Exhibit F - Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 6, 2023- Packet with exhibits — Salinas City Council, October 24, 2023 (part 5 of 12)

There are existing monitoring programs for groundwater elevation, groundwater extraction, and groundwater quality carried out by the Monte rey County Water Resources Agency (MCWRA) and municipal and community water purveyors in order to fulfill groundwater quality regulatory requirements. As described above, the Project would not substantially deplete groundwater resources. In addition, as mentiopned above, although the proposed Project, would increase demand for water use on this specific site compared to the water use currently on the site, the overall city-wide projected population would not change because of this project. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.

4.10.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Hydrology and Water Quality related mitigation measure HYD-1 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5.

37 Salinas Valley Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency. (2022). Salinas Valley Groundwater Basin 180/400 -Foot Aquifer Subbasin 2022 Update. Accessed on March 17, 2023, https://svbgsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/180400-2022-GSP- 09292022.pdf.
38 Salinas Valley Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency (2022). Salinas Valley Groundwater Basin East Side Aquifer Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Accessed on March 17, 2023, https://svbgsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Eastside- Whole-GSP-Report-Only-20220414.pdf.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 102

Figure 4-13 Flood Zone Map
National Flood Hazard Layer Fl RMette @ FEMA
0 250 500 1,000 1,500
Feet
2,000
Basemap : USGS National Map: Ortholmager y: Data refreshed OCtober, 2020 Legend
SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND ANO INDEX MAP FOR FlRM PANEL lAYOUT

SPECIAL FLOOD I

HAZARD AREAS
Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)
Zone A. V. A99
With BFE or Depth Zone AE. AO, AH, ~ AR
Regulatory Floodway

0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas
of 1 % annual chance flood with average
depth less than one foot or with drainage
areas of less than one square mlle ZOIHIX
Future Conditions 1% Ann ual
Chance Flood Hazard Zor.e x
,- Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to
OTHER AREAS OF l evee. See Notes. Zone x
FLOOD HAZARD ,-,I~ Area with Flood Risk due to l evee zon. o NO SCREEN Area of Minima l Flood Hazard Zooex
c::::::J Effecti ve LOMRs
OTHER AREAS Area of Undeter mined Flood Hazard Zooeo
GENERAL Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer
STRUCTURES 11 I 1111 Levee. Dike. or Floodwall
8 20·2 Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance
~ Water Surface Elevation
Coastal Transect
-'11- Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE)
= Lim it of Study
- -- Jurisdicti on Boundary
•· - •·- Coastal Transect Baseline
OTHER - -- Profile Baseline
FEATURES ___ Hydrographl c Feature
Digita l Data Available N

MAP PANELS
No Dlgital Data Available
Unmapped
+
c::::::::J Project Locat ion
This map compli es with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps If It Is not void as described below.

The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap
accuracy standa rds
The flood hazard Information is derived directly from the aut horitative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map was exported on 3/ 17/ 2023 at 5:49 PM and does not
reflect changes or amendme nts subsequent to this date and time. The NFHL and effect ive informat ion may change or become supersede d by new data over time.

This map image is void if the one or more of the foll owing map elements do not appear: base map Imagery, flood zone labels. legend, scale bar, map creation date, community Identifiers , FIRM panel number. and FIRM effective date. Map Images for unmapped and unmodern ized areas cannot be used for
regulatory purposes.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 103

4.11 LAND USE PLANNING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established
community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or regulation adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
X

4.11.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is currently fully developed and is within Salinas city limits.

4.11.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
Less than Significant Impact. Typically, physical division of an established community would occur if a project introduced new incompatible uses inconsistent with the planned or existing land uses or created a physical barrier that impeded access within the community. Typical examples of physical barriers include the introduction of new, intersecting roadways, roadway closures, and construction of new major utility infrastructure (e.g., transmission lines, storm channels, etc.).

Surrounding Land Uses
This Project is funded by SB 2 grant funding for the purpose of providing additional opportunities for housing and mixed-use development, in line with the goals contained in the General Plan and Housing Element. Currently, the site is occupied by big -box r etail buildings, including Foods Co., Fallas Discount Store, and smaller retail and commercial services, collectively identified as “Foods Co.” Recently, several big box retail establishments have either declared bankruptcy or are at risk of declaring bank ruptcy. In consideration of these conditions, the City thought it an appropriate moment to re-imagine these properties as mixed-use villages with critical housing units.

Implementation of the Project would thereby facilitate future development in line with the envisioned transformation of the Project site.

Circulation System
No new streets are proposed that would result in a physical barrier. Street frontage includes East Alisal Street, a four (4)-lane east-west major arterial, South Sanborn Road, a four ( 4)-lane north-south major arterial, in addition to a two (2) -lane local street, McGowan Drive. The Project site is located approximately 0.2 miles north of State Route (SR) 101. There are two (2) bus stops near the site approximately 100 feet east of the site (“East Alisal/Towt” Stop ID: 3416) and 250 feet west of the site (“East Alisal/Sanborn” Stop ID: 3413) on East Alisal Street for Route 41

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 104 – Salinas-Alisal-Northridge and Route 42 – Alisal-Salinas operated by the Monterey -Salinas Transit (MST) with service every 15 minutes.

While no development is proposed, implementation of the Project could result in future development of the Project site with commercial and residential uses. Future development would be accessible by the existing circulation system, including existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit systems, and would not require the development of new roadways or permanent roadway closures.

Utility Infrastructure
No new major utility infrastructure is proposed that would result in a physical barrier. Since the Project site is within the city limits, future development resulting from Project implementation would be required to connect to the city’s water, sewer, stormwater, and wastewater services. Natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications are provided by private companies. Utility systems are described and analyzed in Section 4.10 and Section 4.15. Based on the analysis, implementation of the Project would not result in the construction of new, major utility infrastructure.

Overall, the Project would not result in the physical separation of the established community. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project. b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less than Significant Impact. Generally, policy conflicts are environmental impacts when they would result in direct physical impacts or where those conflicts relate to avoiding or mitigating environmental impacts. As such, associated physical environmental impacts are discussed in this document under specific topical sections, such as Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. The Project includes a General Plan Amendment and Rezone to provide additional opportunities for mixed -use development. Although no development is proposed, future development of the Project site would result in residential and commercial uses.

A discussion of land use policies that are applicable to the Project are included in Table 4-10. As discussed below, the Project is generally consistent with the proposed General Plan land use designation of Mixed Use. Specifically, the Project helps the City achieve Goal LU-1: Develop a balan ced land use pattern that provides a wide range of jobs, housing, shopping, services, and recreation and Goal CD-3: Create a community that promotes a pedestrian friendly, livable environment.

Table 4-10 Discussion on Land Use Policies in the General Plan for Mixed Use Development General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Policy LU -1.1: Achieve a balance of land uses to
provide for a range of housing, jobs, libraries, and
educational and recreational facilities that allow
residents to live, work, shop, learn, and play in the
community.

Consistent. The proposed land use and zone district change would diversify the types of land uses permitted on the Project site, including t he provision of housing, jobs, and public facilities which would otherwise not be permitted under the current land use and zoning designation.

Implementation of the Project would thereby facilitate a greater balance of land uses.

Policy LU -1.2: Provide a plan for land uses that
includes the capacity to accommodate growth
projected for 2020 and beyond.

Consistent. As described under Section 4.3 and Section

4.14, the City of Salinas and County of Monterey are
expected to experience population growth. In addition, the

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 105 city’s RHNA indicates a need for an additional 2,229
housing units. The Project would introduce additional
opportunities for housing and mixed-use development that would help the city meet the projected population growth and demand for housing units. Therefore, implementation of the Project would increase the city’s capacity to
accommodate growth projected for the next decade.

Policy LU -1.3: Make provision in residential areas
for institutional uses that are needed near homes
or which benefit from a residential environment,
including places of religious assembly, day -care
homes, homes for physically or developmentally
disabled persons, and care facilities in accordance
with the provisions of State law.

Consistent. The Project proposes a land us e and zoning change that would allow for future mixed-use development consisting of commercial and residential uses. Under the proposed planned land use designation and zone district, institutional uses including places of religious assembly, day-care homes, homes for physically or developmentally disabled persons, and care facilities would be permitted.

Therefore, Project implementation would allow for
institutional uses near homes.

Policy LU -1.4: Create and pre serve distinct,
identifiable neighborhoods that have traditional
neighborhood development (TND) characteristics.

Specifically, development should: Provide a
balanced mix of housing, workplaces, shopping,
recreational opportunities, and institutional uses,
including mixed -use structures (combined
residential and nonresidential uses), that help to
reduce vehicular trips.

Consistent. The proposed land use and zone change would help the City achieve a mix of uses , including housing, workplaces, shopping, recrea tional opportunities, and
institutional uses. Project implementation would facilitate the future development of mixed -use structures on a site with existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure.

Therefore, Project implementation would introduce
traditional neighborhood development characteristics that help to reduce vehicular trips.

Policy CD -3.4: Actively encourage mixed -use
development in order to provide a greater
spectrum of housing near businesses, alternative
modes of transportation and other activity areas.

Consistent. The Project proposes a land use and zoning
change that would allow for future mixed-use development in an area with existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure. Therefore, Project implementa tion would encourage mixed -use development including commercial
and residential uses near alternative modes of
transportation.

Further, through the entitlement process, future development would be reviewed for compliance with applicable regulations inclusive of those adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental effects. Overall, the entitlement process would ensure that the Project complies with the General Plan, SMC, and any other applicable policies and regulations. As such, a less than significant impact would occur.

4.11.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 106

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
X
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?
X

4.12.1 Environmental Setting
For the purposes of CEQA, mineral resources are land areas or deposits deemed significant by the California Department of Conservation (DOC). Mineral resources include oil, natural gas, and metallic and nonmetallic deposits, including aggregate resources. The California Geological Survey (CGS) classifies and designates areas within California that contain or potentially contain significant mineral resources. Lands are classified into Aggregate and Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs), which identify known or infer red significant mineral resources. According to the California Department of Conservation, CGS’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) Mineral Lands Classification (MLC) data portal, the Project site is in the MRZ-1 zone, indicating little likelihood for the presence of resources. 39 In addition, the City of Salinas, inclusive of the Project site, is not within a CalGEM-recognized oilfield and there are no oil and gas wells on-site.

4.12.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. The Project site is not located in an area designated for mineral resource preservation or recovery.

Therefore, the Project would not 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. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the Project. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important minera l resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
No Impact. As described above, the Project site is not located in an area designated for mineral resource preservation or recovery and as a result, the Project would not 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. Further, the site is not delineated in

39 California Department of Conservation. (2009). Mineral Lands Classification . Accessed on March 17, 2023 , https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=mlc

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 107 the General Plan, a Specific Plan, or other land use plan as a locally important mineral resource recovery site, thus it would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the Project.

