265
Total ORSC Emissions1 21,777
Proposed Project
Mobile 8,347
Area 0
Energy 1,217
Water 36
Solid Waste 87
Refrigerants 46
Total Project Emissions 9,732
905
November 17, 2025 | Page 23
Table 8 Project-Related Operation GHG Emissions
Source
Project GHG Emissions
(MTCO2e/Year)
Net Change (Proposed Project minus Approved Project, PAs 2 through 4) 468
With Project Increase (Net Change plus Approved Project, Total ORSC) 22,245
Significant Increase? No
Ontario CCAP Efficiency Threshold (MTCO2e/2,500 square feet of conditioned building space)2 8.84
Proposed Project GHG Efficiency Threshold (MTCO2e)3 100.5 Exceeds GHG Efficiency Threshold? Yes
Source: CalEEMod, Version 2022.1. Totals may not equal the sum of the values as shown due to rounding.
Notes: MTCO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalence. Modeling assumptions in this table for the Approved and Proposed Projects reflect those described in Table 6. 1 Total emissions for all PAs of the ORSC as shown in Table 5.8-5 of the Certified EIR. 2 Ontario CCAP efficiency threshold for non-residential buildings operational before 2030. 3 Based on the total 242,144 square feet of proposed building space across PAs 2 through 4 shown in Table 1.
As shown in Table 8, the Proposed Project would result in a slight increase in GHG emissions when compared to the Approved Project, primarily due to the slight increase in vehicle trip generation and hotel building space energy needs, and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Nonetheless, operational GHG emissions would be reduced through compliance with Mitigation Measures GHG-1 through GHG-4 in addition to AQ-2, TRAF-1, and TRAF-2. Mitigation Measures GHG-1 and GHG-2 require all-electric building design and on-site renewable energy systems and were incorporated under the Approved Project to address GHG emissions reductions. As discussed below, Mitigation Measures GHG-3 and GHG-4 were incorporated to reduce impacts associated with consistency with the CARB 2022 Scoping Plan and the Ontario CCAP.
In addition to the requirements specific to projects in the ORSC, State emissions reductions requirements would also reduce emissions throughout the lifetime of the Proposed Project. For example, the State’s electricity grid is transitioning to renewable energy under California’s Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program requirements, which is expanded by regulations such as SB 100. SB 100 established a landmark policy requiring renewable energy and zero-carbon resources supply 100 percent of electric retail sales by 2045. The statewide RPS goal is not directly applicable to individual development projects but to utilities and energy providers such as Southern California Edison (SCE), which is the utility that would provide all of electricity needs for the Proposed Project. SCE’s compliance with the RPS goals would support the State in meeting its objective in transitioning to renewable energy.
These features and progress toward achieving RPS goals would help to reduce operational GHG emissions.
Due to these reasons, the Proposed Project compared to the Approved Project would not result in a new GHG emissions impact or substantial increase in the severity of GHG emissions impacts when compared to the Certified EIR.
906
November 17, 2025 | Page 24
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases
The Certified EIR determined that the Approved Project would conflict with the priority areas of the CARB 2022 Scoping Plan, resulting in significant and unavoidable impacts after the incorporation of mitigation. Upon implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-4, the Approved Project would be consistent with the Ontario CCAP.
The following evaluates consistency of the Proposed Project to the CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan, SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), and the Ontar io CCAP.
CARB Scoping Plan
The adopted 2022 CARB Scoping Plan is applicable to state agencies but is not directly applicable to cities/counties and individual projects (i.e., the Scoping Plan does not require the City to adopt policies, programs, or regulations to reduce GHG emissions). However, new regulations adopted by the State agencies outlined in the Scoping Plan result in GHG emissions reductions at the local level. As a result, local jurisdictions benefit from reductions in transportation emissions rates, increases in water efficiency in the building and landscape codes, and other statewide actions that affect a local jurisdiction’s emissions inventory from the top down. Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions include the low-carbon fuel standard and changes in the corporate average fuel economy standards (e.g., Pavley I and Pavley California Advanced Clean Cars program). Like the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would adhere to the programs and regulations identified by the Scoping Plan and implemented by State, regional, and local agencies to achieve the statewide GHG reduction goals of SB 32 and AB 1279. For example, new buildings under the Proposed Project would meet the current CALGreen and Building Energy Efficiency standards at the time they are constructed. Table 8 demonstrates that the Proposed Project would result in a minor increase in GHG emissions when compared to the Approved Project; however, the Proposed Project would incorporate Certified EIR Mitigation Measures GHG-1, GHG-2, and GHG-3, and would therefore be consistent with the Scoping Plan objectives to demonstrate consistency with the State’s long-term carbon neutrality goals.
Though statewide efforts could provide downstream reductions at the local level, the 2022 Scoping Plan identifies three priority areas for local actions that would support and amplify the overall state efforts to reduce GHG emissions and achieve the long-term climate goals: 1) transportation electrification, 2) VMT reduction, and 3) building decarbonization. The Certified EIR incorporated Mitigation Measures GHG-1 and GHG-3 to ensure that projects under the ORSC would incorporate all-electric building design and EV charging infrastructure with the voluntary CALGreen Tier 2 standards, consistent with the first and third 2022 Scoping Plan priority areas. Because the Approved Project exceeded the City’s VMT thresholds after incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures, the Certified EIR determined that the Approved Project would not be consistent with the second Scoping Plan priority area for VMT reduction. Compliance with Mitigation Measures GHG-1 and GHG-3 would ensure that the Proposed Project is also consistent with the transportation electrification and building decarbonization priority areas. While the Proposed Project would also comply with Mitigation Measures TRAF -1 and TRAF-2 to reduce VMT impacts and would result in similar VMT when compared to the Approved Project, impacts would continue to remain significant and unavoidable with respect to compliance with the VMT reduction priority area. The Proposed Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the severity of impacts when compared to the Certified EIR.
SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy SCAG adopted the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS, Connect SoCal, in September 2024. Connect SoCal finds that land use strategies that focus on new housing and job growth in areas rich with destinations and mobility options would be consistent with a land use development pattern that supports and complements the proposed transportation network. The overarching strategy in Connect SoCal is to plan for the southern California region to grow in more compact communities in transit priority areas and priority growth areas; provide neighborhoods with efficient and 907
November 17, 2025 | Page 25
plentiful public transit; establish abundant and safe opportunities to walk, bike, and pursue other forms of active transportation; and preserve more of the region’s remaining natural lands and farmlands (SCAG 2024 ). Connect SoCal’s transportation projects help more efficiently distribute population, housing, and employment growth, and forecast development is generally consistent with regional-level general plan data to promote active transportation and reduce GHG emissions. The projected regional development, when integrated with the proposed regional transportation network in Connect SoCal, would reduce per-capita GHG emissions related to vehicular travel and achieve the GHG reduction per capita targets for the SCAG region.
Connect SoCal does not require that local general plans, proposed projects, or zoning be consistent with the SCS, but provides incentives for consistency to governments and developers. The Certified EIR concluded that because the Approved Project would not result in population growth and would incorporate VMT reduction strategies, the Approved Project would be consistent with Connect SoCal and impacts would be less than significant. The Proposed Project would implement Mitigation Measures TRAF-1 and TRAF-2 and would result in similar impacts with respect to population growth. The Proposed Project would not result in a new impact or substantial increase in the severity of impacts when compared to the Certified EIR.
Ontario Community Climate Action Plan
To ensure new development projects are consistent with the Ontario CCAP, the CCAP includes implementation of a development review process to reduce GHG emissions associated with new development. The development review process sets procedures for evaluating GHG impacts and determining significance for CEQA purposes by using the “Greenhouse Reduction Measures Screening Thresholds Tables” to mitigate project GHG emissions that exceed the threshold level. The screening tables provide a menu of options that both ensure implementation of the reduction strategies and flexibility for projects to reduce GHG emissions to levels that align with the City’s reduction goals. The Certified EIR analyzed the Approved Project’s consistency with the applicable strategies of the CCAP in Table 5.8-7, Ontario Regional Sports Complect Consistency with CCAP Strategies, of the Certified EIR. While the Approved Project was found to be consistent with the strategies in the CCAP, Mitigation Measure GHG-4 was incorporated to ensure that individual development projects in the ORSC would adhere to the measures in the CCAP. This mitigation measure requires projects in PAs 2 through 4 to either achieve a 100-point score under the CCAP’s GHG performance standards (Table 6, “Screening Table for Implementing GHG Performance Standards for Commercial, Office, Medical, Hotel, Industrial, and Retail Development, 2030,” of the CCAP) or demonstrate that annual emissions would not exceed the applicable GHG efficiency threshold.
For purposes of showing consistency with the Ontario CCAP and demonstrating compliance with Mitigation Measure GHG-4, a comparison of the Proposed Project’s emissions to the applicable efficiency threshold of the CCAP is shown in Table 8. The Proposed Project is anticipated to become operational before 2030; therefore, the
8.84 MTCO
2e per 2,500 square feet of conditioned space efficiency metric was utilized to determine Proposed Project’s consistency with the CCAP. As shown in Table 8, the Proposed Project’s emissions would exceed the 8.84 MTCO2e per year efficiency metric of the CCAP for nonresidential development projects , with an estimated efficiency of 100.5 MTCO2e per year per 2,500 square feet of conditioned space, which is principally the result of the Proposed Project’s mobile- and energy-source GHG emissions. Therefore, the Proposed Project will be required to achieve a 100-point score in the screening table of the CCAP (Table 6 of the CCAP) to show compliance with Mitigation Measure GHG-4.
Furthermore, like the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would be consistent with all relevant strategies in the Ontario CCAP. The Proposed Project would largely be subject to the same regulatory requirements as development in the rest of the ORSC, including requirements related to energy efficiency, transportation emissions reductions, off-road equipment emissions reductions, waste diversion, and water use efficiency. The Proposed Project would also be required to comply with all applicable mitigation measures under the Approved Project that align with the strategies in the CCAP, including Mitigation Measures GHG-1, GHG-2, GHG-3, TRAF-1, and TRAF-2. Thus, the 908
November 17, 2025 | Page 26
Proposed Project would not result in a new impact or substantial increase in the severity of impacts when compared to the Certified EIR with respect to consistency with the CCAP.
Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The following applicable mitigation measures were taken directly from the Certified EIR and would be incorporated as part of the Proposed Project. Any modifications to these mitigation measures are shown in strikethrough for deleted text and underline for new, inserted text. Mitigation Measure GHG-4 reflects edits to specify the pathway of compliance outlined in the measure. Because the Proposed Project’s GHG emissions would exceed the applicable CCAP GHG efficiency threshold, the Proposed Project would need a 100-point score on the CCAP’s Table 6 screening table.
GHG-1 The City of Ontario shall require proposed buildings within the ORSC site to be all electric, with electricity to be the only permanent source of energy for all nonemergency building energy needs, including but not limited to water heating; mechanical equipment; and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) (i.e., space-heating and space cooling). All major appliances (e.g., dishwashers, refrigerators, and water heaters) provided/installed shall be electric-powered EnergyStar certified or an equivalent energy efficiency where applicable. The only exception to this measure shall be limited to commercial cooking uses. Prior to issuance of building permits for development projects, applicants shall provide plans that show the aforementioned requirements to the City of Ontario Planning Department. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the City of Ontario Building Department shall verify installation of the electric-powered EnergyStar or equivalent appliances.
GHG-2 The City of Ontario shall require proposed buildings and parking areas within the ORSC site to include on-site renewable energy generation systems. Proposed buildings shall include photovoltaic (PV) and battery energy storage systems compliant with the Prescriptive Requirements of the California Building Standards Code, Part 6, California Energy Code. Proposed buildings may substitute alternative renewable energy generation technology (e.g., wind) for PV systems; however, that alternative generation technology system shall be sized to provide annual electricity equal to what would be provided by a PV system for that building compliant with the Prescriptive Requirements of the California Building Standards Code, Part 6, California Energy Code. Proposed parking areas shall include a PV system or alternative renewable energy generation system (e.g., wind) to help offset electricity demand generated by electric vehicle charging. Prior to issuance of building permits for development projects, applicants shall provide plans that show the aforementioned requirements to the City of Ontario Planning Department. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the City of Ontario Building Department shall verify installation of the PV and battery energy storage system s or alternative renewable energy generation systems.
GHG-3 The City of Ontario shall require that the parking lots and parking structure install electric vehicle spaces in compliance with the voluntary Tier 2 standards under Section A5.106.5.3.2 of the Non - residential Voluntary Measures in the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code. All site plans submitted to the City of Ontario Planning Department shall illustrate compliance with Section A5.106.5.3.2.
GHG-4 The City of Ontario shall require applicants to design and construct buildings in Planning Areas 2, 3, and 4 to achieve a 100-point score in the 2022 Community Climate Action Plan (CCAP), Table 6, “Screening Table for Implementing GHG Performance Standards for Commercial, Office, Medical, Hotel, Industrial, and Retail Development, 2030.” Alternatively, the analysis of development projects can be done through emissions calculations to demonstrate equivalent reductions using CalEEMod or a similar tool. Projects that do not use the CCAP Screening Tables to demonstrate consistency with the 909
November 17, 2025 | Page 27
2022 CCAP must demonstrate that they will generate annual GHG emissions that do not exceed the following emission screening thresholds from the CCAP:
1. For residential development completed between 2020 and 2030, the project shall not produce GHG emissions greater than 5.85 MTCO2e/dwelling unit.
2. For residential development completed after 2030, the project shall not produce GHG emissions greater than 1.53 MTCO2e/dwelling unit.
3. For nonresidential developments of all types completed between 2020 and 2030, the project shall not produce GHG emissions greater than 8.84 MTCO2e/2,500 square feet of conditioned space.
4. For nonresidential developments of all types completed after 2030, the project shall not produce GHG emissions greater than 3.61 MTCO2e/2,500 square feet of conditioned space.
For projects that include both residential and nonresidential space, the residential and nonresidential components must be assessed separately against their respective applicable thresholds.
ENERGY
Based on CEQA Guidelines Appendix F, Energy Conservation, to ensure energy implications are considered in project decisions, CEQA identifies that EIRs include a discussion of the potential impacts of proposed projects, with particular emphasis on avoiding or reducing wasteful, unnecessary, or inefficient use of energy resources as applicable. To assist in analyzing whether the Approved Project’s energy consumption was considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary, the following energy conservation goals from Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines were used:
» Decrease overall per capita energy consumption.
» Decrease reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, and oil. » Increase reliance on renewable energy sources.
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE CERTIFIED EIR
The following summarizes the approved project’s environmental impacts related to energy identified in the Certified EIR.
» Energy Consumption. The Certified EIR determined that implementation of the Approved Project would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. While operation of the ORSC would generate additional electricity and natural gas demand compared to existing conditions, development would be required to comply with the requirements of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, CALGreen, Renewable Portfolio Standards, and C orporate Average Fuel Economy standards. Compliance with the applicable standards would increase building energy efficiency and vehicle fuel efficiency and reduce building energy demand and transportation-related fuel usage. » Energy Plan Consistency . The Certified EIR analyzed the ORSC’s consistency with the California Renewable Portfolio Standard Program and the Ontario CCAP. The EIR determined that the Approved Project would be consistent with these plans due to the project’s compliance with regulatory requirements.
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Would the project:
910
November 17, 2025 | Page 28
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Construction Energy Use
The Proposed Project would result in less building square footage constructed than under the Approved Project.
Energy consumption during construction activities under the Proposed Project would therefore be similar or less than that of the Approved Project. Electricity and fuel resources would be consumed temporarily during construction activities. For example, electric-powered construction equipment could include hand tools (e.g., power drills, table saws) and lighting. Natural gas or other types of fuel would be used for construction vehicles and equipment. Use of such equipment would be considered necessary for the construction of the proposed project, and all construction equipment would cease operating upon completion of project construction. Furthermore, to limit wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption, construction contractors would be required to minimize nonessential idling of construction equipment during construction, in accordance with Section 2449 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9.
Overall, energy consumption during construction under the Proposed Project would be similar to that of the Approved Project; the Proposed Project would not result in a new construction energy impact or substantial increase in the severity of construction energy impacts when compared to the Certified EIR.
Operational Energy Use
Operation of the proposed project would generate new demand for electricity (e.g., appliances and cooling), natural gas (e.g., cooking and heating), and transportation energy.
BUILDING ENERGY: ELECTRICITY AND NATURAL GAS
The proposed increase in electricity and natural gas consumption from buildings under the Proposed Project is shown in Table 9, Operation-Related Building Energy Consumption.
Table 9 Operation-Related Building Energy Consumption
Land Use1
Electricity
(kWh/year)
Natural Gas
(kBTU/year)
Approved Project
PAs 2 through 4 3,500,028 3,152,123
Total ORSC Emissions 17,338,246 12,359,271
Proposed Project
PAs 2 through 4 3,678,327 6,107,068
Net Change (Proposed Project less Approved Project, PAs 2 through 4)
178,299 2,954,945
With Project Increase (Net Change + Approved Project,
Total ORSC)
17,516,545 15,314,216
Percent Increase Under Proposed Project 1% 24%
Source: CalEEMod v. 2022.1.
Note: kWh = kilowatt-hour; kBTU = kilo-British Thermal Unit 911
November 17, 2025 | Page 29
Though the Proposed Project would generate additional energy demand at the site, it would be similar to the energy demand for PAs 2 through 4 of the Approved Project. Like the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would also be required to comply with the applicable Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen requirements.
Compliance with the current Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen would be consistent with the goals outlined in Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines, as the Proposed Project would promote the use of renewable energy and decrease reliance on fossil fuels to meet the energy demands of the Proposed Project. Additionally, the Proposed Project would be required to implement Mitigation Measures AQ-2, GHG-1, GHG-2, and GHG-3, which would decrease natural gas usage under the Proposed Project and promote on-site renewable energy generation.
In addition to the proposed building energy efficiency, Southern California Edison is required to comply with the state’s renewable portfolios standard (RPS), which mandates utilities to procure a certain proportion of electricity from eligible renewable and carbon-free sources and increasing the proportion through the coming years, with an ultimate procurement requirement of 100 percent by 2045. The RPS requirements would support use of electricity by the proposed project that is generated from renewable or carbon-free sources. Overall, the proposed project would generally be consistent with the goals outlined in Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines regarding increasing energy efficiency, decreasing reliance on fossil fuels, and increasing renewable energy sources. Because the Proposed Project would comply with these regulations, it would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy demands.
Due to these reasons, the Proposed Project would not result in a new impact or substantial increase in the severity of impacts when compared to the Certified EIR with respect to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary building energy consumption.
TRANSPORTATION ENERGY
The Proposed Project would result in the consumption of transportation energy during operation from the use of motor vehicles associated with employees and visitors to the site, in addition to truck deliveries for the commercial uses. When compared to the Approved Project, the Proposed Project involves similar land uses and would generate similar types of trips to the project site. Additionally, the number of trips under the Proposed Project would be similar to those under the Approved Project, as shown in Table 10 and detailed in the trip generation estimates provided by the City in Attachment B. As shown in Table 10, Average Daily Trip Generation Comparison for the Approved Project and Proposed Project, the Proposed Project would result in an increase in trips during the scenarios modeled for events on Saturdays but would result in a decrease in trips during the weekday scenario .
Additionally, compliance with Mitigation Measure GHG-3 would require the installation of electric vehicle charging above the mandatory amount, allowing for increased electric vehicle charging under the Proposed Project.
Compliance with Mitigation Measures TRAF-1 and TRAF-2 would help to decrease VMT and associated vehicle fuel consumption associated with the Proposed Project.
Table 10 Average Daily Trip Generation Comparison for the Approved Project and Proposed Project
Weekday with
Stadium Event
Saturday with
Tournament (No Baseball
Stadium Event)
Saturday with Baseball
Stadium Event
(No Tournaments)
Approved Project 8,060 8,035 8,035
Proposed Project 7,638 8,149 8,149
Difference -422 (-5.2%) 114 (1.4%) 114 (1.4%)
Source: City of Ontario 2025 (see Attachment B).
912
November 17, 2025 | Page 30
Moreover, the general fuel efficiency of vehicles with each passing year would improve on average. The improvement in fuel efficiency would be attributable to the statewide fuel reduction strategies and regulatory compliances (e.g., CAFE standards), resulting in new cars that are more fuel efficient and the attrition of older, less fuel-efficient vehicles. The CAFE standards are not directly applicable to land use development projects, but to car manufacturers. Thus, neither the Proposed Project nor the City has direct control of the fuel efficiency of vehicles that are manufactured and available. However, compliance with the CAFE standards by car manufacturers would ensure that vehicles produced in future years have greater fuel efficiency and would generally result in an overall benefit of reducing fuel usage by providing the population of the project site’s region more fuel-efficient vehicle options. In addition, because electricity generated in California is required to meet the increasing renewable energy mix requirements under the State’s RPS, a greater and greater share of electricity consumed for transportation energy demand under the Proposed Project would be sourced from renewable energy sources rather than fossil fuels.
Overall, for these reasons, the Proposed Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the severity of impacts when compared to the Certified EIR with respect to inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary transportation energy consumption.
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? The following evaluates consistency of the proposed project with California’s Renewables Portfolio Standard program and the Ontario CCAP.
California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program
The state’s electricity grid is transitioning to renewable energy under California’s Renewable Energy Program.
Renewable sources of electricity include wind, small hydropower, solar, geothermal, biomass, and biogas. Electricity production from renewable sources is generally considered carbon neutral. Executive Order S -14-08, signed in November 2008, expanded the state’s renewable portfolios standard (RPS) to 33 percent renewable power by 2020.
This standard was adopted by the legislature in 2011 (Senate Bill [SB] X1-2). SB 350 (de Leon) was signed into law September 2015 and establishes tiered increases to the RPS—40 percent by 2024, 45 percent by 2027, and 50 percent by 2030. SB 350 also set a new goal to double the energy -efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas through energy efficiency and conservation measures.
On September 10, 2018, Governor Brown signed SB 100, which supersedes the SB 350 requirements. Under SB 100, the RPS for public-owned facilities and retail sellers consist of 44 percent renewable energy by 2024, 50 percent by 2026, 52 percent by 2027, and 60 percent by 2030. The bill also established a state policy that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100 percent of all retail sales of electricity to California end -use customers and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve all state agencies by December 31, 2045. Additionally, SB 1020 adds interim targets to the SB 100 framework to require renewable energy and zero-carbon resources to supply 90 percent of all retail electricity sales by 2035 and 95 percent of all retail electricity sales by 2040. Under SB 100 and SB 1020, the state cannot increase carbon emissions elsewhere in the western grid or allow resource shuffling to achieve the 100 percent carbon-free electricity target.
The statewide RPS goal is not directly applicable to individual development projects, but to utilities and energy providers such as SCE, which is the utility that would provide all of electricity needs for the P roposed Project.
Compliance of SCE in meeting the RPS goals would ensure the state is meeting its objective in transitioning to renewable energy. In addition, the Proposed Project would be required to comply with the applicable Building Energy Efficiency Standards and implement the requirements under Mitigation Measures AQ-2 and GHG-1 through GHG-3, which would contribute to increasing energy efficiency and renewable energy use under the Proposed Project. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of 913
November 17, 2025 | Page 31
California’s RPS Program. The Proposed Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the severity of impacts when compared to the Certified EIR with respect to consistency with the State’s RPS goals.
Ontario Community Climate Action Plan
As previously discussed, the City of Ontario adopted the CCAP to implement a plan to reduce GHG emissions to achieve SB 32 emission reduction targets by year 2030 and additional reductions beyond year 2030. While the CCAP’s primary focus is reducing community-wide GHG emissions, a main strategy in the plan relates to improving energy efficiency, reducing fossil fuel energy consumption, and promoting renewable energy consumption in its place. The Certified EIR concluded that the Approved Project would generally be considered consistent with the City’s CCAP and its energy efficiency and renewable energy strategies, as shown in Table 5.8-7 of the Certified EIR.
Like the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would comply with these CCAP strategies and implement mitigation measures that further increase energy efficiency and renewable energy generation .
Similar to the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would be required to comply with the version of the California Building Standards Code, including the Building Energy Efficiency Standards in Part 6, that is in effect at the time that each proposed structure is designed. Currently, the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards require that new structures of specified occupancy types either include rooftop solar systems or be designed in such a way they achieve the same energy efficiency as if solar were included. The Proposed Project would also receive the benefits of the ORSC’s pedestrian and active transportation improvements throughout and adjacent to the ORSC site, such as sidewalks and bicycle lanes, that would reduce VMT and transportation fuel consumption. Moreover, the Proposed Project would comply with applicable water efficiency standards in CALGreen to reduce the amount of water and electricity consumed for treatment and transport during operation. These features support the Proposed Project’s consistency with the Ontario CCAP strategies that are focused on energy efficiency and renewable energy.
Therefore, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the Ontario CCAP, and impacts would remain less than significant. The Proposed Project would not result in a new impact or substantial increase in the severity of impacts when compared to the Certified EIR with respect to consistency with the CCAP.
Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project Energy impacts under the Approved Project were less than significant, therefore the Certified EIR did not incorporate any mitigation measures to reduce energy impacts. Certified EIR mitigation measures relevant to energy impacts are discussed in Impacts (a) and (b), above.
Bibliography
Bay Area Air District. 2023, May. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines . https://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-climate/california-environmental-quality-act-ceqa/ updated-ceqa-guidelines.
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2022. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). Version 2022.1. Developed by: ICF in collaboration with the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2005, April. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/california-air -resources-board-air-quality-and-land-use-handbook-a-community-health-perspective.pdf. 914
November 17, 2025 | Page 32
––––––. 2017, March 14. Final Proposed Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/shortlived/shortlived.htm.
––––––. 2022. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/ 2022-12/2022-sp.pdf.
––––––. 2025, August 23 (accessed). Area Designations Maps/State and National. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/maps-state-and-federal-area-designations.
California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA). 2018, November. Final Statement of Reasons for Regulatory Action. http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/2018_CEQA_Final_Statement_of%20Reasons_111218.pdf .
Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI). 2008, June. CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change Through CEQA Review. Technical Advisory. https://opr.ca.gov/docs/june08- ceqa.pdf.
Ontario, City of. 2022, August. Community Climate Action Plan. https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/ Ontario-Files/Planning/The%20Ontario%20Plann/CCAP/Ontario-CCAP_Adopted_20220816.pdf. ––––––. 2023, March. Community Climate Action Plan Screening Tables. https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/ default/files/Ontario-Files/Planning/CCAP/Screening%20Table/Ontario-CCAP_Screening-Tables -MARCH%202023.pdf.
––––––. 2024, January (accessed). Traffic Division, Traffic Counts. https://www.ontarioca.gov/TrafficEngineering. ––––––. 2025, September. Approved Project and Proposed Project Trip Generation. (Attachment B).
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2024. Connect SoCal Plan: The 2024– 2050 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments. https://scag.ca.gov/connect-socal.
South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD). 1992. Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide.
––––––. 1993. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Handbook. ––––––. 2003, August. 2003 Air Quality Management Plan. Appendix V. https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air -quality/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan/2003-aqmp. ––––––. 2008, June. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/ regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/localized-significance-thresholds. ––––––. 2009, November 19. GHG Meeting 14 Main Presentation. Greenhouse Gases (GHG) CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/ handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/ghg-meeting -14/ghg-meeting-14-main-presentation.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
––––––. 2011. Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds. http://www.aqmd .gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/caleemod-guidance.pdf. 915
November 17, 2025 | Page 33
––––––. 2015a. Health Effects of Air Pollution. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default -source/publications/ brochures/the-health-effects-of-air-pollution-brochure.pdf. ––––––. 2015b, October. “Blueprint for Clean Air: 2016 AQMP White Paper.” 2016 AQMP White Papers Web Page. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/aqmp/white-paper-working -groups/wp-blueprint-final.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
––––––. 2022, December 2. 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default -source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2022-air-quality-management-plan/final-2022 -aqmp/final-2022-aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=16.
––––––. 2023, March (revised). South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/south-coast-aqmd-air-quality -significance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=25.
916
Attachment A – Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Modeling
917
CalEEMod Inputs - ORSC Addendum Project, Operation
Name: ORSC Addendum (Hotel Ontario Aloft + Residence Inn Project) Project Number: T&B-02
Project Location: East Riverside Drive & Ontario Avenue County/Air Basin: San Bernardino-South Coast
Climate Zone: 10
Land Use Setting: Suburban
Gas Utility Company: Southern California Gas
Electric Utility Company: Southern California Edison
Air Basin: South Coast Air Basin
Air District: South Coast AQMD
SRA: 33 - Southwest San Bernardino Valley
Project Summary
Approved Project (SQFT) Proposed Project (SQFT) Net Increase PA 2
Retail/Commercial, East 45,000 35,055 -9,945
Hotel 0 158,450 158,450
PA 3
Retail/Commercial 21,000 10,000 -11,000
Hotel 70,000 0 -70,000
PA 4
Retail/Commercial 114,000 36,513 -77,487
Land Use Inputs (PA 2- Aloft & Residence Inn) Land Use Inputs (PA 3 & PA 4) Building Space Land Use SQFT Acreage PA 3 Land Use SQFT Acreage Conference Area 9,891 Retail/Commercia l 10,000 0.23
Hall of Fame 10,169 Hotel 0 0.00
Yogurtland 1,635 Landscaping (ORSC)1 108,505 2.49
Café 3,936 TOTAL 118,505 2.72
Hotel (5 floors)1 170,000 PA 4 Land Use SQFT Acreage
Hotel First Floor 14,742 Retail/Commercia l 36,513 0.84 Hotel & Retail TOTAL 195,631 Landscaping (ORSC)1 170,882 3.92 Building Footprint 40,373 0.93 Surface Parking Lot (ORSC)1 87,120 2.00 Surface Work Land Use SQFT Acreage TOTAL 207,395 4.76
Landscaping 18,442 0.42
Sidewalk Improvement 18,379 0.42 Notes
Pool Areas 1,649 0.04 1
Parking Areas 52,825 1.21
Interior Patio 11,007 0.25
Event Area (Turf) 2,800 0.06
TOTAL 145,475 3.34
Notes
1 Landscaping and parking inputs for PAs 3 and 4 assumed to be the same as those modeled for the ORSC.
Square footage of the proposed hotel accounts for a potential increase in the square footage before the design is finalized.
918
CalEEMod Land Use Inputs (PA 2)
Land Use Type Land Use Subtype Unit Amount Size Metric Lot Acreage Land Use Square Feet Landscape Area Square Feet Special Landscape
Area Square Feet
Recreational Hotel 249 Room 1.41 170,000 18,442 2,800
Retail Strip Mall 20.06 1,000 SQFT -- 20,060 -- --
Recreational Drive Thru 5.57 1,000 SQFT -- 5,571 -- --
Recreational Recreational Swimming Pool 1.65 1,000 SQFT 0.04 1,649 -- -- Parking Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 29.39 1,000 SQFT 0.67 29,386 -- -- Parking Parking Lot 52.82 1,000 SQFT 1.21 52,825 -- --
3.34 CalEEMod Land Use Inputs (PA 3 & PA 4)
Land Use Type Land Use Subtype Unit Amount Size Metric Lot Acreage Land Use Square Feet Landscape Area Square Feet Special Landscape
Area Square Feet
Retail Strip Mall 46.51 1,000 SQFT 7.48 46,513 279,387 -- Parking Parking Lot 87.12 1,000 SQFT 2.00 87,120 -- --
9.48 Vehicle Trips1
Land Use Type
Typical Weekday Trips with
Stadium Event
Saturday Trips with
Stadium Event
PA 2
Hotel (ITE Code 310) 1,990 2,009
Strip Mall (ITE Code 821) 1,184 1,421
Fast Food Restaurant (ITE Code 930) 1,703 1,703
TOTAL 4,877 5,133
PA 3
Strip Mall (ITE Code 821) 338 405
Fast Food Restaurant (ITE Code 930) 486 486
PA 4
Strip Mall (ITE Code 821) 1,233 1,480
Fast Food Restaurant (ITE Code 930) 1,774 1,774
TOTA
L 3,831 4,145
TOTAL (all PAs) 8,708 9,278
nternalization Reduction (50% of Hotel Trips) (398) (402) ternalization Reduction (33% of Retail Trips) (672) (727) TOTAl (with reductions) 7,638 8,149
Notes
1 Water Use
Indoor (gals/year) Outdoor (gals/year) 1 Total
PA 2
Hotel 6,316,326 3,109,860 9,426,186
Strip Mall 1,485,895 1,485,895
Fast Food Restaurant w/o Drive Thru 1,690,683 1,690,683 Recreational Swimming Pool 97,586 97,586
TOTA
L 9,590,489 3,109,860 12,700,349
PAs 3 & 4
Strip Mall 3,445,113 1,572,063 5,017,176
Notes
1 Project trips reflect the Saturday with a stadium event and no tournament scenario- the maximum ADT across all three traffic scenarios: typical weekday with stadium event, Saturday with one tournament and no stadium event, and Saturday with stadium event and no tournament.