4.12.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 108

4.13 NOISE
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise
levels?
X
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?
X

4.13.1 Environmental Setting
An Acoustical Analysis of the Project was conducted on February 28, 2023, by WJV Acoustics, Inc. (WJVA). The full report is provided in Appendix E. A summary of the Acoustical Analysis is provided below. Overall, the Acoustical Analysis concludes that future development of the Project site would decrease traffic volumes (and potentially decrease overall noise exposure levels) in the vicinity of the Project site. However, residential development could potentially be exposed to exterior and interior noise levels that exceed the City of Salinas noise standards for residential land uses. Additionally, non-residential land uses associated with future deve lopment could result in compatibility concerns with both existing and proposed uses in the vicinity of the Project site. When site -specific uses are proposed, site-specific acoustical analyses may be required if there are potential noise impacts at existing and proposed noise-sensitive land uses. However, because the Project does not propose development, the Project itself would not specifically be expected to result in any significant noise impacts to existing noise -sensitive receptors.

General Plan
The Salinas General Plan Noise Element outline policies to address negative effects of noise by establishing programs and policies to reduce excessive noise and limit the community’s exposure to loud noise . These policies are related to land use planning (Goal N-1), transportation-related noise (Goal N-2), and non-transportation related noise (Goal N-3). In particular, policies in the General Plan that are applicable to the Project include:

Goal N-1: Minimize the adverse effects of noise through proper land use planning

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 109 Policy N-1.1: Ensure that new development can be made compatible with the noise environment by using noise/land use compatibility standards and the Noise Contours Map as a guide for future planning and development decisions.

Policy N-1.2: Require the inclusion of noise-reducing design features in development and reuse/revitalization projects to address the impact of noise on residential development.

Policy N-1.4: Ensure proposed development meets Title 24 Noise Insulation Standards for construction.

Goal N-2: Minimize transportation-related noise impacts Policy N-2.1: Ensure noise impacts generated by vehicular sources are minimized through the use of noise control measures (e.g., earthen berms, landscaped walls, lowered streets).

Goal N-3: Minimize non-transportation related noise impacts Policy N -3.1: Enforce the City of Salinas Noise Ordinance to ensure stationary noise sources and noise emanating from construction activities, private developments/residences and special events are minimized.

The General Plan also addresses noise standards and land use compatibility. To ensure that noise producers do not adversely affect sensitive receptors, the city uses land use compatibility standards when planning and making development decisions. Table N-2 of the General Plan (reproduced as Table 4-11 below) summarizes the city noise standards for various types of land uses. The standards represent the maximum acceptable noise level as measured at the property boundary, which is used to determine noise impacts.

Table 4-11 Exterior Noise Standards (General Plan Table N-2) Designation/District of Property Receiving Noise Maximum Noise Level, Ldn or CNEL, dBA Agricultural 70
Residential 60
Commercial 65
Industrial 70
Public and Semipublic 70
Source: City of Salinas General Plan, Noise Element, Table N-2 Exterior Noise Standards These noise standards are the basis for development of the land use compatibility guidelines presented in Table N- 3 of the General Plan (i.e., the Noise/Land Use Compatibility Matrix) (reproduced as Table 4-12 below). If the noise level of a project falls within Zone A or Zone B as identified in the Noise/Land Use Compatibility Matrix , then the project is considered compatible with the noise enviro nment. Zone A implies that no mitigation will be needed.

Zone B implies that minor mitigation may be required to meet the city’s and Title 24 noise standards. All development project proponents are required to demonstrate that the noise standards will be met prior to human occupation of a building.

The General Plan identifies and projects noise contours and impact areas . Figure N -1 of the General Plan (reproduced as Figure 4-14 below) shows future noise contours and impact areas. The noise contours are used as a guide for land use and development decisions. Contours of 60 dBA or greater define noise impacted areas. When noise sensitive land uses are proposed within these contours, an acoustical analysis must be prepared. For a project to be approved, the analysis must demonstrate that the project is designed to attenuate the noise to meet the City noise standards identified in Table N-2 (Table 4-11 reproduced above). If a project is not designed to meet the noise standards, mitigation measures should be recommended in the analysis. If the analysis demonstrates that the noise

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 110 standards can be met with implementation of mitigation measures, the project can be approved with the mitigation measures, which shall be required as conditions of project approval. The proposed Project site is located in a noise contour and impact area greater than 60 dBA.

Lastly, the General Plan incorporates California Noise Insulation Standards (Title 24) which establishes an interior noise standard of 45 dBA for residential space (CNEL or Ldn). For residential structures to be located within noise contours of 60 dBA or greater from freeways, major streets, thoroughfares, rail lines, rapid transit lines, or industrial noise sources, acoustical studies must be prepared. Studies must demonstrate that the building is designed to reduce interior noise to 45 dBA or lower.

Table 4-12 Noise/ Land Use Compatibility Matrix
Land Use
Community Noise Exposure (Ldn or CNEL)
Zone A
Normally
Acceptable
Zone B
Conditionally
Acceptable
Zone C
Normally
Unacceptable
Zone D
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential < 60 60 - 70 70 - 75 > 75
Transient Lodging – Motel, Hotel < 60 60 - 75 75 - 80 > 80 Schools, Libraries, Churches,
Hospitals, Nursing Homes < 60 60 - 70 70 - 80 > 80
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
Amphitheaters - < 70 - > 70
Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator
Sports - < 75 - > 75
Playground, Parks < 70 - 70 - 75 > 75
Golf Course, Riding Stables, Water
Recreation, Cemeteries < 70 - 70 – 80 > 80
Office Buildings, Business
Commercial, and Professional < 65 60 - 75 > 75 -
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities,
Agriculture < 70 70 - 80 > 80 -
Source: City of Salinas General Plan, Modified by CBA from 1998 State of California General Plan Guidelines Zone A - Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved meet conventional Title 24 construction standards. No special noise insulation requirements.

ZONE B - Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development shall be undertaken only after a detailed noise analysis is made and noise reduction measures are identified and included i n the project design.

Zone C- Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development is discouraged. If new construction is proposed, a detailed analysis is required, noise reduction measures must be identified, and noise insulation features included in the design.

ZONE D- Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development clearly should not be undertaken.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 111

Figure 4-14 Future Noise Contour and Impact Areas
Sowoet.!WJdmd~200 1
City Boundary
Growth Arca Boundary
Project Location
0 2,500
City of Solinas
General Pion
S,0001\.
..........
---
\
\
\
\
I
I
I

I I I I
Future Community Noise Equivalent level
(CNEL) Contours
N-14
Figure N- 1
Future Noise Contours
and Impact Areas
September 2002

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 112 California Noise Insulation Standards (Title 24)
Title 24 established an interior noise standard of 45 dBA for residential space (CNEL or Ldn). The standards regulate that technical noise studies shall be prepared for residential units that are located within noise contours of or over 60 dBA from traffic or industrial noise sources. This is incorporated in the General Plan as illustrated above.

City of Salinas Municipal Code
SMC Section 37 -50.180 regulates ambient noise levels measured at the property boundary. The city’s noise standards for different types of land uses are listed in Table 4-13.

Table 4-13 Maximum Noise Standards
Zone of Property Receiving Noise Maximum Noise Level (CNEL, dBA) Agricultural District 70
Residential District 60 **
Commercial District 65
Industrial District 70
Mixed Use District 65 *
Parks or Open Space District 70
Public or Semipublic District 60
Source: City of Salinas Municipal Code Table 37-50.50
* The interior noise level in any residential dwelling unit located in a mixed use building or development shall not exceed a maximum of forty-five dBA from exterior ambient noise. ** In residential zones, the noise standard shall be 5.0 dBA lower between 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.

Other sections of the code provide regulations on operational noise, such as Section 5-12.03 – Prohibited Noises provides examples of noise d isturbance that are not allowed. These include operational sounds that could bring disturbance across a residential or commercial property line, such as residential devices, speakers, animals, loading and unloading, emergency signaling devices, and domestic power tools or machinery.

4.13.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
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 in other applicable local, state, or federal standards?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated . While no development is currently proposed, implementation of the Project would result in future development that would have noise generating activities. It is not anticipated that future development would generate 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 nois e ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or federal standards , given the type of development that would be permitted in the Project area (i.e., commercial, residential).

Traffic Noise Exposure
The Proje ct site is exposed to traffic noise associat ed with vehicles on East Alisal Street and surrounding local streets. The FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA -RF-77-108) was utilized for modeling traffic noise exposure (Appendix E) based on the estimated trip generation (Appendix F) that would occur under maximum

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 113 buildout of the Project site. Overall, the modeling indicates a reduction of theoretical noise exposure levels by 7 dB Leq that would occur under maximum buildout. This demonstrates that traffic volumes associated with the Project would decrease as a result of Project implementation; however, implementation of the Project would likely not result in any significant overall reduction in existing traffic noise exposure levels in proximity to the site.

Existing ambient noise exposure measured in vicinity of the site indicates a 69.1 dB L dn and 70.9 dB L dn which are above the city’s 60 dB L dn exterior noise level standard for residential uses. Typically, the exterior noise standard would apply at the outdoor activity areas (e.g., outdoor common areas, balconies, etc.) . Additionally, the city’s interior noise level standard is 45 dB Ldn.

A reduction of 7 dB L eq would not meet this standard. With regard to analyzing the exposure of sensitive uses to ambient noise levels in the vicinity in excess of established standards, CEQA case law had concluded that agencies subject to CEQA generally are not required to analyze the impact of existing environmental conditions on a project’s future users or residents except in specific instances where such conditions could be exacerbated due to implementation of the project (California Building Industry Association v Bay Area Air Quality Management District (S213478, December 17, 2015). As modeled, implementation of the proposed Project would not exacerbate traffic noise. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Stationary Noise Exposure
Mixed‐use land uses would typically include a variety of land uses including residential, commercial, retail and office uses. A wide variety of noise sources can be associated with commercial and retail land uses. The noise levels produced by such sources can also be highly variable and could potentially impact existing on‐site and off‐site sensitive receptors. From the perspective of the city’s noise standards, noise sources not associated with transportation sources are considered stationary noise sources. Typical examples of stationary noise sources include:
• Fans and blowers
• HVAC/Mechanical equipment
• Truck deliveries
• Loading Docks
• Compactors
• Amplified Drive‐Thru Menu Board Speakers
• Automated Car Wash Operations
Since no physical development is proposed, noise levels from new stationary noise sources cannot be predicted with certainty at this time since specific uses have not yet been proposed and the locations of stationary noise sources relative to locations of noise sensitive uses are not known. However, under some circumstances, there is a potential for such uses to exceed the city’s noise standards for stationary noise sources at the location of sensitive receptors. Future mixed-use development resulting from Project implementation would be required to comply with General Plan Policy N-3.1, requiring that stationary sources are minimized.

In addition, the Project site is within a noise contour and impact area greater than 60 dBA as shown in Figure N -1 of the General Plan (reproduced as Figure 4-14 below). Therefore, future development would be required to prepare a site-specific acoustical analysis that demonstrates the development is designed to attenuate the noise to meet the city’s noise standards iden tified in Table N-2 (Table 4-11 reproduced above). Any mitigation would be

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 114 required as conditions of project approval. Therefore, the Project would not be expected to result in any significant impacts related to stationary noise. Impacts would be less than significant.

Construction Noise Exposure
Construction noise was estimated using the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) Version 1.0.

Construction phases would include demolition, site preparation, grading, build ing construction, architectural coating, and paving. Of all construction phases, it is anticipated that grading would produce the loudest noise.

Consequently, for the purpose of this noise assessment, one of each construction equipment listed in the CalEEMod run (Appendix A) is included in the construction noise modeling. According to existing and anticipated land use within and around the Project site, the baseline and receptors that are analyzed in the RCNM are shown in Table 4-14.

Table 4-14 Receptors and Baseline Analyzed in the RCNM
Location Land Use Daytime Baseline (dBA) Evening Baseline (dBA) Nighttime Baseline (dBA) **
15 feet to the south Residential 60 60 55
50 feet within site* Commercial 65 65 65
* Since the site would not be development concurrently, the analysis assumes that future development could happen approximately 50 feet from future developed commercial units on site. ** Noise Baselines are based on Section 37-50.180 – Performance standards Short-term construction noises include traffic noise generated from transporting construction equipment and materials and construction worker commuting. These activities would raise noise levels near the site. According to CalEEMod, construction of the Project site would require 37 offroad equipment and generate a total of 622 worker trips and 86 vendor trips. According to modeling of the FHWA RCNM Version 1.0 , construction noise generated from the offroad equipment is estimated to be 99.7 dB Leq if all equipment was used at the same time. Ambient noise from construction activities would cease upon completion of construction. However, to further ensure that potential impacts related to constructi on noise levels are mitigated to levels that are less than significant, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure NOI -1. Compliance with the mitigation measure and applicable policies and regulations would ensure the Project would have a less than s ignificant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Prior to ground disturbing activities, the City of Salinas shall ensure the following with the Project proponent:
• Construction equipment, fixed of mobile, shall be outfitted with properly operating and maintained mufflers.
• Construction noise reduction methods such as shutting off idling equipment, installing temporary acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources, maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas and occupied residential areas, and using electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel equipment shall be used. • During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be located so that emitted noise is directed away from or shielded from sensitive noise receivers.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 115 b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. While no development is currently proposed, implementation of the Project would result in future development that would have noise generating activities. Ground borne vibration may result from operations and/or construction, depending on the use of equipme nt (e.g., pile drivers, bulldozers, jackhammers, etc.), distance to affected structures, and soil type. Depending on the method, equipment-generated vibrations could spread through the ground and affect nearby buildings. It is not anticipated that the Project would generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels, given the type of development that would be permitted in the Project area (i.e., residential, commercial, office). Potential vibration impacts from future construction would be short -term, temporary, and subject to compliance with Mitigation Measure NOI-1 and SMC Section 37-50.180 – Performance Standards. However, to further ensure that potential vibration impacts related to construction noise levels are mitigated to levels th at are less than significant, the Project shall also incorporate Mitigation Measure NOI-2. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measure NOI-2: The use of heavy construction equipment within 25 feet of existing structures shall be prohibited.
c) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Less than Significant Impact. The nearest public use airport is the Salinas Municipal Airport (SNS) located approximately 1.8 miles southeast of the Project site. SNS occupies 763 acres with two (2) runways, measuring 4,825 feet long and 150 feet wide and 6,004 feet long and 150 feet wide. The air traffic control tower is in operation 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. The applicable airport land use plan for SNS is the 1982 Salinas Municipal Airp ort Land Use Plan (Plan) adopted by the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission on May 17, 1982.31F 40 According
to the Plan, the Project site is located within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) of the Airport (AR) Overlay District.

Since the parcel is within the AIA, development on the parcel would be subject to regulations contained in Division 7 – Airport (AR) Overlay District of the SMC. Future physical development of the parcel would be subject to review for airport compatibility prior to approval by the applicable reviewing body. As a result, the Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project Area to excessive noise levels and a less than significant impact would occur.

4.13.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Noise related mitigation measures NOI-1 and NOI- 2 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5.

40 Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission. (1982). Salinas Municipal Airport Land Use Plan. Accessed on October 26, 2022,
https://www.cityofsalinas.org/sites/default/files/departments_files/public_works_files/airport_files/salinas_clup_reduced_si ze_adopted_05-17-1982_0.pdf

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 116

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned
population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X

4.14.1 Environmental Setting
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires that a CEQA document discuss the ways in which the proposed Project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. The CEQA Guidelines provide an example of a major expansion of a wastewater treatment plant that may allow for more construction within the service area. The CEQA Guidelines also note that the evaluation of growth inducement should consider the chara cteristics of a project that may encourage or facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment. Direct and Indirect Growth Inducement consists of activities that directly facilitate population growth, such as construction of new dwelling units. A key consideration in evaluating growth inducement is whether the activity in question constitutes “planned growth.” Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG)
The Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Monterey Bay Area, inclusive of the City of Salinas . In 2022, AMBAG adopted the long-term transportation planning document, 2045 Metropolitan T ransportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS) that provides population and employment forecasts for the region between 2015 and 2045. 41 The AMBAG region is projected to grow by 107,500 people, build over 42,200 housing units, and add 65,500 jobs between 201 5 and 2045, for a total population of 869,800, 304,900 total housing units, and 442,800 total jobs by 2045. The City of Salinas is projected to grow by 19,069 people, build over 10,149 housing units, and add 12,674 jobs between 2015 and 2045 for a total population of 177,128, 53,150 total housing units, and 85,683 total jobs between 2015 and 2045.

41 AMBAG. (2022). 2045 Metropoli tan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (Appendix A). Accessed March 31, 2023, https://www.ambag.org/sites/default/files/2022-05/PDFAAppendix%20A_2022%20RGF.pdf.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 117 U.S. Census Bureau
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the current population of the City of Salinas is 163,542 with a total of 44,405 housing units and an average household size of 4.15; there are approximately 68,879 jobs.42 Housing Element
The City of Salinas 2015 -2023 Housing Element identifies the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the City of Salinas as determined by AMBAG. The RHNA for 2014 -2023 is 2,229 units with an estimated 43,001 total units as of 2015. 43 The additional units would increase the total units to 45,230.

4.14.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Less than Significant Impact. The Project includes a G eneral Plan Amendment and Rezone. GPA No. 2022 -002 requests a land use change from Retail to Mixed -Use. Rezone No. 2022 -002 requests a rezone from CR – Commercial Retail to MX – Mixed Use, consistent with the proposed land use designation.

Although no phy sical development is proposed, the Project could facilitate future mixed-use development containing commercial and residential uses. The proposed Project would allow future buildout of up to 576 multi- family residential units and up to 147,015 sf. of commercial space. Based on an average household size of 4.15, the 576 units could generate approximately 2,390 new residents thereby increasing the city’s population from 163,542 to 165,932. The 576 units would also increase the total number of housing units from 44,405 to 44,981. The 147,015 sf. of commercial space could generate approximately 427 employees, increasing the number of employees citywide from 68,879 to 69,306. 44
Overall, the population, housing units, and employees generated by the proposed Proj ect would be within the AMBAG projections for the region and city. The new units would also assist the city with meeting its RHNA.

Therefore, the Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth and a less than significant impact would occur.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. There are approximately 10 existing structures on the Project site that predominately consist of retail uses. The site does not contain any existing housing or residential uses. Since the site does not currently provide

42 U.S. Census Bureau. 2022. Community Prof ile: Salinas, City, California. Accessed on March 31, 2023 , https://data.census.gov/profile/Salinas_city,_California?g=1600000US0664224. 43 City of Salinas. (2015). 2015 -2023 Housing Element. Accessed on March 31, 2023 , https://www.cityofsalinas.org/sites/default/files/Departments_Files/Community_Development_Files/General_Plan_Files/Ad opted_Salinas_HE_2015-2023_1.pdf
44 Southern California Association of Governments. (2001). Employment Density Study Summary Report. Accessed on March 15, 2023, https://www.mwcog.org/file.aspx?A=QTTlTR24POOOUIw5mPNzK8F4d8djdJe4LF9Exj6lXOU%3D

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 118 housing, future development of the Project site would not result in the physical displacement of people or housing.

No impact would occur because of the Project.

4.14.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 119

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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:

i. Fire protection? X
ii. Police protection? X
iii. Schools? X
iv. Parks? X
v. Other public facilities? X

4.15.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located within Salinas city limits and thus, future development would be subject to fees for the construction, acquisition, and improvements for public services and facilities . The City of Salinas implements a Public Facilities Impact Fee program per SMC Article V-D whereby any new development occurring within city limits is required to contribute its proportionate share of the costs of new public facilities intended to serve said development. Public services and facilities are further described below.

Fire Protection Services
Fire Protection Services in the city are provided by the Salinas Fire Department (SFD). The SFD operates a total of six (6) fire stations that serve the city, with Fire Station #4 closest to the Project site at 308 Williams Rd, Salinas, CA 93905. Fire Station #4 is located approximately 0.8 miles northeast of the Project site. The total authorized staffing for SFD is 99 personnel , and the minimum daily staffing is 26 . The response time goal for fire protection and emergency services is to “provide a 6-minute response from receipt of 911 call for arrival of first company 90% of the time.” The General Plan Safety Element includes the following goals and policies to ensure reductions in the potential for fire hazards and fire demand:

Policy LU-4.1: Provide an effective and responsive level of fire protection, public education and emergency response service (including facilities, personnel, and equipment) through the Salinas Fire Department.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 120 Policy LU-4.2: Improve the enforcement of regulations, such as zoning codes and building codes, to ensure existing and new development is constructed, occupied, and maintained to minimize potential fire and other hazards.

Policy LU-12: Review the level of services and f unding levels at budget time, adjusting when necessary to ensure that adequate levels of service are provided and facilities are maintained.

Policy S-4.6: Ensure that all development and reuse/revitalization projects are developed in accordance with the most recent Uniform Fire Code requirements.

Policy S-5.2: Ensure that street widths and clearance areas are sufficient to accommodate fire protection equipment and emergency vehicles.

Policy S -5.3: Monitor water fire -flow capability throughout the city and work with water providers to improve water pressure availability considered inadequate for fire protection.

Further, projects are subject to review by the SFD and to regulations and standards such as the California Uniform Fire Code (UFC), which includes regulations on construction, maintenance and building use. The UFC addresses fire department access, fire hydrants, sprinklers, fire alarm system, etc., for new buildings.

Police Protection Services
Police Protection Services in the city are provided by the Salinas Police Department (SPD). The SPD is located at 222 Lincoln Avenue, which is approximately 0.6 miles east of the Project site. According to the SPD 2021 Annual Report, there are 143 sworn of ficers employed , which provides a ratio of approximately 0.87 officers per thousand residents, a decrease from the ratio of 1.1 assessed in the General Plan. 45 The SPD received a total of 72,565 calls in 2021, and 90% of those instances officers arrives on-scene in four (4) minutes or less. The General Plan identifies policies to provide effective and responsive police protection , including alternative policing methods, youth programs, and crime awareness.

Schools
Educational services within the Project area are primarily served by Salinas City Elementary School District (SCESD) and Salinas Union High School Distric t. Schools within a one (1) -mile radius of the Protect site include Jesse G Sanchez School, Ashton School, Bard Blades School, Fremont School, El Sausal Middle School, Los Padres Elementary School, Hartnell College East Campus, and Sherwood School. In the 2021-2022 school year, the Salinas City Elementary School District had an enrollment of 8,287 students and the Salinas Union High School District had an enrollment of 16,525 students.46 Funding for schools and school facilities impacts is outlined in Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995 et. seq. (State statutes) which govern the amount of fees that can be levied against new development. These fees are used to construct new or expanded school facilities.