Indoor water use is based on CalEEMod defaults. Outdoor water use is based on the water use calculated for ORSC Water Supply Assessment.
919
Solid Waste (CalEEMod default)
Land Use Total Solid Waste (tons/year)
Hotel 136.33
Strip Mall 21.06
Fast Food Restaurant w/o Drive Thru 64.16
Recreational Swimming Pool 9.40
Strip Mall 48.84
Electricity (Buildings)
Default CalEEMod Energy Use
Land Use Subtype
Total Annual Electricity
Consumption (kWh/year)
Total Annual Natural Gas
Consumption (kBTU/year)
Title-24 Electricity Energy
Intensity
(kWhr/size/year)*
Title-24 Natural Gas Energy Intensity
(KBTU/size/year)*
Nontitle-24 Electricity
Energy Intensity
(kWhr/size/year)
Nontitle-24 Natural Gas
Energy Intensity
(KBTU/size/year)
PA 2
Hotel 2,712,767.51 5,077,984.35 2,137,128.11 2,713,321.73 575,639.40 2,364,662.62 Strip Mall 195,150.38 118,263.53 154,589.35 28,196.03 40,561.02 90,067.50 Fast Food Restaurant w/o Drive Thru 195,356.39 636,602.96 98,625.37 121,414.34 96,731.01 515,188.61 Parking 46,270.32 0.00 46,270.32 0.00 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 452,464.81 274,216.93 358,445.39 65,377.96 94,048.60 208,838.97 Parking Lot 76,317.12 0.00 76,317.12 0.00 0.00 0.00
TOTAL 3,678,327 6,107,068
Architectural Coating
Percent Painted
Interior Painted: 100%
Exterior Painted: 100%
Interior Paint VOC content: 50 grams per liter
Exterior Paing VOC content: 50 grams per liter
Structures Paintable Interior Area Paintable Exterior Area Non-Residential Structures
PA 2 - 4 363,216 121,072
Parking
Parking (All) - 10,160
Landscape Equipment
Mitigation Measure AQ-2 Require all-electric landscaping equipment
CalEEMod Area Source Measure LL-1 Replace Gas Powered Landscape Equipment with Zero-Emission Landscape Equipment PA 3 & PA 4
PA 2
PAs 3 & 4
920
CalEEMod Inputs - Onatrio Regional Sports Complex (PA 2 - 4), Operation Name: ORSC PA 2 - 4
Project Number: ONT-06.10
Project Location: East Riverside Drive & Ontario Avenue County/Air Basin: San Bernardino-South Coast
Climate Zone: 10
Land Use Setting: Suburban
Gas Utility Company: Southern California Gas
Electric Utility Company: Southern California Edison
Air Basin: South Coast Air Basin
Air District: South Coast AQMD
SRA: 33 - Southwest San Bernardino Valley
Project Summary
Approved Project (SQFT) Proposed Project (SQFT) Net Increase PA 2
Retail/Commercial, East 45,000 35,055 -9,945
Hotel 0 158,450 158,450
PA 3
Retail/Commercial 21,000 10,000 -11,000
Hotel 70,000 0 -70,000
PA 4
Retail/Commercial 114,000 36,513 -77,487
CalEEMod Land Use Inputs
Land Use Type Land Use Subtype Unit Amount Size Metric Lot Acreage Land Use Square Feet Landscape Area Square Feet PA 2
Retail Strip Mall 45.00 1,000 SQFT 5.00 45,000 --
Parking Parking Lot 1,500.00 Space 14.56 -- 46,174
PA 3
Retail Strip Mall 21.00 1,000 SQFT 2.17 21,000 73,525
Recreational Hotel 100.00 Room 2.41 70,000 34,980
PA 4
Retail Strip Mall 114.00 1,000 SQFT 6.54 114,000 170,882 Parking Parking Lot 250.00 Space 2.00 -- --
32.68 921
Vehicle Trips1
Land Use Type
Typical Weekday Trips with Stadium
Event
Saturday Trips with
Stadium Event2
PA 2
Strip Mall (ITE Code 821) 1,519 1,824
Fast Food Restaurant (ITE Code 930) 2,186 2,186
PA 3
Hotel (ITE Code 310) 799 807
Strip Mall (ITE Code 821) 709 851
Fast Food Restaurant (ITE Code 930
) 1,020 1,020
PA 4
Strip Mall (ITE Code 821) 473 567
Fast Food Restaurant (ITE Code 930
) 680 680
Chicken 'n Pickle San Antonio Data 1,493 2,856
TOTAL (all PAs) 8,879 10,791
Hotel Internalization Reduction (50% of Hotel Trips) (160) (404) Retail Internalization Reduction (33% of Retail Trips) (659) (2,352) TOTAl (with reductions) 8,060 8,035
Notes
1 2
Architectural Coating (CalEEMod Default)
Percent Painted
Interior Painted: 100%
Exterior Painted: 100%
Interior Paint VOC content: 50 grams per liter
Exterior Paing VOC content: 50 grams per liter
Structures Paintable Interior Area Paintable Exterior Area Non-Residential Structures
Strip Mall & Hotel 1,500,386 496,526
Parking
Parking (All) - 211,231
Landscape Equipment
Mitigation Measure AQ-2 Require all-electric landscaping equipment
CalEEMod Area Source Measure LL-1 Replace Gas Powered Landscape Equipment with Zero-Emission Landscape Equipmen t Project trips reflect typical weekday ADT with a stadium event - the maximum ADT across all three traffic scenarios: typical weekday with stadium event, Saturday with one tournament and no stadium event, and Saturday with stadium event and no tournament.
922
Proposed Project Component Indoor Water Consumption
(Gallons/Year)1
Outdoor Water Consumption
(Gallons/Year)1
Planning Area 1
PA 1 Baseball Stadium 1,836,995 5,028,056
PA 1 Parking Structure A --
Planning Area 2
PA 2 Retail / Commercial, East 3,324,420 715,345
PA 2 Surface Parking Lot, East - -
Planning Area 3
PA 3 Stadium Retail / Commercial 1,425,690 306,778
PA 3 Hotel 4,745,000 340,708
Planning Area 4
PA 4 Stadium Retail / Commercial 4,296,780 924,577
PA 4 Surface Parking Lot, South - -
Planning Area 5
PA 5 Multipurpose Fields - 25,565,322
PA 5 Multiuse Fields - 24,326,445
PA 5 Park - 3,357,779
PA 5 Parking Structure B --
PA 5 Surface Parking, South - -
Planning Area 6
PA 6 Indoor Athletic Facility 1,783,953 -
PA 6 Surface Parking Lot --
Planning Area 7
PA 7 Community Center / Admin Building 770,000 -
PA 7 Activity Center --
PA 7 Surface Parking Lot --
On-Site Roadways
Ontario Avenue --
Street A --
Street B --
Off-Site Improvements
Chino Avenue --
Riverside Drive --
Vineyard Avenue --
TOTALS 18,182,838 60,565,010
Notes:
ORSC EIR Water Consumption Estimates
1. Land uses with no indoor water consumption are generally considered as part of the predominant development component they are associated with. For example, the indoor water consumption estimates for PA 7 Community Center / Admin Building generally covers the PA 7 Activity Center water consumption as well. Land uses with no outdoor water consumption are generally considered as part of the Fields and Park land use outdoor water consumption. Assumes 100% aerobic treatment for the City's Wastewater Treatment Facility. 923
Vehicle Type: Passenger Medium Duty Heavy Duty Total
99 0 1 100
Key
Vehicle
Class
Default
(%)
Adjusted
(%)
LDA=Light duty auto LDA 49.75322 64.07375
LDT1=Light duty truck 1 LDT1 3.83638 4.94061
LDT2=Light duty truck 2 LDT2 21.20354 27.30658
MCY=Motorcycle MCY 2.08028 2.67906
MDV=Medium duty vehicle MDV 15.27987 0.00000
LHD1=Light heavy duty 1 LHD1 2.82841 0.36046
LHD2=Light heavy duty 2 LHD2 0.77467 0.09873
MHD=Medium heavy duty MHD 1.79189 0.22836
HHD=Heavy heavy duty HHD 1.83178 0.23344
OBUS=Other bus OBUS 0.06026 0.00768
UBUS=Urban bus UBUS 0.03098 0.00395
SBUS=School bus SBUS 0.10891 0.01388
MH=Motorhome MH 0.41982 0.05350
Totals 100.00000 100.00000
Passenger Vehicles 76.87342 99.00000
Medium Duty Vehicles 15.27987 0.00000
Heavy Duty Vehicles 7.84671 1.00000
Totals 100.00000 100.00000
Source: Fehr & Peers (2024)
ORSC EIR Fleet Mix Adjustments
Assumed Fleet Mix (Percent
of Total):
Year 2027
924
CalEEMod Inputs-Ontario Sports Complex Project, Operation Name: Ontario Sports Complex Project, Construction
Project Number: ONT-06
Project Location: Ontario, CA
County/Air Basin: San Bernardino County
Climate Zone: 10
Land Use Setting: Urban
First Year of Operation: 2027
Electricity Company: Southern California Edison (SCE)
Air Basin: South Coast Air Basin (SCAB)
Air District: South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD) SRA: 33 - Southwest San Bernardino Valley
CalEEMod Energy Use
Project Component
Total Annual Electricity Consumption
(kWh/year)
Total Annual Natural Gas
Consumption (kBTU/year)
Title-24 Electricity
(kWh/year)
Title-24 Natural Gas
(KBTU/year)
Nontitle-24 Electricity
(kWh/year)
Nontitle-24 Natural Gas
(KBTU/year)
PA 1 Baseball Stadium 8,730,000.00 0.00 3,100,500.00 0.00 5,629,500.00 0.00 PA 1 Parking Structure A 682,914.84 0.00 647,764.84 0.00 35,150.00 0.00 PA 2 Retail / Commercial, East 437,775.03 265,297.05 346,785.69 63,251.31 90,989.34 202,045.74 PA 2 Surface Parking Lot, East 555,588.63 0.00 555,588.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA 3 Stadium Retail / Commercial 204,295.01 123,805.29 161,833.32 29,517.28 42,461.69 94,288.01 PA 3 Hotel 1,117,021.92 2,090,934.73 879,993.93 1,117,250.12 237,027.99 973,684.61 PA 4 Stadium Retail / Commercial 1,109,030.06 672,085.87 878,523.74 160,236.66 230,506.32 511,849.21 PA 4 Surface Parking Lot, South 76,317.12 0.00 76,317.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA 5 Multipurpose Fields 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PA 5 Multiuse Fields 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PA 5 Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PA 5 Parking Structure B 321,154.55 0.00 304,624.55 0.00 16,530.00 0.00 PA 5 Surface Parking, South 389,217.31 0.00 389,217.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA 6 Indoor Athletic Facility 1,778,825.84 6,600,346.44 1,464,249.98 2,782,533.48 314,575.86 3,817,812.96 PA 6 Surface Parking Lot 119,054.71 0.00 119,054.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA 7 Community Center / Admin Building 1,221,632.12 1,920,801.21 983,502.73 1,550,094.62 238,129.39 370,706.59 PA 7 Activity Center 436,297.18 686,000.43 351,250.97 553,605.22 85,046.21 132,395.21 PA 7 Surface Parking Lot 159,121.20 0.00 159,121.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 Ontario Avenue 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Street A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Street B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Chino Avenue 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Riverside Drive 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Vineyard Avenue 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
TOTALS 17,338,245.52 12,359,271.02 10,418,328.72 6,256,488.69 6,919,916.80 6,102,782.33 Note: Natural gas consumption not reduced for MM GHG-1 due to the unknown extent of commercial cooking uses. 925
Solid Waste1
Development Component Total Solid Waste (tons/yr)
PA 1 Baseball Stadium 0.97
PA 1 Parking Structure A 0.00
PA 2 Retail / Commercial, East 47.25
PA 2 Surface Parking Lot, East 0.00
PA 3 Stadium Retail / Commercial 22.05
PA 3 Hotel 54.75
PA 4 Stadium Retail / Commercial 119.70
PA 4 Surface Parking Lot, South 0.00
PA 5 Fields & Park 8.35
PA 5 Parking Structure B 0.00
PA 5 Surface Parking, South 0.00
PA 6 Indoor Athletic Facility 58.04
PA 6 Surface Parking Lot 0.00
PA 7 Community Center / Admin Building 65.10
PA 7 Activity Center 44.62
PA 7 Surface Parking Lot 0.00
Ontario Avenue 0.00
Street A 0.00
Street B 0.00
Chino Avenue 0.00
Riverside Drive 0.00
Vineyard Avenue 0.00
TOTAL 420.83
Notes:
1 Based on CalEEMod default
926
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 1 / 49
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) 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
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.1.2. Mitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
927
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 2 / 49
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
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.7.2. Mitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
928
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 3 / 49
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.8.2. Mitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.9.2. Mitigated
5. Activity Data
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
929
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 4 / 49
5.11.2. Mitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.12.2. Mitigated
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
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.15.2. Mitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
8. User Changes to Default Data
930
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 5 / 49
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Operational Y ear 2027
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.60
Precipitation (days) 9.20
Location 34.014735002712754, -117.60595454674288
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Ontario
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5260
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.30
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
Hotel 249 Room 1.41 170,000 184,420,000 2,800 — PA 2 Hotel Strip Mall 20.1 1000sqft 0.00 20,060 0.00 — — PA 2 Conference & Hall of
Fame
931
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 6 / 49
Fast Food
Restaurant
w/o
Drive Thru
5.57 1000sqft 0.00 5,571 0.00 — — PA 2 Cafe &
Y ogur
tland
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
1.65 1000sqft 0.04 1,650 0.00 — — PA 2 Pool Area
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
29.4 1000sqft 0.67 0.00 0.00 — — P
A 2 Hardsdcape
Parking Lot 52.8 1000sqft 1.21 0.00 0.00 — — PA 2 Parking Strip Mall 46.5 1000sqft 7.48 46,513 279,387 — — PA 3 & 4 Retail Parking Lot 87.1 1000sqft 2.00 0.00 0.00 — — PA 3 & 4 Parking User Defined
Recreational
1.00 User Defined Unit 0.00 0.00 0.00 — — —
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Area Sources LL-1 Replace Gas Powered Landscape Equipment with Zero-Emission Landscape
Equipment
2. Emissions Summary
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. 38.0 35.5 15.2 269 0.54 0.40 55.3 55.7 0.38 14.0 14.4 179 60,932 61,111 17.9 1.64 442 62,491 Mit. 36.1 33.8 15.2 259 0.54 0.38 55.3 55.7 0.36 14.0 14.3 179 60,898 61,077 17.9 1.64 442 62,457 %
Reduced
5% 5% 1% 4% — 5% — < 0.5% 4% — < 0.5% — < 0.5% < 0.5% < 0.5% — — < 0.5% 932
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 7 / 49
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Unmit. 34.5 32.2 16.5 218 0.49 0.38 55.3 55.7 0.36 14.0 14.3 179 56,606 56,785 18.0 1.74 279 58,033 Mit. 34.5 32.2 16.5 218 0.49 0.38 55.3 55.7 0.36 14.0 14.3 179 56,606 56,785 18.0 1.74 279 58,033 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 35.5 33.1 16.9 233 0.50 0.40 55.0 55.4 0.37 13.9 14.3 179 57,304 57,482 18.0 1.76 347 58,805 Mit. 34.2 31.9 16.8 226 0.50 0.38 55.0 55.4 0.36 13.9 14.3 179 57,281 57,459 18.0 1.76 347 58,782 %
Reduced
4% 4% < 0.5% 3% — 3% — < 0.5% 3% — < 0.5% — < 0.5% < 0.5% — — — < 0.5% Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 6.48 6.04 3.08 42.5 0.09 0.07 10.0 10.1 0.07 2.54 2.60 29.6 9,487 9,517 2.98 0.29 57.5 9,736 Mit. 6.25 5.83 3.07 41.2 0.09 0.07 10.0 10.1 0.07 2.54 2.60 29.6 9,483 9,513 2.98 0.29 57.5 9,732 %
Reduced
4% 4% < 0.5% 3% < 0.5% 3% — < 0.5% 3% — < 0.5% — < 0.5% < 0.5% < 0.5% < 0.5% — < 0.5%
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 30.4 28.2 13.5 257 0.53 0.26 55.3 55.6 0.24 14.0 14.2 — 53,405 53,405 2.23 1.54 168 54,086 Area 7.39 7.25 0.09 10.5 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.01 — 0.01 — 43.3 43.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 43.5 Energy 0.18 0.09 1.64 1.38 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.12 — 0.12 — 7,318 7,318 0.51 0.04 — 7,344 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 166 193 0.11 0.06 — 215 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 151 0.00 151 15.1 0.00 — 528933 Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 8 / 49
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 275 275
Total 38.0 35.5 15.2 269 0.54 0.40 55.3 55.7 0.38 14.0 14.4 179 60,932 61,111 17.9 1.64 442 62,491 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 28.8 26.6 14.9 216 0.48 0.26 55.3 55.6 0.24 14.0 14.2 — 49,122 49,122 2.34 1.63 4.34 49,672 Area 5.52 5.52 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.18 0.09 1.64 1.38 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.12 — 0.12 — 7,318 7,318 0.51 0.04 — 7,344 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 166 193 0.11 0.06 — 215 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 151 0.00 151 15.1 0.00 — 528 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 275 275
Total 34.5 32.2 16.5 218 0.49 0.38 55.3 55.7 0.36 14.0 14.3 179 56,606 56,785 18.0 1.74 279 58,033 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 28.6 26.3 15.2 224 0.49 0.26 55.0 55.2 0.24 13.9 14.1 — 49,790 49,790 2.34 1.66 72.4 50,414 Area 6.80 6.70 0.06 7.21 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 29.7 29.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 29.8 Energy 0.18 0.09 1.64 1.38 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.12 — 0.12 — 7,318 7,318 0.51 0.04 — 7,344 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 166 193 0.11 0.06 — 215 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 151 0.00 151 15.1 0.00 — 528 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 275 275
Total 35.5 33.1 16.9 233 0.50 0.40 55.0 55.4 0.37 13.9 14.3 179 57,304 57,482 18.0 1.76 347 58,805 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.21 4.80 2.77 40.9 0.09 0.05 10.0 10.1 0.04 2.54 2.58 — 8,243 8,243 0.39 0.27 12.0 8,347 Area 1.24 1.22 0.01 1.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.91 4.91 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.93 Energy 0.03 0.02 0.30 0.25 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 1,212 1,212 0.08 0.01 — 1,216 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.61 27.4 32.0 0.02 0.01 — 35.5 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 25.0 0.00 25.0 2.50 0.00 — 87.3 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 45.5 45.5
Total 6.48 6.04 3.08 42.5 0.09 0.07 10.0 10.1 0.07 2.54 2.60 29.6 9,487 9,517 2.98 0.29 57.5 9,736 934
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 9 / 49
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 30.4 28.2 13.5 257 0.53 0.26 55.3 55.6 0.24 14.0 14.2 — 53,405 53,405 2.23 1.54 168 54,086 Area 5.52 5.52 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.18 0.09 1.64 1.38 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.12 — 0.12 — 7,328 7,328 0.51 0.04 — 7,354 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 166 193 0.11 0.06 — 215 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 151 0.00 151 15.1 0.00 — 528 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 275 275
Total 36.1 33.8 15.2 259 0.54 0.38 55.3 55.7 0.36 14.0 14.3 179 60,898 61,077 17.9 1.64 442 62,457 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 28.8 26.6 14.9 216 0.48 0.26 55.3 55.6 0.24 14.0 14.2 — 49,122 49,122 2.34 1.63 4.34 49,672 Area 5.52 5.52 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.18 0.09 1.64 1.38 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.12 — 0.12 — 7,318 7,318 0.51 0.04 — 7,344 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 166 193 0.11 0.06 — 215 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 151 0.00 151 15.1 0.00 — 528 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 275 275
Total 34.5 32.2 16.5 218 0.49 0.38 55.3 55.7 0.36 14.0 14.3 179 56,606 56,785 18.0 1.74 279 58,033 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 28.6 26.3 15.2 224 0.49 0.26 55.0 55.2 0.24 13.9 14.1 — 49,790 49,790 2.34 1.66 72.4 50,414 Area 5.52 5.52 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.18 0.09 1.64 1.38 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.12 — 0.12 — 7,325 7,325 0.51 0.04 — 7,351 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 166 193 0.11 0.06 — 215 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 151 0.00 151 15.1 0.00 — 528935 Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 10 / 49
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 275 275
Total 34.2 31.9 16.8 226 0.50 0.38 55.0 55.4 0.36 13.9 14.3 179 57,281 57,459 18.0 1.76 347 58,782 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.21 4.80 2.77 40.9 0.09 0.05 10.0 10.1 0.04 2.54 2.58 — 8,243 8,243 0.39 0.27 12.0 8,347 Area 1.01 1.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.03 0.02 0.30 0.25 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 1,213 1,213 0.08 0.01 — 1,217 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.61 27.4 32.0 0.02 0.01 — 35.5 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 25.0 0.00 25.0 2.50 0.00 — 87.3 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 45.5 45.5
Total 6.25 5.83 3.07 41.2 0.09 0.07 10.0 10.1 0.07 2.54 2.60 29.6 9,483 9,513 2.98 0.29 57.5 9,732
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Strip
Mall
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 936
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 11 / 49
0.000.000.000.000.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Recreati onal
Swimmi
Pool
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
30.4 28.2 13.5 257 0.53 0.26 55.3 55.6 0.24 14.0 14.2 — 53,405 53,405 2.23 1.54 168 54,086 Total 30.4 28.2 13.5 257 0.53 0.26 55.3 55.6 0.24 14.0 14.2 — 53,405 53,405 2.23 1.54 168 54,086 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Strip
Mall
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
28.8 26.6 14.9 216 0.48 0.26 55.3 55.6 0.24 14.0 14.2 — 49,122 49,122 2.34 1.63 4.34 49,672 937
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 12 / 49
Total 28.8 26.6 14.9 216 0.48 0.26 55.3 55.6 0.24 14.0 14.2 — 49,122 49,122 2.34 1.63 4.34 49,672 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Strip
Mall
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
5.21 4.80 2.77 40.9 0.09 0.05 10.0 10.1 0.04 2.54 2.58 — 8,243 8,243 0.39 0.27 12.0 8,347 Total 5.21 4.80 2.77 40.9 0.09 0.05 10.0 10.1 0.04 2.54 2.58 — 8,243 8,243 0.39 0.27 12.0 8,347
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Strip
Mall
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 938
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 13 / 49
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
30.4 28.2 13.5 257 0.53 0.26 55.3 55.6 0.24 14.0 14.2 — 53,405 53,405 2.23 1.54 168 54,086 Total 30.4 28.2 13.5 257 0.53 0.26 55.3 55.6 0.24 14.0 14.2 — 53,405 53,405 2.23 1.54 168 54,086 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Strip
Mall
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 939
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 14 / 49
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
28.8 26.6 14.9 216 0.48 0.26 55.3 55.6 0.24 14.0 14.2 — 49,122 49,122 2.34 1.63 4.34 49,672 Total 28.8 26.6 14.9 216 0.48 0.26 55.3 55.6 0.24 14.0 14.2 — 49,122 49,122 2.34 1.63 4.34 49,672 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Strip
Mall
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
5.21 4.80 2.77 40.9 0.09 0.05 10.0 10.1 0.04 2.54 2.58 — 8,243 8,243 0.39 0.27 12.0 8,347 Total 5.21 4.80 2.77 40.9 0.09 0.05 10.0 10.1 0.04 2.54 2.58 — 8,243 8,243 0.39 0.27 12.0 8,347
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) 940
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 15 / 49
CO2eRN2OCH4CO2TNBCO2BCO2PM2.5TPM2.5DPM2.5EPM10TPM10DPM10ESO2CONOxROGTOGLand Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — 3,954 3,954 0.25 0.03 — 3,969 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 944 944 0.06 0.01 — 948
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — 285 285 0.02 < 0.005 — 286
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 179 179 0.01 < 0.005 — 179
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 5,361 5,361 0.33 0.04 — 5,381 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — 3,954 3,954 0.25 0.03 — 3,969 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 944 944 0.06 0.01 — 948
941
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 16 / 49
286—< 0.0050.02285285————————————Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 179 179 0.01 < 0.005 — 179
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 5,361 5,361 0.33 0.04 — 5,381 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — 655 655 0.04 < 0.005 — 657 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 156 156 0.01 < 0.005 — 157
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — 47.1 47.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 47.3 Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 29.6 29.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 29.7 942
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 17 / 49
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 888 888 0.06 0.01 — 891
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — 3,961 3,961 0.25 0.03 — 3,976 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 947 947 0.06 0.01 — 950
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — 285 285 0.02 < 0.005 — 286
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 179 179 0.01 < 0.005 — 179
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 5,371 5,371 0.33 0.04 — 5,391 943
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 18 / 49
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — 3,954 3,954 0.25 0.03 — 3,969 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 944 944 0.06 0.01 — 948
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — 285 285 0.02 < 0.005 — 286
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 179 179 0.01 < 0.005 — 179
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 5,361 5,361 0.33 0.04 — 5,381 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — 655 655 0.04 < 0.005 — 658 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 157 157 0.01 < 0.005 — 157
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — 47.2 47.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 47.3944 Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 19 / 49
0.00—0.000.000.000.00————————————Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 29.6 29.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 29.7 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 889 889 0.06 0.01 — 892
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel 0.15 0.08 1.36 1.15 0.01 0.10 — 0.10 0.10 — 0.10 — 1,627 1,627 0.14 < 0.005 — 1,632 Strip
Mall
0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 126 126 0.01 < 0.005 — 126 Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
0.02 0.01 0.17 0.14 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 204 204 0.02 < 0.005 — 205 Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 945
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 20 / 49
0.00—0.000.000.000.00—0.00—0.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.00Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.18 0.09 1.64 1.38 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.12 — 0.12 — 1,957 1,957 0.17 < 0.005 — 1,963 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel 0.15 0.08 1.36 1.15 0.01 0.10 — 0.10 0.10 — 0.10 — 1,627 1,627 0.14 < 0.005 — 1,632 Strip
Mall
0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 126 126 0.01 < 0.005 — 126 Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
0.02 0.01 0.17 0.14 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 204 204 0.02 < 0.005 — 205 Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.18 0.09 1.64 1.38 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.12 — 0.12 — 1,957 1,957 0.17 < 0.005 — 1,963 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel 0.03 0.01 0.25 0.21 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 269 269 0.02 < 0.005 — 270 946
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 21 / 49
Strip
Mall
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 20.8 20.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 20.9 Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 33.8 33.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 33.9 Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.03 0.02 0.30 0.25 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 324 324 0.03 < 0.005 — 325
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel 0.15 0.08 1.36 1.15 0.01 0.10 — 0.10 0.10 — 0.10 — 1,627 1,627 0.14 < 0.005 — 1,632 Strip
Mall
0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 126 126 0.01 < 0.005 — 126 947
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 22 / 49
205—< 0.0050.02204204—0.01—0.010.01—0.01< 0.0050.140.170.010.02Fast Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.18 0.09 1.64 1.38 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.12 — 0.12 — 1,957 1,957 0.17 < 0.005 — 1,963 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel 0.15 0.08 1.36 1.15 0.01 0.10 — 0.10 0.10 — 0.10 — 1,627 1,627 0.14 < 0.005 — 1,632 Strip
Mall
0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 126 126 0.01 < 0.005 — 126 Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
0.02 0.01 0.17 0.14 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 204 204 0.02 < 0.005 — 205 Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 948
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 23 / 49
Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.18 0.09 1.64 1.38 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.12 — 0.12 — 1,957 1,957 0.17 < 0.005 — 1,963 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel 0.03 0.01 0.25 0.21 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 269 269 0.02 < 0.005 — 270 Strip
Mall
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 20.8 20.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 20.9 Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 33.8 33.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 33.9 Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.03 0.02 0.30 0.25 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 324 324 0.03 < 0.005 — 325
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 CO2e949 Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 24 / 49
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
5.20 5.20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.32 0.32 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
1.87 1.73 0.09 10.5 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.01 — 0.01 — 43.3 43.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 43.5 Total 7.39 7.25 0.09 10.5 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.01 — 0.01 — 43.3 43.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 43.5 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
5.20 5.20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.32 0.32 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 5.52 5.52 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
0.95 0.95 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.06 0.06 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
950
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 25 / 49
4.93—< 0.005< 0.0054.914.91—< 0.005—< 0.005< 0.005—< 0.005< 0.0051.320.010.220.23Landsca pe
Total 1.24 1.22 0.01 1.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.91 4.91 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.93
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
5.20 5.20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.32 0.32 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 5.52 5.52 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
5.20 5.20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.32 0.32 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 5.52 5.52 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
0.95 0.95 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
951
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 26 / 49
Architect
Coatings
0.06 0.06 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 1.01 1.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
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) 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 13.5 86.7 100 0.05 0.03 — 110 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 10.5 61.1 71.6 0.04 0.02 — 79.6
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.61 16.8 20.4 0.01 0.01 — 23.1
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.21 0.97 1.18 <
0.005 < 0.005 — 1.33
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 166 193 0.11 0.06 — 215 952
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 27 / 49
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 13.5 86.7 100 0.05 0.03 — 110 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 10.5 61.1 71.6 0.04 0.02 — 79.6
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.61 16.8 20.4 0.01 0.01 — 23.1
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.21 0.97 1.18 <
0.005 < 0.005 — 1.33
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 166 193 0.11 0.06 — 215 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 2.23 14.4 16.6 0.01 < 0.005 — 18.3 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 1.74 10.1 11.9 0.01 < 0.005 — 13.2 Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.60 2.78 3.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.83953 Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 28 / 49
0.22—< 0.005< 0.0050.190.160.03———————————Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 4.61 27.4 32.0 0.02 0.01 — 35.5
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 13.5 86.7 100 0.05 0.03 — 110 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 10.5 61.1 71.6 0.04 0.02 — 79.6
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.61 16.8 20.4 0.01 0.01 — 23.1
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.21 0.97 1.18 <
0.005 < 0.005 — 1.33
954
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 29 / 49
0.00—0.000.000.000.000.00———————————Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 166 193 0.11 0.06 — 215 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 13.5 86.7 100 0.05 0.03 — 110 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 10.5 61.1 71.6 0.04 0.02 — 79.6
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.61 16.8 20.4 0.01 0.01 — 23.1
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.21 0.97 1.18 <
0.005 < 0.005 — 1.33
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 27.9 166 193 0.11 0.06 — 215 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 2.23 14.4 16.6 0.01 < 0.005 — 18.3 955
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 30 / 49
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 1.74 10.1 11.9 0.01 < 0.005 — 13.2 Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.60 2.78 3.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.83 Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.16 0.19 <
0.005 < 0.005 — 0.22
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 4.61 27.4 32.0 0.02 0.01 — 35.5
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 73.5 0.00 73.5 7.34 0.00 — 257 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 37.7 0.00 37.7 3.77 0.00 — 132
956
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 31 / 49
121—0.003.4634.60.0034.6———————————Fast
Food
Restaurant
w/o
Drive
Thru
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — 5.07 0.00 5.07 0.51 0.00 — 17.7
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 151 0.00 151 15.1 0.00 — 528 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 73.5 0.00 73.5 7.34 0.00 — 257 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 37.7 0.00 37.7 3.77 0.00 — 132
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 34.6 0.00 34.6 3.46 0.00 — 121
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — 5.07 0.00 5.07 0.51 0.00 — 17.7
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
957
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 32 / 49
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 151 0.00 151 15.1 0.00 — 528 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 12.2 0.00 12.2 1.22 0.00 — 42.6 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 6.24 0.00 6.24 0.62 0.00 — 21.8
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 5.72 0.00 5.72 0.57 0.00 — 20.0
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.84 0.00 0.84 0.08 0.00 — 2.94
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 25.0 0.00 25.0 2.50 0.00 — 87.3
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 958
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 33 / 49
——————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 73.5 0.00 73.5 7.34 0.00 — 257 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 37.7 0.00 37.7 3.77 0.00 — 132
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 34.6 0.00 34.6 3.46 0.00 — 121
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — 5.07 0.00 5.07 0.51 0.00 — 17.7
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 151 0.00 151 15.1 0.00 — 528 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 73.5 0.00 73.5 7.34 0.00 — 257 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 37.7 0.00 37.7 3.77 0.00 — 132
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 34.6 0.00 34.6 3.46 0.00 — 121
959
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 34 / 49
17.7—0.000.515.070.005.07———————————Recreati
onal
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 151 0.00 151 15.1 0.00 — 528 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 12.2 0.00 12.2 1.22 0.00 — 42.6 Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 6.24 0.00 6.24 0.62 0.00 — 21.8
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 5.72 0.00 5.72 0.57 0.00 — 20.0
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.84 0.00 0.84 0.08 0.00 — 2.94
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 25.0 0.00 25.0 2.50 0.00 — 87.3 960
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 35 / 49
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 266 266
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.41 0.41
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 8.71 8.71
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 275 275
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 266 266
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.41 0.41
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 8.71 8.71
961
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 36 / 49
0.010.01————————————————Recreati
onal
Swimmi
Pool
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 275 275
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 44.0 44.0
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.07 0.07
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.44 1.44
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — <
0.005 < 0.005
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 45.5 45.5
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 266 266
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.41 0.41
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 8.71 8.71
962
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 37 / 49
Recreati
Swimming
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 275 275
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 266 266
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.41 0.41
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 8.71 8.71
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 275 275
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 44.0 44.0
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.07 0.07
Fast
Food
Restaur
ant
w/o Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.44 1.44
Recreati
onal
Swimmi
ng
Pool
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — <
0.005 < 0.005
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 45.5 45.5
963
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 38 / 49
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) Equipm
ent
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
964
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 39 / 49
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 965
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 40 / 49
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.9.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
966
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 41 / 49
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Fast Food
Restaurant
w/o
Drive Thru
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Recreational
8,149 8,149 8,149 2,974,385 79,208 79,208 79,208 28,911,022
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 Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
967
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 42 / 49
0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Fast Food
Restaurant w/o
Driv
e Thru
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Recreational
8,149 8,149 8,149 2,974,385 79,208 79,208 79,208 28,911,022
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.1.2. Mitigated
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)
0 0.00 363,216 121,072 10,160
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
968
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 43 / 49
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
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) Hotel 2,712,768 532 0.0330 0.0040 5,077,984
Strip Mall 195,150 532 0.0330 0.0040 118,264
Fast Food Restaurant w/o
Driv
e Thru
195,356 532 0.0330 0.0040 636,603
Recreational Swimming Pool 0.00 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 46,270 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Strip Mall 452,494 532 0.0330 0.0040 274,217
Parking Lot 76,317 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
User Defined Recreational 0.00 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
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) Hotel 2,712,768 532 0.0330 0.0040 5,077,984
Strip Mall 195,150 532 0.0330 0.0040 118,264
Fast Food Restaurant w/o
Driv
e Thru
195,356 532 0.0330 0.0040 636,603
969
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 44 / 49
Recreational Swimming Pool 0.00 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 46,270 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Strip Mall 452,494 532 0.0330 0.0040 274,217
Parking Lot 76,317 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
User Defined Recreational 0.00 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Hotel 6,316,326 3,109,860
Strip Mall 1,485,895 0.00
Fast Food Restaurant w/o Drive Thru 1,690,683 0.00
Recreational Swimming Pool 97,586 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 3,445,113 1,572,063
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
User Defined Recreational 0.00 0.00
5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Hotel 6,316,326 3,109,860
Strip Mall 1,485,895 0.00
Fast Food Restaurant w/o Drive Thru 1,690,683 0.00
Recreational Swimming Pool 97,586 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
970
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 45 / 49
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 3,445,113 1,572,063
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
User Defined Recreational 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Hotel 136 —
Strip Mall 21.1 —
Fast Food Restaurant w/o Drive Thru 64.2 —
Recreational Swimming Pool 9.40 —
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Strip Mall 48.8 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
User Defined Recreational 0.00 —
5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Hotel 136 —
Strip Mall 21.1 —
Fast Food Restaurant w/o Drive Thru 64.2 —
Recreational Swimming Pool 9.40 —
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Strip Mall 48.8 —
971
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 46 / 49
Parking Lot 0.00 —
User Defined Recreational 0.00 —
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 Hotel Household
refriger
ators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.00 0.60 0.00 1.00
Hotel Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 1.80 4.00 4.00 18.0
Hotel Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Fast Food Restaurant
w/o Dr
ive Thru
Household
refriger
ators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.00 0.60 0.00 1.00
Fast Food Restaurant
w/o Dr
ive Thru
Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 1.80 4.00 4.00 18.0
Fast Food Restaurant
w/o Dr
ive Thru
Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
972
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 47 / 49
18.04.004.00< 0.0052,088R-410AStrip Mall Other commercial A/C and heat pumps
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Hotel Household
refriger
ators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.00 0.60 0.00 1.00
Hotel Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 1.80 4.00 4.00 18.0
Hotel Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Fast Food Restaurant
w/o Dr
ive Thru
Household
refriger
ators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.00 0.60 0.00 1.00
Fast Food Restaurant
w/o Dr
ive Thru
Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 1.80 4.00 4.00 18.0
Fast Food Restaurant
w/o Dr
ive Thru
Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
973
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 48 / 49
1.000.001.000.041,430R-134aRecreational
Swimming P
ool
Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.15.2. Mitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Y ear Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
974
Ontario Regional Sports Complex Addendum (PA 2- 4) Custom Report, 10/2/2025 49 / 49
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use See Project Description
Operations: Vehicle Data Based on average daily vehicle trips for approved uses and average travel distance from ORSC EIR. Proposed
project trips reflect typical weekday ADT with a stadium event - the maximum ADT across all three traffic scenarios: typical weekday with stadium event, Saturday with one tournament and no stadium event, and Saturday with stadium event and no tournament.