Payment of fees authorized by the statute is deemed “full and complete mitigation.” Pursuant to SMC Article V-A –

45 Police Services of Salinas. (2021). 2021 Annual Report. Accessed on November 1, 2022, https://salinaspd.org/2021-annual- report/
46 California Department of Education (2022). Data Quest. Accessed on November 17, 2022, https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 121 School Facilities Fee, a School Facilities Fee would be assessed for future development based on the rates in place at the time payment is due. In addition, the Salinas General Plan Land Use Element includes the following policy for educational facilities:

Policy LU-19: Continue to work with the school districts to the extent allowed by State law to ensure adequate school and recreational facilities are provided and maintained in the community. The City will cooperate in expediting construction of schools. School d istricts will consult with the City at the earliest possible time.

Parks and Recreation
Park and Recreation Facilities are overseen by the City of Salinas Recreation and Community Services Department.

Currently, there are approximately 593.5 acres of parkland, which provides a parkland to population ratio of 3.64 acres of parkland per 1,000 people. 47 This meets the city’s standard of three (3) acres per 1,000 residents. In addition, the City of Salinas General Plan Conservation/Open Space Element includes the following goals and policies related to park and recreational facilities and services:

Goal COS-7: Provide, develop, and maintain ample park and recreational facilities that offer a variety of recreational activities.

Policy COS-7 .1: Develop a high-quality public park system that provides adequate space and facilities for a variety of recreational opportunities conveniently accessible to all Salinas residents.

Policy COS-7.2: Maximize the use of built and natural features to develop a citywide network of parks and open spaces with Carr Lake, Gabilan Creek and the Sherwood Park/Rodeo Grounds complex as essential elements of the open space network.

Policy COS-7.3: Plan park and recreation facilities in cooperation with concerned public and private agencies and organizations, particularly school districts and neighborhood residents.

Policy COS-7.5: Identify the recreation needs of special user groups, such as the di sabled and elderly, and address these in park and recreation facility development.

Policy COS -7.7: Encourage development of private commercial recreational facilities (e.g., golf courses, sports centers, bowling alleys, family fun centers, etc.) to expand community recreational opportunities and to fill unmet needs.

Policy COS-7.8: While supporting the development of private recreational facilities, ensure that the supply and maintenance of public parks and recreational opportunities is adequate to ensure p ermanent availability of parks and recreational facilities for use by the entire community.

Policy COS-7.9: Require new residential development to provide land and/or fees to achieve a minimum of

3.0 acres per additional 1,000 population for developed publ ic parklands for community or neighborhood parks.

47 City of Salinas, Public Works Department, GIS Division. (Modified October 17, 2022). Parks and Recreation. Accessed on November 1, 2022, https://cityofsalinas.opendatasoft.com/explore/dataset/parks-and- recreation/information/?location=13,36.69581,-121.63405

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 122 Policy COS-7 .11: Develop and maintain an integrated system of open-space corridors and trails along utility easements, power -transmission-line rights -of-way, the reclamation ditch, stream banks, drainagewa ys, slopes, and other natural features.

Policy COS-7.12: Link activity centers, recreational opportunities, transit nodes and other services to the integrated trails network.

4.15.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Would the project result in substantial adve rse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the 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:
i. Fire protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is within city limits and is currently served by the SFD. Therefore, future development of the Project site would be served by the SFD. Although no specific development is proposed by the Project, the Project would facilitate future residential development that would introduce residents to the area and therefore could increase the demand for fire protection services. However, the increase would be incremental and would be within the anticipated growth projections for the city (See Section 4.14). The Project’s proximity to the existing station would support adequate service ratios, response times, and other performance objectives for fire protection services. In addition, future development would be reviewed by the SFD for requirements related to water supply, fire hydrants, and fire apparatus access. Further, future development would be subject to proportionate payment of the Public Facilities Impact Fee for construction and acquisition costs for improvements to fire protection services and facilities. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project would n ot result in the need for new or altered facilities that could have an environmental impact and a less than significant impact would occur.
ii. Police protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is within the city limits and therefore is curren tly served by the SPD.

Therefore, future development of the Project site would be served by the SPD. Although no specific development is proposed by the Project, the Project would facilitate future residential development that would introduce residents to the area and therefore could increase the demand for police services. However, the increase would be incremental and would be within the anticipated growth projections for the city (See Section 4.14). The Project’s proximity to the existing station would s upport adequate service ratios, response times, and other performance objectives for police protection services. In addition, future development of the Project site would be reviewed by the SPD for requirements related to crime protection . Further, future development would be subject to proportionate payment of the Public Facilities Impact Fee for construction and acquisition costs for improvements to police protection services and facilities. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project would not result in the need for new or altered facilities that could have an environmental impact and a less than significant impact would occur.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 123 iii. Schools?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is within the SCESD and Salinas Union High School District with several schools within a one-mile radius including Sherwood Elementary, Lincoln Elementary School, Roosevelt Elementary School, Salinas High School, Mount Toro High School, and Salinas Pre-School. In the 2021-2022 school year, SCESD had an enrollment of 8,287 students and the Salinas High School District had an enrollment of 16,525 students.

Although no specific development is proposed by the Project, the Project would facilitate future residential development that would introduce resid ents to the area and therefore could generate new students that would increase the school districts’ enrollment. A School Impact Fee would be assessed for future development of the Project site based on the rates in place at the time payment is due. As sta ted in Government Code Section 65995 et. seq., payment of School Impact Fees is deemed full and complete mitigation for potential impacts to schools caused by development. Therefore, payment of the assessed School Impact Fee would reduce impacts related to new school facilities resulting from implementation of the Project and impacts would be less than significant. iv. Parks?
Less than Significant Impact. Park and recreational facilities are typically impacted by an increase in use from residential development. Although no specific development is proposed by the Project, the Project would facilitate future residential development that would introduce residents to the area and therefore could increase the demand for and use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. The nearest public parks to the Project site include the Los Padres Neighborhood Park (2.7 acres, 0.2 miles east), La Paz Neighborhood Park (1.5 acres, 0.5 miles northwest), Hebbron Heights Park and Community Center (1.4 acres, 0.4 miles north), and Cesar Chavez Community Park (33.3 acres, 0.4 miles north).

As described in Section 4.16, the city’s current parkland to population ratio is 3.64 acres of parkland per 1,000 people, which meets the city’s standard of three (3) acres per 1,000 people. The proposed Project would allow future buildout of up to 5 76 multi-family residential units. Based on an average household size of 4.15, the 5 76 units could generate approximately 2,390 new residents thereby increasing the city’s population from 163,542 to 165,932. The incremental population increase would result in a parkland to population ratio of 3.59, wh ich would still meet the city’s standard. Therefore, residential demand associated with future development of the Project site would maintain the city’s performance standard.

In addition, f uture development would be subject to the applicable SMC regulatio ns, including payment of the Public Facilities Impact Fee in order to mitigate any potential impacts to the city’s park and recreation facilities generated by the incremental population increase. Compliance with these requirements would reduce any impacts resulting from increased residential demand for park and recreational facilities so as to not cause substantial physical deterioration of the facilities. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact. v. Other public facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. Although no specific development is currently proposed, future development resulting from Project implementation could increase the demand for other public services, such as courts, libraries, hospitals, etc. Incre ased demand as a result of the continued implementation of the Project could result in development or expansion of public facilities. Typical environmental impacts associated with the development of these facilities include air quality, greenhouse gas emis sions, noise, traffic, etc. The expansion of these facilities would be subject to CEQA as they are proposed. In addition, future development would be subject to the payment

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 124 of the Public Facilities Impact Fee in order to mitigate any potential impacts to t hese public facilities. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

4.15.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 125

4.16 RECREATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
X
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
X

4.16.1 Environmental Setting
Park and Recreation Facilities are overseen by the City of Salinas Recreation and Community Services Department.

Currently, there are approximately 593.5 acres of parkland, which provides a parkland to population ratio of 3.64 acres of parkland per 1,000 p eople. 48 This meets the city’s standard of three (3) acres per 1,000 residents. The nearest public parks to the Project site include Los Padres Neighborhood Park (2.7 acres, 0.2 miles east), La Paz Neighborhood Park (1.5 acres, 0.5 miles northwest), Hebbron Heights Park and Community Center (1.4 acres, 0.4 miles north), and Cesar Chavez Community Park (33.3 acres, 0.4 miles north).

General Plan
The Salinas General Plan Conservation/Open Space Element includes the following goals and policies related to park and recreational facilities and services:

Goal COS-7: Provide, develop, and maintain ample park and recreational facilities that offer a variety of recreational activities.

Policy COS-7 .1: Develop a high-quality public park system that provides adequate space and facilities for a variety of recreational opportunities conveniently accessible to all Salinas residents.

Policy COS-7.3: Plan park and recreation facilities in cooperation with concerned public and private agencies and organizations, particularly school districts and neighborhood residents.

48 City of Salinas, Public Works Department, GIS Division. (Modified October 17, 2022). Parks and Recreation. Accessed on November 1, 2022, https://cityofsalinas.opendatasoft.com/explore/dataset/parks-and- recreation/information/?location=13,36.69581,-121.63405

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 126 Policy COS-7.5: Identify the recreation needs of special user groups, such as the disabled and elderly, and address these in park and recreation facility development.

Policy COS-7.8: While supporting the development of private recreational facilities, ensure that the supply and maintenance of public parks and recreational opportunities is adequate to ensure permanent availability of parks and recreational facilities for use by the entire community.

Policy COS-7.9: Require new residential development to provide land and/or fees to achieve a minimum of

3.0 acres per additional 1,000 population for developed public parklands for community or neighborhood parks.

Policy COS-7 .11: Develop and maintain an integrated system of open-space corridors and trails along utility easements, power -transmission-line rights -of-way, the reclamation ditch, stream banks, drainageways, slopes, and other natural features.

Policy COS-7.12: Link activity centers, recreational opportunities, transit nodes and other services to the integrated trails network.

Salinas Municipal Code
In addition, the City of Salinas implements a Public Facilities Impact Fee program per SMC Article V-D whereby any new development occurring within city limits is required to contribute its proportionate share of the costs of new public facilities intended to serve said development.

4.16.2 Impact Assessment
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? Less than Significant Impact. Park and recreational facilities are typically impacted by an increase in use from residential development. Although no specific development is proposed by the Project, the Project would facilitate future residential development that would introduce residents to the area and therefore increase the demand for and use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. The nearest public parks to the Project site include the Cornell Corner (0.08 acres, 0.2 m iles southwest), Bantaan Memorial Park (0.7 acres, 0.4 miles northwest), Exposition Grounds (7.6-acre community park, 0.4 miles north), La Paz Neighborhood Park (1.5 acres, 0.3 miles east), and Cesar Chavez Community Park (33.3 acres, 0.4 miles northeast).

The proposed Project would allow future buildout of up to 576 multi-family residential units. Based on an average household size of 4.15, the 5 76 units could generate approximately 2, 390 new residents thereby increasing the city’s population from 163,542 to 165, 932. The incremental population increase would result in a parkland to population ratio of 3.59, which would still meet the city’s standard. Therefore, residential demand associated with future development of the Project site would maintain the city’s performance standard.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 127 Future development would be subject to the applicable SMC regulations, including payment of the Public Facilities Impact Fee in order to mitigate any potential impacts to the city’s park and recreation facilities generated by the incremental population increase. In addition, future development would be subject to open space provisions as required by the SMC. Compliance with these requirements would reduce any impacts resulting from increased residential demand for park and recreatio nal facilities so as to not cause substantial physical deterioration of the facilities. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact. b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact . Future residential development resulting from the Project could include the construction of recreational facilities as required by the SMC . In such cases, de velopment would be subject to compliance with the SMC and would be reviewed and conditioned by the City to ensure that physical effects on the environment are less than significant. Compliance would ensure that the facilities would not be in an area or be built to a scale that would cause an adverse physical effect on the environment. As a result, a less than significant impact would occur.

4.16.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 128

4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities?
X
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access? X

4.17.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is currently fully developed and paved . Street frontage includes East Alisal Street , a four (4)-lane east-west major arterial, South Sanborn Road, a four (4) -lane north-south major arterial, in addition to a two (2)- lane local street, McGowan Drive. Six (6)-foot sidewalks are on both sides of the roadways . Th ere is one (1 ) controlled crosswalk at East Alisal/South Sanborn Road. The Project site is located approximately 0.2 miles north of State Route (SR) 101. There are two (2) bus stops near the site approximately 100 feet east of the site (“ East Alisal/Towt” Stop ID: 3416) and 250 feet west of the site (“East Alisal/Sanborn” Stop ID: 3413) on East Alisal Street for Route 41 – Salinas-Alisal-Northridge and Route 42 – Alisal-Salinas operated by the Monterey -Salinas Transit (MST) with service every 15 minutes.

Monterey County Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
The Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) adopted the Monterey County Active Transportation Plan (ATP) in 2018 as an update to the 2011 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.49 The ATP identifies gaps in the bicycle and pedestrian network and opportunity areas for innovative bicycle facility design. Chapter 5.10 of the ATP provides a community profile for the City of Salinas. There are no existing bikeways in the vicinity of the Project site and the Plan proposed a Class IV protected bike land along Sanborn Road and a Class II buffered bike lane alon g East Alisal Street within and in the vicinity of the Project site.

General Plan
The Circulation Element of th e Salinas General Plan established goals and policies to maintain the operations of

49 Transportation Agency for Monterey County. (2018). 2018 Monterey County Active Transportation Plan. Accessed April 3, 2023, https://www.tamcmonterey.org/files/991071e61/2018-Monterey-County-Active-Transportation-Plan.pdf.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 129 existing roadway systems as new development occurs . These policies aim to prevent negative impacts caused by new developments and ensure that adequate transportation system is provided. The following goals and policies are generally applicable to the proposed Project.

Goal C-1: Provide and maintain a circulation system that meets the current and future needs of the community.

Policy C-1.2: Strive to maintain traffic Level of Service (LOS) D or better for all intersections and roadways.

Policy C-1.3: Require that new development and any proposal for an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan demonstrate that traffic service levels meeting established General Plan standards will be maintained on arterial and collector streets.

Policy C-1.4: Continue to require new development to contribute t o the financing of street improvements, including formation of roadway maintenance assessment districts, required to meet the demand generated by the project.

Policy C-1.5: Ensure that new development makes provisions for street maintenance through appropr iate use of gas tax and formation of maintenance assessment districts.

Policy C-1.8: Whenever possible, in reuse/revitalization projects, reduce the number of existing driveways on arterial streets to improve traffic flow.

Policy C-1.9: Use traffic calming methods within residential areas where necessary to create a pedestrian- friendly circulation system.

Policy C-1.11: Continue to enforce traffic laws, including those addressing bicycle and pedestrian traffic, to ensure a circulation system that is safe for motorized, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic.

Goal C-4: Provide an extensive, safe public bicycle network that provides on-street as well as offstreet facilities.

Policy C-4.3: Encourage existing businesses and require new construction to provide on-premise facilities to aid bicycle commuters, such as on-site safe bicycle parking.

Policy C-4.6: Ensure that all pedestrian and bicycle route improvements meet the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards for accessibility, and Caltrans standards for design.

Policy C-4.7: Encourage parking lot designs that provide for safe and secure bicycle parking.

General Plan Policies C -1.2 and C-1.3 require a level of service (LOS) evaluation to determine project consistency with the General Plan. However, LOS is no longer required to determine potential transportation impacts under CEQA (See CEQA Guidelines).

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 130 City of Salinas Vision Zero: Reducing Serious Injuries and Fatalities on Salinas Streets The City of Salinas adopted the Vision Zero Policy (Resolution No. 21791) on February 11, 2020, commencing the development of a Vision Zero Action Plan. The “Vision Zero” strategy seeks to eliminate all traffic facilities and serve injuries, while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all. 50 The Vision Zero Action Plan was adopted on August 24, 2020.51
According to the Action Plan, the Project site is in the vicinity of th e highest collision corridors (East Alisal Street between Front Street and Sanborn Road, and Sanborn Road between East Laurel Drive and SR 101). The Action Plan also identifies a High Injury Network (HIN) (Figure 4-15). South Sanborn Road, East Alisal Street, and a portion of McGowan Drive that are in the vicinity of the Project site is in the HIN. The Action Plan identifies implementation actions are identified. Applicable policies for new development, or redevelopment, are as follows.

Action 2.6. Establish internal process for Vision Zero countermeasures to be evaluated and implemented, where feasible, on projects on the HIN.

Action 2.7. Require that new development incorporate Vision Zero principles for any new road construction.

Action 2.8. Require that any redevelopment contribute to street safety improvements required to meet the demand generated by the project.

Action 2.9. Whenever possible, in new or re -development projects, reduce the number of driveways and access points on arterial streets.

CEQA Guidelines
Under Senate Bill 743 (SB743), traffic impacts are related to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). The VMT metric became mandatory on July 1, 2020. Senate Bill (SB) 743 requires that relevant CEQA analysis of transportation impacts be conducted using a metric known as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) instead of Level of Service (LOS). VMT measures how much actual automobile travel (additional miles driven) a proposed Project would create on California roads.

If the project adds excessive automobile travel onto roads, then the project may cause a significant transportation impact. Therefore, LOS measures of impacts on traffic facilities are no longer a relevant CEQA criteria for transportation impacts.

To implement SB 743, the CEQA Guidelines we re amended by adding Section 15064.3 . According to Section 15064.3, VMT measures the automobile travel generated from a proposed project (i.e., the additional miles driven).

Here, ‘automobile’ refers to on -road passenger vehicles such as cars and light -duty trucks. If a proposed project adds excessive automobile travel on California roads thereby exceeding an applicable threshold of significance, then the project may cause a significant transportation impact.

50 City of Salinas. 2022. Vision Zero: Reducing Serious Injuries and Fatalities on Salinas Streets. Accessed November 22, 2022, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/our-city-services/public-works/traffic-transportation-engineering/vision-zero 51 City of Salinas. 2020. Vision Zero Action Plan. Accessed November 22, 2022, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/sites/default/files/departments_files/public_works_files/salinas_vision_zero_action_plan.pdf

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 131

Figure 4-15 High Injury Network Map
. ·-. . '• ·-·-·-·-·" '•-• .. ·-·-·
.
/

HIGH INJURY NETWORK
- High Injury Network ·--♦-• .... , ....
...... , •,. I

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 132 Among its provisions, Section 15064.3(b) establishes criteria for analyzing transportation impacts. Specifically, Section 15064.3(b) (1) establishes a less than significant presumption for certain land use projects that are proposed within ½-mile of an existing major transit stop or along a high-quality transit corridor. If this presumption does not apply to a land use project, then the VMT can be qualitatively or quantitatively analyzed.

In the case that quantitative models or methods are not available to the lead agency to estimate the VMT for the project being considered, provisions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)(3) permits the lead agency to conduct a qualitative analysis. Th e qualitative analysis may evaluate factors including but not limited to the availability of transit, proximity to other destinations, and construction traffic.

Lastly, Section 15064.3(b)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines states that “[a] lead agency has discretion to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household or in any other measure. A lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicle miles traveled and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment based on substantial evidence. Any assumptions used to estimate vehicle miles traveled and any revision to model outputs should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the project. The standard of adequacy in Section 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section.”
SB 743 Technical Advisory
In April 2018, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OP R) issued the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) (revised December 2018) to provide technical recommendations regarding VMT, thresholds of significance, and mitigation measures for a variety of land use project types.

The Technical Advisory includes screening thresholds for agencies to use in order to identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. • Screening Thresholds for Small Project. Absent substantial evidence indicating that a project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, or inconsistency with a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or general plan, projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day generally may be assumed to cause a less -than significant transportation impact. This threshold is based on a CEQA categorical exemption for existing facilities, including additions to existing structures of up to 10,00 square feet, so long as the project is in an area where public infrastructure is available to allow for maximum planned development and the project is not in an environmentally sensitive area. • Map-Based Screening Threshold for Residential and Office Projects. Residential and office projects that locate in areas with low VMT, and that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility), will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT. Maps created with VMT data, for example from a travel survey or a travel demand model, can illustrate areas that are currently below threshold VMT. Because new development in such locations would likely result in a similar level of VMT, such maps can be used to screen out residential and office projects from needing to prepare a detailed VMT analysis. • Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact Near Transit Thresholds. Proposed CEQA Guideline Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)(1), states that lead agencies generally should presume that certain projects (including residential, retail, and office projects, as well as projects that are a mix of these uses) proposed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high quality transit corridor will

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 133 have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. This presumption would not apply, however, if project-specific or location-specific information indicates that the project will still generate significant levels of VMT. • Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact for Affordable Residential Development. Adding affordable housing to infill locations gene rally improves jobs -housing match, in turn shortening commutes and reducing VMT. Therefore, a project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis for the lead agency to find a less-than-significant impact on VMT.

According to the Technical Advisory, lead agencies, using more location -specific information, may develop their own more specific thresholds, which may include other land use types.

City of Salinas SB 743 VMT Implementation Policy
The City of Salinas adopted the I nterim Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Policy on October 13, 2020, to determine transportation impacts under CEQA. 52 The VMT Policy provides guidance and steps to determine the significance of transportation impacts and identify mitigation measures. The VMT Policy provides seven (7) screening criteria per the OPR guidance, concluding that projects that fall within the thresholds would not cause a significant impact regarding VMT. The screening criteria include:
• Small Projects: Less than significant impact if the project generates less than 110 trips per day. • Projects Near High Quality Transit: Less than significant impact if the project is 1) within 0.5-miles of an existing major transit stop, 2) maintains a service interval frequency of 15 min or less during peak commute times, 3) has a floor area ratio (FAR) of more than 0.75, and 4) does not include more parking than the municipal code requires. (See Figure 4-16)
• Local-Serving Retail: Less than significant impact if the project proposes 1) no single store on -site exceed 50,000 sf, and 2) project is local-serving as determined by the City of Salinas. • Affordable Housing: Less than significant impact if the project provides a high percentage of affordable housing as determined by the City of Salinas.
• Local Essential Service: Less than significant impact if buildings less than 50,000 sf. with land use of day care center, public K-12 school, police or fire facility, medical office, or government offices. • Map-based Screening: Less than significant impact if the area of development is under the 15 percent County threshold as shown on the City of Salinas VMT screening map. The screening map is limited to residential and office projects. (See Figure 4-17)
• Redevelopment Projects: Less than significant impact if project replaces an existing VMT -generating land use and does not result in net overall increase in VMT.