Operations: Architectural Coatings South Coast AQMD Rule 1113 Operations: Landscape Equipment Compliance with Mitigation Measure AQ-2 for all electric landscaping equipment Operations: Water and Waste Water Assume 100% aerobc treatment; ORSC EIR water consumption rates.
Operations: Fleet Mix Based on average fleet mix from ORSC EIR. 975
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 1 / 50
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed 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
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.1.2. Mitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
976
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 2 / 50
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
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.7.2. Mitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
977
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 3 / 50
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.8.2. Mitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.9.2. Mitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated
4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated
4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.9.2. Mitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
978
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 4 / 50
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
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
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
979
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 5 / 50
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.15.2. Mitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2.2. Mitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
980
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 6 / 50
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
981
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 7 / 50
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario
Operational Y ear 2027
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.60
Precipitation (days) 9.20
Location 34.016438324398166, -117.6079135785921
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Ontario
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5260
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.30
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
Strip Mall 45.0 1000sqft 5.06 45,000 0.00 0.00 — PA 2 Retail / Commercial, East
982
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 8 / 50
—0.0046,1740.0014.6Space1,500Parking Lot PA 2 Surface
Parking, East
Strip Mall 21.0 1000sqft 2.17 21,000 73,525 0.00 — PA 3 Stadium Retail / Commercial
Hotel 100 Room 2.41 70,000 34,980 0.00 — PA 3 Hotel
Strip Mall 114 1000sqft 6.54 114,000 170,882 0.00 — PA 4 Stadium Retail / Commercial
Parking Lot 250 Space 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — PA 4 Surface Par
king, South
User Defined
Recreational
1.00 User Defined Unit 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — Total Project Vehicle
Trips
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Area Sources LL-1 Replace Gas Powered Landscape Equipment with Zero-Emission Landscape
Equipment
2. Emissions Summary
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. 39.0 36.7 14.3 266 0.53 0.34 54.7 55.1 0.32 13.8 14.1 158 58,243 58,401 18.5 1.63 276 59,624 Mit. 37.1 34.9 14.2 255 0.53 0.32 54.7 55.0 0.30 13.8 14.1 158 58,207 58,364 18.5 1.63 276 59,587 %
Reduced
5% 5% 1% 4% — 6% — < 0.5% 5% — < 0.5% — < 0.5% < 0.5% < 0.5% — — < 0.5% Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
983
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 9 / 50
Unmit. 35.5 33.3 15.5 215 0.48 0.32 54.7 55.0 0.30 13.8 14.1 158 53,963 54,120 18.6 1.72 115 55,212 Mit. 35.5 33.3 15.5 215 0.48 0.32 54.7 55.0 0.30 13.8 14.1 158 53,963 54,120 18.6 1.72 115 55,212 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 36.6 34.2 15.9 230 0.49 0.33 54.4 54.7 0.31 13.7 14.1 158 54,654 54,811 18.6 1.74 182 55,977 Mit. 35.3 33.0 15.9 222 0.49 0.32 54.4 54.7 0.30 13.7 14.0 158 54,629 54,787 18.6 1.74 182 55,953 %
Reduced
4% 4% < 0.5% 3% — 4% — < 0.5% 3% — < 0.5% — < 0.5% < 0.5% — — — < 0.5% Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 6.68 6.25 2.91 42.0 0.09 0.06 9.93 9.99 0.06 2.51 2.56 26.1 9,049 9,075 3.08 0.29 30.2 9,268 Mit. 6.44 6.03 2.90 40.6 0.09 0.06 9.93 9.98 0.05 2.51 2.56 26.1 9,044 9,071 3.08 0.29 30.2 9,264 %
Reduced
4% 4% < 0.5% 3% < 0.5% 4% — < 0.5% 3% — < 0.5% — < 0.5% < 0.5% < 0.5% < 0.5% — < 0.5%
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 30.1 27.9 13.4 254 0.52 0.26 54.7 55.0 0.24 13.8 14.1 — 52,821 52,821 2.20 1.52 166 53,496 Area 8.88 8.73 0.09 10.9 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.01 — 0.01 — 44.7 44.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 44.9 Energy 0.09 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 5,248 5,248 0.41 0.04 — 5,271 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 26.4 128 155 2.72 0.07 — 242 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 131 0.00 131 13.1 0.00 — 460 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 111 111
Total 39.0 36.7 14.3 266 0.53 0.34 54.7 55.1 0.32 13.8 14.1 158 58,243 58,401 18.5 1.63 276 59,624 984
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 10 / 50
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 28.5 26.3 14.7 214 0.48 0.26 54.7 55.0 0.24 13.8 14.1 — 48,586 48,586 2.32 1.61 4.30 49,129 Area 6.94 6.94 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.09 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 5,248 5,248 0.41 0.04 — 5,271 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 26.4 128 155 2.72 0.07 — 242 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 131 0.00 131 13.1 0.00 — 460 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 111 111
Total 35.5 33.3 15.5 215 0.48 0.32 54.7 55.0 0.30 13.8 14.1 158 53,963 54,120 18.6 1.72 115 55,212 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 28.2 26.0 15.0 222 0.49 0.26 54.4 54.6 0.24 13.7 14.0 — 49,246 49,246 2.32 1.64 71.6 49,864 Area 8.27 8.17 0.06 7.45 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 30.6 30.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 30.7 Energy 0.09 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 5,248 5,248 0.41 0.04 — 5,271 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 26.4 128 155 2.72 0.07 — 242 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 131 0.00 131 13.1 0.00 — 460 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 111 111
Total 36.6 34.2 15.9 230 0.49 0.33 54.4 54.7 0.31 13.7 14.1 158 54,654 54,811 18.6 1.74 182 55,977 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.15 4.75 2.74 40.5 0.09 0.05 9.93 9.97 0.04 2.51 2.55 — 8,153 8,153 0.38 0.27 11.8 8,256 Area 1.51 1.49 0.01 1.36 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.07 5.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.09 Energy 0.02 0.01 0.15 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 869 869 0.07 0.01 — 873 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.38 21.3 25.6 0.45 0.01 — 40.1 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 21.7 0.00 21.7 2.17 0.00 — 76.1 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 18.3 18.3
Total 6.68 6.25 2.91 42.0 0.09 0.06 9.93 9.99 0.06 2.51 2.56 26.1 9,049 9,075 3.08 0.29 30.2 9,268
2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
985
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 11 / 50
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 30.1 27.9 13.4 254 0.52 0.26 54.7 55.0 0.24 13.8 14.1 — 52,821 52,821 2.20 1.52 166 53,496 Area 6.94 6.94 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.09 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 5,257 5,257 0.41 0.04 — 5,279 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 26.4 128 155 2.72 0.07 — 242 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 131 0.00 131 13.1 0.00 — 460 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 111 111
Total 37.1 34.9 14.2 255 0.53 0.32 54.7 55.0 0.30 13.8 14.1 158 58,207 58,364 18.5 1.63 276 59,587 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 28.5 26.3 14.7 214 0.48 0.26 54.7 55.0 0.24 13.8 14.1 — 48,586 48,586 2.32 1.61 4.30 49,129 Area 6.94 6.94 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.09 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 5,248 5,248 0.41 0.04 — 5,271 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 26.4 128 155 2.72 0.07 — 242 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 131 0.00 131 13.1 0.00 — 460 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 111 111
Total 35.5 33.3 15.5 215 0.48 0.32 54.7 55.0 0.30 13.8 14.1 158 53,963 54,120 18.6 1.72 115 55,212 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 28.2 26.0 15.0 222 0.49 0.26 54.4 54.6 0.24 13.7 14.0 — 49,246 49,246 2.32 1.64 71.6 49,864 Area 6.94 6.94 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.09 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 5,254 5,254 0.41 0.04 — 5,276 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 26.4 128 155 2.72 0.07 — 242 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 131 0.00 131 13.1 0.00 — 460 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 111 111
986
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 12 / 50
Total 35.3 33.0 15.9 222 0.49 0.32 54.4 54.7 0.30 13.7 14.0 158 54,629 54,787 18.6 1.74 182 55,953 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.15 4.75 2.74 40.5 0.09 0.05 9.93 9.97 0.04 2.51 2.55 — 8,153 8,153 0.38 0.27 11.8 8,256 Area 1.27 1.27 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.02 0.01 0.15 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 870 870 0.07 0.01 — 874 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.38 21.3 25.6 0.45 0.01 — 40.1 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 21.7 0.00 21.7 2.17 0.00 — 76.1 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 18.3 18.3
Total 6.44 6.03 2.90 40.6 0.09 0.06 9.93 9.98 0.05 2.51 2.56 26.1 9,044 9,071 3.08 0.29 30.2 9,264
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
30.1 27.9 13.4 254 0.52 0.26 54.7 55.0 0.24 13.8 14.1 — 52,821 52,821 2.20 1.52 166 53,496 Total 30.1 27.9 13.4 254 0.52 0.26 54.7 55.0 0.24 13.8 14.1 — 52,821 52,821 2.20 1.52 166 53,496 987
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 13 / 50
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Strip
Mall
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
28.5 26.3 14.7 214 0.48 0.26 54.7 55.0 0.24 13.8 14.1 — 48,586 48,586 2.32 1.61 4.30 49,129 Total 28.5 26.3 14.7 214 0.48 0.26 54.7 55.0 0.24 13.8 14.1 — 48,586 48,586 2.32 1.61 4.30 49,129 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
5.15 4.75 2.74 40.5 0.09 0.05 9.93 9.97 0.04 2.51 2.55 — 8,153 8,153 0.38 0.27 11.8 8,256 Total 5.15 4.75 2.74 40.5 0.09 0.05 9.93 9.97 0.04 2.51 2.55 — 8,153 8,153 0.38 0.27 11.8 8,256
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 988
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 14 / 50
Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
30.1 27.9 13.4 254 0.52 0.26 54.7 55.0 0.24 13.8 14.1 — 52,821 52,821 2.20 1.52 166 53,496 Total 30.1 27.9 13.4 254 0.52 0.26 54.7 55.0 0.24 13.8 14.1 — 52,821 52,821 2.20 1.52 166 53,496 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
28.5 26.3 14.7 214 0.48 0.26 54.7 55.0 0.24 13.8 14.1 — 48,586 48,586 2.32 1.61 4.30 49,129 Total 28.5 26.3 14.7 214 0.48 0.26 54.7 55.0 0.24 13.8 14.1 — 48,586 48,586 2.32 1.61 4.30 49,129 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 User
Defined
Recreational
5.15 4.75 2.74 40.5 0.09 0.05 9.93 9.97 0.04 2.51 2.55 — 8,153 8,153 0.38 0.27 11.8 8,256 Total 5.15 4.75 2.74 40.5 0.09 0.05 9.93 9.97 0.04 2.51 2.55 — 8,153 8,153 0.38 0.27 11.8 8,256
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) 989
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 15 / 50
CO2eRN2OCH4CO2TNBCO2BCO2PM2.5TPM2.5DPM2.5EPM10TPM10DPM10ESO2CONOxROGTOGLand Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,120 2,120 0.16 0.02 — 2,130
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 765 765 0.06 0.01 — 769
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,353 1,353 0.10 0.01 — 1,359 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 4,238 4,238 0.32 0.04 — 4,258 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,120 2,120 0.16 0.02 — 2,130
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 765 765 0.06 0.01 — 769
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,353 1,353 0.10 0.01 — 1,359 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 4,238 4,238 0.32 0.04 — 4,258 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 351 351 0.03 < 0.005 — 353
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 127 127 0.01 < 0.005 — 127
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — 224 224 0.02 < 0.005 — 225 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
990
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 16 / 50
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 702 702 0.05 0.01 — 705
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,127 2,127 0.16 0.02 — 2,136
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 765 765 0.06 0.01 — 769
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,355 1,355 0.10 0.01 — 1,361 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 4,247 4,247 0.32 0.04 — 4,266 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,120 2,120 0.16 0.02 — 2,130
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 765 765 0.06 0.01 — 769
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,353 1,353 0.10 0.01 — 1,359 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 4,238 4,238 0.32 0.04 — 4,258 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 352 352 0.03 < 0.005 — 353
991
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 17 / 50
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 127 127 0.01 < 0.005 — 127
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — 224 224 0.02 < 0.005 — 225 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 703 703 0.05 0.01 — 706
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
0.03 0.02 0.29 0.24 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 340 340 0.03 < 0.005 — 341 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Hotel 0.06 0.03 0.56 0.47 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 670 670 0.06 < 0.005 — 672 User
Defined
Recreational
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.09 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 1,010 1,010 0.09 < 0.005 — 1,013 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
0.03 0.02 0.29 0.24 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 340 340 0.03 < 0.005 — 341 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Hotel 0.06 0.03 0.56 0.47 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 670 670 0.06 < 0.005 — 672 992
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 18 / 50
0.00—0.000.000.000.00—0.00—0.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.00User Defined
Recreational
Total 0.09 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 1,010 1,010 0.09 < 0.005 — 1,013 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 56.3 56.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 56.5 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Hotel 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 111 111 0.01 < 0.005 — 111 User
Defined
Recreational
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.02 0.01 0.15 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 167 167 0.01 < 0.005 — 168
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
0.03 0.02 0.29 0.24 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 340 340 0.03 < 0.005 — 341 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Hotel 0.06 0.03 0.56 0.47 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 670 670 0.06 < 0.005 — 672 User
Defined
Recreational
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.09 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 1,010 1,010 0.09 < 0.005 — 1,013 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
993
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 19 / 50
Strip
Mall
0.03 0.02 0.29 0.24 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 340 340 0.03 < 0.005 — 341 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Hotel 0.06 0.03 0.56 0.47 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 670 670 0.06 < 0.005 — 672 User
Defined
Recreational
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.09 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 1,010 1,010 0.09 < 0.005 — 1,013 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 56.3 56.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 56.5 Parking
Lot
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Hotel 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 111 111 0.01 < 0.005 — 111 User
Defined
Recreational
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.02 0.01 0.15 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 167 167 0.01 < 0.005 — 168
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
5.41 5.41 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
994
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 20 / 50
————————————————1.541.54Architect
ural
Coating
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
1.93 1.79 0.09 10.9 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.01 — 0.01 — 44.7 44.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 44.9 Total 8.88 8.73 0.09 10.9 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.01 — 0.01 — 44.7 44.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 44.9 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
5.41 5.41 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
1.54 1.54 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 6.94 6.94 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
0.99 0.99 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.28 0.28 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
0.24 0.22 0.01 1.36 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.07 5.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.09 Total 1.51 1.49 0.01 1.36 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.07 5.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.09
4.3.2. Mitigated
995
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 21 / 50
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
5.41 5.41 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
1.54 1.54 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 6.94 6.94 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
5.41 5.41 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
1.54 1.54 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 6.94 6.94 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s
0.99 0.99 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
0.28 0.28 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 1.27 1.27 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
996
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 22 / 50
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) 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 17.3 87.1 104 1.78 0.04 — 162
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 9.09 41.3 50.4 0.94 0.02 — 80.5 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 26.4 128 155 2.72 0.07 — 242 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 17.3 87.1 104 1.78 0.04 — 162
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 9.09 41.3 50.4 0.94 0.02 — 80.5 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 26.4 128 155 2.72 0.07 — 242 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 2.87 14.4 17.3 0.30 0.01 — 26.8
997
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 23 / 50
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 1.51 6.84 8.34 0.15 < 0.005 — 13.3 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 4.38 21.3 25.6 0.45 0.01 — 40.1
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 17.3 87.1 104 1.78 0.04 — 162
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 9.09 41.3 50.4 0.94 0.02 — 80.5 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 26.4 128 155 2.72 0.07 — 242 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 17.3 87.1 104 1.78 0.04 — 162
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 9.09 41.3 50.4 0.94 0.02 — 80.5 998
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 24 / 50
0.00—0.000.000.000.000.00———————————User
Defined
Recreational
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 26.4 128 155 2.72 0.07 — 242 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 2.87 14.4 17.3 0.30 0.01 — 26.8
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 1.51 6.84 8.34 0.15 < 0.005 — 13.3 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 4.38 21.3 25.6 0.45 0.01 — 40.1
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 102 0.00 102 10.2 0.00 — 356
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 29.5 0.00 29.5 2.95 0.00 — 103 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 131 0.00 131 13.1 0.00 — 460 999
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 25 / 50
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 102 0.00 102 10.2 0.00 — 356
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 29.5 0.00 29.5 2.95 0.00 — 103 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 131 0.00 131 13.1 0.00 — 460 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 16.9 0.00 16.9 1.69 0.00 — 59.0
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 4.89 0.00 4.89 0.49 0.00 — 17.1 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 21.7 0.00 21.7 2.17 0.00 — 76.1
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 102 0.00 102 10.2 0.00 — 356
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
1000
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 26 / 50
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 29.5 0.00 29.5 2.95 0.00 — 103 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 131 0.00 131 13.1 0.00 — 460 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 102 0.00 102 10.2 0.00 — 356
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 29.5 0.00 29.5 2.95 0.00 — 103 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 131 0.00 131 13.1 0.00 — 460 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 16.9 0.00 16.9 1.69 0.00 — 59.0
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — 4.89 0.00 4.89 0.49 0.00 — 17.1 User
Defined
Recreational
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 21.7 0.00 21.7 2.17 0.00 — 76.1
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 1001
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 27 / 50
CO2eRN2OCH4CO2TNBCO2BCO2PM2.5TPM2.5DPM2.5EPM10TPM10DPM10ESO2CONOxROGTOGLand Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.12 1.12
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 109 109
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 111 111
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.12 1.12
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 109 109
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 111 111
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.19 0.19
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 18.1 18.1
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 18.3 18.3
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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.12 1.12
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 109 109
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 111 1111002
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 28 / 50
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.12 1.12
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 109 109
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 111 111
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.19 0.19
Hotel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 18.1 18.1
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 18.3 18.3
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) Equipm
ent
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.7.2. Mitigated
1003
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 29 / 50
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
1004
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 30 / 50
4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
1005
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 31 / 50
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.9.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetati
on
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 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
1006
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 32 / 50
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
1007
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 33 / 50
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 1008
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 34 / 50
——————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
1009
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 35 / 50
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
1010
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 36 / 50
5. Activity Data
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear Strip Mall 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Recreational
8,060 8,060 8,060 2,941,900 78,343 78,343 78,343 28,595,268
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 Strip Mall 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hotel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
User Defined
Recreational
8,060 8,060 8,060 2,941,900 78,343 78,343 78,343 28,595,268
5.10. Operational Area Sources
1011
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 37 / 50
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.1.2. Mitigated
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)
0 0.00 1,500,386 496,526 211,231
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
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) Strip Mall 437,775 442 0.0330 0.0040 265,297
Parking Lot 555,589 442 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Strip Mall 204,295 442 0.0330 0.0040 123,805 1012
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 38 / 50
Hotel 1,117,022 442 0.0330 0.0040 2,090,935
Strip Mall 1,109,030 442 0.0330 0.0040 672,086
Parking Lot 76,317 442 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
User Defined Recreational 0.00 442 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
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) Strip Mall 437,775 442 0.0330 0.0040 265,297
Parking Lot 555,589 442 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Strip Mall 204,295 442 0.0330 0.0040 123,805
Hotel 1,117,022 442 0.0330 0.0040 2,090,935
Strip Mall 1,109,030 442 0.0330 0.0040 672,086
Parking Lot 76,317 442 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
User Defined Recreational 0.00 442 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Strip Mall 3,324,420 715,345
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 1,425,690 306,778
Hotel 4,745,000 340,708
Strip Mall 4,296,780 924,557
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
User Defined Recreational 0.00 0.00
1013
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 39 / 50
5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Strip Mall 3,324,420 715,345
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Strip Mall 1,425,690 306,778
Hotel 4,745,000 340,708
Strip Mall 4,296,780 924,557
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
User Defined Recreational 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Strip Mall 47.3 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Strip Mall 22.1 —
Hotel 54.8 —
Strip Mall 120 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
User Defined Recreational 0.00 —
5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Strip Mall 47.3 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Strip Mall 22.1 —
1014
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 40 / 50
Hotel 54.8 —
Strip Mall 120 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
User Defined Recreational 0.00 —
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 Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Hotel Household
refriger
ators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.00 0.60 0.00 1.00
Hotel Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 1.80 4.00 4.00 18.0
Hotel Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
1015
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 41 / 50
1.000.001.000.041,430R-134aStrip Mall Stand-alone retail refrigerators and
freezers
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Hotel Household
refriger
ators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.00 0.60 0.00 1.00
Hotel Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 1.80 4.00 4.00 18.0
Hotel Walk-in refrigerators
and freez
ers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
1016
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 42 / 50
20.07.507.50< 0.0053,922R-404AStrip Mall Walk-in refrigerators and freezers
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.15.2. Mitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Y ear Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
1017
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 43 / 50
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
5.18.2.2. Mitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG
emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
1018
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 44 / 50
Temperature and Extreme Heat 20.0 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 3.95 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observ
ed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received
over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider in
undation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate
, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
1019
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 45 / 50
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 80.1
AQ-PM 95.9
AQ-DPM 61.4
Drinking Water 99.7
Lead Risk Housing 10.0
Pesticides 76.9
Toxic Releases 70.5 1020
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 46 / 50
Traffic 12.6
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 19.0
Groundwater 97.8
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 63.9
Impaired Water Bodies 43.8
Solid Waste 95.7
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 42.6
Cardio-vascular 67.7
Low Birth Weights 45.9
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 52.1
Housing 11.2
Linguistic 75.8
Poverty 34.7
Unemployment 49.9
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 80.61080457
Employed 84.28076479
Median HI 74.02797382
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 64.24996792
High school enrollment 100
1021
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 47 / 50
Preschool enrollment 21.59630438
Transportation —
Auto Access 80.12318748
Active commuting 28.08931092
Social —
2-parent households 68.63852175
Voting 58.7963557
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 77.23598101
Park access 50.75067368
Retail density 13.56345438
Supermarket access 57.55164892
Tree canopy 14.56435262
Housing —
Homeownership 67.43231105
Housing habitability 76.73553189
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 83.54933915 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 44.41165148
Uncrowded housing 60.77248813
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 78.89131272
Arthritis 80.8
Asthma ER Admissions 59.0
High Blood Pressure 87.7
Cancer (excluding skin) 71.8
Asthma 55.1
Coronary Heart Disease 88.8
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 74.0
1022
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 48 / 50
Diagnosed Diabetes 73.9
Life Expectancy at Birth 56.4
Cognitively Disabled 91.4
Physically Disabled 90.7
Heart Attack ER Admissions 29.6
Mental Health Not Good 53.9
Chronic Kidney Disease 85.5
Obesity 57.9
Pedestrian Injuries 43.5
Physical Health Not Good 62.9
Stroke 84.7
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 29.5
Current Smoker 54.4
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 61.9
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 11.1
Elderly 89.5
English Speaking 63.5
Foreign-born 35.4
Outdoor Workers 64.2
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 72.5
Traffic Density 14.9
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
1023
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 49 / 50
Hardship 39.2
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 78.3
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 73.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 70.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Project Description
Operations: Vehicle Data Based on average daily vehicle trips for approved uses and average travel distance from ORSC EIR. Appro
ved project trips reflect typical weekday ADT with a stadium event - the maximum ADT across all three traffic scenarios: typical weekday with stadium event, Saturday with one tournament and no stadium event, and Saturday with stadium event and no tournament.
Operations: Architectural Coatings South Coast AQMD Rule 1113 1024
ORSC Operations Average Day Scenario Detailed Report, 10/1/2025 50 / 50
Operations: Energy Use Stadium 19.937 kWh/SF/year estimate Operations: Water and Waste Water ORSC EIR water consumption rates.
Characteristics: Utility Information SCE 2022 Sustainability Report Operations: Fleet Mix Based on average fleet mix from ORSC EIR.
Operations: Landscape Equipment —
1025
1 CalEEMod, Version 2022.1.
Approved Project
Summer
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Mobile 27.90 13.40 254.00 0.52 55.00 14.10
Area 6.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 0.06
Total 34.89 14.25 254.71 0.53 55.06 14.16
Winter
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Mobile 26.30 14.70 214.00 0.48 55.00 14.10
Area 6.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 0.06
Total 33.29 15.55 214.71 0.49 55.06 14.16
Max Daily
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Mobile 27.90 14.70 254.00 0.52 55.00 14.10
Area 6.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.05 0.85 0.71 0.01 0.06 0.06
Total 34.89 15.55 254.71 0.53 55.06 14.16
55 55 550 150 150 55
Proposed Project
Summer
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Mobile 28.20 13.50 257.00 0.53 55.60 14.20
Area 5.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.09 1.64 1.38 0.01 0.12 0.12
Total 33.81 15.14 258.38 0.54 55.72 14.32
Winter
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Mobile 26.60 14.90 216.00 0.48 55.60 14.20
Area 5.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.09 1.64 1.38 0.01 0.12 0.12
Total 32.21 16.54 217.38 0.49 55.72 14.32
Max Daily
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Mobile 28 15 257 1 56 14
Area 6000 0 0
Energy 0210 0 0
Total 34 17 258 1 56 14
55 55 550 150 150 55
No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Regional Operation Emissions Worksheet
Regional Thresholds (lb/day)
Regional Thresholds (lb/day)
Exceeds Approved Project?
1026
1 CalEEMod, Version 2022.1.
Includes incorporation of ORSC Mitigation Measure AQ-2
Approved Project (PAs 2-4 Only)
Maximum Daily (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Total 35 16 255 1 55 14
Proposed Project (PAs 2-4 Only)
Maximum Daily (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Total 34 17 258 1 56 14
-1 140 1 0
Approved ORSC Project (All PAs) - Worst Case Saturday (Table 5.3-18) Maximum Daily (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Total 110 46 738 2 156 40
55 55 550 150 150 55
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Proposed Project (Approved ORSC Project + Net Change) - Worst Case Saturday Maximum Daily (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Total 109 47 742 2 157 40
55 55 550 150 150 55
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Change in Impact? No No No No No No
Approved ORSC Project (All PAs) - Average Weekday (Table 5.3-19) Maximum Daily (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Total 83 34 538 1 115 30
55 55 550 150 150 55
Yes No No No No No
Proposed Project (Approved ORSC Project + Net Change) - Average Weekday Maximum Daily (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Total 82 35 542 1 116 30
76 29 480 1 100 26
55 55 550 150 150 55
Yes No No No No No
Change in Impact? No No No No No No
Exceeds Approved Project?