52 City of Salinas. (202 0). Senate Bill 743 VMT Implementation Policy . Accessed on November 1, 2022, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/sites/default/files/departments_files/community_development_files/final_interim_vmt_policy .pdf

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 134

Figure 4-16 City of Salinas High-Quality Transit Corridors c:J Projec t Site
EJ BusStops
~ High-Qua lity Trans it Corridors
Source: City of Sal n ,s, County of Monterey Open oata

0.125 0.25 0.5 () 0 0.75
Miles - -- -
CITY OF SALINAS· LARGE SHOPPING CENTERS/rOODSCO GENERAL PLAN AMEN OM ENT AND REZONE

INITIAL STUDY

EJ -- -
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStt~~@lfors-
··----- -.. . .'~Et::f;51 0 N
~ . t; YU r~ •-~:;:,f::};;,• _...

Created 4/3/ 2023

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 135

Figure 4-17 City of Salinas VMT Screening Map - Residential VMT per Capita Mot AppNeab-.
- Al or S.aow Cown'Y Th,eshold
- 1~ 10 U~ Abovtt County Tt1rnhold
- Ht,._ Of Moc. A.bow• County ThtUM-ld
0 .& t t$
M ~•1
Mont•t•)' Coun_!l Thtnhokh ,

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 136

4.17.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Although no development is proposed by the Project, future development of the Project site would be required by the City to comply with all project-level requirements implemented by a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, roadway, pedestrian and bicycle, and transit facilities. The Project’s consistency for each facility type is addressed below.

Roadway Facilities
CEQA Guidelines no longer use motorist delays or level of service (LOS) to measure transportation impacts.

However, in evaluating Project consistency with the General Plan, a comparison of LOS is required per General Plan Policies C-1.2 and C-1.3. Therefore, a LOS analysis is provided for informational purposes. Based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip G eneration Manual, 10th Edition, trip generation rates for mid -rise residential with ground floor commercial (ITE 231), the Project would generate an estimated total average daily trip generation of 1,982 trips. 53 A Trip Generation Memo is provided in Appendix F.

To provide a conservative analysis, Project -generated trips were applied to the intersection with the highest available trip counts in the vicinity of the Project site. The South Sanborn Road /John Street intersection has the highest available trip counts in the vicinity of the Project site with a reported total volume of 14,913 daily trips on June 12, 2018.54 55 Assuming all Project-generated trips use South Sanborn Road, 16,895 average daily trips would be expected on this roadway resulting in a LOS of A (below 22,000 trips) per General Plan Table C-2 for a four (4)- lane divided arterial (with left turn lane).56 Therefore, the Project would be consistent with General Plan Policies C-

1.2 and C-1.3, which aims to maintain LOS D for all roadways in the city. As such, impacts to roadway facilities would be less than significant.

Although no physical development is proposed, future development resulting from Project implementation would be subject to review and approval by the City for compliance with standards for on and off-site improvements. In addition, because the Project site is in the vicinity of the highest collision corridors (East Alisal Street between Front Street and Sanborn Road, and Sanborn Road between East Laurel Drive and SR 101), future development would be subject to compliance with implementation actions identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan. To ensure compliance with implementation actions identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan and thereby maintain safety standards at all intersections and roadway segments pursuant to the Plan, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure TRANS-

1. Incorporation of the mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts related to roadway facilities to less than significant.

53 According to ITE 231, an Average Rate of 3.44 multiplied by 576 dwelling units equals 1,982 average daily trips. 54 City of Salinas. (2018). Signalized Intersection. Accessed April 3, 2023, GIS hosting on salinas-gis.ci.salinas.ca.us. 55 The next closest intersection is East Alisal Street/ South Sanborn Road with an daily traffic volume of 10,024 trips on June 12, 2018.
56 14,913 plus 1,982 equals 10,992

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 137 Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: To maintain safety standards at all intersections and roadway segments pursuant to implementation actions identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan, a traffic impact study shall be required f or all development projects anticipated to generate 110 or more new daily vehicle trips within the Project Area, unless not required by the City. Depending on the results of this study, future developments may be required to construct or contribute to street safety improvements to meet the demand generated by the project. Improvements shall be in accordance with the City of Salinas’ Vision Zero Action Plan (i.e. pedestrian -activated crosswalk warning beacon, high visibility crosswalks, pedestrian hybrid bea con, reduced parking at intersection, intersection control, raised median and street trees, protected bike lanes, and lane reduction). These improvements shall be required as conditions of approval.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
There are no existing bike lanes within the vicinity of the Project site. However, there are six (6)-foot sidewalks located on both sides of all roadways within the Project site. There is also a controlled crosswalk at East Alisal Street and South Sanborn Road intersection. According to intersection data available for East Alisal Street/South Sanborn Road, approximately 261 pedestrians utilize the crosswalk on a daily basis. Although no development is currently proposed, future development of the Project site would result in an incremental increase in residents which could result in an increased demand for pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

Future development would be subject to review and approval by the City to ensure compliance with existing City plans and policies regarding pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including the Vision Zero Action Plan implementation actions and Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 as identified above. In addition, future development projects could also be conditioned to provide a Class IV protected bike land along Sanborn Road and a Class II buffered bike lane along East Alisal Street as proposed by the Monterey County ATP . Further, all future development would be subject to the Public Facilities Impact Fee program per SMC Article V-D whereby any new development occurring within city limits is required to contribute its proportionate share of the costs of new public facilities intended to serve said development. Through compliance with City plans and policies and payment of the Public Facilities Impact Fee, impacts to pedestrian and bicycle facilities would be less than significant.

Transit Facilities
There are two (2) bus stops approximately 100 feet east of the site (“East Alisal/Towt” Stop ID: 3416) and 250 feet west of the site (“East Alisal/Sanborn” Stop ID: 3413) on East Alisal Street for Route 41 – Salinas-Alisal-Northridge and Route 42 – Alisal-Salinas operated by the Monterey -Salinas Transit (MST) with service every 15 minutes.

Although no development is currently proposed, f uture development of the Project site could result in an incremental increase in residents which could result in an increased demand for transit. Increased demand for transit would result in fewer automobile trips, which would not cause an adverse environmental impact. The Project would generate new automobile trips, which could cause a delay for buses utilizing East Alisal Street. However, as discussed above, the projected traffic volumes would not have a significant impact. For these reasons, impacts to transit facilities would be less than significant.

Therefore, through compliance with the programs, plans, ordinances, and policies addressing the circulation system (inclusive of transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities), a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 138 b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less than Significant Impact. SB 743 requires that relevant CEQA analysis of transportation impacts be conducted using a metric known as VMT instead of LOS. Based on the city’s adopted SB 743 VMT Implementation Policy, the Project is eligible to “screen out” from further VMT analysis pur suant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) because the site is located along a High -Quality transit corridor, within 0.5 -miles of an existing major transit stop that maintains a service interval frequency of 1 5 minutes or less during peak commute (Figure 4-16). In addition, the Project can also screen out from further VMT analysis using Map-based Screening for residential development and Redevelopment Projects for commercial development. As shown in Figure 4-17, the Project site is at or below County threshold for residential VMT per capita . In addition, the Project site as is currently developed has a 0.28 FAR. The current FAR is larger than the proposed 0.25 FAR used for the analysis contained in this study which indicates that future commercial development of the site would be at a lesser intensity. As such, the Project would replace an existing VMT-generating land use and does not result in a net overall increase in VMT. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project would have a less than significant impact. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than Significant Impact. Although no development is currently proposed, future development of the Project site would be subject to review and approval by the City through the entitlement process. Review by the City would ensure that project design does not include hazardous design features such as sharp curves or dangerous intersections, or incompatible uses . As discussed above, the Project site is in the vicinity of the highest collision corridors (East Alisal Street between Front Street and Sanborn Road, and Sanborn Road between East Laurel Drive and SR 101). As such, to reduce safety hazards resulting from future development, the Project would be subject to compliance with implementation actions identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan as incorporated through Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 described under criterion a). Through compliance with the city’s standards and Vision Zero Action Plan implementation actions, the Project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses and a less than significant impact would occur. d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project does not involve a change to any emergency response plan. In addition, although no development is currently proposed, future development of the Project site is subject to review by the city to ensure adequate site access including emergency access. In the case that future construction requires lane closures, access through existing roadways would be maintained through standard traffic control and therefore, potential lane closures would not affect emergency evacuation pla ns. Thus, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.

4.17.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Transportation related mitigation measure TRANS- 1 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 139

4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in PRC 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:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in PRC
section 5020.1(k), or,
X
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 PRC section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of PRC section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider
the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.

4.18.1 Environmental Setting
See Section 4.5.

4.18.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape , sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the CHRIS Records Search conducted on April 14, 2022, there are no known local, state, or federal designated historical resources pursuant to Section 5020.1(k) on the Project site. While there is no evidence that historical resources exist on the Project site, there is some possibility that existing structures qualify as historical resources or hidden, and buried resources may exist with no surface evidence that may be impacted by future physical development of the site. In the event of the accidental discovery and recognition of previously unknown historical resources before or during construction acti vities, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL -1 through Mitigation Measure CUL -8 to assure construction

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 140 activities do not result in significant impacts to any potential historical resources discovered above or below ground surface. Thus, if such resources were discovered, implementation of the required mitigation measure s would reduce the impact to less than significant. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
b) A resource determined by t he lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource C ode Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated . The Project site and its resources have not been determined by the city to be significant pursuant to Section 5024.1. However, as discussed in Section 4.5, there is some possibility that a non -visible, buried site may exist and may be uncovered during ground disturbing construction activities which could constitute a significant impact. Therefore, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure TCR-1 to assure construction activities do not result in significant impacts to any potential resources of significance to a California Native American tribe discovered above or below ground surface. Thus, if such resources were discovered, implementation of the required mitigation measures would reduce the impact to less than significant. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measure TCR-1 Inadvertent Discoveries During Construction In the event that cultural resources of Native American origin are identified during grading or construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until a qualified archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find; an appropriate Native American representative, based on the nature of the find, is consulted; and mitigation measures are put in place for the disposition and protection of any find pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. If the City, in consultation with local Native Americans, determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with local Native American group(s) prior to continuation of any earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find. The plan shall include avoidance of the resource or, if avoidance of the resource is infeasible, shall outline the appropr iate treatment of the resource in coordination with the appropriate local Native American tribal representative and, if applicable, a qualified archaeologist. Examples of appropriate mitigation for tribal cultural resources include, but are not limited to, protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource, protecting traditional use of the resource, protecting the confidentiality of the resource, or heritage recovery.