Regional Operation Comparison with ORSC Emissions
Net Change in Emissions
Regional Thresholds (lb/day)
Exceeds Approved Project?
Regional Thresholds (lb/day)
Exceeds Approved Project?
Regional Thresholds (lb/day)
Exceeds Approved Project?
Regional Thresholds (lb/day)
1027
1 CalEEMod, Version 2022.1.
Includes incorporation of ORSC Mitigation Measure AQ-2.
Approved Project (PAs 2-4 Only)
Maximum Daily (lbs/day)
NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Total 0.85 0.71 0.06 0.06
Proposed Project (PAs 2-4 Only)
Maximum Daily (lbs/day)
NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Total 1.64 1.38 0.12 0.12
1 1 <1 <1
Approved ORSC Project (All PAs) - Localized On-Site Emissions (Table 5.3-16) Maximum Daily (lbs/day)
NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Total 45 7< 1 < 1
270 2,193 4 2
No No No No
Proposed Project (Approved ORSC Project + Net Change) - Localized On-Site Emissions Maximum Daily (lbs/day)
NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total
Total 55 8< 1 < 1
270 2,193 4 2
No No No No
Change in Impact? No No No No
Exceeds Approved Project?
Localized (On-Site Only) Operation Comparison with ORSC Emissions Net Change in Emissions
Regional Thresholds (lb/day)
Exceeds Approved Project?
Regional Thresholds (lb/day)
1028
GHG Emissions Inventory
Approved Project
Operation1
MTCO2e/Year2
Operations %
Mobile 8,256.00 89%
Area 0.00 0%
Energy 874.00 9%
Water 40.10 0%
Solid Waste 76.10 1%
Refrigerants 18.30 0%
9,265 100%
Proposed Project
Operation1
MTCO2e/Year2
Operations %
Mobile 8,347 86%
Area 0 0%
Energy 1,217 13%
Water 36 0%
Solid Waste 87 1%
Refrigerants 46 0%
9,732 100%
Ontario CCAP GHG Efficiency Threshold
(MTCO2e/2,500 square feet of conditioned building space) 8.84 Proposed Project GHG Efficiency Threshold (MTCO 2e) 100.5 Exceeds Ontario CCAP GHG Efficiency Threshold? Yes
1 CalEEMod, Version 2022.1.
2 MTCO2e=metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.
1029
Project Comparison with ORSC GHG Emissions
Approved Project (PAs 2-4 Only)
Approved Operation1 MTCO2e/Year2
Operations
Total 9,265
Proposed Project (PAs 2-4 Only)
Proposed Operation1 MTCO2e/Year2
Operations
9,732
Net Difference in Emissions 468
Approved ORSC Project (All PAs) - Table 5.8-5
Approved Operation1 MTCO2e/Year2
Operations
Total 21,777
Proposed Project (Approved ORSC Project + Net Change)
Proposed Operation1 MTCO2e/Year2
Operations
22,245
Exceeds No Net Increase? Yes
1 CalEEMod, Version 2022.1.
2 MTCO2e=metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.
1030
Attachment B – Approved Project and Proposed Project Trip Generation
1031
ORSC EIR Data Source Quantity Unit Rate %In %Out Rate %In %Out In Out Total In Out Total PA 2
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 22.5 KSF 67.52 1.73 62% 38% 5.19 49% 51% 1519 24 15 39 58 59 117 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 22.5 KSF 97.14 1.43 50% 50% 12.55 55% 45% 2186 16 17 33 155 127 282 Hotel 0
PA 3
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 10.5 KSF 67.52 1.73 62% 38% 5.19 49% 51% 709 11 7 18 27 28 55 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 10.5 KSF 97.14 1.43 50% 50% 12.55 55% 45% 1020 8 8 16 72 59 131 Hotel 70,000 sq ft/100 rooms ITE Code 310-Hotel 100 Keys 7.99 0.46 56% 44% 0.59 51% 49% 799 26 20 46 30 29 59 PA 4
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 7 KSF 67.52 1.73 62% 38% 5.19 49% 51% 473 8 5 13 18 19 37 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 7 KSF 97.14 1.43 50% 50% 12.55 55% 45% 680 5 5 10 48 40 88 Chicken 'n Pickle San Antonio Data 12 Courts 124.4 4.6 93% 7% 11.7 68% 32% 1493 51 4 55 95 45 140 Lodging and Retail Total 8879 149 81 230 503 406 909
Hotel Internalization Reduction (20% of Hotel Trips) -160 -5 -4 -9 -6 -6 -12 Retail Internalization Reduction (10% of Retail Trips) -659 -7 -6 -13 -38 -33 -71 Lodging and Retail Total Subtotal 8060 137 71 208 459 367 826 Revised Data Source Quantity Unit Rate %In %Out Rate %In %Out In Out Total In Out Total PA 2
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 17.53 KSF 67.52 1.73 62% 38% 5.19 49% 51% 1184 19 12 31 45 46 91 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 17.53 KSF 97.14 1.43 50% 50% 12.55 55% 45% 1703 13 13 26 121 99 220 Hotel 249 Rooms ITE Code 310-Hotel 249 Keys 7.99 0.46 56% 44% 0.59 51% 49% 1990 64 50 114 75 72 147 PA 3
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 5 KSF 67.52 1.73 62% 38% 5.19 49% 51% 338 5 4 9 13 13 26 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 5 KSF 97.14 1.43 50% 50% 12.55 55% 45% 486 4 4 8 35 28 63 Hotel 0
PA 4
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 18.26 KSF 67.52 1.73 62% 38% 5.19 49% 51% 1233 20 13 33 46 48 94 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 18.26 KSF 97.14 1.43 50% 50% 12.55 55% 45% 1774 13 14 27 126 103 229 Lodging and Retail Total 8708 138 110 248 461 409 870
Hotel Internalization Reduction (20% of Hotel Trips) -398 -13 -10 -23 -15 -14 -29 Retail Internalization Reduction (10% of Retail Trips) -672 -7 -6 -13 -39 -34 -72 Lodging and Retail Total Subtotal 7638 118 94 212 407 361 769 PROPOSED - APPROVED (TYPICAL WEEKDAY WITH STADIUM EVENT) -422 -19 23 4 -52 -6 -57 AM Peak PM Peak
Trip Generation Rates (11th Edition) Estimated Trip Generation (11th Edition) AM Peak PM PeakDaily TripsDaily Rate
Trip Generation Rates (11th Edition) Estimated Trip Generation (11th Edition) Daily Trips AM Peak PM Peak Daily Trips AM Peak PM Peak Retail 21,000 sq ft
Retail 45,000 sq ft
Retail 114,000 sq ft
Retail 35,055.44 sq ft
Retail 10,000 sq ft
Retail 36,512.54 sq ft
1032
ORSC EIR Data Source Quantity Unit Rate %In %Out In Out Total PA 2
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 22.5 KSF 81.07 6.22 52% 48% 1824 73 67 140 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 22.5 KSF 97.14 32.64 55% 45% 2186 404 330 734 Hotel 0
PA 3
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 10.5 KSF 81.07 6.22 52% 48% 851 34 31 65 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 10.5 KSF 97.14 32.64 55% 45% 1020 188 154 342 Hotel 70,000 sq ft/100 rooms ITE Code 310-Hotel 100 Keys 8.07 0.72 56% 44% 807 40 32 72 PA 4
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 7 KSF 81.07 6.22 52% 48% 567 23 21 44 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 7 KSF 97.14 32.64 55% 45% 680 126 103 229 Chicken 'n Pickle San Antonio Data 12 Courts 238 11.2 59% 41% 2856 79 55 134 Lodging and Retail Total 10791 967 793 1760
Hotel Internalization Reduction (50% of Hotel Trips) -404 -20 -16 -36 Retail Internalization Reduction (33% of Retail Trips) -2352 -280 -233 -513 Lodging and Retail Total Subtotal 8035 667 544 1211
Revised Data Source Quantity Unit Rate %In %Out In Out Total PA 2
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 17.53 KSF 81.07 6.22 52% 48% 1421 57 52 109 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 17.53 KSF 97.14 32.64 55% 45% 1703 315 257 572 Hotel 249 Rooms ITE Code 310-Hotel 249 Keys 8.07 0.72 56% 44% 2009 100 79 179 PA 3
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 5 KSF 81.07 6.22 52% 48% 405 16 15 31 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 5 KSF 97.14 32.64 55% 45% 486 90 73 163 Hotel 0
PA 4
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 18.26 KSF 81.07 6.22 52% 48% 1480 59 55 114 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 18.26 KSF 97.14 32.64 55% 45% 1774 328 268 596 Lodging and Retail Total 9278 965 799 1764
Hotel Internalization Reduction (50% of Hotel Trips) -402 -20 -16 -36 Retail Internalization Reduction (33% of Retail Trips) -727 -87 -72 -159 Lodging and Retail Total Subtotal 8149 858 711 1569
PROPOSED - APPROVED (SATURDAY WITH ONE TOURNAMENT - NO BASEBALL STADIUM USE) 114 191 167 358 Trip Generation Rates (11th Edition) Estimated Trip Generation (11th Edition) Daily Rate Midday Peak Hour Daily
Trips
Midday Peak Hour
Retail 45,000 sq ft
Retail 21,000 sq ft
Retail 114,000 sq ft
Trip Generation Rates (11th Edition) Estimated Trip Generation (11th Edition) Daily Trips Midday Peak Hour Daily
Trips
Midday Peak Hour
Retail 35,055.44 sq ft
Retail 10,000 sq ft
Retail 36,512.54 sq ft
1033
ORSC EIR Data Source Quantity Unit Rate %In %Out In Out Total PA 2
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 22.5 KSF 81.07 6.22 52% 48% 1824 73 67 140 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 22.5 KSF 97.14 32.64 55% 45% 2186 404 330 734 Hotel 0
PA 3
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 10.5 KSF 81.07 6.22 52% 48% 851 34 31 65 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 10.5 KSF 97.14 32.64 55% 45% 1020 188 154 342 Hotel 70,000 sq ft/100 rooms ITE Code 310-Hotel 100 Keys 8.07 0.72 56% 44% 807 40 32 72 PA 4
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 7 KSF 81.07 6.22 52% 48% 567 23 21 44 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 7 KSF 97.14 32.64 55% 45% 680 126 103 229 Chicken 'n Pickle San Antonio Data 12 Courts 238 17.8 58% 42% 2856 124 90 214 Lodging and Retail Total 10791 1012 828 1840
Hotel Internalization Reduction (50% of Hotel Trips) -404 -20 -16 -36 Retail Internalization Reduction (33% of Retail Trips) -2352 -280 -233 -513 Lodging and Retail Total Subtotal 8035 712 579 1291
Revised Data Source Quantity Unit Rate %In %Out In Out Total PA 2
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 17.53 KSF 81.07 6.22 52% 48% 1421 57 52 109 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 17.53 KSF 97.14 32.64 55% 45% 1703 315 257 572 Hotel 249 Rooms ITE Code 310-Hotel 249 Keys 8.07 0.72 56% 44% 2009 100 79 179 PA 3
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 5 KSF 81.07 6.22 52% 48% 405 16 15 31 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 5 KSF 97.14 32.64 55% 45% 486 90 73 163 Hotel 0
PA 4
ITE Code 821-Shopping Plaza 18.26 KSF 81.07 6.22 52% 48% 1480 59 55 114 ITE Code 930-Fast Casual Restaurant 18.26 KSF 97.14 32.64 55% 45% 1774 328 268 596 Lodging and Retail Total 9278 965 799 1764
Hotel Internalization Reduction (50% of Hotel Trips) -402 -20 -16 -36 Retail Internalization Reduction (33% of Retail Trips) -727 -87 -72 -159 Lodging and Retail Total Subtotal 8149 858 711 1569
PROPOSED - APPROVED (SATURDAY WITH STADIUM EVENT - NO FIELD TOURNAMENTS) 114 146 132 278 Trip Generation Rates (11th Edition) Estimated Trip Generation (11th Edition) Daily Rate Peak Hour of Arrival (5-6PM) Daily
Trips
Peak Hour of Arrival (5-6PM)
Retail 45,000 sq ft
Retail 21,000 sq ft
Retail 114,000 sq ft
Trip Generation Rates (11th Edition) Estimated Trip Generation (11th Edition) Daily Trips Peak Hour of Arrival (5-6PM) Daily
Trips
Peak Hour of Arrival (5-6PM)
Retail 35,055.44 sq ft
Retail 10,000 sq ft
Retail 36,512.54 sq ft
1034
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
1035
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. 1036
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:
1037
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%
1038
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
1039
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
1040
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.
1041
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:
1042
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
1043
T
T
MAIN ELEC
BOILER
PATIO
POOL
RESTROOMS
EQUIP
EVENT AREA
SPA
CAFE-RETAIL
LEGENDS ATTIC
CONFERENCE
IRRIGATION BACKFLOW
YOGURT - LAND
IRRIGATION
CONTROLLER
KID POOL
OUTDOOR
EXERCISE
ALOFT + RESIDENCE INN
5 STORY HOTEL
(PARCEL 1)
SD
SD
776
777
778
780
A STREET
RIVERSIDE DR
C STREET
℄
℄
℄
℄
776.8
CHAMPION AVE
777.71 FFE
777.71 FFE
777.71 FFE
777.71FFE
777.71FFE
SD
SD
E:\PROJECTS\24-013 Marriott Hotel (near Stadium) Ontario CA\PG
REVISIONS
DATEMARK BY DESCRIPTION
DESIGNED BY:
DATE: 06/10/2025
DA
DRAWN BY:
DATE: 06/10/2025
PS
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
SHEET
CONTRACT
ACCOUNT
DWG. NO.
OF 07
RECOMMENDED BY:
APPROVED BY: KHOI DO P.E., CITY ENGINEER
BRYAN LIRLEY P.E., ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER DATE
DATE
C I T Y O F O N T A R I O ALOFT-RESIDENCE INN HOTEL
WQMP BMP SITE PLAN
DMA - DA1 IMPERVIOUS AREA
(SF.)
PERVIOUS AREA
(SF.)
TOTAL AREA
(SF.)
EXISTING CONDITON 13,460 175,460 188,920
PROPOSED CONDITION 168,447 20,473 188,920
1044
HYDROLOGY &
HYDRAULIC STUDY
For:
Residence Inn, Ontario
P.O. BOX 660
Watsonville CA 95076
Prepared By:
Hariya INC
26121 Wallack place,
Loma Linda, CA 92354
909-499-8270
Oct 07, 2025
Project No. 24-013
1045
HYDROLOGY STUDY SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario Avenue, Ontario CA 91761
Hydrology Report
Prepared for Commercial Development
Table of Content
Section I Introduction
Section II Hydrology Methodology
Section III Project Description
Pre-developed condition
Post-developed condition
Section IV Post-development Runoff Mitigation, Retention & Conclusion
Appendix A Vicinity Map
Appendix B Hydrological Rainfall Data Reference NOAA Precipitation Data
Hydrologic Soil group map
Appendix C Hydrology Study – Rational Method for Pre & Post-developed 10-year & 100-year storm event using CivilD software
Appendix D Hydrology Study – Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method for Pre & Post- developed 10-year & 100-year Storm event using CivilD software.
Appendix E Hydraflow Hydrographs Report
Appendix F Pre-developed Hydrology Map – Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method Post-developed Hydrology Map –Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method Post-developed Hydrology Map – Rational Method
1046
HYDROLOGY STUDY SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario Avenue, Ontario CA 91761
Hydrology Report
Prepared for Commercial Development
Section I Introduction
The following hydrology and hydraulic study has been prepared for the development of the commercial property situated south east of Riverside drive & Ontario Avenue in the City of Ontario in San Bernardino County, California. The subject site is approximately
4.337 acres, and the general location of the site is illustrated in “Vicinity map” in “Appendix A” of this report. The purpose of this project is to analyze the excess peak flow rates that will be generated due to the development of this project. The hydraulic & hydrological analysis were performed to determine the difference in peak flow rates and design the retention basin to mitigate peak flow rates and provide adequate storage volume in the post-developed condition.
Section II Methodology
For both, the pre-developed and post-developed conditions, the peak flow rates were determined for 10-year and 100-year storm events using Rational Method per San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual. The Inlets were sized for peak flow rates of 100- year storm event generated using Rational method in conformance with San Bernardino County standards. The drainage areas were studied for Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method to determine hydrograph volume of 10-year & 100-year storm event with 24-hour storm duration. All hydrological calculations were developed using CivilD Design software Version 9.0. The retention volume calculation for underground MC-4500 Stormtech chambers was analyzed using Hydraflow Hydrograph software.
Section III Project Description
Pre-developed Site Conditions
Currently, the existing site consists of approximately a total of 4.337 acres of mostly barren land with poor vegetation. The runoff from the site sheet flows in the south direction discharging away from the boundary at the south side. Based on the Figure C-15 in the San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual, the project site is classified as hydrologic soil type B. Refer to the “Pre-developed Hydrology Map” in “Appendix F” for an illustration of drainage pattern.
The entire site is divided into two distinct drainage areas in the pre-developed condition.
The peak flow rates for 10-year and 100-year storm events were determined for the drainage area using Synthetic Unit Hydrograph method in the pre-developed condition.
All calculations can be found in Appendix C & D of this report.
1047
HYDROLOGY STUDY SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario Avenue, Ontario CA 91761
Hydrology Report
Prepared for Commercial Development
Table-1, Peak flow rates using Synthetic Unit Hydrograph pre-developed condition:
The excess runoff further flows towards the south side.
Post-developed Site Conditions
The proposed development will consist of construction of a multi-stories hotel building, paved parking area, drive aisles, landscape planters, occupying approximately an area of
4.337 acres. The peak flow rates for 10-year and 100-year storm events were determined for each sub-basin using the Rational Method in the post-developed condition. The runoff from the site will sheet flow over the parking areas into the ribbon gutter and curb and gutter system. The runoff will then be intercepted by Flogard catch basins and conveyed further by storm drain system into the underground MC-4500 stormtech infiltration system located at the south-east side of the site. Using an 18” storm drain outlet structure, the excess runoff will be discharged into the curb inlet located offsite at the south-east corner of the site along A-street.
The following table summarizes the peak flow rates for 100-year storm events using rational method in the post-developed condition:
Table-2, Peak flow rates using rational method post-developed condition:
Drainage
Area
Sub-Basins
Area
(acres)
Flow
Length
(ft)
Soil
Type
Time of
Concentration
Tc (min)
Q100
(cfs)
SB1 0.276 62 B 3.62 1.81
SB2 0.196 109 B 3.95 1.22
SB3 0.826 188 B 5.39 4.26
SB4 0.686 151 B 4.61 3.89
SB5 0.633 150 B 5.00 3.42
SB6 0.632 149 B 5.22 3.32
SB7 0.672 146 B 5.86 3.30
Note: The 100-yr peak flow rates in Table-2 are used to size the inlets. Refer to “Post- developed Hydrology Map – Rational Method” in Appendix F.
Drainage
Area
Area
(acres)
Flow
Length
(ft)
Soil
Type
Q10
(cfs)
Q100
(cfs)
DA1.1 2.430 425 B 3.63 6.22
DA1.2 1.907 498 B 2.69 4.64
1048
HYDROLOGY STUDY SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario Avenue, Ontario CA 91761
Hydrology Report
Prepared for Commercial Development
Section IV Post-development Runoff Mitigation, Retention & Conclusion
Post-developed Peak Flow Rates Mitigation and Retention Volume The synthetic unit hydrograph method is used to determine the hydrograph volume for 10-year & 100-year storm events with 24-hour storm duration. The entire site is considered as a single drainage area for Synthetic Unit Hydrograph analysis. Refer to “Post-developed Hydrology Map – Synthetic Unit Hydrograph method” in “Appendix F” for an illustration of runoff generated from the site. The following table summarizes the peak flow rates for 10-year and 100-year storm events using Synthetic Unit Hydrograph method in the post-developed condition:
Table-3, Peak flow rates using Synthetic Unit Hydrograph method post-developed condition:
Drainage Area Area
(acres)
Post-developed discharge
without mitigation
Q10
(cfs)
Q100
(cfs)
DA 1 4.337 12.57 19.20
Total 4.337 12.57 19.20
A hydrograph analysis was performed to determine the required retention volume using MC-4500 stormtech system. Refer to the “Hydraflow Hydrographs Report in Appendix E” which illustrates that a detention volume of 48,467 CF is provided to reduce the peak flow rates of 10-year & 100-year storm events to less than the corresponding pre-developed condition flow rates. The minimum Design Capture volume required for water quality treatment is 19,076 CF, the storage volume provided using MC-4500 stormtech system is 48,566 CF.
Summary
The difference in peak flow rates of pre-developed and post-developed conditions for 10- yr and 100-yr storm events are primarily due to increase in impervious area which is approximately 89% in the post-developed condition. Below is the hydrology summary table of entire site for pre-developed and post-developed condition after retention:
Table-4, Peak flow rates comparison pre-developed & post-developed condition after retention using Synthetic Unit Hydrograph method:
Drainage
Area
Area
(acres)
Pre-
developed
discharge Drainage
Area
Area
(acres)
Post-
developed
mitigated
discharge
Design
Capture
volume
required
WQMP
(cu-ft)
Provided
using MC-
4500
stormtech
system
Cu-ft)
Q10
(cfs)
Q100
(cfs)
Q10
(cfs)
Q100
(cfs)
DA1.1 2.430 3.63 6.22
DA1 4.337 0.06 8.79 19,076 48,566
DA1.2 1.907 2.69 4.64
Total 4.337 6.32 10.86 4.337 0.06 8.79 19,076 48,566 1049
HYDROLOGY STUDY SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario Avenue, Ontario CA 91761
Hydrology Report
Prepared for Commercial Development
We conclude that adequate storage volume has been provided in the post-developed condition. This indicates that there will be no adverse impact on the downstream end due to the development of this site. The underground MC-4500 stormtech system will attenuate the post-developed flow rate to less than 81% of their corresponding pre- developed flow rate.
1050
HYDROLOGY STUDY SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario Avenue, O ntario CA 91761
Hydrology Report
Prepared for Commercial Development
APPENDIX A
VICINITY MAP
North Arrow
SITE
1051
HYDROLOGY STUDY SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario Avenue, Ontario CA 91761
Hydrology Report
Prepared for Commercial Development
APPENDIX B
Hydrological Rainfall Data Reference
NOAA Precipitation Data
Hydrologic Soil group map
1052
www.nws.noaa.gov
Home Site Map Organization Search NWS All NOAA Go
General Information
Homepage
Progress Reports
FAQ
Glossary
Precipitation
Frequency
Data Server
GIS Grids
Maps
Time Series
Temporals
Documents
Probable Maximum
Precipitation
Documents
Miscellaneous
Publications
Storm Analysis
Record Precipitation
Contact Us
Inquiries
Data description
Data type: Precipitation depth Units: English Time series type: Partial duration Select location
1) Manually:
a) By location (decimal degrees, use "-" for S and W): Latitude: Longitude: Submit b) By station (list of CA stations): Select station
c) By address
2) Use map:
a) Select location
Move crosshair or double click
b) Click on station icon
Show stations on map
Location information:
Name: Ontario, California, USA*
Latitude: 34.0182°
Longitude: -117.6012°
Elevation: 778 ft **
NOAA ATLAS 14 POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES: CA
34.018216, -117.601174
Map
1053
* Source: ESRI Maps
** Source: USGS
PF tabular PF graphical Supplementary information
PDS-based 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 0.113
(0.094‑0.137)
0.149
(0.124‑0.181)
0.195
(0.162‑0.237)
0.231
(0.191‑0.283)
0.279
(0.222‑0.354)
0.314
(0.245‑0.408)
0.349
(0.265‑0.465)
0.385
(0.284‑0.527)
0.431
(0.305‑0.617)
0.467
(0.318‑0.692)
10-min 0.162
(0.135‑0.196)
0.214
(0.178‑0.259)
0.280
(0.232‑0.340)
0.331
(0.273‑0.406)
0.400
(0.318‑0.507)
0.451
(0.351‑0.584)
0.501
(0.380‑0.667)
0.552
(0.407‑0.756)
0.618
(0.437‑0.885)
0.669
(0.456‑0.992)
15-min 0.196
(0.164‑0.237)
0.259
(0.216‑0.314)
0.338
(0.281‑0.411)
0.401
(0.330‑0.491)
0.483
(0.385‑0.613)
0.545
(0.424‑0.707)
0.606
(0.460‑0.806)
0.667
(0.492‑0.914)
0.748
(0.528‑1.07)
0.809
(0.551‑1.20)
30-min 0.297
(0.248‑0.359)
0.392
(0.326‑0.475)
0.512
(0.425‑0.622)
0.607
(0.500‑0.744)
0.732
(0.582‑0.928)
0.825
(0.642‑1.07)
0.917
(0.696‑1.22)
1.01 (0.744‑1.38)
1.13 (0.799‑1.62)
1.22 (0.834‑1.82)
60-min 0.439
(0.366‑0.531)
0.580
(0.483‑0.702)
0.757
(0.630‑0.920)
0.898
(0.740‑1.10)
1.08 (0.862‑1.37)
1.22 (0.950‑1.58)
1.36 (1.03‑1.81)
1.49 (1.10‑2.05)
1.68 (1.18‑2.40)
1.81 (1.23‑2.69)
2-hr 0.652
(0.544‑0.789)
0.858
(0.715‑1.04)
1.12 (0.927‑1.35)
1.32 (1.08‑1.61)
1.58 (1.25‑2.00)
1.77 (1.38‑2.29)
1.95 (1.48‑2.60)
2.14 (1.58‑2.93)
2.38 (1.68‑3.41)
2.56 (1.74‑3.80)
3-hr 0.814
(0.680‑0.985)
1.07 (0.891‑1.30)
1.39 (1.15‑1.68)
1.63 (1.34‑2.00)
1.95 (1.55‑2.48)
2.18 (1.70‑2.83)
2.41 (1.83‑3.21)
2.64 (1.94‑3.61)
2.93 (2.07‑4.19)
3.14 (2.14‑4.66)
6-hr 1.14
(0.954‑1.38)
1.50 (1.25‑1.82)
1.94 (1.61‑2.36)
2.28 (1.88‑2.80)
2.72 (2.17‑3.46)
3.04 (2.37‑3.95)
3.36 (2.55‑4.47)
3.67 (2.70‑5.02)
4.06 (2.87‑5.81)
4.36 (2.97‑6.46)
12-hr 1.48
(1.24‑1.80)
1.95 (1.62‑2.36)
2.53 (2.10‑3.07)
2.98 (2.46‑3.65)
3.56 (2.83‑4.52)
3.99 (3.10‑5.17)
4.40 (3.34‑5.86)
4.81 (3.55‑6.59)
5.34 (3.77‑7.64)
5.73 (3.90‑8.50)
24-hr 1.96
(1.73‑2.26)
2.59 (2.29‑2.99)
3.38 (2.98‑3.92)
4.01 (3.50‑4.68)
4.82 (4.08‑5.81)
5.42 (4.50‑6.67)
6.02 (4.87‑7.58)
6.61 (5.20‑8.55)
7.38 (5.58‑9.95)
7.95 (5.82‑11.1)
2-day 2.34
(2.07‑2.70)
3.15 (2.78‑3.64)
4.19 (3.69‑4.85)
5.02 (4.39‑5.86)
6.13 (5.19‑7.39)
6.96 (5.78‑8.57)
7.80 (6.32‑9.82)
8.64 (6.81‑11.2)
9.77 (7.39‑13.2)
10.6 (7.77‑14.8)
3-day 2.50
(2.21‑2.88)
3.42 (3.02‑3.94)
4.60 (4.06‑5.33)
5.56 (4.87‑6.49)
6.86 (5.81‑8.27)
7.85 (6.51‑9.65)
8.84 (7.16‑11.1)
9.86 (7.77‑12.8)
11.2 (8.50‑15.2)
12.3 (9.00‑17.2)
4-day 2.69
(2.38‑3.10)
3.71 (3.28‑4.28)
5.04 (4.44‑5.83)
6.11 (5.35‑7.13)
7.57 (6.41‑9.13)
8.70 (7.21‑10.7)
9.83 (7.96‑12.4)
11.0 (8.67‑14.2)
12.6 (9.52‑17.0)
13.8 (10.1‑19.3)
7-day 3.15
(2.78‑3.63)
4.36 (3.86‑5.04)
5.97 (5.26‑6.91)
7.28 (6.37‑8.49)
9.07 (7.68‑10.9)
10.4 (8.67‑12.9)
11.9 (9.60‑14.9)
13.3 (10.5‑17.2)
15.3 (11.6‑20.6)
16.8 (12.3‑23.5)
10-day 3.41 4.76 6.53 7.99 10.0 11.5 13.1 14.8 17.0 18.8
POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY (PF) ESTIMATES
WITH 90% CONFIDENCE INTERVALS AND SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 6, Version 2
Print page
+
–
2km
1mi
1054
(3.02‑3.94) (4.21‑5.49) (5.76‑7.56) (6.99‑9.33) (8.46‑12.0) (9.58‑14.2) (10.6‑16.6) (11.7‑19.1) (12.9‑23.0) (13.8‑26.2) 20-day 4.10
(3.62‑4.72)
5.78 (5.10‑6.67)
8.03 (7.08‑9.29)
9.90 (8.66‑11.6)
12.5 (10.6‑15.1)
14.6 (12.1‑17.9)
16.7 (13.5‑21.0)
18.9 (14.9‑24.5)
22.0 (16.7‑29.7)
24.5 (17.9‑34.2)
30-day 4.78
(4.24‑5.52)
6.77 (5.98‑7.81)
9.46 (8.34‑10.9)
11.7 (10.3‑13.7)
14.9 (12.6‑18.0)
17.4 (14.5‑21.4)
20.1 (16.3‑25.3)
22.9 (18.0‑29.6)
26.8 (20.3‑36.1)
29.9 (21.9‑41.8)
45-day 5.73
(5.07‑6.61)
8.08 (7.14‑9.32)
11.3 (9.96‑13.1)
14.0 (12.3‑16.4)
17.9 (15.2‑21.6)
21.1 (17.5‑25.9)
24.4 (19.8‑30.7)
27.9 (22.0‑36.2)
33.0 (24.9‑44.4)
37.0 (27.1‑51.7)
60-day 6.68
(5.91‑7.70)
9.34 (8.25‑10.8)
13.0 (11.5‑15.1)
16.2 (14.2‑18.9)
20.7 (17.5‑25.0)
24.4 (20.2‑30.0)
28.3 (22.9‑35.7)
32.5 (25.6‑42.1)
38.6 (29.2‑52.0)
43.5 (31.8‑60.7)
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.
Estimates from the table in CSV format: Precipitation frequency estimates Submit Main Link Categories:
Home | OWP
US Department of Commerce
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Weather Service
Office of Water Prediction (OWP)
1325 East West Highway
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Page Author: HDSC webmaster
Page last modified: April 21, 2017
Map Disclaimer
Disclaimer
Credits
Glossary
Privacy Policy
About Us
Career Opportunities
1055
1056
HYDROLOGY STUDY SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario Avenue, Ontario CA 91761
Hydrology Report
Prepared for Commercial Development
APPENDIX C
Hydrology Study – Rational Method for Pre & Post-developed 10-year & 100-year storm event using CivilD software
1057
DA11ExRat10yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/01/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Pre‐developed DA1.1, 10‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 10.0
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 10.00 1 hour rainfall = 0.898 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 2
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.100 to Point/Station 1.110 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 78.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 1.0000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.404(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 425.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 782.500(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 774.240(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 8.260(Ft.)
Slope = 0.01944 s(%)= 1.94
TC = k(0.525)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 12.996 min.
1 1058
DA11ExRat10yr24013
Rainfall intensity = 2.248(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.738 Subarea runoff = 4.035(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 2.430(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 1.000
Initial area Fm value = 0.404(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 2.43 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 1.000
Area averaged SCS curve number = 78.0
2 1059
DA11ExRat100yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/01/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Pre‐developed DA1.1, 100‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
10 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 0.898(In.)
100 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 1.360(In.)
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 100.00 1 hour rainfall = 1.360 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.100 to Point/Station 1.110 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 78.00
Adjusted SCS curve number for AMC 3 = 92.80
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 1.0000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.140(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 425.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 782.500(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 774.240(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 8.260(Ft.)
1 1060
DA11ExRat100yr24013
Slope = 0.01944 s(%)= 1.94
TC = k(0.525)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 12.996 min.
Rainfall intensity = 3.405(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.863 Subarea runoff = 7.141(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 2.430(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 1.000
Initial area Fm value = 0.140(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 2.43 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 1.000
Area averaged SCS curve number = 78.0
2 1061
DA12ExRat10yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/01/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Pre‐developed DA1.2, 10‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 10.0
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 10.00 1 hour rainfall = 0.898 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 2
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.200 to Point/Station 1.210 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 78.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 1.0000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.404(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 498.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 779.800(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 775.240(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 4.560(Ft.)
Slope = 0.00916 s(%)= 0.92
TC = k(0.525)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 16.095 min.
1 1062
DA12ExRat10yr24013
Rainfall intensity = 1.978(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.716 Subarea runoff = 2.702(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 1.907(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 1.000
Initial area Fm value = 0.404(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 1.91 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 1.000
Area averaged SCS curve number = 78.0
2 1063
DA12ExRat100yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/01/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Pre‐developed DA1.2, 100‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
10 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 0.898(In.)
100 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 1.360(In.)
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 100.00 1 hour rainfall = 1.360 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.200 to Point/Station 1.210 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 78.00
Adjusted SCS curve number for AMC 3 = 92.80
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 1.0000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.140(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 498.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 779.800(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 775.240(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 4.560(Ft.)
1 1064
DA12ExRat100yr24013
Slope = 0.00916 s(%)= 0.92
TC = k(0.525)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 16.095 min.
Rainfall intensity = 2.995(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.858 Subarea runoff = 4.900(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 1.907(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 1.000
Initial area Fm value = 0.140(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 1.91 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 1.000
Area averaged SCS curve number = 78.0
2 1065
DA1PrRat10yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/06/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Post‐developed DA1, 10‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 10.0
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 10.00 1 hour rainfall = 0.898 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 2
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.000 to Point/Station 1.100 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ COMMERCIAL subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.1000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.073(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 188.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 779.130(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 775.340(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 3.790(Ft.)
Slope = 0.02016 s(%)= 2.02
TC = k(0.304)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 5.391 min.
1 1066
DA1PrRat10yr24013
Rainfall intensity = 3.812(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.883 Subarea runoff = 14.594(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 4.337(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.100
Initial area Fm value = 0.073(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 4.34 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.100
Area averaged SCS curve number = 56.0
2 1067
DA1PrRat100yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/06/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Post‐developed DA1, 100‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
10 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 0.898(In.)
100 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 1.360(In.)
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 100.00 1 hour rainfall = 1.360 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.000 to Point/Station 1.100 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ COMMERCIAL subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Adjusted SCS curve number for AMC 3 = 75.80
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.1000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.044(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 188.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 779.130(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 775.340(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 3.790(Ft.)
1 1068
DA1PrRat100yr24013
Slope = 0.02016 s(%)= 2.02
TC = k(0.304)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 5.391 min.
Rainfall intensity = 5.774(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.893 Subarea runoff = 22.364(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 4.337(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.100
Initial area Fm value = 0.044(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 4.34 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.100
Area averaged SCS curve number = 56.0
2 1069
SB1Rat100yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/06/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Post‐developed SB1, 100‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
10 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 0.898(In.)
100 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 1.360(In.)
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 100.00 1 hour rainfall = 1.360 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 100.000 to Point/Station 101.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ COMMERCIAL subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Adjusted SCS curve number for AMC 3 = 75.80
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.1000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.044(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 62.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 776.870(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 775.880(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 0.990(Ft.)
1 1070
SB1Rat100yr24013
Slope = 0.01597 s(%)= 1.60
TC = k(0.304)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 3.624 min.
Rainfall intensity = 7.327(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.895 Subarea runoff = 1.809(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.276(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.100
Initial area Fm value = 0.044(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 0.28 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.100
Area averaged SCS curve number = 56.0
2 1071
SB2Rat100yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/07/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Post‐developed SB2, 100‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
10 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 0.898(In.)
100 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 1.360(In.)
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 100.00 1 hour rainfall = 1.360 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 200.000 to Point/Station 201.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ COMMERCIAL subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Adjusted SCS curve number for AMC 3 = 75.80
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.1000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.044(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 109.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 779.130(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 775.630(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 3.500(Ft.)
1 1072
SB2Rat100yr24013
Slope = 0.03211 s(%)= 3.21
TC = k(0.304)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 3.949 min.
Rainfall intensity = 6.959(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.894 Subarea runoff = 1.220(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.196(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.100
Initial area Fm value = 0.044(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 0.20 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.100
Area averaged SCS curve number = 56.0
2 1073
SB3Rat100yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/06/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Post‐developed SB3, 100‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
10 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 0.898(In.)
100 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 1.360(In.)
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 100.00 1 hour rainfall = 1.360 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 300.000 to Point/Station 301.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ COMMERCIAL subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Adjusted SCS curve number for AMC 3 = 75.80
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.1000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.044(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 188.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 779.130(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 775.340(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 3.790(Ft.)
1 1074
SB3Rat100yr24013
Slope = 0.02016 s(%)= 2.02
TC = k(0.304)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 5.391 min.
Rainfall intensity = 5.774(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.893 Subarea runoff = 4.259(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.826(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.100
Initial area Fm value = 0.044(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 0.83 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.100
Area averaged SCS curve number = 56.0
2 1075
SB4Rat100yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/06/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Post‐developed SB4, 100‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
10 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 0.898(In.)
100 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 1.360(In.)
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 100.00 1 hour rainfall = 1.360 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 400.000 to Point/Station 401.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ COMMERCIAL subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Adjusted SCS curve number for AMC 3 = 75.80
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.1000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.044(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 151.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 779.370(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 775.070(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 4.300(Ft.)
1 1076
SB4Rat100yr24013
Slope = 0.02848 s(%)= 2.85
TC = k(0.304)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 4.609 min.
Rainfall intensity = 6.343(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.894 Subarea runoff = 3.889(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.686(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.100
Initial area Fm value = 0.044(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 0.69 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.100
Area averaged SCS curve number = 56.0
2 1077
SB5Rat100yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/06/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Post‐developed SB5, 100‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
10 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 0.898(In.)
100 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 1.360(In.)
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 100.00 1 hour rainfall = 1.360 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 500.000 to Point/Station 501.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ COMMERCIAL subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Adjusted SCS curve number for AMC 3 = 75.80
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.1000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.044(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 150.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 778.100(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 775.300(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 2.800(Ft.)
1 1078
SB5Rat100yr24013
Slope = 0.01867 s(%)= 1.87
TC = k(0.304)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 5.001 min.
Rainfall intensity = 6.039(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.893 Subarea runoff = 3.415(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.633(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.100
Initial area Fm value = 0.044(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 0.63 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.100
Area averaged SCS curve number = 56.0
2 1079
SB6Rat100yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/06/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Post‐developed SB6, 100‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
10 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 0.898(In.)
100 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 1.360(In.)
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 100.00 1 hour rainfall = 1.360 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 600.000 to Point/Station 601.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ COMMERCIAL subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Adjusted SCS curve number for AMC 3 = 75.80
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.1000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.044(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 149.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 778.270(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 776.060(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 2.210(Ft.)
1 1080
SB6Rat100yr24013
Slope = 0.01483 s(%)= 1.48
TC = k(0.304)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 5.223 min.
Rainfall intensity = 5.884(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.893 Subarea runoff = 3.322(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.632(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.100
Initial area Fm value = 0.044(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 0.63 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.100
Area averaged SCS curve number = 56.0
2 1081
SB7Rat100yr24013
San Bernardino County Rational Hydrology Program
(Hydrology Manual Date ‐ August 1986)
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989‐2019 Version 9.1 Rational Hydrology Study Date: 10/06/25
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Post‐developed SB7, 100‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
10 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 0.898(In.)
100 Year storm 1 hour rainfall = 1.360(In.)
Computed rainfall intensity:
Storm year = 100.00 1 hour rainfall = 1.360 (In.) Slope used for rainfall intensity curve b = 0.6000
Soil antecedent moisture condition (AMC) = 3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 700.000 to Point/Station 701.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
______________________________________________________________________ COMMERCIAL subarea type
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 1.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 0.000
SCS curve number for soil(AMC 2) = 56.00
Adjusted SCS curve number for AMC 3 = 75.80
Pervious ratio(Ap) = 0.1000 Max loss rate(Fm)= 0.044(In/Hr) Initial subarea data:
Initial area flow distance = 146.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation = 777.700(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 776.530(Ft.)
Difference in elevation = 1.170(Ft.)
1 1082
SB7Rat100yr24013
Slope = 0.00801 s(%)= 0.80
TC = k(0.304)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2
Initial area time of concentration = 5.859 min.
Rainfall intensity = 5.492(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.893 Subarea runoff = 3.295(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.672(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction = 0.100
Initial area Fm value = 0.044(In/Hr)
End of computations, Total Study Area = 0.67 (Ac.) The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.
Note: These figures do not consider reduced effective area effects caused by confluences in the rational equation.
Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.100
Area averaged SCS curve number = 56.0
2 1083
HYDROLOGY STUDY SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario Avenue, Ontario CA 91761
Hydrology Report
Prepared for Commercial Development
APPENDIX D
Hydrology Study – Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method for Pre & Post-developed 10-year & 100-year storm event using CivilD software
1084
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s
Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 ‐ 2018, Version 9.0 Study date 10/01/25
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ San Bernardino County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method
Manual date ‐ August 1986
Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Pre‐developed DA1.1, 10‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Storm Event Year = 10
Antecedent Moisture Condition = 2
English (in‐lb) Input Units Used
English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used
English Units used in output format
Area averaged rainfall intensity isohyetal data:
Sub‐ Area Duration Isohyetal
(Ac.) (hours) (In)
Rainfall data for year 10
2.43 1 0.90
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rainfall data for year 10
2.43 6 2.28
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rainfall data for year 10
1 1085
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
2.43 24 4.01
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ******** Area‐averaged max loss rate, Fm ********
SCS curve SCS curve Area Area Fp(Fig C6) Ap Fm No.(AMCII) NO.(AMC 2) (Ac.) Fraction (In/Hr) (dec.) (In/Hr)
86.0 86.0 2.43 1.000 0.265 0.918 0.243 Area‐averaged adjusted loss rate Fm (In/Hr) = 0.243
********* Area‐Averaged low loss rate fraction, Yb ********** Area Area SCS CN SCS CN S Pervious (Ac.) Fract (AMC2) (AMC2) Yield Fr
2.23 0.918 86.0 86.0 1.63 0.637
0.20 0.082 98.0 98.0 0.20 0.941 Area‐averaged catchment yield fraction, Y = 0.662
Area‐averaged low loss fraction, Yb = 0.338
User entry of time of concentration = 0.217 (hours)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Watershed area = 2.43(Ac.)
Catchment Lag time = 0.173 hours
Unit interval = 5.000 minutes
Unit interval percentage of lag time = 48.0917
Hydrograph baseflow = 0.00(CFS)
Average maximum watershed loss rate(Fm) = 0.243(In/Hr) Average low loss rate fraction (Yb) = 0.338 (decimal)
VALLEY UNDEVELOPED S‐Graph Selected
Computed peak 5‐minute rainfall = 0.332(In)
Computed peak 30‐minute rainfall = 0.681(In)
Specified peak 1‐hour rainfall = 0.898(In)
Computed peak 3‐hour rainfall = 1.630(In)
Specified peak 6‐hour rainfall = 2.280(In)
Specified peak 24‐hour rainfall = 4.010(In)
Note: user specified rainfall values used.
Rainfall depth area reduction factors:
Using a total area of 2.43(Ac.) (Ref: fig. E‐4)
5‐minute factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 0.332(In) 30‐minute factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 0.680(In) 1‐hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 0.898(In) 3‐hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 1.630(In) 2 1086
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
6‐hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 2.280(In) 24‐hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 4.010(In) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ U n i t H y d r o g r a p h
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Interval 'S' Graph Unit Hydrograph
Number Mean values ((CFS))
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ (K = 29.39 (CFS))
1 5.770 1.696
2 30.294 7.207
3 59.228 8.503
4 72.910 4.021
5 79.903 2.055
6 84.734 1.420
7 88.239 1.030
8 90.941 0.794
9 92.952 0.591
10 94.500 0.455
11 95.879 0.405
12 96.937 0.311
13 97.794 0.252
14 98.467 0.198
15 98.973 0.149
16 99.454 0.141
17 100.000 0.071
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Peak Unit Adjusted mass rainfall Unit rainfall
Number (In) (In)
1 0.3323 0.3323
2 0.4385 0.1062
3 0.5157 0.0772
4 0.5786 0.0629
5 0.6326 0.0540
6 0.6805 0.0479
7 0.7238 0.0433
8 0.7635 0.0397
9 0.8003 0.0368
10 0.8347 0.0344
11 0.8672 0.0324
12 0.8979 0.0307
13 0.9378 0.0399
14 0.9763 0.0385
15 1.0135 0.0372
16 1.0496 0.0361
17 1.0847 0.0351
3 1087
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
18 1.1189 0.0342
19 1.1522 0.0333
20 1.1848 0.0325
21 1.2166 0.0318
22 1.2477 0.0311
23 1.2781 0.0305
24 1.3080 0.0299
25 1.3373 0.0293
26 1.3661 0.0288
27 1.3943 0.0283
28 1.4221 0.0278
29 1.4495 0.0273
30 1.4764 0.0269
31 1.5029 0.0265
32 1.5290 0.0261
33 1.5548 0.0258
34 1.5802 0.0254
35 1.6052 0.0251
36 1.6300 0.0247
37 1.6517 0.0218
38 1.6732 0.0215
39 1.6944 0.0212
40 1.7153 0.0209
41 1.7359 0.0206
42 1.7563 0.0204
43 1.7764 0.0201
44 1.7963 0.0199
45 1.8159 0.0197
46 1.8354 0.0194
47 1.8546 0.0192
48 1.8736 0.0190
49 1.8924 0.0188
50 1.9110 0.0186
51 1.9294 0.0184
52 1.9476 0.0182
53 1.9657 0.0180
54 1.9835 0.0179
55 2.0012 0.0177
56 2.0188 0.0175
57 2.0361 0.0174
58 2.0534 0.0172
59 2.0704 0.0171
60 2.0873 0.0169
61 2.1041 0.0168
62 2.1207 0.0166
63 2.1372 0.0165
64 2.1536 0.0164
65 2.1698 0.0162
4 1088
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
66 2.1859 0.0161
67 2.2019 0.0160
68 2.2178 0.0159
69 2.2335 0.0157
70 2.2491 0.0156
71 2.2646 0.0155
72 2.2800 0.0154
73 2.2928 0.0128
74 2.3056 0.0127
75 2.3182 0.0126
76 2.3307 0.0125
77 2.3432 0.0124
78 2.3555 0.0123
79 2.3678 0.0123
80 2.3800 0.0122
81 2.3920 0.0121
82 2.4040 0.0120
83 2.4159 0.0119
84 2.4277 0.0118
85 2.4394 0.0117
86 2.4511 0.0116
87 2.4627 0.0116
88 2.4742 0.0115
89 2.4856 0.0114
90 2.4969 0.0113
91 2.5082 0.0113
92 2.5194 0.0112
93 2.5305 0.0111
94 2.5415 0.0110
95 2.5525 0.0110
96 2.5634 0.0109
97 2.5742 0.0108
98 2.5850 0.0108
99 2.5957 0.0107
100 2.6064 0.0106
101 2.6170 0.0106
102 2.6275 0.0105
103 2.6380 0.0105
104 2.6484 0.0104
105 2.6587 0.0103
106 2.6690 0.0103
107 2.6792 0.0102
108 2.6894 0.0102
109 2.6995 0.0101
110 2.7095 0.0101
111 2.7196 0.0100
112 2.7295 0.0100
113 2.7394 0.0099
5 1089
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
114 2.7493 0.0098
115 2.7591 0.0098
116 2.7688 0.0097
117 2.7785 0.0097
118 2.7881 0.0096
119 2.7977 0.0096
120 2.8073 0.0096
121 2.8168 0.0095
122 2.8263 0.0095
123 2.8357 0.0094
124 2.8450 0.0094
125 2.8544 0.0093
126 2.8636 0.0093
127 2.8729 0.0092
128 2.8821 0.0092
129 2.8912 0.0091
130 2.9003 0.0091
131 2.9094 0.0091
132 2.9184 0.0090
133 2.9274 0.0090
134 2.9363 0.0089
135 2.9452 0.0089
136 2.9541 0.0089
137 2.9629 0.0088
138 2.9717 0.0088
139 2.9805 0.0088
140 2.9892 0.0087
141 2.9979 0.0087
142 3.0065 0.0086
143 3.0151 0.0086
144 3.0237 0.0086
145 3.0322 0.0085
146 3.0407 0.0085
147 3.0492 0.0085
148 3.0576 0.0084
149 3.0660 0.0084
150 3.0744 0.0084
151 3.0827 0.0083
152 3.0910 0.0083
153 3.0993 0.0083
154 3.1075 0.0082
155 3.1157 0.0082
156 3.1239 0.0082
157 3.1320 0.0081
158 3.1401 0.0081
159 3.1482 0.0081
160 3.1563 0.0080
161 3.1643 0.0080
6 1090
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
162 3.1723 0.0080
163 3.1802 0.0080
164 3.1882 0.0079