4.18.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Tribal Cultural Resources related mitigation measures CUL-1 through CUL-8 and TCR-1 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 141

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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
effect?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development
during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider, which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition
to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
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?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes
and regulations related to solid waste?
X

4.19.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is currently fully developed and contains approximately 10 existing structures. The site is connected to water, wastewater, and stormwater services. Natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications are provided by private companies. Each utility system is described below.

Water
Water supply, usage, and services are described in Section 4.10.

Wastewater
Monterey One Water (M1W) is the public wastewater treatment agency for the City of Salinas. M1W provides wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal services. Collected wastewater is transported to the Regional Treatment Plan located two (2) miles north of the city of Marina, CA. The RTP’s daily capacity is 29.6 million gallons

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 142 for primary and secondary treatment and five (5) million gallons for advanced purification for groundwater replenishment.57 The RTP treats an average 17 million gallons per day wi th a remaining capacity of 12.6 million gallons per day.

The City of Salinas maintains 292 miles of sanitary sewer collection system pipeline, which vary in diameter from 6- inch to 54-inches, and 11 sanitary sewer lift stations. The city’s Wastewater Division of the Public Works Department is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the city’s sanitary sewer collection system, including performing infrastructure maintenance, water quality monitoring, illicit discharge prevention, and public education on the city’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit (NPDES). The City of Salinas Sewer System Master Plan (Updated 2023) addresses the City’s long-term wastewater planning. 58 Solid Waste
The Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority provides solid waste collection services for residents, commercial, and industrial developments in the city, transporting waste to the Johnson Canyon Landfill. This landfill is permitted to receive a maximum of 1,574 tons per day and has a remaining capacity of 6,923,297 cubic yards, with an estimated closure date of 2055. Of note, to comply with the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), Monterey County is required to divert at least 50 percent of solid waste from landfills. The City of Salinas mandates recycling for businesses and multifamily complexes , including both Business Recycling and Organic Recycling , as required by the city’s ordinance and State law (i.e., AB 341, Mandatory Commercial Recycling Law) . The City also implements a Household Hazardous Waste Program to ensure that hazardous waste produced in homes is safely used, transported, and disposed.

Stormwater
Stormwater services are described in Section 4.10.

Natural Gas and Electricity
The Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE) would provide electricity supply to new development at the Project site. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) would provide electricity transmission and natural gas. According to the PG&E Distribution Investment Deferral Framework (DIDF) Map, there are PG&E-maintained power lines along the street frontages surrounding the Project site.59
Telecommunications
Accordingly, telecommunications providers in the area incrementa lly expand and update their service systems in response to usage and demand. Upon request, the site would be connected to existing broadband infrastructure and subject to applicable connection and service fees.

57 Monterey One Water. (2022). Regional Treatment Plant. Accessed on November 23, 2022, https://www.montereyonewater.org/280/Regional-Treatment-Plant 58 City of Salinas (2023). Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update . Accessed July 31, 2023, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/files/sharedassets/city/public-works/documents/salinas-sanitary-sewer-master-plan-update- 2023.pdf
59 PG&E. (2022). Distribution Investment Deferral Framework (DIDF) Map. Accessed on April 3, 2023 , https://www.pge.com/b2b/distribution-resource-planning/grid-needs-assessment-map.html

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 143

4.19.2 Impact Assessment
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?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is within city limits and thus, future development of the Project site would be required to connect to water, stormwater, and wastewater services, and utilize solid waste, collection services. Natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications would be provided by private companies. In general, the Project site is an infill site within an area of the city that is predominately developed with commercial uses. Because the Project site is largely d eveloped, there is existing utility infrastructure available to serve the site which would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telec ommunications facilities. Through the entitlement review process for future development, the City and responsible agencies would review the Project to ensure compliance with applicable connection requirements. Compliance would ensure that future developmen t would not cause significant environmental effects related to utilities and service systems. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in detail in Section 4.10, the city’s long-term water resource planning is addressed in the city’s UWMP. As concluded in Section 4.10, it can be presumed that that existing and planned water supplies should be adequate to serve the Project’s anticipated demand at maximum buildout . Regarding water supply availability for the Project and future development, the UWMP indicates that Cal Water has sufficient production capacity and groundwater supply to meet most demands in the future during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Minor shortfalls (two percent) are anticipated in 20 40 under single dry year and multiple dry year conditions in the Salinas PWS and is expected to increase slightly in 2045. However, the UWMP expects for shortfalls to be alleviated through implementation of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) and ot her supply augmentation measures as discussed in Chapter 8 – Water Shortage Contingency Planning in the UWMP.

Furthermore, as discussed under Section 4.10 , adherence to connection requirements and recommendations pursuant to the city’s and Cal Water’s water conservation efforts (e.g., compliance with California Plumbing Code, efficient appliances, efficient landscaping, etc.) should not negatively impact water supply or impede water management. In particular, future development would be built accordance with all mandatory outdoor water use requirements as outlined in the applicable California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11, Section 4.304 – Outdoor Water Use and verified through the building permit process. As a mixed-use development that would contain landscaping pursuant to SMC regulations, future development shall comply with the updated Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) (California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Chapter 2.7, Division 2), as implemented and enforced through the building permit process. Therefore, through compliance, the potential for the Project to substantially decrease groundwater supplies is limited and impacts would be less than significant.

Finally, although the proposed Project, would increase demand for water use on this specific site compared to the water use currently on the site, as previously discussed in Section 2.9 of this document, the overall projected

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 144 citywide population would not change because of this Project. In fact , the increase in potential residential units does not constitute a significantly greater water demand because higher density, multi -family residential development generates less water use due to property features including less outdoor irrigation due to shared common areas. Thus, if assumed population increases are redirected to higher density multi -family development rather than single -family development, the overall anticipated water demand w ould be less than anticipated citywide. In addition, the UWMP determi ned that there is enough water capacity to serve the city’s projected population. As discussed further in Section 4.14.2, the population and housing units generated by the proposed Project would be within the AMBAG projections for the region and city.

Overall, based on the information collected from the UWMP, the Project would not generate significantly greater water demand as to substantially decrease groundwater supplies. Additionally, adherence to connection requirements and recommendations pursuant to water conservation efforts as well as compliance with applicable California Green Building Standards Code and MWELO would reduce water demand and reduce the potential for the Project to substantially decrease water supply available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years . For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The City’s long-term wastewater planning is addressed in the City’s Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update (Master Plan). 60 Land use types are important to determine projected demand and adequate sizing and capacity for pipes and facilities to maintain effective sanitary sewer system facilities. The land use assumptions in the Master Plan were based on the General Plan Land Use Map and the City’s GIS database.

The Master Plan also uses the General Plan to forecast the wastewater flows that will be contributed by growth areas in the future, both within and outside City limits, for buildout in the Year 2045. For the purposes of the Master Plan, 213,063 persons was used for the City’s buildout population. Although it is assumed that water conservation measures will be taken, such as low flow plumbing fixtures for future deve lopments, the future flows are determined by using the existing flow factors identified in the Master Plan. The total estimated future flow is estimated to 17,715,200 gallons per day (GPD).

To analyze capacity of the collection system, the Master Plan utilizes the City’s Public Works Department’s Standard Specifications and Design Standards (2017) and the City’s Sewer System Management Plan (2019). One of the performance criteria for gravity sewer lines is the maximum allowable flow depth (i.e., d/D ratio ). The variables used in this ratio include the depth of flow in a pipe, d, divided by the diameter of the pipe, D. The maximum d/D criteria defined in the Sewer System Management Plan is 0.90 for all existing pipes and 0.75 for new developments.

60 City of Salinas (2023). Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update . Accessed July 31, 2023, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/files/sharedassets/city/public-works/documents/salinas-sanitary-sewer-master-plan-update- 2023.pdf

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 145 The maximum allowable flow depth criteria is based on pipe diameter ranges, consistent with industry standards that typically have varying levels of d/D ratios for various pipe sizes.

According to the Master Plan, the Project site is in the existing sewer service area with existing 18-inch pipe in Sanborn Road and East Alisal Street adjacent to the Project site (Master Plan Figure 3 -1). These pipelines flow southwest toward the Salinas Area Pump Station (Master Plan Figure 5 -1). As shown in Figure 6 -3 of the Master Plan, the sewer main in Sanborn Road and East Alisal Street adjacent to the Project site currently has available capacity. However, the East Alisal Street main is expected to exceed capacity during peak conditions (Master Plan Figure 6-6) and future sewer upgrades are proposed.

To improve capacity, there is an existing Capital Improvement Project (CIP) proposed along East A lisal Street to South Sanborn Road, identified in the Master Plan as the “Upstream TP2 Diversion” project. This project proposes to increase the invert, which would cause the 18-inch along East Alisal Street to act as an overflow line and lessen the downstream flow. The Master Plan indicates that future flows will affect the CIP, causing a need for upsizing the South Sanborn Road pipes. The future sewer upgrades include the East Alisal Street Future CIP project which proposes to upsize the Alisal Street pipe and the South Sanborn Road Future CIP project which proposes to increase overflow evaluation and upsize the Sanborn Road pipe.

The Project proposes to change the planned land use from Retail to Mixed Use. As shown in Table 4-4 of the Master Plan, the Residential land use type is projected to generate a wastewater flow factor of 54.5 GPD per person and the Commercial land use type is projected to generate a wastewater flow factor of 0.08 GPD per square feet. Table 4-15 summarizes the total wastewater flows to be expected for future buildout of the Project site compared to the existing wastewater flows estimated for the existing use. The estimated wastewater flows for future buildout of the Project site account for approximately 0.80 percent of the total estimated future flow for buildout in the Year 2045 (142,016 GPD divided by 17,715,200 GPD equals 0.80 percent). Therefore, the wastewater treatment plant would have the capacity to meet the wastewater demands resulting from maximum buildout of the site.

Table 4-15 Estimated Wastewater Flow by Land Use
Land Use Unit Flow Factor
(GPD/Unit)
Existing Average
Flow
Future Average
Flow
Residential Persons 54.5 None 130,25561
Commercial Square Feet 0.08 11,76162 11,76163
Total 11,761 142,016
Source: City of Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan (2023), Table 4-4. Existing Flow Factors However, given the potential increase in future average flow resulting from Project implementation, there is a potential for flows to exceed the allowable flow depth for gravity sewer lines that could cause insufficient capacity to meet the City’s performance standards while conveying existing population wastewater flows. Insufficient

61 Future population of the Project site was estimated in Section 4.14, finding that a 576-unit residential development could generate 2,390 residents.
62 The square footage of existing commercial buildings was estimated using property data and aerial imagery. Based on this data, there is approximately 147,015 square feet of existing building area. 63 As detailed in the Project Description, build out of the Project site could result in a commercial building area of 147,015 square feet.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 146 pipeline capacity would necessitate upgrades and improvements. As discussed above, the max imum d/D criteria defined in the Sewer System Management Plan is 0.75 for new developments; exceedance of 0.75 d/D would constitute a significant impact. Therefore, to mitigate any impacts to gravity sewer lines to a less than significant level, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure UTL-1 Mitigation Measure UTL -1: New development generating wastewater flows that result s in a downstream exceedance of 0.75 d/D shall construct system upgrades for those found to be insufficient in capacity per the requirements of the Public Works Department. The flow shall be verified through a sewer modeling program during the planning and design phase, prior to entitlement approval. The model shall e valuate pipeline capacity, flow velocity, and maximum d/D ratio for normal, dry, and wet weather conditions.

In addition, future development would be reviewed and conditioned by the City to install new branches or laterals and pay all required connection charges and ongoing user charges to serve the development. This, in addition to compliance with Mitigation Measure UTL-1, would ensure that the Project’s impacts on wastewater facilities are adequately offset (i.e., ensuring that sufficient capacity is available). Compliance with these requirements would be ensured through the building permit process.

In summary, maximum buildout of the Project site is anticipated to generate additional wastewater beyond existing conditions. However, the estimated generat ion would be within the remaining capacity of the wastewater treatment plant. In addition, future development of the Project site resulting in downstream exceedance of pipeline capacity would be required to comply with Mitigation Measure UTL-1. Future development would be reviewed and conditioned by the City to install new branches or laterals and pay applicable fees to adequately offset any impacts.

This would ensure that sufficient capacity is maintained and therefore impacts would be less than significan t with mitigation incorporated.
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less than Significant Impact. Although no development is currently proposed, future development that results from the implementation of the Project would generate solid waste and recycling. The future development would be served by the Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority and would be required to comply with local and state law regarding solid waste and recycling. According to CalEEMod (Appendix A), buildout of the Project site is expected to generate approximately 419.3 tons per year or 2,297.7 pounds per day of solid waste. Assuming a 50 percent diversion from landfills pursuant to AB 939, the Project would send approximately 209.7 tons per year or 1,148.9 pounds per day of solid waste to the Johnson Canyon Landfill, which would account for less than 0.1 percent of the landfill’s receiving maximum.

In addition, t hrough the entitlement review process, future development would be required to comply with requirements outlined in SMC Sec. 37-50.200. - Recycling and solid waste disposal regulations. Compliance with these requirements would e nsure regular collection and recycling of materials based on the capacity of local infrastructure. Through compliance, future development would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastruc ture, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 147 e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less than Significant Impact. As described under criterion d), future development would be required to comply with state and local law which include management and reduction statutes and regulations to ensure that solid waste is handled, transported, and disposed accordingly. Through compliance with local and state law, it can be determined that future development would also comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. As a result, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.

4.19.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicab le, the Utilities and Service System related mitigation measure UTL-1 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 148

4.20 WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility or
lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
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?
X
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?
X
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?
X

4.20.1 Environmental Setting
The City of Salinas is an urbanized community that is surrounded by agricultural lands. The risk of wildland fires increases in the rangelands on the hillsides surrounding the city. The Project site is centrally located within the city limits and sphere of influence and is not in proximity to the rangelands or hillsides. As such, the greatest fire risk is urban fires. The city, inclusive of the Project site, is not located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as moderate, high, or very high fire hazard severity zones as identified by CAL FIRE. 64 Rather, the city, inclusive of the Project site, is within an “area of local responsibility” that is an area of low fire risk. As an area of local responsibility, the Salinas Fire Department is responsible for providing fire protection services (See Section 4.15).

64 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. FHSZ Viewer. Accessed on April 3, 2023, https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 149

Figure 4-18 Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones Surrounding the City of Salinas CJ CityUma
D Sphcroof lnfucnco
Proposed Sph«o of lnfuenco
Very High Fire Hazard SeYerity
- Zone In Stoto Rosponsb11ity
Area
Very High Aro Hllzatd Severity
- Zone in Local Responsibilfy
Arn
Sou1ce State of CaWom.a Department o ! Forestry and F::e Protection, F.re cU :d R~souice Asses ;tnt:r l Pre>grdll\ 200 7. C1ty of SauncsS, 2021.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 150

4.20.2 Impact Assessment
If located in or near state responsibility 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? No Impact. The city inclusive of the Project site is not located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The Project site is fully developed and paved, containing existing structures and on- and off-site improvements including drive approaches, curb, gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, utilities, and landscaping. As discussed in Section 4.15, the Salinas Fire Department provides emergency response and public safety services for sites within city limits including the Proj ect site. Future development would be reviewed and conditioned by the City for adequate provision of vehicular and pedestrian circulation and emergency access.

Review and approval by the City would ensure that future development does not substantially impair the adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. For these reasons, no impact would occur because of the Project.
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? No Impact. The city inclusive of the Project site is not located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The Project site is fully developed and paved, is located on a relatively flat property with minimal slope and is not in an area that is subject to strong prevailing winds or other factors that would exacerbate wildfire risks. For these reasons, no impact would occur. 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?
No Impact. The city inclusive of the Project site is not located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The Project site is fully developed and paved . As such, the site is served by existing infrastructure such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, and other utilities. Future development of the site would be reviewed and conditioned by the City for compliance with applicable standards, specifications, and codes related to the installation and maintenance of infrastructure. Such infrastructure would be typical for urban uses and would not exacerbate fire risks or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. Therefore, no impact would occur.
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? No Impact. The city inclusive of the Project site is not located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The topography of the Project site is relatively flat with stable, native soils, and the site is not in the immediate vicinity of rivers or creeks that would be more susceptible to landslides. Therefore, no impact would occur because of the Project.

4.20.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 151

4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self -sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, 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?
X
b) Does the project have impacts that
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed
in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable
future projects)?
X
c) Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X

4.21.1 Impact Assessment
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The analyses of environmental issues contained in this Initial Study indicate that the Project is not expected to have substantial impact on the environment or on any resources identified in the Initial Study. Standard requirements that will be implemented through the entitlement process and the attached mitigation monitoring and reporting program have been incorporated in the project to

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 152 reduce all potentially significant impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the Project would have a le ss than significant impact.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated . CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(i) states that a Lead Agency shall consider whether the cumulat ive impact of a project is significant and whether the effects of the project are cumulatively considerable. The assessment of the significance of the cumulative effects of a project must, therefore, be conducted in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects. Due to the nature of the Project and consistency with environmental policies, incremental contributions to impacts are considered less than cumulatively considerable. All Project-related impacts w ere determined to be less than significant in compliance with all applicable standards, policies, and mitigation measures. The Project would not contribute substantially to adverse cumulative conditions, or create any substantial indirect impacts (i.e., in crease in population could lead to an increased need for housing, increase in traffic, air pollutants, etc.). In addition to the proposed Project, four (4) other General Plan Amendments and Rezones (GPA/RZ) are proposed within the City of Salinas. All thes e GPA/RZ projects are funded by SB 2 for the purpose of providing additional opportunities for housing and mixed -use development, in line with the goals contained in the General Plan and Housing Element. This indicates that the anticipated growth and impac ts from the GPA/RZs are, to an extent, compliant and previously analyzed within the General Plan and Housing Element. In addition, no development is proposed or mandated as part of these GPA/RZs, and there is no guarantee of future development or the timing that development could happen. In addition, as mentioned above, it has been shown in previous studies that upzoning property doesn’t typically result in overall population increases. As such, Project impacts are not considered to be cumulatively consider able given the insignificance of project induced impacts.

The impact is therefore less than significant with mitigation incorporated. c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The analyses of environmental issues contained in this Initial Study indicate that the project is not expected to have substantial impact on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Standard requirements and conditions in addition to mitigation measures have been incorporated in the project to reduce all potentially significant impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 153 5 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
This mitigation measure monitoring and reporting checklist was prepared pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15097 and Section 21081.6 of the PRC (PRC). The timing of implementing each mitigation measure is identified in in the checklist, as well as identifies the entity responsible for verifying that the mitigation measures applied to a project are performed. Project applicants are responsible for providing evidence that mitigation measures are implemented. As lead agency, the City of Salinas is responsible for verifying that mitigation is performed/completed.

Mitigation Measures Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of
Completion
Date Initials
Air Quality
Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Construction Air Quality. During construction, the applicant or successor in interest for each individual site shall:
• Limit grading to 8.1 acres per day, and limit grading and excavation to 2.2 acres per day.
• Provide watering trucks on site to maintain adequate soil moisture during grading and water
graded/excavated areas at least twice daily, thus minimizing dust generation. In addition, the
water trucks shall be used to wash down trucks and tractors, including earth loads, prior to
entering public roadways.
• Prohibit all grading activities whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per h our (mph).
• Maintain a minimum of two feet for freeboard for all haul trucks. • Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, or loose materials. • Cover inactive storage piles.
• Enforce a 15-mph speed limit for all unpaved surfaces when visible dust clouds are formed by vehicle movement.

During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department – Plan
Check Service

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 154 • Place gravel base near site entrances to clean tires prior to entering public roadways.

Mitigation Measure AQ -2: MBARD Health Risk Consultation. Prior to issuance of any grading permit and/or building permit for each individual site, the applicant or successor in interest shall consult with MBARD regarding the potential need for a diesel health risk assessment (HRA). If required, the applicant or successor in interest shall prepare a diesel HRA and shall implement the measures contained therein to ensure that project-specific emissions are below MBARD’s established health risk thresholds: hazard index greater than 1 for acute or chroni c impacts, and cancer risk greater than 10 in one million for long-term operational emissions or 1 per 100,000 population for temporary construction-related emissions. Measures may include, but would not be limited to:
• Use of diesel -fueled equipment equipp ed with Tier 4 (or Tier 3 if the Tier 4 standard is unavailable) USEPA engine standards. The USEPA estimates that Tier 4 engines would reduce PM emissions by approximately 90 percent compared to the USEPA Tier 2 standards (USEPA 2008).
• Retrofit off -road di esel equipment with Verified Diesel Emissions Control Strategy (VDECS) like Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF). Particulate Matter level 3 VDECS can provide at least an 85 percent reduction (CARB 2015). • Use alternatively fueled (e.g., natural gas) diesel con struction equipment, including all off-road and portable diesel-powered equipment. • Use electrically driven equipment that is not powered by a portable generator set.
• Limit the hours of operation for heavy-duty equipment and/or limit the quantity of heavy-duty equipment operating at the same time.

Prior to
issuance of
any grading
permit
and/or
building
permit;
during
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department – Plan
Check Services;
MBARD

Biological Resources
Mitigation Measure BIO -1: Nesting Bird Surveys and Avoidance. The Project shall implement the following measures to mitigate for loss of nesting habitat of the Project in compliance with the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and relevant Fish and Game Codes:

Not more
than 14 days
prior to
Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 155 • Avoidance. In order to avoid impacts to nesting raptors and migratory birds, the Project will be constructed, if feasible, from September 16th and January 31st, which is outside the avian nesting season.
• Preconstruction Surveys. If Project activitie s must occur during the nesting season (February 1 -September 15), a qualified biologist will conduct preconstruction surveys for active raptor and migratory bird nests within 10 days prior to the start of these activities. The survey will include the propo sed work area(s) and surrounding lands within 500 feet, where accessible, for all nesting raptors and migratory birds. If