165 3.1961 0.0079
166 3.2039 0.0079
167 3.2118 0.0078
168 3.2196 0.0078
169 3.2274 0.0078
170 3.2352 0.0078
171 3.2429 0.0077
172 3.2506 0.0077
173 3.2583 0.0077
174 3.2660 0.0077
175 3.2736 0.0076
176 3.2812 0.0076
177 3.2888 0.0076
178 3.2963 0.0076
179 3.3039 0.0075
180 3.3114 0.0075
181 3.3188 0.0075
182 3.3263 0.0075
183 3.3337 0.0074
184 3.3411 0.0074
185 3.3485 0.0074
186 3.3559 0.0074
187 3.3632 0.0073
188 3.3705 0.0073
189 3.3778 0.0073
190 3.3851 0.0073
191 3.3923 0.0072
192 3.3996 0.0072
193 3.4068 0.0072
194 3.4139 0.0072
195 3.4211 0.0072
196 3.4282 0.0071
197 3.4353 0.0071
198 3.4424 0.0071
199 3.4495 0.0071
200 3.4566 0.0070
201 3.4636 0.0070
202 3.4706 0.0070
203 3.4776 0.0070
204 3.4846 0.0070
205 3.4915 0.0069
206 3.4984 0.0069
207 3.5053 0.0069
208 3.5122 0.0069
209 3.5191 0.0069
7 1091
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
210 3.5259 0.0068
211 3.5328 0.0068
212 3.5396 0.0068
213 3.5464 0.0068
214 3.5531 0.0068
215 3.5599 0.0068
216 3.5666 0.0067
217 3.5733 0.0067
218 3.5800 0.0067
219 3.5867 0.0067
220 3.5934 0.0067
221 3.6000 0.0066
222 3.6066 0.0066
223 3.6133 0.0066
224 3.6198 0.0066
225 3.6264 0.0066
226 3.6330 0.0066
227 3.6395 0.0065
228 3.6460 0.0065
229 3.6525 0.0065
230 3.6590 0.0065
231 3.6655 0.0065
232 3.6720 0.0065
233 3.6784 0.0064
234 3.6848 0.0064
235 3.6912 0.0064
236 3.6976 0.0064
237 3.7040 0.0064
238 3.7103 0.0064
239 3.7167 0.0063
240 3.7230 0.0063
241 3.7293 0.0063
242 3.7356 0.0063
243 3.7419 0.0063
244 3.7482 0.0063
245 3.7544 0.0062
246 3.7606 0.0062
247 3.7669 0.0062
248 3.7731 0.0062
249 3.7792 0.0062
250 3.7854 0.0062
251 3.7916 0.0062
252 3.7977 0.0061
253 3.8039 0.0061
254 3.8100 0.0061
255 3.8161 0.0061
256 3.8222 0.0061
257 3.8282 0.0061
8 1092
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
258 3.8343 0.0061
259 3.8403 0.0060
260 3.8464 0.0060
261 3.8524 0.0060
262 3.8584 0.0060
263 3.8644 0.0060
264 3.8704 0.0060
265 3.8763 0.0060
266 3.8823 0.0060
267 3.8882 0.0059
268 3.8941 0.0059
269 3.9001 0.0059
270 3.9060 0.0059
271 3.9118 0.0059
272 3.9177 0.0059
273 3.9236 0.0059
274 3.9294 0.0058
275 3.9353 0.0058
276 3.9411 0.0058
277 3.9469 0.0058
278 3.9527 0.0058
279 3.9585 0.0058
280 3.9642 0.0058
281 3.9700 0.0058
282 3.9758 0.0057
283 3.9815 0.0057
284 3.9872 0.0057
285 3.9929 0.0057
286 3.9986 0.0057
287 4.0043 0.0057
288 4.0100 0.0057
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Unit Unit Unit Effective Period Rainfall Soil‐Loss Rainfall (number) (In) (In) (In) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 1 0.0057 0.0019 0.0038 2 0.0057 0.0019 0.0038 3 0.0057 0.0019 0.0038 4 0.0057 0.0019 0.0038 5 0.0057 0.0019 0.0038 6 0.0058 0.0019 0.0038 7 0.0058 0.0020 0.0038 8 0.0058 0.0020 0.0038 9 0.0058 0.0020 0.0039 10 0.0058 0.0020 0.0039 11 0.0059 0.0020 0.0039 12 0.0059 0.0020 0.0039 9 1093
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
13 0.0059 0.0020 0.0039 14 0.0059 0.0020 0.0039 15 0.0059 0.0020 0.0039 16 0.0060 0.0020 0.0039 17 0.0060 0.0020 0.0040 18 0.0060 0.0020 0.0040 19 0.0060 0.0020 0.0040 20 0.0060 0.0020 0.0040 21 0.0061 0.0020 0.0040 22 0.0061 0.0021 0.0040 23 0.0061 0.0021 0.0040 24 0.0061 0.0021 0.0041 25 0.0061 0.0021 0.0041 26 0.0062 0.0021 0.0041 27 0.0062 0.0021 0.0041 28 0.0062 0.0021 0.0041 29 0.0062 0.0021 0.0041 30 0.0062 0.0021 0.0041 31 0.0063 0.0021 0.0042 32 0.0063 0.0021 0.0042 33 0.0063 0.0021 0.0042 34 0.0063 0.0021 0.0042 35 0.0064 0.0022 0.0042 36 0.0064 0.0022 0.0042 37 0.0064 0.0022 0.0043 38 0.0064 0.0022 0.0043 39 0.0065 0.0022 0.0043 40 0.0065 0.0022 0.0043 41 0.0065 0.0022 0.0043 42 0.0065 0.0022 0.0043 43 0.0066 0.0022 0.0044 44 0.0066 0.0022 0.0044 45 0.0066 0.0022 0.0044 46 0.0066 0.0022 0.0044 47 0.0067 0.0023 0.0044 48 0.0067 0.0023 0.0044 49 0.0067 0.0023 0.0045 50 0.0068 0.0023 0.0045 51 0.0068 0.0023 0.0045 52 0.0068 0.0023 0.0045 53 0.0068 0.0023 0.0045 54 0.0069 0.0023 0.0045 55 0.0069 0.0023 0.0046 56 0.0069 0.0023 0.0046 57 0.0070 0.0024 0.0046 58 0.0070 0.0024 0.0046 59 0.0070 0.0024 0.0047 60 0.0070 0.0024 0.0047 10 1094
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
61 0.0071 0.0024 0.0047 62 0.0071 0.0024 0.0047 63 0.0072 0.0024 0.0047 64 0.0072 0.0024 0.0048 65 0.0072 0.0024 0.0048 66 0.0072 0.0024 0.0048 67 0.0073 0.0025 0.0048 68 0.0073 0.0025 0.0048 69 0.0074 0.0025 0.0049 70 0.0074 0.0025 0.0049 71 0.0074 0.0025 0.0049 72 0.0075 0.0025 0.0049 73 0.0075 0.0025 0.0050 74 0.0075 0.0025 0.0050 75 0.0076 0.0026 0.0050 76 0.0076 0.0026 0.0050 77 0.0077 0.0026 0.0051 78 0.0077 0.0026 0.0051 79 0.0077 0.0026 0.0051 80 0.0078 0.0026 0.0051 81 0.0078 0.0026 0.0052 82 0.0078 0.0027 0.0052 83 0.0079 0.0027 0.0052 84 0.0079 0.0027 0.0053 85 0.0080 0.0027 0.0053 86 0.0080 0.0027 0.0053 87 0.0081 0.0027 0.0054 88 0.0081 0.0027 0.0054 89 0.0082 0.0028 0.0054 90 0.0082 0.0028 0.0054 91 0.0083 0.0028 0.0055 92 0.0083 0.0028 0.0055 93 0.0084 0.0028 0.0055 94 0.0084 0.0028 0.0056 95 0.0085 0.0029 0.0056 96 0.0085 0.0029 0.0056 97 0.0086 0.0029 0.0057 98 0.0086 0.0029 0.0057 99 0.0087 0.0029 0.0057 100 0.0087 0.0029 0.0058 101 0.0088 0.0030 0.0058 102 0.0088 0.0030 0.0058 103 0.0089 0.0030 0.0059 104 0.0089 0.0030 0.0059 105 0.0090 0.0030 0.0060 106 0.0091 0.0031 0.0060 107 0.0091 0.0031 0.0061 108 0.0092 0.0031 0.0061 11 1095
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
109 0.0093 0.0031 0.0061 110 0.0093 0.0031 0.0062 111 0.0094 0.0032 0.0062 112 0.0095 0.0032 0.0063 113 0.0096 0.0032 0.0063 114 0.0096 0.0032 0.0064 115 0.0097 0.0033 0.0064 116 0.0097 0.0033 0.0065 117 0.0098 0.0033 0.0065 118 0.0099 0.0033 0.0066 119 0.0100 0.0034 0.0066 120 0.0101 0.0034 0.0067 121 0.0102 0.0034 0.0067 122 0.0102 0.0035 0.0068 123 0.0103 0.0035 0.0068 124 0.0104 0.0035 0.0069 125 0.0105 0.0036 0.0070 126 0.0106 0.0036 0.0070 127 0.0107 0.0036 0.0071 128 0.0108 0.0036 0.0071 129 0.0109 0.0037 0.0072 130 0.0110 0.0037 0.0073 131 0.0111 0.0038 0.0074 132 0.0112 0.0038 0.0074 133 0.0113 0.0038 0.0075 134 0.0114 0.0039 0.0076 135 0.0116 0.0039 0.0077 136 0.0116 0.0039 0.0077 137 0.0118 0.0040 0.0078 138 0.0119 0.0040 0.0079 139 0.0121 0.0041 0.0080 140 0.0122 0.0041 0.0081 141 0.0123 0.0042 0.0082 142 0.0124 0.0042 0.0082 143 0.0126 0.0043 0.0084 144 0.0127 0.0043 0.0084 145 0.0154 0.0052 0.0102 146 0.0155 0.0052 0.0103 147 0.0157 0.0053 0.0104 148 0.0159 0.0054 0.0105 149 0.0161 0.0054 0.0107 150 0.0162 0.0055 0.0107 151 0.0165 0.0056 0.0109 152 0.0166 0.0056 0.0110 153 0.0169 0.0057 0.0112 154 0.0171 0.0058 0.0113 155 0.0174 0.0059 0.0115 156 0.0175 0.0059 0.0116 12 1096
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
157 0.0179 0.0060 0.0118 158 0.0180 0.0061 0.0119 159 0.0184 0.0062 0.0122 160 0.0186 0.0063 0.0123 161 0.0190 0.0064 0.0126 162 0.0192 0.0065 0.0127 163 0.0197 0.0066 0.0130 164 0.0199 0.0067 0.0132 165 0.0204 0.0069 0.0135 166 0.0206 0.0070 0.0137 167 0.0212 0.0072 0.0140 168 0.0215 0.0073 0.0142 169 0.0247 0.0084 0.0164 170 0.0251 0.0085 0.0166 171 0.0258 0.0087 0.0171 172 0.0261 0.0088 0.0173 173 0.0269 0.0091 0.0178 174 0.0273 0.0092 0.0181 175 0.0283 0.0096 0.0187 176 0.0288 0.0097 0.0191 177 0.0299 0.0101 0.0198 178 0.0305 0.0103 0.0202 179 0.0318 0.0107 0.0211 180 0.0325 0.0110 0.0215 181 0.0342 0.0115 0.0226 182 0.0351 0.0119 0.0233 183 0.0372 0.0126 0.0247 184 0.0385 0.0130 0.0255 185 0.0307 0.0104 0.0203 186 0.0324 0.0110 0.0215 187 0.0368 0.0124 0.0244 188 0.0397 0.0134 0.0263 189 0.0479 0.0162 0.0317 190 0.0540 0.0182 0.0358 191 0.0772 0.0203 0.0569 192 0.1062 0.0203 0.0859 193 0.3323 0.0203 0.3120 194 0.0629 0.0203 0.0426 195 0.0433 0.0146 0.0287 196 0.0344 0.0116 0.0228 197 0.0399 0.0135 0.0264 198 0.0361 0.0122 0.0239 199 0.0333 0.0113 0.0221 200 0.0311 0.0105 0.0206 201 0.0293 0.0099 0.0194 202 0.0278 0.0094 0.0184 203 0.0265 0.0090 0.0176 204 0.0254 0.0086 0.0168 13 1097
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
205 0.0218 0.0074 0.0144 206 0.0209 0.0071 0.0138 207 0.0201 0.0068 0.0133 208 0.0194 0.0066 0.0129 209 0.0188 0.0064 0.0124 210 0.0182 0.0062 0.0121 211 0.0177 0.0060 0.0117 212 0.0172 0.0058 0.0114 213 0.0168 0.0057 0.0111 214 0.0164 0.0055 0.0108 215 0.0160 0.0054 0.0106 216 0.0156 0.0053 0.0103 217 0.0128 0.0043 0.0085 218 0.0125 0.0042 0.0083 219 0.0123 0.0041 0.0081 220 0.0120 0.0040 0.0079 221 0.0117 0.0040 0.0078 222 0.0115 0.0039 0.0076 223 0.0113 0.0038 0.0075 224 0.0110 0.0037 0.0073 225 0.0108 0.0037 0.0072 226 0.0106 0.0036 0.0071 227 0.0105 0.0035 0.0069 228 0.0103 0.0035 0.0068 229 0.0101 0.0034 0.0067 230 0.0100 0.0034 0.0066 231 0.0098 0.0033 0.0065 232 0.0096 0.0033 0.0064 233 0.0095 0.0032 0.0063 234 0.0094 0.0032 0.0062 235 0.0092 0.0031 0.0061 236 0.0091 0.0031 0.0060 237 0.0090 0.0030 0.0059 238 0.0089 0.0030 0.0059 239 0.0088 0.0030 0.0058 240 0.0086 0.0029 0.0057 241 0.0085 0.0029 0.0057 242 0.0084 0.0028 0.0056 243 0.0083 0.0028 0.0055 244 0.0082 0.0028 0.0055 245 0.0081 0.0027 0.0054 246 0.0080 0.0027 0.0053 247 0.0080 0.0027 0.0053 248 0.0079 0.0027 0.0052 249 0.0078 0.0026 0.0052 250 0.0077 0.0026 0.0051 251 0.0076 0.0026 0.0051 252 0.0076 0.0026 0.0050 14 1098
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
253 0.0075 0.0025 0.0050 254 0.0074 0.0025 0.0049 255 0.0073 0.0025 0.0049 256 0.0073 0.0025 0.0048 257 0.0072 0.0024 0.0048 258 0.0071 0.0024 0.0047 259 0.0071 0.0024 0.0047 260 0.0070 0.0024 0.0046 261 0.0069 0.0023 0.0046 262 0.0069 0.0023 0.0046 263 0.0068 0.0023 0.0045 264 0.0068 0.0023 0.0045 265 0.0067 0.0023 0.0044 266 0.0067 0.0023 0.0044 267 0.0066 0.0022 0.0044 268 0.0066 0.0022 0.0043 269 0.0065 0.0022 0.0043 270 0.0065 0.0022 0.0043 271 0.0064 0.0022 0.0042 272 0.0064 0.0021 0.0042 273 0.0063 0.0021 0.0042 274 0.0063 0.0021 0.0041 275 0.0062 0.0021 0.0041 276 0.0062 0.0021 0.0041 277 0.0061 0.0021 0.0041 278 0.0061 0.0021 0.0040 279 0.0060 0.0020 0.0040 280 0.0060 0.0020 0.0040 281 0.0060 0.0020 0.0039 282 0.0059 0.0020 0.0039 283 0.0059 0.0020 0.0039 284 0.0058 0.0020 0.0039 285 0.0058 0.0020 0.0038 286 0.0058 0.0020 0.0038 287 0.0057 0.0019 0.0038 288 0.0057 0.0019 0.0038 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Total soil rain loss = 1.24(In)
Total effective rainfall = 2.77(In)
Peak flow rate in flood hydrograph = 3.63(CFS)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 24 ‐ H O U R S T O R M
R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Hydrograph in 5 Minute intervals ((CFS))
15 1099
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Time(h+m) Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 0+ 5 0.0000 0.01 Q | | | | 0+10 0.0003 0.03 Q | | | | 0+15 0.0007 0.07 Q | | | | 0+20 0.0013 0.08 Q | | | | 0+25 0.0019 0.09 Q | | | | 0+30 0.0025 0.09 Q | | | | 0+35 0.0032 0.10 Q | | | | 0+40 0.0039 0.10 Q | | | | 0+45 0.0046 0.10 Q | | | | 0+50 0.0054 0.11 Q | | | | 0+55 0.0061 0.11 Q | | | | 1+ 0 0.0069 0.11 Q | | | | 1+ 5 0.0076 0.11 Q | | | | 1+10 0.0084 0.11 Q | | | | 1+15 0.0092 0.11 Q | | | | 1+20 0.0100 0.11 Q | | | | 1+25 0.0108 0.11 Q | | | | 1+30 0.0116 0.12 Q | | | | 1+35 0.0124 0.12 Q | | | | 1+40 0.0132 0.12 Q | | | | 1+45 0.0140 0.12 Q | | | | 1+50 0.0148 0.12 QV | | | | 1+55 0.0156 0.12 QV | | | | 2+ 0 0.0164 0.12 QV | | | | 2+ 5 0.0172 0.12 QV | | | | 2+10 0.0180 0.12 QV | | | | 2+15 0.0188 0.12 QV | | | | 2+20 0.0196 0.12 QV | | | | 2+25 0.0205 0.12 QV | | | | 2+30 0.0213 0.12 QV | | | | 2+35 0.0221 0.12 QV | | | | 2+40 0.0230 0.12 QV | | | | 2+45 0.0238 0.12 QV | | | | 2+50 0.0246 0.12 QV | | | | 2+55 0.0255 0.12 QV | | | | 3+ 0 0.0263 0.12 QV | | | | 3+ 5 0.0272 0.12 QV | | | | 3+10 0.0280 0.12 Q V | | | | 3+15 0.0289 0.12 Q V | | | | 3+20 0.0297 0.12 Q V | | | | 3+25 0.0306 0.12 Q V | | | | 3+30 0.0315 0.13 Q V | | | | 3+35 0.0323 0.13 Q V | | | | 3+40 0.0332 0.13 Q V | | | | 3+45 0.0341 0.13 Q V | | | | 16 1100
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
3+50 0.0349 0.13 Q V | | | | 3+55 0.0358 0.13 Q V | | | | 4+ 0 0.0367 0.13 Q V | | | | 4+ 5 0.0376 0.13 Q V | | | | 4+10 0.0385 0.13 Q V | | | | 4+15 0.0394 0.13 Q V | | | | 4+20 0.0403 0.13 Q V | | | | 4+25 0.0412 0.13 Q V | | | | 4+30 0.0421 0.13 Q V | | | | 4+35 0.0430 0.13 Q V | | | | 4+40 0.0439 0.13 Q V | | | | 4+45 0.0448 0.13 Q V | | | | 4+50 0.0458 0.13 Q V | | | | 4+55 0.0467 0.13 Q V | | | | 5+ 0 0.0476 0.14 Q V | | | | 5+ 5 0.0485 0.14 Q V | | | | 5+10 0.0495 0.14 Q V | | | | 5+15 0.0504 0.14 Q V | | | | 5+20 0.0514 0.14 Q V | | | | 5+25 0.0523 0.14 Q V | | | | 5+30 0.0533 0.14 Q V | | | | 5+35 0.0542 0.14 Q V | | | | 5+40 0.0552 0.14 Q V | | | | 5+45 0.0562 0.14 Q V | | | | 5+50 0.0571 0.14 Q V | | | | 5+55 0.0581 0.14 Q V | | | | 6+ 0 0.0591 0.14 Q V | | | | 6+ 5 0.0601 0.14 Q V | | | | 6+10 0.0611 0.14 Q V | | | | 6+15 0.0621 0.14 Q V | | | | 6+20 0.0631 0.15 Q V | | | | 6+25 0.0641 0.15 Q V | | | | 6+30 0.0651 0.15 Q V | | | | 6+35 0.0661 0.15 Q V | | | | 6+40 0.0671 0.15 Q V | | | | 6+45 0.0682 0.15 Q V | | | | 6+50 0.0692 0.15 Q V | | | | 6+55 0.0702 0.15 Q V | | | | 7+ 0 0.0713 0.15 Q V | | | | 7+ 5 0.0723 0.15 Q V | | | | 7+10 0.0734 0.15 Q V | | | | 7+15 0.0744 0.15 Q V | | | | 7+20 0.0755 0.15 Q V | | | | 7+25 0.0766 0.16 Q V | | | | 7+30 0.0777 0.16 Q V | | | | 7+35 0.0787 0.16 Q V | | | | 7+40 0.0798 0.16 Q V | | | | 7+45 0.0809 0.16 Q V | | | | 17 1101
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
7+50 0.0820 0.16 Q V | | | | 7+55 0.0831 0.16 Q V | | | | 8+ 0 0.0843 0.16 Q V | | | | 8+ 5 0.0854 0.16 Q V | | | | 8+10 0.0865 0.16 Q V | | | | 8+15 0.0877 0.17 Q V | | | | 8+20 0.0888 0.17 Q V | | | | 8+25 0.0899 0.17 Q V | | | | 8+30 0.0911 0.17 Q V | | | | 8+35 0.0923 0.17 Q V | | | | 8+40 0.0934 0.17 Q V | | | | 8+45 0.0946 0.17 Q V | | | | 8+50 0.0958 0.17 Q V | | | | 8+55 0.0970 0.17 Q V | | | | 9+ 0 0.0982 0.17 Q V | | | | 9+ 5 0.0994 0.18 Q V | | | | 9+10 0.1006 0.18 Q V | | | | 9+15 0.1019 0.18 Q V | | | | 9+20 0.1031 0.18 Q V | | | | 9+25 0.1044 0.18 Q V | | | | 9+30 0.1056 0.18 Q V | | | | 9+35 0.1069 0.18 Q V | | | | 9+40 0.1082 0.19 Q V | | | | 9+45 0.1094 0.19 Q V | | | | 9+50 0.1107 0.19 Q V | | | | 9+55 0.1120 0.19 Q V | | | | 10+ 0 0.1134 0.19 Q V | | | | 10+ 5 0.1147 0.19 Q V | | | | 10+10 0.1160 0.19 Q V | | | | 10+15 0.1174 0.20 Q V | | | | 10+20 0.1187 0.20 Q V | | | | 10+25 0.1201 0.20 Q V | | | | 10+30 0.1215 0.20 Q V | | | | 10+35 0.1229 0.20 Q V | | | | 10+40 0.1243 0.20 Q V | | | | 10+45 0.1257 0.21 Q V | | | | 10+50 0.1271 0.21 Q V| | | | 10+55 0.1285 0.21 Q V| | | | 11+ 0 0.1300 0.21 Q V| | | | 11+ 5 0.1315 0.21 Q V| | | | 11+10 0.1330 0.22 Q V| | | | 11+15 0.1345 0.22 Q V| | | | 11+20 0.1360 0.22 Q V| | | | 11+25 0.1375 0.22 Q V| | | | 11+30 0.1390 0.22 Q V| | | | 11+35 0.1406 0.23 Q V | | | 11+40 0.1422 0.23 Q V | | | 11+45 0.1438 0.23 Q V | | | 18 1102
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
11+50 0.1454 0.23 Q V | | | 11+55 0.1470 0.24 Q V | | | 12+ 0 0.1487 0.24 Q V | | | 12+ 5 0.1503 0.24 Q V | | | 12+10 0.1521 0.26 |Q V | | | 12+15 0.1540 0.28 |Q |V | | | 12+20 0.1560 0.29 |Q |V | | | 12+25 0.1580 0.29 |Q |V | | | 12+30 0.1600 0.30 |Q |V | | | 12+35 0.1621 0.30 |Q |V | | | 12+40 0.1643 0.31 |Q |V | | | 12+45 0.1664 0.31 |Q |V | | | 12+50 0.1686 0.32 |Q | V | | | 12+55 0.1708 0.32 |Q | V | | | 13+ 0 0.1731 0.33 |Q | V | | | 13+ 5 0.1753 0.33 |Q | V | | | 13+10 0.1776 0.34 |Q | V | | | 13+15 0.1800 0.34 |Q | V | | | 13+20 0.1824 0.35 |Q | V | | | 13+25 0.1848 0.35 |Q | V | | | 13+30 0.1873 0.36 |Q | V | | | 13+35 0.1898 0.36 |Q | V | | | 13+40 0.1923 0.37 |Q | V | | | 13+45 0.1949 0.37 |Q | V | | | 13+50 0.1975 0.38 |Q | V | | | 13+55 0.2002 0.39 |Q | V | | | 14+ 0 0.2029 0.39 |Q | V | | | 14+ 5 0.2057 0.41 |Q | V | | | 14+10 0.2086 0.43 |Q | V | | | 14+15 0.2117 0.45 |Q | V | | | 14+20 0.2149 0.47 |Q | V | | | 14+25 0.2182 0.48 |Q | V | | | 14+30 0.2216 0.49 |Q | V | | | 14+35 0.2251 0.50 | Q | V | | | 14+40 0.2286 0.52 | Q | V | | | 14+45 0.2323 0.53 | Q | V | | | 14+50 0.2360 0.55 | Q | V | | | 14+55 0.2399 0.56 | Q | V | | | 15+ 0 0.2439 0.58 | Q | V | | | 15+ 5 0.2480 0.60 | Q | V | | | 15+10 0.2523 0.62 | Q | V | | | 15+15 0.2567 0.64 | Q | V | | | 15+20 0.2613 0.67 | Q | V | | | 15+25 0.2660 0.68 | Q | V| | | 15+30 0.2706 0.67 | Q | V| | | 15+35 0.2750 0.65 | Q | V| | | 15+40 0.2796 0.67 | Q | V | | 15+45 0.2845 0.71 | Q | V | | 19 1103
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
15+50 0.2899 0.78 | Q | V | | 15+55 0.2962 0.91 | Q | |V | | 16+ 0 0.3043 1.17 | Q | |V | | 16+ 5 0.3179 1.98 | Q | | V | | 16+10 0.3420 3.50 | | Q | V | | 16+15 0.3671 3.63 | | Q | V | | 16+20 0.3825 2.24 | Q | | V | | 16+25 0.3931 1.54 | Q | | V | | 16+30 0.4019 1.28 | Q | | V | | 16+35 0.4096 1.12 | Q | | V| | 16+40 0.4166 1.00 | Q | | V| | 16+45 0.4227 0.89 | Q | | V | 16+50 0.4283 0.81 | Q | | V | 16+55 0.4335 0.76 | Q | | |V | 17+ 0 0.4383 0.69 | Q | | |V | 17+ 5 0.4427 0.64 | Q | | |V | 17+10 0.4467 0.59 | Q | | |V | 17+15 0.4504 0.53 | Q | | | V | 17+20 0.4538 0.50 |Q | | | V | 17+25 0.4569 0.45 |Q | | | V | 17+30 0.4597 0.41 |Q | | | V | 17+35 0.4624 0.39 |Q | | | V | 17+40 0.4650 0.38 |Q | | | V | 17+45 0.4675 0.36 |Q | | | V | 17+50 0.4700 0.35 |Q | | | V | 17+55 0.4723 0.34 |Q | | | V | 18+ 0 0.4746 0.33 |Q | | | V | 18+ 5 0.4768 0.32 |Q | | | V | 18+10 0.4789 0.30 |Q | | | V | 18+15 0.4808 0.28 |Q | | | V | 18+20 0.4826 0.26 |Q | | | V | 18+25 0.4844 0.26 |Q | | | V | 18+30 0.4861 0.25 Q | | | V | 18+35 0.4877 0.24 Q | | | V | 18+40 0.4893 0.23 Q | | | V | 18+45 0.4909 0.23 Q | | | V | 18+50 0.4924 0.22 Q | | | V | 18+55 0.4939 0.22 Q | | | V | 19+ 0 0.4954 0.21 Q | | | V | 19+ 5 0.4968 0.21 Q | | | V | 19+10 0.4982 0.20 Q | | | V | 19+15 0.4996 0.20 Q | | | V | 19+20 0.5010 0.20 Q | | | V | 19+25 0.5023 0.19 Q | | | V | 19+30 0.5036 0.19 Q | | | V | 19+35 0.5049 0.19 Q | | | V | 19+40 0.5062 0.19 Q | | | V | 19+45 0.5075 0.18 Q | | | V | 20 1104
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
19+50 0.5087 0.18 Q | | | V | 19+55 0.5099 0.18 Q | | | V | 20+ 0 0.5111 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+ 5 0.5123 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+10 0.5135 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+15 0.5146 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+20 0.5158 0.17 Q | | | V | 20+25 0.5169 0.16 Q | | | V | 20+30 0.5180 0.16 Q | | | V | 20+35 0.5191 0.16 Q | | | V | 20+40 0.5202 0.16 Q | | | V | 20+45 0.5213 0.16 Q | | | V | 20+50 0.5224 0.15 Q | | | V | 20+55 0.5234 0.15 Q | | | V | 21+ 0 0.5245 0.15 Q | | | V | 21+ 5 0.5255 0.15 Q | | | V | 21+10 0.5265 0.15 Q | | | V | 21+15 0.5275 0.15 Q | | | V | 21+20 0.5285 0.15 Q | | | V | 21+25 0.5295 0.14 Q | | | V | 21+30 0.5305 0.14 Q | | | V | 21+35 0.5315 0.14 Q | | | V | 21+40 0.5324 0.14 Q | | | V | 21+45 0.5334 0.14 Q | | | V | 21+50 0.5343 0.14 Q | | | V | 21+55 0.5353 0.14 Q | | | V | 22+ 0 0.5362 0.14 Q | | | V | 22+ 5 0.5371 0.13 Q | | | V | 22+10 0.5381 0.13 Q | | | V | 22+15 0.5390 0.13 Q | | | V | 22+20 0.5399 0.13 Q | | | V | 22+25 0.5407 0.13 Q | | | V | 22+30 0.5416 0.13 Q | | | V | 22+35 0.5425 0.13 Q | | | V | 22+40 0.5434 0.13 Q | | | V | 22+45 0.5442 0.13 Q | | | V | 22+50 0.5451 0.12 Q | | | V| 22+55 0.5460 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+ 0 0.5468 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+ 5 0.5476 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+10 0.5485 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+15 0.5493 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+20 0.5501 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+25 0.5509 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+30 0.5517 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+35 0.5525 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+40 0.5533 0.12 Q | | | V| 23+45 0.5541 0.12 Q | | | V| 21 1105
DA11ExSyn10yr24013
23+50 0.5549 0.11 Q | | | V| 23+55 0.5557 0.11 Q | | | V| 24+ 0 0.5565 0.11 Q | | | V| 24+ 5 0.5572 0.11 Q | | | V| 24+10 0.5577 0.08 Q | | | V| 24+15 0.5581 0.05 Q | | | V| 24+20 0.5583 0.03 Q | | | V| 24+25 0.5584 0.02 Q | | | V| 24+30 0.5585 0.02 Q | | | V| 24+35 0.5586 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+40 0.5587 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+45 0.5587 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+50 0.5588 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+55 0.5588 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+ 0 0.5588 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+ 5 0.5588 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+10 0.5589 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+15 0.5589 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+20 0.5589 0.00 Q | | | V ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 22 1106
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s
Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 ‐ 2018, Version 9.0 Study date 10/01/25
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ San Bernardino County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method
Manual date ‐ August 1986
Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Pre‐developed DA1.1, 100‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Storm Event Year = 100
Antecedent Moisture Condition = 3
English (in‐lb) Input Units Used
English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used
English Units used in output format
Area averaged rainfall intensity isohyetal data:
Sub‐ Area Duration Isohyetal
(Ac.) (hours) (In)
Rainfall data for year 100
2.43 1 1.36
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rainfall data for year 100
2.43 6 3.36
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rainfall data for year 100
1 1107
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
2.43 24 6.02
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ******** Area‐averaged max loss rate, Fm ********
SCS curve SCS curve Area Area Fp(Fig C6) Ap Fm No.(AMCII) NO.(AMC 3) (Ac.) Fraction (In/Hr) (dec.) (In/Hr)
86.0 97.2 2.43 1.000 0.055 0.918 0.051 Area‐averaged adjusted loss rate Fm (In/Hr) = 0.051
********* Area‐Averaged low loss rate fraction, Yb ********** Area Area SCS CN SCS CN S Pervious (Ac.) Fract (AMC2) (AMC3) Yield Fr
2.23 0.918 86.0 97.2 0.29 0.945
0.20 0.082 98.0 98.0 0.20 0.960 Area‐averaged catchment yield fraction, Y = 0.946
Area‐averaged low loss fraction, Yb = 0.054
User entry of time of concentration = 0.217 (hours)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Watershed area = 2.43(Ac.)
Catchment Lag time = 0.173 hours
Unit interval = 5.000 minutes
Unit interval percentage of lag time = 48.0917
Hydrograph baseflow = 0.00(CFS)
Average maximum watershed loss rate(Fm) = 0.051(In/Hr) Average low loss rate fraction (Yb) = 0.054 (decimal)
VALLEY UNDEVELOPED S‐Graph Selected
Computed peak 5‐minute rainfall = 0.503(In)
Computed peak 30‐minute rainfall = 1.031(In)
Specified peak 1‐hour rainfall = 1.360(In)
Computed peak 3‐hour rainfall = 2.410(In)
Specified peak 6‐hour rainfall = 3.360(In)
Specified peak 24‐hour rainfall = 6.020(In)
Note: user specified rainfall values used.
Rainfall depth area reduction factors:
Using a total area of 2.43(Ac.) (Ref: fig. E‐4)
5‐minute factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 0.503(In) 30‐minute factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 1.031(In) 1‐hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 1.360(In) 3‐hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 2.410(In) 2 1108
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
6‐hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 3.360(In) 24‐hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 6.020(In) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ U n i t H y d r o g r a p h
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Interval 'S' Graph Unit Hydrograph
Number Mean values ((CFS))
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ (K = 29.39 (CFS))
1 5.770 1.696
2 30.294 7.207
3 59.228 8.503
4 72.910 4.021
5 79.903 2.055
6 84.734 1.420
7 88.239 1.030
8 90.941 0.794
9 92.952 0.591
10 94.500 0.455
11 95.879 0.405
12 96.937 0.311
13 97.794 0.252
14 98.467 0.198
15 98.973 0.149
16 99.454 0.141
17 100.000 0.071
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Peak Unit Adjusted mass rainfall Unit rainfall
Number (In) (In)
1 0.5033 0.5033
2 0.6641 0.1608
3 0.7810 0.1169
4 0.8763 0.0953
5 0.9581 0.0818
6 1.0306 0.0725
7 1.0961 0.0655
8 1.1563 0.0601
9 1.2120 0.0558
10 1.2642 0.0522
11 1.3133 0.0491
12 1.3598 0.0465
13 1.4177 0.0579
14 1.4735 0.0558
15 1.5275 0.0539
16 1.5797 0.0522
17 1.6304 0.0507
3 1109
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
18 1.6796 0.0493
19 1.7276 0.0480
20 1.7744 0.0468
21 1.8200 0.0457
22 1.8647 0.0446
23 1.9084 0.0437
24 1.9511 0.0428
25 1.9931 0.0419
26 2.0342 0.0411
27 2.0746 0.0404
28 2.1143 0.0397
29 2.1533 0.0390
30 2.1916 0.0384
31 2.2294 0.0378
32 2.2666 0.0372
33 2.3032 0.0366
34 2.3393 0.0361
35 2.3749 0.0356
36 2.4100 0.0351
37 2.4418 0.0319
38 2.4733 0.0314
39 2.5042 0.0310
40 2.5348 0.0306
41 2.5650 0.0302
42 2.5948 0.0298
43 2.6243 0.0294
44 2.6533 0.0291
45 2.6821 0.0287
46 2.7105 0.0284
47 2.7386 0.0281
48 2.7664 0.0278
49 2.7939 0.0275
50 2.8211 0.0272
51 2.8480 0.0269
52 2.8746 0.0266
53 2.9010 0.0264
54 2.9271 0.0261
55 2.9530 0.0259
56 2.9786 0.0256
57 3.0040 0.0254
58 3.0291 0.0252
59 3.0540 0.0249
60 3.0787 0.0247
61 3.1032 0.0245
62 3.1275 0.0243
63 3.1516 0.0241
64 3.1755 0.0239
65 3.1992 0.0237
4 1110
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
66 3.2227 0.0235
67 3.2460 0.0233
68 3.2691 0.0231
69 3.2921 0.0230
70 3.3149 0.0228
71 3.3375 0.0226
72 3.3600 0.0225
73 3.3795 0.0196
74 3.3989 0.0194
75 3.4182 0.0192
76 3.4373 0.0191
77 3.4562 0.0190
78 3.4750 0.0188
79 3.4937 0.0187
80 3.5122 0.0185
81 3.5306 0.0184
82 3.5489 0.0183
83 3.5671 0.0181
84 3.5851 0.0180
85 3.6030 0.0179
86 3.6207 0.0178
87 3.6384 0.0177
88 3.6559 0.0175
89 3.6733 0.0174
90 3.6906 0.0173
91 3.7078 0.0172
92 3.7249 0.0171
93 3.7419 0.0170
94 3.7588 0.0169
95 3.7755 0.0168
96 3.7922 0.0167
97 3.8088 0.0166
98 3.8252 0.0165
99 3.8416 0.0164
100 3.8579 0.0163
101 3.8741 0.0162
102 3.8902 0.0161
103 3.9062 0.0160
104 3.9221 0.0159
105 3.9379 0.0158
106 3.9536 0.0157
107 3.9693 0.0156
108 3.9848 0.0156
109 4.0003 0.0155
110 4.0157 0.0154
111 4.0310 0.0153
112 4.0463 0.0152
113 4.0614 0.0152
5 1111
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
114 4.0765 0.0151
115 4.0915 0.0150
116 4.1064 0.0149
117 4.1213 0.0149
118 4.1361 0.0148
119 4.1508 0.0147
120 4.1654 0.0146
121 4.1800 0.0146
122 4.1945 0.0145
123 4.2089 0.0144
124 4.2233 0.0144
125 4.2376 0.0143
126 4.2518 0.0142
127 4.2659 0.0142
128 4.2800 0.0141
129 4.2941 0.0140
130 4.3080 0.0140
131 4.3220 0.0139
132 4.3358 0.0138
133 4.3496 0.0138
134 4.3633 0.0137
135 4.3770 0.0137
136 4.3906 0.0136
137 4.4041 0.0136
138 4.4176 0.0135
139 4.4311 0.0134
140 4.4445 0.0134
141 4.4578 0.0133
142 4.4711 0.0133
143 4.4843 0.0132
144 4.4974 0.0132
145 4.5106 0.0131
146 4.5236 0.0131
147 4.5366 0.0130
148 4.5496 0.0130
149 4.5625 0.0129
150 4.5753 0.0129
151 4.5881 0.0128
152 4.6009 0.0128
153 4.6136 0.0127
154 4.6263 0.0127
155 4.6389 0.0126
156 4.6515 0.0126
157 4.6640 0.0125
158 4.6764 0.0125
159 4.6889 0.0124
160 4.7013 0.0124
161 4.7136 0.0123
6 1112
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
162 4.7259 0.0123
163 4.7381 0.0122
164 4.7503 0.0122
165 4.7625 0.0122
166 4.7746 0.0121
167 4.7867 0.0121
168 4.7987 0.0120
169 4.8107 0.0120
170 4.8227 0.0120
171 4.8346 0.0119
172 4.8465 0.0119
173 4.8583 0.0118
174 4.8701 0.0118
175 4.8819 0.0118
176 4.8936 0.0117
177 4.9052 0.0117
178 4.9169 0.0116
179 4.9285 0.0116
180 4.9400 0.0116
181 4.9516 0.0115
182 4.9631 0.0115
183 4.9745 0.0115
184 4.9859 0.0114
185 4.9973 0.0114
186 5.0087 0.0113
187 5.0200 0.0113
188 5.0312 0.0113
189 5.0425 0.0112
190 5.0537 0.0112
191 5.0649 0.0112
192 5.0760 0.0111
193 5.0871 0.0111
194 5.0982 0.0111
195 5.1092 0.0110
196 5.1202 0.0110
197 5.1312 0.0110
198 5.1421 0.0109
199 5.1530 0.0109
200 5.1639 0.0109
201 5.1748 0.0108
202 5.1856 0.0108
203 5.1964 0.0108
204 5.2071 0.0108
205 5.2178 0.0107
206 5.2285 0.0107
207 5.2392 0.0107
208 5.2498 0.0106
209 5.2604 0.0106
7 1113
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
210 5.2710 0.0106
211 5.2815 0.0105
212 5.2921 0.0105
213 5.3025 0.0105
214 5.3130 0.0105
215 5.3234 0.0104
216 5.3338 0.0104
217 5.3442 0.0104
218 5.3545 0.0103
219 5.3649 0.0103
220 5.3752 0.0103
221 5.3854 0.0103
222 5.3957 0.0102
223 5.4059 0.0102
224 5.4161 0.0102
225 5.4262 0.0102
226 5.4363 0.0101
227 5.4465 0.0101
228 5.4565 0.0101
229 5.4666 0.0101
230 5.4766 0.0100
231 5.4866 0.0100
232 5.4966 0.0100
233 5.5065 0.0100
234 5.5165 0.0099
235 5.5264 0.0099
236 5.5363 0.0099
237 5.5461 0.0099
238 5.5560 0.0098
239 5.5658 0.0098
240 5.5755 0.0098
241 5.5853 0.0098
242 5.5950 0.0097
243 5.6048 0.0097
244 5.6144 0.0097
245 5.6241 0.0097
246 5.6338 0.0096
247 5.6434 0.0096
248 5.6530 0.0096
249 5.6626 0.0096
250 5.6721 0.0096
251 5.6816 0.0095
252 5.6912 0.0095
253 5.7006 0.0095
254 5.7101 0.0095
255 5.7196 0.0094
256 5.7290 0.0094
257 5.7384 0.0094
8 1114
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
258 5.7478 0.0094
259 5.7571 0.0094
260 5.7665 0.0093
261 5.7758 0.0093
262 5.7851 0.0093
263 5.7944 0.0093
264 5.8036 0.0093
265 5.8129 0.0092
266 5.8221 0.0092
267 5.8313 0.0092
268 5.8405 0.0092
269 5.8496 0.0092
270 5.8587 0.0091
271 5.8679 0.0091
272 5.8770 0.0091
273 5.8860 0.0091
274 5.8951 0.0091
275 5.9041 0.0090
276 5.9132 0.0090
277 5.9222 0.0090
278 5.9312 0.0090
279 5.9401 0.0090
280 5.9491 0.0089
281 5.9580 0.0089
282 5.9669 0.0089
283 5.9758 0.0089
284 5.9847 0.0089
285 5.9935 0.0089
286 6.0024 0.0088
287 6.0112 0.0088
288 6.0200 0.0088
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Unit Unit Unit Effective Period Rainfall Soil‐Loss Rainfall (number) (In) (In) (In) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 1 0.0088 0.0005 0.0083 2 0.0088 0.0005 0.0083 3 0.0089 0.0005 0.0084 4 0.0089 0.0005 0.0084 5 0.0089 0.0005 0.0084 6 0.0089 0.0005 0.0084 7 0.0090 0.0005 0.0085 8 0.0090 0.0005 0.0085 9 0.0090 0.0005 0.0085 10 0.0090 0.0005 0.0086 11 0.0091 0.0005 0.0086 12 0.0091 0.0005 0.0086 9 1115
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
13 0.0091 0.0005 0.0086 14 0.0092 0.0005 0.0087 15 0.0092 0.0005 0.0087 16 0.0092 0.0005 0.0087 17 0.0093 0.0005 0.0088 18 0.0093 0.0005 0.0088 19 0.0093 0.0005 0.0088 20 0.0093 0.0005 0.0088 21 0.0094 0.0005 0.0089 22 0.0094 0.0005 0.0089 23 0.0094 0.0005 0.0089 24 0.0095 0.0005 0.0090 25 0.0095 0.0005 0.0090 26 0.0095 0.0005 0.0090 27 0.0096 0.0005 0.0091 28 0.0096 0.0005 0.0091 29 0.0096 0.0005 0.0091 30 0.0097 0.0005 0.0091 31 0.0097 0.0005 0.0092 32 0.0097 0.0005 0.0092 33 0.0098 0.0005 0.0093 34 0.0098 0.0005 0.0093 35 0.0099 0.0005 0.0093 36 0.0099 0.0005 0.0093 37 0.0099 0.0005 0.0094 38 0.0100 0.0005 0.0094 39 0.0100 0.0005 0.0095 40 0.0100 0.0005 0.0095 41 0.0101 0.0005 0.0095 42 0.0101 0.0005 0.0096 43 0.0102 0.0005 0.0096 44 0.0102 0.0005 0.0096 45 0.0102 0.0006 0.0097 46 0.0103 0.0006 0.0097 47 0.0103 0.0006 0.0098 48 0.0103 0.0006 0.0098 49 0.0104 0.0006 0.0098 50 0.0104 0.0006 0.0099 51 0.0105 0.0006 0.0099 52 0.0105 0.0006 0.0099 53 0.0106 0.0006 0.0100 54 0.0106 0.0006 0.0100 55 0.0107 0.0006 0.0101 56 0.0107 0.0006 0.0101 57 0.0108 0.0006 0.0102 58 0.0108 0.0006 0.0102 59 0.0108 0.0006 0.0103 60 0.0109 0.0006 0.0103 10 1116
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
61 0.0109 0.0006 0.0104 62 0.0110 0.0006 0.0104 63 0.0110 0.0006 0.0104 64 0.0111 0.0006 0.0105 65 0.0111 0.0006 0.0105 66 0.0112 0.0006 0.0106 67 0.0112 0.0006 0.0106 68 0.0113 0.0006 0.0107 69 0.0113 0.0006 0.0107 70 0.0114 0.0006 0.0108 71 0.0115 0.0006 0.0108 72 0.0115 0.0006 0.0109 73 0.0116 0.0006 0.0109 74 0.0116 0.0006 0.0110 75 0.0117 0.0006 0.0110 76 0.0117 0.0006 0.0111 77 0.0118 0.0006 0.0112 78 0.0118 0.0006 0.0112 79 0.0119 0.0006 0.0113 80 0.0120 0.0006 0.0113 81 0.0120 0.0006 0.0114 82 0.0121 0.0007 0.0114 83 0.0122 0.0007 0.0115 84 0.0122 0.0007 0.0115 85 0.0123 0.0007 0.0116 86 0.0123 0.0007 0.0117 87 0.0124 0.0007 0.0118 88 0.0125 0.0007 0.0118 89 0.0126 0.0007 0.0119 90 0.0126 0.0007 0.0119 91 0.0127 0.0007 0.0120 92 0.0128 0.0007 0.0121 93 0.0129 0.0007 0.0122 94 0.0129 0.0007 0.0122 95 0.0130 0.0007 0.0123 96 0.0131 0.0007 0.0124 97 0.0132 0.0007 0.0125 98 0.0132 0.0007 0.0125 99 0.0133 0.0007 0.0126 100 0.0134 0.0007 0.0127 101 0.0135 0.0007 0.0128 102 0.0136 0.0007 0.0128 103 0.0137 0.0007 0.0129 104 0.0137 0.0007 0.0130 105 0.0138 0.0007 0.0131 106 0.0139 0.0008 0.0132 107 0.0140 0.0008 0.0133 108 0.0141 0.0008 0.0133 11 1117
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
109 0.0142 0.0008 0.0135 110 0.0143 0.0008 0.0135 111 0.0144 0.0008 0.0137 112 0.0145 0.0008 0.0137 113 0.0146 0.0008 0.0138 114 0.0147 0.0008 0.0139 115 0.0149 0.0008 0.0141 116 0.0149 0.0008 0.0141 117 0.0151 0.0008 0.0143 118 0.0152 0.0008 0.0143 119 0.0153 0.0008 0.0145 120 0.0154 0.0008 0.0146 121 0.0156 0.0008 0.0147 122 0.0156 0.0008 0.0148 123 0.0158 0.0009 0.0150 124 0.0159 0.0009 0.0151 125 0.0161 0.0009 0.0152 126 0.0162 0.0009 0.0153 127 0.0164 0.0009 0.0155 128 0.0165 0.0009 0.0156 129 0.0167 0.0009 0.0158 130 0.0168 0.0009 0.0159 131 0.0170 0.0009 0.0161 132 0.0171 0.0009 0.0162 133 0.0173 0.0009 0.0164 134 0.0174 0.0009 0.0165 135 0.0177 0.0010 0.0167 136 0.0178 0.0010 0.0168 137 0.0180 0.0010 0.0170 138 0.0181 0.0010 0.0172 139 0.0184 0.0010 0.0174 140 0.0185 0.0010 0.0175 141 0.0188 0.0010 0.0178 142 0.0190 0.0010 0.0179 143 0.0192 0.0010 0.0182 144 0.0194 0.0010 0.0184 145 0.0225 0.0012 0.0212 146 0.0226 0.0012 0.0214 147 0.0230 0.0012 0.0217 148 0.0231 0.0012 0.0219 149 0.0235 0.0013 0.0222 150 0.0237 0.0013 0.0224 151 0.0241 0.0013 0.0228 152 0.0243 0.0013 0.0230 153 0.0247 0.0013 0.0234 154 0.0249 0.0013 0.0236 155 0.0254 0.0014 0.0240 156 0.0256 0.0014 0.0242 12 1118
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
157 0.0261 0.0014 0.0247 158 0.0264 0.0014 0.0249 159 0.0269 0.0015 0.0255 160 0.0272 0.0015 0.0257 161 0.0278 0.0015 0.0263 162 0.0281 0.0015 0.0266 163 0.0287 0.0016 0.0272 164 0.0291 0.0016 0.0275 165 0.0298 0.0016 0.0282 166 0.0302 0.0016 0.0286 167 0.0310 0.0017 0.0293 168 0.0314 0.0017 0.0297 169 0.0351 0.0019 0.0332 170 0.0356 0.0019 0.0337 171 0.0366 0.0020 0.0346 172 0.0372 0.0020 0.0352 173 0.0384 0.0021 0.0363 174 0.0390 0.0021 0.0369 175 0.0404 0.0022 0.0382 176 0.0411 0.0022 0.0389 177 0.0428 0.0023 0.0405 178 0.0437 0.0024 0.0413 179 0.0457 0.0025 0.0432 180 0.0468 0.0025 0.0443 181 0.0493 0.0027 0.0466 182 0.0507 0.0027 0.0479 183 0.0539 0.0029 0.0510 184 0.0558 0.0030 0.0528 185 0.0465 0.0025 0.0440 186 0.0491 0.0026 0.0465 187 0.0558 0.0030 0.0528 188 0.0601 0.0032 0.0569 189 0.0725 0.0039 0.0686 190 0.0818 0.0042 0.0776 191 0.1169 0.0042 0.1127 192 0.1608 0.0042 0.1566 193 0.5033 0.0042 0.4991 194 0.0953 0.0042 0.0910 195 0.0655 0.0035 0.0620 196 0.0522 0.0028 0.0494 197 0.0579 0.0031 0.0548 198 0.0522 0.0028 0.0494 199 0.0480 0.0026 0.0454 200 0.0446 0.0024 0.0422 201 0.0419 0.0023 0.0397 202 0.0397 0.0021 0.0375 203 0.0378 0.0020 0.0357 204 0.0361 0.0019 0.0341 13 1119
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
205 0.0319 0.0017 0.0301 206 0.0306 0.0016 0.0289 207 0.0294 0.0016 0.0279 208 0.0284 0.0015 0.0269 209 0.0275 0.0015 0.0260 210 0.0266 0.0014 0.0252 211 0.0259 0.0014 0.0245 212 0.0252 0.0014 0.0238 213 0.0245 0.0013 0.0232 214 0.0239 0.0013 0.0226 215 0.0233 0.0013 0.0221 216 0.0228 0.0012 0.0216 217 0.0196 0.0011 0.0185 218 0.0191 0.0010 0.0181 219 0.0187 0.0010 0.0177 220 0.0183 0.0010 0.0173 221 0.0179 0.0010 0.0169 222 0.0175 0.0009 0.0166 223 0.0172 0.0009 0.0163 224 0.0169 0.0009 0.0160 225 0.0166 0.0009 0.0157 226 0.0163 0.0009 0.0154 227 0.0160 0.0009 0.0151 228 0.0157 0.0008 0.0149 229 0.0155 0.0008 0.0146 230 0.0152 0.0008 0.0144 231 0.0150 0.0008 0.0142 232 0.0148 0.0008 0.0140 233 0.0146 0.0008 0.0138 234 0.0144 0.0008 0.0136 235 0.0142 0.0008 0.0134 236 0.0140 0.0008 0.0132 237 0.0138 0.0007 0.0130 238 0.0136 0.0007 0.0129 239 0.0134 0.0007 0.0127 240 0.0133 0.0007 0.0126 241 0.0131 0.0007 0.0124 242 0.0130 0.0007 0.0123 243 0.0128 0.0007 0.0121 244 0.0127 0.0007 0.0120 245 0.0125 0.0007 0.0118 246 0.0124 0.0007 0.0117 247 0.0122 0.0007 0.0116 248 0.0121 0.0007 0.0115 249 0.0120 0.0006 0.0113 250 0.0119 0.0006 0.0112 251 0.0118 0.0006 0.0111 252 0.0116 0.0006 0.0110 14 1120
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
253 0.0115 0.0006 0.0109 254 0.0114 0.0006 0.0108 255 0.0113 0.0006 0.0107 256 0.0112 0.0006 0.0106 257 0.0111 0.0006 0.0105 258 0.0110 0.0006 0.0104 259 0.0109 0.0006 0.0103 260 0.0108 0.0006 0.0102 261 0.0107 0.0006 0.0101 262 0.0106 0.0006 0.0101 263 0.0105 0.0006 0.0100 264 0.0105 0.0006 0.0099 265 0.0104 0.0006 0.0098 266 0.0103 0.0006 0.0097 267 0.0102 0.0006 0.0097 268 0.0101 0.0005 0.0096 269 0.0101 0.0005 0.0095 270 0.0100 0.0005 0.0094 271 0.0099 0.0005 0.0094 272 0.0098 0.0005 0.0093 273 0.0098 0.0005 0.0092 274 0.0097 0.0005 0.0092 275 0.0096 0.0005 0.0091 276 0.0096 0.0005 0.0090 277 0.0095 0.0005 0.0090 278 0.0094 0.0005 0.0089 279 0.0094 0.0005 0.0089 280 0.0093 0.0005 0.0088 281 0.0092 0.0005 0.0087 282 0.0092 0.0005 0.0087 283 0.0091 0.0005 0.0086 284 0.0091 0.0005 0.0086 285 0.0090 0.0005 0.0085 286 0.0089 0.0005 0.0085 287 0.0089 0.0005 0.0084 288 0.0088 0.0005 0.0084 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Total soil rain loss = 0.29(In)
Total effective rainfall = 5.73(In)
Peak flow rate in flood hydrograph = 6.22(CFS)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 24 ‐ H O U R S T O R M
R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Hydrograph in 5 Minute intervals ((CFS))
15 1121
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Time(h+m) Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 0+ 5 0.0001 0.01 Q | | | | 0+10 0.0006 0.07 Q | | | | 0+15 0.0016 0.15 Q | | | | 0+20 0.0028 0.18 Q | | | | 0+25 0.0042 0.20 Q | | | | 0+30 0.0056 0.21 Q | | | | 0+35 0.0071 0.22 Q | | | | 0+40 0.0087 0.23 Q | | | | 0+45 0.0103 0.23 Q | | | | 0+50 0.0119 0.24 Q | | | | 0+55 0.0136 0.24 Q | | | | 1+ 0 0.0152 0.24 Q | | | | 1+ 5 0.0169 0.25 Q | | | | 1+10 0.0186 0.25 Q | | | | 1+15 0.0204 0.25 VQ | | | | 1+20 0.0221 0.25 VQ | | | | 1+25 0.0239 0.25 VQ | | | | 1+30 0.0256 0.25 VQ | | | | 1+35 0.0274 0.26 VQ | | | | 1+40 0.0291 0.26 |Q | | | | 1+45 0.0309 0.26 |Q | | | | 1+50 0.0327 0.26 |Q | | | | 1+55 0.0345 0.26 |Q | | | | 2+ 0 0.0363 0.26 |Q | | | | 2+ 5 0.0381 0.26 |Q | | | | 2+10 0.0399 0.26 |Q | | | | 2+15 0.0417 0.26 |Q | | | | 2+20 0.0435 0.26 |Q | | | | 2+25 0.0453 0.26 |Q | | | | 2+30 0.0471 0.27 |Q | | | | 2+35 0.0490 0.27 |Q | | | | 2+40 0.0508 0.27 |Q | | | | 2+45 0.0526 0.27 |Q | | | | 2+50 0.0545 0.27 |Q | | | | 2+55 0.0564 0.27 |Q | | | | 3+ 0 0.0582 0.27 |QV | | | | 3+ 5 0.0601 0.27 |QV | | | | 3+10 0.0620 0.27 |QV | | | | 3+15 0.0639 0.27 |QV | | | | 3+20 0.0658 0.27 |QV | | | | 3+25 0.0677 0.28 |QV | | | | 3+30 0.0696 0.28 |QV | | | | 3+35 0.0715 0.28 |QV | | | | 3+40 0.0734 0.28 |QV | | | | 3+45 0.0753 0.28 |QV | | | | 16 1122
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
3+50 0.0773 0.28 |QV | | | | 3+55 0.0792 0.28 |QV | | | | 4+ 0 0.0812 0.28 |QV | | | | 4+ 5 0.0831 0.28 |QV | | | | 4+10 0.0851 0.29 |QV | | | | 4+15 0.0871 0.29 |Q V | | | | 4+20 0.0891 0.29 |Q V | | | | 4+25 0.0910 0.29 |Q V | | | | 4+30 0.0930 0.29 |Q V | | | | 4+35 0.0951 0.29 |Q V | | | | 4+40 0.0971 0.29 |Q V | | | | 4+45 0.0991 0.29 |Q V | | | | 4+50 0.1011 0.30 |Q V | | | | 4+55 0.1032 0.30 |Q V | | | | 5+ 0 0.1052 0.30 |Q V | | | | 5+ 5 0.1073 0.30 |Q V | | | | 5+10 0.1094 0.30 |Q V | | | | 5+15 0.1114 0.30 |Q V | | | | 5+20 0.1135 0.30 |Q V | | | | 5+25 0.1156 0.30 |Q V | | | | 5+30 0.1177 0.31 |Q V | | | | 5+35 0.1198 0.31 |Q V | | | | 5+40 0.1220 0.31 |Q V | | | | 5+45 0.1241 0.31 |Q V | | | | 5+50 0.1262 0.31 |Q V | | | | 5+55 0.1284 0.31 |Q V | | | | 6+ 0 0.1306 0.31 |Q V | | | | 6+ 5 0.1327 0.32 |Q V | | | | 6+10 0.1349 0.32 |Q V | | | | 6+15 0.1371 0.32 |Q V | | | | 6+20 0.1393 0.32 |Q V | | | | 6+25 0.1415 0.32 |Q V | | | | 6+30 0.1438 0.32 |Q V | | | | 6+35 0.1460 0.32 |Q V | | | | 6+40 0.1482 0.33 |Q V | | | | 6+45 0.1505 0.33 |Q V | | | | 6+50 0.1528 0.33 |Q V | | | | 6+55 0.1551 0.33 |Q V | | | | 7+ 0 0.1574 0.33 |Q V | | | | 7+ 5 0.1597 0.34 |Q V | | | | 7+10 0.1620 0.34 |Q V | | | | 7+15 0.1643 0.34 |Q V | | | | 7+20 0.1667 0.34 |Q V | | | | 7+25 0.1690 0.34 |Q V | | | | 7+30 0.1714 0.34 |Q V | | | | 7+35 0.1738 0.35 |Q V | | | | 7+40 0.1762 0.35 |Q V | | | | 7+45 0.1786 0.35 |Q V | | | | 17 1123
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
7+50 0.1810 0.35 |Q V | | | | 7+55 0.1834 0.35 |Q V | | | | 8+ 0 0.1859 0.36 |Q V | | | | 8+ 5 0.1883 0.36 |Q V | | | | 8+10 0.1908 0.36 |Q V | | | | 8+15 0.1933 0.36 |Q V | | | | 8+20 0.1958 0.36 |Q V | | | | 8+25 0.1984 0.37 |Q V | | | | 8+30 0.2009 0.37 |Q V | | | | 8+35 0.2035 0.37 |Q V | | | | 8+40 0.2060 0.37 |Q V | | | | 8+45 0.2086 0.38 |Q V | | | | 8+50 0.2112 0.38 |Q V | | | | 8+55 0.2138 0.38 |Q V | | | | 9+ 0 0.2165 0.38 |Q V | | | | 9+ 5 0.2191 0.39 |Q V | | | | 9+10 0.2218 0.39 |Q V | | | | 9+15 0.2245 0.39 |Q V | | | | 9+20 0.2272 0.39 |Q V | | | | 9+25 0.2300 0.40 |Q V | | | | 9+30 0.2327 0.40 |Q V | | | | 9+35 0.2355 0.40 |Q V | | | | 9+40 0.2383 0.41 |Q V | | | | 9+45 0.2411 0.41 |Q V | | | | 9+50 0.2439 0.41 |Q V | | | | 9+55 0.2468 0.41 |Q V | | | | 10+ 0 0.2496 0.42 |Q V | | | | 10+ 5 0.2525 0.42 |Q V | | | | 10+10 0.2555 0.42 |Q V | | | | 10+15 0.2584 0.43 |Q V | | | | 10+20 0.2614 0.43 |Q V| | | | 10+25 0.2644 0.43 |Q V| | | | 10+30 0.2674 0.44 |Q V| | | | 10+35 0.2704 0.44 |Q V| | | | 10+40 0.2735 0.45 |Q V| | | | 10+45 0.2766 0.45 |Q V| | | | 10+50 0.2797 0.45 |Q V| | | | 10+55 0.2828 0.46 |Q V| | | | 11+ 0 0.2860 0.46 |Q V| | | | 11+ 5 0.2892 0.47 |Q V | | | 11+10 0.2925 0.47 |Q V | | | 11+15 0.2957 0.47 |Q V | | | 11+20 0.2990 0.48 |Q V | | | 11+25 0.3024 0.48 |Q V | | | 11+30 0.3057 0.49 |Q V | | | 11+35 0.3091 0.49 |Q V | | | 11+40 0.3126 0.50 |Q V | | | 11+45 0.3160 0.50 | Q V | | | 18 1124
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
11+50 0.3195 0.51 | Q |V | | | 11+55 0.3231 0.51 | Q |V | | | 12+ 0 0.3267 0.52 | Q |V | | | 12+ 5 0.3303 0.53 | Q |V | | | 12+10 0.3341 0.56 | Q |V | | | 12+15 0.3382 0.58 | Q |V | | | 12+20 0.3423 0.60 | Q |V | | | 12+25 0.3465 0.61 | Q |V | | | 12+30 0.3508 0.62 | Q | V | | | 12+35 0.3552 0.63 | Q | V | | | 12+40 0.3596 0.64 | Q | V | | | 12+45 0.3641 0.65 | Q | V | | | 12+50 0.3687 0.66 | Q | V | | | 12+55 0.3733 0.67 | Q | V | | | 13+ 0 0.3780 0.68 | Q | V | | | 13+ 5 0.3828 0.69 | Q | V | | | 13+10 0.3876 0.70 | Q | V | | | 13+15 0.3925 0.71 | Q | V | | | 13+20 0.3975 0.72 | Q | V | | | 13+25 0.4026 0.73 | Q | V | | | 13+30 0.4077 0.74 | Q | V | | | 13+35 0.4129 0.76 | Q | V | | | 13+40 0.4182 0.77 | Q | V | | | 13+45 0.4236 0.78 | Q | V | | | 13+50 0.4291 0.80 | Q | V | | | 13+55 0.4346 0.81 | Q | V | | | 14+ 0 0.4403 0.83 | Q | V | | | 14+ 5 0.4461 0.85 | Q | V | | | 14+10 0.4522 0.88 | Q | V | | | 14+15 0.4586 0.92 | Q | V | | | 14+20 0.4651 0.95 | Q | V | | | 14+25 0.4719 0.98 | Q | V | | | 14+30 0.4788 1.00 | Q | V | | | 14+35 0.4858 1.03 | Q | V | | | 14+40 0.4931 1.06 | Q | V | | | 14+45 0.5006 1.09 | Q | V | | | 14+50 0.5083 1.12 | Q | V | | | 14+55 0.5162 1.15 | Q | V | | | 15+ 0 0.5244 1.19 | Q | V | | | 15+ 5 0.5328 1.23 | Q | V | | | 15+10 0.5415 1.27 | Q | V | | | 15+15 0.5506 1.32 | Q | V| | | 15+20 0.5601 1.37 | Q | V| | | 15+25 0.5698 1.41 | Q | V| | | 15+30 0.5794 1.39 | Q | V | | 15+35 0.5889 1.37 | Q | V | | 15+40 0.5986 1.42 | Q | V | | 15+45 0.6092 1.53 | Q | |V | | 19 1125
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
15+50 0.6208 1.69 | Q | |V | | 15+55 0.6342 1.94 | Q | |V | | 16+ 0 0.6508 2.41 | Q| | V | | 16+ 5 0.6761 3.68 | | Q | V | | 16+10 0.7175 6.01 | | | Q | | 16+15 0.7603 6.22 | | | Q V | | 16+20 0.7883 4.06 | | Q | V | | 16+25 0.8083 2.91 | |Q | V | | 16+30 0.8252 2.45 | Q| | V | | 16+35 0.8402 2.18 | Q | | V| | 16+40 0.8537 1.96 | Q | | V| | 16+45 0.8658 1.76 | Q | | V| | 16+50 0.8768 1.60 | Q | | V | 16+55 0.8871 1.49 | Q | | V | 17+ 0 0.8966 1.38 | Q | | |V | 17+ 5 0.9053 1.28 | Q | | |V | 17+10 0.9134 1.17 | Q | | |V | 17+15 0.9208 1.08 | Q | | |V | 17+20 0.9278 1.01 | Q | | | V | 17+25 0.9341 0.93 | Q | | | V | 17+30 0.9400 0.85 | Q | | | V | 17+35 0.9456 0.82 | Q | | | V | 17+40 0.9511 0.79 | Q | | | V | 17+45 0.9563 0.76 | Q | | | V | 17+50 0.9613 0.73 | Q | | | V | 17+55 0.9662 0.71 | Q | | | V | 18+ 0 0.9710 0.69 | Q | | | V | 18+ 5 0.9756 0.67 | Q | | | V | 18+10 0.9799 0.63 | Q | | | V | 18+15 0.9840 0.59 | Q | | | V | 18+20 0.9879 0.57 | Q | | | V | 18+25 0.9917 0.55 | Q | | | V | 18+30 0.9954 0.53 | Q | | | V | 18+35 0.9990 0.52 | Q | | | V | 18+40 1.0025 0.51 | Q | | | V | 18+45 1.0059 0.49 |Q | | | V | 18+50 1.0092 0.48 |Q | | | V | 18+55 1.0125 0.47 |Q | | | V | 19+ 0 1.0157 0.46 |Q | | | V | 19+ 5 1.0188 0.46 |Q | | | V | 19+10 1.0219 0.45 |Q | | | V | 19+15 1.0249 0.44 |Q | | | V | 19+20 1.0279 0.43 |Q | | | V | 19+25 1.0308 0.42 |Q | | | V | 19+30 1.0337 0.42 |Q | | | V | 19+35 1.0365 0.41 |Q | | | V | 19+40 1.0393 0.41 |Q | | | V | 19+45 1.0421 0.40 |Q | | | V | 20 1126
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
19+50 1.0448 0.39 |Q | | | V | 19+55 1.0474 0.39 |Q | | | V | 20+ 0 1.0501 0.38 |Q | | | V | 20+ 5 1.0527 0.38 |Q | | | V | 20+10 1.0553 0.37 |Q | | | V | 20+15 1.0578 0.37 |Q | | | V | 20+20 1.0603 0.36 |Q | | | V | 20+25 1.0628 0.36 |Q | | | V | 20+30 1.0653 0.36 |Q | | | V | 20+35 1.0677 0.35 |Q | | | V | 20+40 1.0701 0.35 |Q | | | V | 20+45 1.0724 0.34 |Q | | | V | 20+50 1.0748 0.34 |Q | | | V | 20+55 1.0771 0.34 |Q | | | V | 21+ 0 1.0794 0.33 |Q | | | V | 21+ 5 1.0817 0.33 |Q | | | V | 21+10 1.0839 0.33 |Q | | | V | 21+15 1.0861 0.32 |Q | | | V | 21+20 1.0884 0.32 |Q | | | V | 21+25 1.0905 0.32 |Q | | | V | 21+30 1.0927 0.31 |Q | | | V | 21+35 1.0948 0.31 |Q | | | V | 21+40 1.0970 0.31 |Q | | | V | 21+45 1.0991 0.31 |Q | | | V | 21+50 1.1012 0.30 |Q | | | V | 21+55 1.1032 0.30 |Q | | | V | 22+ 0 1.1053 0.30 |Q | | | V | 22+ 5 1.1073 0.30 |Q | | | V | 22+10 1.1093 0.29 |Q | | | V | 22+15 1.1113 0.29 |Q | | | V | 22+20 1.1133 0.29 |Q | | | V | 22+25 1.1153 0.29 |Q | | | V | 22+30 1.1172 0.28 |Q | | | V | 22+35 1.1192 0.28 |Q | | | V | 22+40 1.1211 0.28 |Q | | | V | 22+45 1.1230 0.28 |Q | | | V | 22+50 1.1249 0.27 |Q | | | V | 22+55 1.1268 0.27 |Q | | | V| 23+ 0 1.1286 0.27 |Q | | | V| 23+ 5 1.1305 0.27 |Q | | | V| 23+10 1.1323 0.27 |Q | | | V| 23+15 1.1341 0.27 |Q | | | V| 23+20 1.1360 0.26 |Q | | | V| 23+25 1.1378 0.26 |Q | | | V| 23+30 1.1396 0.26 |Q | | | V| 23+35 1.1413 0.26 |Q | | | V| 23+40 1.1431 0.26 |Q | | | V| 23+45 1.1448 0.25 |Q | | | V| 21 1127
DA11ExSyn100yr24013
23+50 1.1466 0.25 |Q | | | V| 23+55 1.1483 0.25 |Q | | | V| 24+ 0 1.1500 0.25 Q | | | V| 24+ 5 1.1517 0.23 Q | | | V| 24+10 1.1528 0.17 Q | | | V| 24+15 1.1535 0.10 Q | | | V| 24+20 1.1540 0.07 Q | | | V| 24+25 1.1543 0.05 Q | | | V| 24+30 1.1546 0.04 Q | | | V| 24+35 1.1548 0.03 Q | | | V| 24+40 1.1549 0.02 Q | | | V| 24+45 1.1551 0.02 Q | | | V| 24+50 1.1552 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+55 1.1552 0.01 Q | | | V| 25+ 0 1.1553 0.01 Q | | | V| 25+ 5 1.1553 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+10 1.1553 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+15 1.1553 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+20 1.1553 0.00 Q | | | V ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 22 1128
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s
Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 ‐ 2018, Version 9.0 Study date 10/01/25
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ San Bernardino County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method
Manual date ‐ August 1986
Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Pre‐developed DA1.2, 10‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Storm Event Year = 10
Antecedent Moisture Condition = 2
English (in‐lb) Input Units Used
English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used
English Units used in output format
Area averaged rainfall intensity isohyetal data:
Sub‐ Area Duration Isohyetal
(Ac.) (hours) (In)
Rainfall data for year 10
1.91 1 0.90
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rainfall data for year 10
1.91 6 2.28
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Rainfall data for year 10
1 1129
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
1.91 24 4.01
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ******** Area‐averaged max loss rate, Fm ********
SCS curve SCS curve Area Area Fp(Fig C6) Ap Fm No.(AMCII) NO.(AMC 2) (Ac.) Fraction (In/Hr) (dec.) (In/Hr)
86.0 86.0 1.91 1.000 0.265 0.943 0.250 Area‐averaged adjusted loss rate Fm (In/Hr) = 0.250
********* Area‐Averaged low loss rate fraction, Yb ********** Area Area SCS CN SCS CN S Pervious (Ac.) Fract (AMC2) (AMC2) Yield Fr
1.80 0.943 86.0 86.0 1.63 0.637
0.11 0.057 98.0 98.0 0.20 0.941 Area‐averaged catchment yield fraction, Y = 0.655
Area‐averaged low loss fraction, Yb = 0.345
User entry of time of concentration = 0.268 (hours)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Watershed area = 1.91(Ac.)
Catchment Lag time = 0.215 hours
Unit interval = 5.000 minutes
Unit interval percentage of lag time = 38.8247
Hydrograph baseflow = 0.00(CFS)
Average maximum watershed loss rate(Fm) = 0.250(In/Hr) Average low loss rate fraction (Yb) = 0.345 (decimal)
VALLEY UNDEVELOPED S‐Graph Selected
Computed peak 5‐minute rainfall = 0.332(In)
Computed peak 30‐minute rainfall = 0.681(In)
Specified peak 1‐hour rainfall = 0.898(In)
Computed peak 3‐hour rainfall = 1.630(In)
Specified peak 6‐hour rainfall = 2.280(In)
Specified peak 24‐hour rainfall = 4.010(In)
Note: user specified rainfall values used.
Rainfall depth area reduction factors:
Using a total area of 1.91(Ac.) (Ref: fig. E‐4)
5‐minute factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 0.332(In) 30‐minute factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 0.680(In) 1‐hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 0.898(In) 3‐hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 1.630(In) 2 1130
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
6‐hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 2.280(In) 24‐hour factor = 1.000 Adjusted rainfall = 4.010(In) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ U n i t H y d r o g r a p h
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Interval 'S' Graph Unit Hydrograph
Number Mean values ((CFS))
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ (K = 23.06 (CFS))
1 4.166 0.961
2 21.135 3.913
3 47.205 6.013
4 65.226 4.156
5 74.103 2.047
6 79.596 1.267
7 83.663 0.938
8 86.846 0.734
9 89.301 0.566
10 91.329 0.468
11 92.924 0.368
12 94.181 0.290
13 95.357 0.271
14 96.331 0.225
15 97.131 0.185
16 97.809 0.156
17 98.363 0.128
18 98.794 0.099
19 99.183 0.090
20 99.571 0.090
21 100.000 0.045
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Peak Unit Adjusted mass rainfall Unit rainfall
Number (In) (In)
1 0.3323 0.3323
2 0.4385 0.1062
3 0.5157 0.0772
4 0.5786 0.0629
5 0.6326 0.0540
6 0.6805 0.0479
7 0.7238 0.0433
8 0.7635 0.0397
9 0.8003 0.0368
10 0.8348 0.0344
11 0.8672 0.0324
12 0.8979 0.0307
13 0.9378 0.0399
3 1131
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
14 0.9763 0.0385
15 1.0135 0.0372
16 1.0497 0.0361
17 1.0848 0.0351
18 1.1189 0.0342
19 1.1523 0.0333
20 1.1848 0.0325
21 1.2166 0.0318
22 1.2477 0.0311
23 1.2782 0.0305
24 1.3080 0.0299
25 1.3373 0.0293
26 1.3661 0.0288
27 1.3944 0.0283
28 1.4222 0.0278
29 1.4495 0.0273
30 1.4764 0.0269
31 1.5029 0.0265
32 1.5290 0.0261
33 1.5548 0.0258
34 1.5802 0.0254
35 1.6053 0.0251
36 1.6300 0.0247
37 1.6517 0.0218
38 1.6732 0.0215
39 1.6944 0.0212
40 1.7153 0.0209
41 1.7359 0.0206
42 1.7563 0.0204
43 1.7764 0.0201
44 1.7963 0.0199
45 1.8159 0.0197
46 1.8354 0.0194
47 1.8546 0.0192
48 1.8736 0.0190
49 1.8924 0.0188
50 1.9110 0.0186
51 1.9294 0.0184
52 1.9476 0.0182
53 1.9657 0.0180
54 1.9835 0.0179
55 2.0012 0.0177
56 2.0188 0.0175
57 2.0361 0.0174
58 2.0534 0.0172
59 2.0704 0.0171
60 2.0873 0.0169
61 2.1041 0.0168
4 1132
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
62 2.1208 0.0166
63 2.1372 0.0165
64 2.1536 0.0164
65 2.1698 0.0162
66 2.1859 0.0161
67 2.2019 0.0160
68 2.2178 0.0159
69 2.2335 0.0157
70 2.2491 0.0156
71 2.2646 0.0155
72 2.2800 0.0154
73 2.2928 0.0128
74 2.3056 0.0127
75 2.3182 0.0126
76 2.3308 0.0125
77 2.3432 0.0124
78 2.3555 0.0123
79 2.3678 0.0123
80 2.3800 0.0122
81 2.3920 0.0121
82 2.4040 0.0120
83 2.4159 0.0119
84 2.4277 0.0118
85 2.4395 0.0117
86 2.4511 0.0116
87 2.4627 0.0116
88 2.4742 0.0115
89 2.4856 0.0114
90 2.4969 0.0113
91 2.5082 0.0113
92 2.5194 0.0112
93 2.5305 0.0111
94 2.5415 0.0110
95 2.5525 0.0110
96 2.5634 0.0109
97 2.5743 0.0108
98 2.5850 0.0108
99 2.5957 0.0107
100 2.6064 0.0106
101 2.6170 0.0106
102 2.6275 0.0105
103 2.6380 0.0105
104 2.6484 0.0104
105 2.6587 0.0103
106 2.6690 0.0103
107 2.6792 0.0102
108 2.6894 0.0102
109 2.6995 0.0101
5 1133
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
110 2.7096 0.0101
111 2.7196 0.0100
112 2.7295 0.0100
113 2.7394 0.0099
114 2.7493 0.0098
115 2.7591 0.0098
116 2.7688 0.0097
117 2.7785 0.0097
118 2.7881 0.0096
119 2.7977 0.0096
120 2.8073 0.0096
121 2.8168 0.0095
122 2.8263 0.0095
123 2.8357 0.0094
124 2.8450 0.0094
125 2.8544 0.0093
126 2.8636 0.0093
127 2.8729 0.0092
128 2.8821 0.0092
129 2.8912 0.0091
130 2.9003 0.0091
131 2.9094 0.0091
132 2.9184 0.0090
133 2.9274 0.0090
134 2.9363 0.0089
135 2.9452 0.0089
136 2.9541 0.0089
137 2.9629 0.0088
138 2.9717 0.0088
139 2.9805 0.0088
140 2.9892 0.0087
141 2.9979 0.0087
142 3.0065 0.0086
143 3.0151 0.0086
144 3.0237 0.0086
145 3.0322 0.0085
146 3.0407 0.0085
147 3.0492 0.0085
148 3.0576 0.0084
149 3.0660 0.0084
150 3.0744 0.0084
151 3.0827 0.0083
152 3.0910 0.0083
153 3.0993 0.0083
154 3.1075 0.0082
155 3.1157 0.0082
156 3.1239 0.0082
157 3.1320 0.0081
6 1134
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
158 3.1401 0.0081
159 3.1482 0.0081
160 3.1563 0.0080
161 3.1643 0.0080
162 3.1723 0.0080
163 3.1802 0.0080
164 3.1882 0.0079
165 3.1961 0.0079
166 3.2040 0.0079
167 3.2118 0.0078
168 3.2196 0.0078
169 3.2274 0.0078
170 3.2352 0.0078
171 3.2429 0.0077
172 3.2506 0.0077
173 3.2583 0.0077
174 3.2660 0.0077
175 3.2736 0.0076
176 3.2812 0.0076
177 3.2888 0.0076
178 3.2963 0.0076
179 3.3039 0.0075
180 3.3114 0.0075
181 3.3189 0.0075
182 3.3263 0.0075
183 3.3337 0.0074
184 3.3411 0.0074
185 3.3485 0.0074
186 3.3559 0.0074
187 3.3632 0.0073
188 3.3705 0.0073
189 3.3778 0.0073
190 3.3851 0.0073
191 3.3923 0.0072
192 3.3996 0.0072
193 3.4068 0.0072
194 3.4139 0.0072
195 3.4211 0.0072
196 3.4282 0.0071
197 3.4354 0.0071
198 3.4424 0.0071
199 3.4495 0.0071
200 3.4566 0.0070
201 3.4636 0.0070
202 3.4706 0.0070
203 3.4776 0.0070
204 3.4846 0.0070
205 3.4915 0.0069
7 1135
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
206 3.4984 0.0069
207 3.5053 0.0069
208 3.5122 0.0069
209 3.5191 0.0069
210 3.5259 0.0068
211 3.5328 0.0068
212 3.5396 0.0068
213 3.5464 0.0068
214 3.5531 0.0068
215 3.5599 0.0068
216 3.5666 0.0067
217 3.5733 0.0067
218 3.5800 0.0067
219 3.5867 0.0067
220 3.5934 0.0067
221 3.6000 0.0066
222 3.6066 0.0066
223 3.6133 0.0066
224 3.6198 0.0066
225 3.6264 0.0066
226 3.6330 0.0066
227 3.6395 0.0065
228 3.6460 0.0065
229 3.6525 0.0065
230 3.6590 0.0065
231 3.6655 0.0065
232 3.6720 0.0065
233 3.6784 0.0064
234 3.6848 0.0064
235 3.6912 0.0064
236 3.6976 0.0064
237 3.7040 0.0064
238 3.7103 0.0064
239 3.7167 0.0063
240 3.7230 0.0063
241 3.7293 0.0063
242 3.7356 0.0063
243 3.7419 0.0063
244 3.7482 0.0063
245 3.7544 0.0062
246 3.7606 0.0062
247 3.7669 0.0062
248 3.7731 0.0062
249 3.7792 0.0062
250 3.7854 0.0062
251 3.7916 0.0062
252 3.7977 0.0061
253 3.8039 0.0061
8 1136
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
254 3.8100 0.0061
255 3.8161 0.0061
256 3.8222 0.0061
257 3.8282 0.0061
258 3.8343 0.0061
259 3.8403 0.0060
260 3.8464 0.0060
261 3.8524 0.0060
262 3.8584 0.0060
263 3.8644 0.0060
264 3.8704 0.0060
265 3.8763 0.0060
266 3.8823 0.0060
267 3.8882 0.0059
268 3.8941 0.0059
269 3.9001 0.0059
270 3.9060 0.0059
271 3.9118 0.0059
272 3.9177 0.0059
273 3.9236 0.0059
274 3.9294 0.0058
275 3.9353 0.0058
276 3.9411 0.0058
277 3.9469 0.0058
278 3.9527 0.0058
279 3.9585 0.0058
280 3.9642 0.0058
281 3.9700 0.0058
282 3.9758 0.0057
283 3.9815 0.0057
284 3.9872 0.0057
285 3.9929 0.0057
286 3.9986 0.0057
287 4.0043 0.0057
288 4.0100 0.0057
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Unit Unit Unit Effective Period Rainfall Soil‐Loss Rainfall (number) (In) (In) (In) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 1 0.0057 0.0020 0.0037 2 0.0057 0.0020 0.0037 3 0.0057 0.0020 0.0037 4 0.0057 0.0020 0.0037 5 0.0057 0.0020 0.0038 6 0.0058 0.0020 0.0038 7 0.0058 0.0020 0.0038 8 0.0058 0.0020 0.0038 9 1137
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
9 0.0058 0.0020 0.0038 10 0.0058 0.0020 0.0038 11 0.0059 0.0020 0.0038 12 0.0059 0.0020 0.0038 13 0.0059 0.0020 0.0039 14 0.0059 0.0020 0.0039 15 0.0059 0.0021 0.0039 16 0.0060 0.0021 0.0039 17 0.0060 0.0021 0.0039 18 0.0060 0.0021 0.0039 19 0.0060 0.0021 0.0039 20 0.0060 0.0021 0.0039 21 0.0061 0.0021 0.0040 22 0.0061 0.0021 0.0040 23 0.0061 0.0021 0.0040 24 0.0061 0.0021 0.0040 25 0.0061 0.0021 0.0040 26 0.0062 0.0021 0.0040 27 0.0062 0.0021 0.0041 28 0.0062 0.0021 0.0041 29 0.0062 0.0022 0.0041 30 0.0062 0.0022 0.0041 31 0.0063 0.0022 0.0041 32 0.0063 0.0022 0.0041 33 0.0063 0.0022 0.0041 34 0.0063 0.0022 0.0042 35 0.0064 0.0022 0.0042 36 0.0064 0.0022 0.0042 37 0.0064 0.0022 0.0042 38 0.0064 0.0022 0.0042 39 0.0065 0.0022 0.0042 40 0.0065 0.0022 0.0042 41 0.0065 0.0023 0.0043 42 0.0065 0.0023 0.0043 43 0.0066 0.0023 0.0043 44 0.0066 0.0023 0.0043 45 0.0066 0.0023 0.0043 46 0.0066 0.0023 0.0043 47 0.0067 0.0023 0.0044 48 0.0067 0.0023 0.0044 49 0.0067 0.0023 0.0044 50 0.0068 0.0023 0.0044 51 0.0068 0.0023 0.0044 52 0.0068 0.0024 0.0045 53 0.0068 0.0024 0.0045 54 0.0069 0.0024 0.0045 55 0.0069 0.0024 0.0045 56 0.0069 0.0024 0.0045 10 1138
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
57 0.0070 0.0024 0.0046 58 0.0070 0.0024 0.0046 59 0.0070 0.0024 0.0046 60 0.0070 0.0024 0.0046 61 0.0071 0.0024 0.0046 62 0.0071 0.0025 0.0047 63 0.0072 0.0025 0.0047 64 0.0072 0.0025 0.0047 65 0.0072 0.0025 0.0047 66 0.0072 0.0025 0.0047 67 0.0073 0.0025 0.0048 68 0.0073 0.0025 0.0048 69 0.0074 0.0025 0.0048 70 0.0074 0.0026 0.0048 71 0.0074 0.0026 0.0049 72 0.0075 0.0026 0.0049 73 0.0075 0.0026 0.0049 74 0.0075 0.0026 0.0049 75 0.0076 0.0026 0.0050 76 0.0076 0.0026 0.0050 77 0.0077 0.0026 0.0050 78 0.0077 0.0027 0.0050 79 0.0077 0.0027 0.0051 80 0.0078 0.0027 0.0051 81 0.0078 0.0027 0.0051 82 0.0078 0.0027 0.0051 83 0.0079 0.0027 0.0052 84 0.0079 0.0027 0.0052 85 0.0080 0.0028 0.0052 86 0.0080 0.0028 0.0052 87 0.0081 0.0028 0.0053 88 0.0081 0.0028 0.0053 89 0.0082 0.0028 0.0053 90 0.0082 0.0028 0.0054 91 0.0083 0.0029 0.0054 92 0.0083 0.0029 0.0054 93 0.0084 0.0029 0.0055 94 0.0084 0.0029 0.0055 95 0.0085 0.0029 0.0055 96 0.0085 0.0029 0.0056 97 0.0086 0.0030 0.0056 98 0.0086 0.0030 0.0056 99 0.0087 0.0030 0.0057 100 0.0087 0.0030 0.0057 101 0.0088 0.0030 0.0058 102 0.0088 0.0030 0.0058 103 0.0089 0.0031 0.0058 104 0.0089 0.0031 0.0059 11 1139
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
105 0.0090 0.0031 0.0059 106 0.0091 0.0031 0.0059 107 0.0091 0.0032 0.0060 108 0.0092 0.0032 0.0060 109 0.0093 0.0032 0.0061 110 0.0093 0.0032 0.0061 111 0.0094 0.0033 0.0062 112 0.0095 0.0033 0.0062 113 0.0096 0.0033 0.0063 114 0.0096 0.0033 0.0063 115 0.0097 0.0033 0.0063 116 0.0097 0.0034 0.0064 117 0.0098 0.0034 0.0064 118 0.0099 0.0034 0.0065 119 0.0100 0.0035 0.0065 120 0.0101 0.0035 0.0066 121 0.0102 0.0035 0.0067 122 0.0102 0.0035 0.0067 123 0.0103 0.0036 0.0068 124 0.0104 0.0036 0.0068 125 0.0105 0.0036 0.0069 126 0.0106 0.0037 0.0069 127 0.0107 0.0037 0.0070 128 0.0108 0.0037 0.0071 129 0.0109 0.0038 0.0071 130 0.0110 0.0038 0.0072 131 0.0111 0.0038 0.0073 132 0.0112 0.0039 0.0073 133 0.0113 0.0039 0.0074 134 0.0114 0.0039 0.0075 135 0.0116 0.0040 0.0076 136 0.0116 0.0040 0.0076 137 0.0118 0.0041 0.0077 138 0.0119 0.0041 0.0078 139 0.0121 0.0042 0.0079 140 0.0122 0.0042 0.0080 141 0.0123 0.0043 0.0081 142 0.0124 0.0043 0.0081 143 0.0126 0.0044 0.0083 144 0.0127 0.0044 0.0083 145 0.0154 0.0053 0.0101 146 0.0155 0.0054 0.0101 147 0.0157 0.0054 0.0103 148 0.0159 0.0055 0.0104 149 0.0161 0.0056 0.0105 150 0.0162 0.0056 0.0106 151 0.0165 0.0057 0.0108 152 0.0166 0.0057 0.0109 12 1140
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
153 0.0169 0.0058 0.0111 154 0.0171 0.0059 0.0112 155 0.0174 0.0060 0.0114 156 0.0175 0.0061 0.0115 157 0.0179 0.0062 0.0117 158 0.0180 0.0062 0.0118 159 0.0184 0.0064 0.0121 160 0.0186 0.0064 0.0122 161 0.0190 0.0066 0.0124 162 0.0192 0.0066 0.0126 163 0.0197 0.0068 0.0129 164 0.0199 0.0069 0.0130 165 0.0204 0.0070 0.0133 166 0.0206 0.0071 0.0135 167 0.0212 0.0073 0.0139 168 0.0215 0.0074 0.0141 169 0.0247 0.0085 0.0162 170 0.0251 0.0087 0.0164 171 0.0258 0.0089 0.0169 172 0.0261 0.0090 0.0171 173 0.0269 0.0093 0.0176 174 0.0273 0.0094 0.0179 175 0.0283 0.0098 0.0185 176 0.0288 0.0099 0.0188 177 0.0299 0.0103 0.0196 178 0.0305 0.0105 0.0199 179 0.0318 0.0110 0.0208 180 0.0325 0.0112 0.0213 181 0.0342 0.0118 0.0224 182 0.0351 0.0121 0.0230 183 0.0372 0.0129 0.0244 184 0.0385 0.0133 0.0252 185 0.0307 0.0106 0.0201 186 0.0324 0.0112 0.0212 187 0.0368 0.0127 0.0241 188 0.0397 0.0137 0.0260 189 0.0479 0.0165 0.0313 190 0.0540 0.0187 0.0354 191 0.0772 0.0208 0.0564 192 0.1062 0.0208 0.0853 193 0.3323 0.0208 0.3115 194 0.0629 0.0208 0.0421 195 0.0433 0.0149 0.0283 196 0.0344 0.0119 0.0226 197 0.0399 0.0138 0.0261 198 0.0361 0.0125 0.0236 199 0.0333 0.0115 0.0218 200 0.0311 0.0107 0.0204 13 1141
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
201 0.0293 0.0101 0.0192 202 0.0278 0.0096 0.0182 203 0.0265 0.0092 0.0174 204 0.0254 0.0088 0.0166 205 0.0218 0.0075 0.0142 206 0.0209 0.0072 0.0137 207 0.0201 0.0070 0.0132 208 0.0194 0.0067 0.0127 209 0.0188 0.0065 0.0123 210 0.0182 0.0063 0.0119 211 0.0177 0.0061 0.0116 212 0.0172 0.0059 0.0113 213 0.0168 0.0058 0.0110 214 0.0164 0.0057 0.0107 215 0.0160 0.0055 0.0105 216 0.0156 0.0054 0.0102 217 0.0128 0.0044 0.0084 218 0.0125 0.0043 0.0082 219 0.0123 0.0042 0.0080 220 0.0120 0.0041 0.0078 221 0.0117 0.0041 0.0077 222 0.0115 0.0040 0.0075 223 0.0113 0.0039 0.0074 224 0.0110 0.0038 0.0072 225 0.0108 0.0037 0.0071 226 0.0106 0.0037 0.0070 227 0.0105 0.0036 0.0068 228 0.0103 0.0036 0.0067 229 0.0101 0.0035 0.0066 230 0.0100 0.0034 0.0065 231 0.0098 0.0034 0.0064 232 0.0096 0.0033 0.0063 233 0.0095 0.0033 0.0062 234 0.0094 0.0032 0.0061 235 0.0092 0.0032 0.0060 236 0.0091 0.0031 0.0060 237 0.0090 0.0031 0.0059 238 0.0089 0.0031 0.0058 239 0.0088 0.0030 0.0057 240 0.0086 0.0030 0.0057 241 0.0085 0.0029 0.0056 242 0.0084 0.0029 0.0055 243 0.0083 0.0029 0.0055 244 0.0082 0.0028 0.0054 245 0.0081 0.0028 0.0053 246 0.0080 0.0028 0.0053 247 0.0080 0.0027 0.0052 248 0.0079 0.0027 0.0052 14 1142
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
249 0.0078 0.0027 0.0051 250 0.0077 0.0027 0.0050 251 0.0076 0.0026 0.0050 252 0.0076 0.0026 0.0049 253 0.0075 0.0026 0.0049 254 0.0074 0.0026 0.0048 255 0.0073 0.0025 0.0048 256 0.0073 0.0025 0.0048 257 0.0072 0.0025 0.0047 258 0.0071 0.0025 0.0047 259 0.0071 0.0024 0.0046 260 0.0070 0.0024 0.0046 261 0.0069 0.0024 0.0045 262 0.0069 0.0024 0.0045 263 0.0068 0.0024 0.0045 264 0.0068 0.0023 0.0044 265 0.0067 0.0023 0.0044 266 0.0067 0.0023 0.0044 267 0.0066 0.0023 0.0043 268 0.0066 0.0023 0.0043 269 0.0065 0.0022 0.0043 270 0.0065 0.0022 0.0042 271 0.0064 0.0022 0.0042 272 0.0064 0.0022 0.0042 273 0.0063 0.0022 0.0041 274 0.0063 0.0022 0.0041 275 0.0062 0.0021 0.0041 276 0.0062 0.0021 0.0040 277 0.0061 0.0021 0.0040 278 0.0061 0.0021 0.0040 279 0.0060 0.0021 0.0040 280 0.0060 0.0021 0.0039 281 0.0060 0.0021 0.0039 282 0.0059 0.0020 0.0039 283 0.0059 0.0020 0.0039 284 0.0058 0.0020 0.0038 285 0.0058 0.0020 0.0038 286 0.0058 0.0020 0.0038 287 0.0057 0.0020 0.0038 288 0.0057 0.0020 0.0037 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Total soil rain loss = 1.27(In)
Total effective rainfall = 2.74(In)
Peak flow rate in flood hydrograph = 2.69(CFS)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 24 ‐ H O U R S T O R M
15 1143
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Hydrograph in 5 Minute intervals ((CFS))
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Time(h+m) Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 0+ 5 0.0000 0.00 Q | | | | 0+10 0.0001 0.02 Q | | | | 0+15 0.0004 0.04 Q | | | | 0+20 0.0008 0.06 Q | | | | 0+25 0.0013 0.06 Q | | | | 0+30 0.0017 0.07 Q | | | | 0+35 0.0022 0.07 Q | | | | 0+40 0.0027 0.08 Q | | | | 0+45 0.0033 0.08 Q | | | | 0+50 0.0038 0.08 Q | | | | 0+55 0.0044 0.08 Q | | | | 1+ 0 0.0050 0.08 Q | | | | 1+ 5 0.0055 0.08 Q | | | | 1+10 0.0061 0.09 Q | | | | 1+15 0.0067 0.09 Q | | | | 1+20 0.0073 0.09 Q | | | | 1+25 0.0079 0.09 Q | | | | 1+30 0.0085 0.09 Q | | | | 1+35 0.0091 0.09 Q | | | | 1+40 0.0098 0.09 Q | | | | 1+45 0.0104 0.09 Q | | | | 1+50 0.0110 0.09 QV | | | | 1+55 0.0116 0.09 QV | | | | 2+ 0 0.0123 0.09 QV | | | | 2+ 5 0.0129 0.09 QV | | | | 2+10 0.0135 0.09 QV | | | | 2+15 0.0141 0.09 QV | | | | 2+20 0.0148 0.09 QV | | | | 2+25 0.0154 0.09 QV | | | | 2+30 0.0161 0.09 QV | | | | 2+35 0.0167 0.09 QV | | | | 2+40 0.0173 0.09 QV | | | | 2+45 0.0180 0.09 QV | | | | 2+50 0.0186 0.09 QV | | | | 2+55 0.0193 0.09 QV | | | | 3+ 0 0.0199 0.09 QV | | | | 3+ 5 0.0206 0.10 QV | | | | 3+10 0.0213 0.10 QV | | | | 3+15 0.0219 0.10 Q V | | | | 3+20 0.0226 0.10 Q V | | | | 3+25 0.0232 0.10 Q V | | | | 16 1144
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
3+30 0.0239 0.10 Q V | | | | 3+35 0.0246 0.10 Q V | | | | 3+40 0.0253 0.10 Q V | | | | 3+45 0.0259 0.10 Q V | | | | 3+50 0.0266 0.10 Q V | | | | 3+55 0.0273 0.10 Q V | | | | 4+ 0 0.0280 0.10 Q V | | | | 4+ 5 0.0287 0.10 Q V | | | | 4+10 0.0294 0.10 Q V | | | | 4+15 0.0301 0.10 Q V | | | | 4+20 0.0308 0.10 Q V | | | | 4+25 0.0315 0.10 Q V | | | | 4+30 0.0322 0.10 Q V | | | | 4+35 0.0329 0.10 Q V | | | | 4+40 0.0336 0.10 Q V | | | | 4+45 0.0343 0.10 Q V | | | | 4+50 0.0350 0.10 Q V | | | | 4+55 0.0357 0.10 Q V | | | | 5+ 0 0.0364 0.10 Q V | | | | 5+ 5 0.0371 0.10 Q V | | | | 5+10 0.0379 0.11 Q V | | | | 5+15 0.0386 0.11 Q V | | | | 5+20 0.0393 0.11 Q V | | | | 5+25 0.0401 0.11 Q V | | | | 5+30 0.0408 0.11 Q V | | | | 5+35 0.0416 0.11 Q V | | | | 5+40 0.0423 0.11 Q V | | | | 5+45 0.0430 0.11 Q V | | | | 5+50 0.0438 0.11 Q V | | | | 5+55 0.0446 0.11 Q V | | | | 6+ 0 0.0453 0.11 Q V | | | | 6+ 5 0.0461 0.11 Q V | | | | 6+10 0.0468 0.11 Q V | | | | 6+15 0.0476 0.11 Q V | | | | 6+20 0.0484 0.11 Q V | | | | 6+25 0.0492 0.11 Q V | | | | 6+30 0.0500 0.11 Q V | | | | 6+35 0.0507 0.11 Q V | | | | 6+40 0.0515 0.11 Q V | | | | 6+45 0.0523 0.12 Q V | | | | 6+50 0.0531 0.12 Q V | | | | 6+55 0.0539 0.12 Q V | | | | 7+ 0 0.0547 0.12 Q V | | | | 7+ 5 0.0555 0.12 Q V | | | | 7+10 0.0564 0.12 Q V | | | | 7+15 0.0572 0.12 Q V | | | | 7+20 0.0580 0.12 Q V | | | | 7+25 0.0588 0.12 Q V | | | | 17 1145
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
7+30 0.0597 0.12 Q V | | | | 7+35 0.0605 0.12 Q V | | | | 7+40 0.0614 0.12 Q V | | | | 7+45 0.0622 0.12 Q V | | | | 7+50 0.0631 0.12 Q V | | | | 7+55 0.0639 0.12 Q V | | | | 8+ 0 0.0648 0.13 Q V | | | | 8+ 5 0.0656 0.13 Q V | | | | 8+10 0.0665 0.13 Q V | | | | 8+15 0.0674 0.13 Q V | | | | 8+20 0.0683 0.13 Q V | | | | 8+25 0.0692 0.13 Q V | | | | 8+30 0.0701 0.13 Q V | | | | 8+35 0.0710 0.13 Q V | | | | 8+40 0.0719 0.13 Q V | | | | 8+45 0.0728 0.13 Q V | | | | 8+50 0.0737 0.13 Q V | | | | 8+55 0.0746 0.13 Q V | | | | 9+ 0 0.0756 0.14 Q V | | | | 9+ 5 0.0765 0.14 Q V | | | | 9+10 0.0774 0.14 Q V | | | | 9+15 0.0784 0.14 Q V | | | | 9+20 0.0793 0.14 Q V | | | | 9+25 0.0803 0.14 Q V | | | | 9+30 0.0813 0.14 Q V | | | | 9+35 0.0823 0.14 Q V | | | | 9+40 0.0832 0.14 Q V | | | | 9+45 0.0842 0.14 Q V | | | | 9+50 0.0852 0.15 Q V | | | | 9+55 0.0862 0.15 Q V | | | | 10+ 0 0.0872 0.15 Q V | | | | 10+ 5 0.0883 0.15 Q V | | | | 10+10 0.0893 0.15 Q V | | | | 10+15 0.0903 0.15 Q V | | | | 10+20 0.0914 0.15 Q V | | | | 10+25 0.0924 0.15 Q V | | | | 10+30 0.0935 0.15 Q V | | | | 10+35 0.0946 0.16 Q V | | | | 10+40 0.0957 0.16 Q V | | | | 10+45 0.0968 0.16 Q V | | | | 10+50 0.0979 0.16 Q V| | | | 10+55 0.0990 0.16 Q V| | | | 11+ 0 0.1001 0.16 Q V| | | | 11+ 5 0.1012 0.16 Q V| | | | 11+10 0.1024 0.17 Q V| | | | 11+15 0.1035 0.17 Q V| | | | 11+20 0.1047 0.17 Q V| | | | 11+25 0.1059 0.17 Q V| | | | 18 1146
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
11+30 0.1071 0.17 Q V| | | | 11+35 0.1083 0.17 Q V| | | | 11+40 0.1095 0.18 Q V | | | 11+45 0.1107 0.18 Q V | | | 11+50 0.1119 0.18 Q V | | | 11+55 0.1132 0.18 Q V | | | 12+ 0 0.1145 0.18 Q V | | | 12+ 5 0.1158 0.19 Q V | | | 12+10 0.1171 0.20 Q V | | | 12+15 0.1185 0.21 Q V | | | 12+20 0.1200 0.22 Q |V | | | 12+25 0.1216 0.22 Q |V | | | 12+30 0.1231 0.23 Q |V | | | 12+35 0.1247 0.23 Q |V | | | 12+40 0.1264 0.24 Q |V | | | 12+45 0.1280 0.24 Q |V | | | 12+50 0.1297 0.24 Q |V | | | 12+55 0.1314 0.25 Q | V | | | 13+ 0 0.1331 0.25 |Q | V | | | 13+ 5 0.1349 0.25 |Q | V | | | 13+10 0.1366 0.26 |Q | V | | | 13+15 0.1384 0.26 |Q | V | | | 13+20 0.1403 0.27 |Q | V | | | 13+25 0.1421 0.27 |Q | V | | | 13+30 0.1440 0.27 |Q | V | | | 13+35 0.1459 0.28 |Q | V | | | 13+40 0.1479 0.28 |Q | V | | | 13+45 0.1498 0.29 |Q | V | | | 13+50 0.1519 0.29 |Q | V | | | 13+55 0.1539 0.30 |Q | V | | | 14+ 0 0.1560 0.30 |Q | V | | | 14+ 5 0.1581 0.31 |Q | V | | | 14+10 0.1603 0.32 |Q | V | | | 14+15 0.1627 0.34 |Q | V | | | 14+20 0.1651 0.35 |Q | V | | | 14+25 0.1676 0.36 |Q | V | | | 14+30 0.1702 0.37 |Q | V | | | 14+35 0.1729 0.38 |Q | V | | | 14+40 0.1756 0.39 |Q | V | | | 14+45 0.1784 0.40 |Q | V | | | 14+50 0.1812 0.42 |Q | V | | | 14+55 0.1842 0.43 |Q | V | | | 15+ 0 0.1872 0.44 |Q | V | | | 15+ 5 0.1903 0.45 |Q | V | | | 15+10 0.1936 0.47 |Q | V | | | 15+15 0.1969 0.49 |Q | V | | | 15+20 0.2004 0.50 | Q | V | | | 15+25 0.2040 0.52 | Q | V | | | 19 1147
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
15+30 0.2075 0.52 | Q | V| | | 15+35 0.2110 0.50 | Q | V| | | 15+40 0.2145 0.51 | Q | V| | | 15+45 0.2182 0.54 | Q | V | | 15+50 0.2222 0.58 | Q | V | | 15+55 0.2268 0.67 | Q | V | | 16+ 0 0.2325 0.83 | Q | |V | | 16+ 5 0.2416 1.32 | Q | | V | | 16+10 0.2569 2.23 | Q | | V | | 16+15 0.2755 2.69 | Q | V | | 16+20 0.2896 2.05 | Q | | V | | 16+25 0.2990 1.36 | Q | | V | | 16+30 0.3063 1.06 | Q | | V | | 16+35 0.3127 0.93 | Q | | V | | 16+40 0.3184 0.83 | Q | | V| | 16+45 0.3235 0.75 | Q | | V| | 16+50 0.3282 0.68 | Q | | V | 16+55 0.3325 0.62 | Q | | V | 17+ 0 0.3365 0.57 | Q | | V | 17+ 5 0.3402 0.54 | Q | | |V | 17+10 0.3436 0.50 |Q | | |V | 17+15 0.3468 0.46 |Q | | |V | 17+20 0.3497 0.42 |Q | | | V | 17+25 0.3524 0.39 |Q | | | V | 17+30 0.3549 0.37 |Q | | | V | 17+35 0.3574 0.35 |Q | | | V | 17+40 0.3597 0.33 |Q | | | V | 17+45 0.3618 0.31 |Q | | | V | 17+50 0.3638 0.28 |Q | | | V | 17+55 0.3656 0.27 |Q | | | V | 18+ 0 0.3675 0.27 |Q | | | V | 18+ 5 0.3693 0.26 |Q | | | V | 18+10 0.3709 0.24 Q | | | V | 18+15 0.3725 0.23 Q | | | V | 18+20 0.3740 0.21 Q | | | V | 18+25 0.3754 0.21 Q | | | V | 18+30 0.3768 0.20 Q | | | V | 18+35 0.3781 0.19 Q | | | V | 18+40 0.3794 0.19 Q | | | V | 18+45 0.3806 0.18 Q | | | V | 18+50 0.3818 0.18 Q | | | V | 18+55 0.3830 0.17 Q | | | V | 19+ 0 0.3842 0.17 Q | | | V | 19+ 5 0.3853 0.17 Q | | | V | 19+10 0.3865 0.16 Q | | | V | 19+15 0.3876 0.16 Q | | | V | 19+20 0.3886 0.16 Q | | | V | 19+25 0.3897 0.15 Q | | | V | 20 1148
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
19+30 0.3907 0.15 Q | | | V | 19+35 0.3917 0.15 Q | | | V | 19+40 0.3927 0.15 Q | | | V | 19+45 0.3937 0.14 Q | | | V | 19+50 0.3947 0.14 Q | | | V | 19+55 0.3957 0.14 Q | | | V | 20+ 0 0.3966 0.14 Q | | | V | 20+ 5 0.3975 0.14 Q | | | V | 20+10 0.3985 0.13 Q | | | V | 20+15 0.3994 0.13 Q | | | V | 20+20 0.4003 0.13 Q | | | V | 20+25 0.4012 0.13 Q | | | V | 20+30 0.4020 0.13 Q | | | V | 20+35 0.4029 0.13 Q | | | V | 20+40 0.4038 0.12 Q | | | V | 20+45 0.4046 0.12 Q | | | V | 20+50 0.4054 0.12 Q | | | V | 20+55 0.4063 0.12 Q | | | V | 21+ 0 0.4071 0.12 Q | | | V | 21+ 5 0.4079 0.12 Q | | | V | 21+10 0.4087 0.12 Q | | | V | 21+15 0.4095 0.11 Q | | | V | 21+20 0.4103 0.11 Q | | | V | 21+25 0.4110 0.11 Q | | | V | 21+30 0.4118 0.11 Q | | | V | 21+35 0.4126 0.11 Q | | | V | 21+40 0.4133 0.11 Q | | | V | 21+45 0.4141 0.11 Q | | | V | 21+50 0.4148 0.11 Q | | | V | 21+55 0.4155 0.11 Q | | | V | 22+ 0 0.4163 0.11 Q | | | V | 22+ 5 0.4170 0.10 Q | | | V | 22+10 0.4177 0.10 Q | | | V | 22+15 0.4184 0.10 Q | | | V | 22+20 0.4191 0.10 Q | | | V | 22+25 0.4198 0.10 Q | | | V | 22+30 0.4205 0.10 Q | | | V | 22+35 0.4212 0.10 Q | | | V | 22+40 0.4219 0.10 Q | | | V | 22+45 0.4225 0.10 Q | | | V | 22+50 0.4232 0.10 Q | | | V | 22+55 0.4239 0.10 Q | | | V| 23+ 0 0.4245 0.10 Q | | | V| 23+ 5 0.4252 0.10 Q | | | V| 23+10 0.4258 0.09 Q | | | V| 23+15 0.4265 0.09 Q | | | V| 23+20 0.4271 0.09 Q | | | V| 23+25 0.4278 0.09 Q | | | V| 21 1149
DA12ExSyn10yr24013
23+30 0.4284 0.09 Q | | | V| 23+35 0.4290 0.09 Q | | | V| 23+40 0.4296 0.09 Q | | | V| 23+45 0.4303 0.09 Q | | | V| 23+50 0.4309 0.09 Q | | | V| 23+55 0.4315 0.09 Q | | | V| 24+ 0 0.4321 0.09 Q | | | V| 24+ 5 0.4327 0.08 Q | | | V| 24+10 0.4331 0.07 Q | | | V| 24+15 0.4335 0.05 Q | | | V| 24+20 0.4337 0.03 Q | | | V| 24+25 0.4338 0.02 Q | | | V| 24+30 0.4339 0.02 Q | | | V| 24+35 0.4340 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+40 0.4341 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+45 0.4342 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+50 0.4342 0.01 Q | | | V| 24+55 0.4343 0.01 Q | | | V| 25+ 0 0.4343 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+ 5 0.4343 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+10 0.4344 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+15 0.4344 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+20 0.4344 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+25 0.4344 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+30 0.4344 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+35 0.4344 0.00 Q | | | V| 25+40 0.4344 0.00 Q | | | V ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 22 1150
DA12ExSyn100yr24013
U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s
Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 ‐ 2018, Version 9.0 Study date 10/01/25
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ San Bernardino County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method
Manual date ‐ August 1986
Program License Serial Number 6474
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Commercial Development
Pre‐developed DA1.2, 100‐YR
SEC Riverside Drive and Ontario (Champion) Avenue,
Ontario CA 91761
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Storm Event Year = 100
Antecedent Moisture Condition = 3
English (in‐lb) Input Units Used
English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used
English Units used in output format
Area averaged rainfall intensity isohyetal data: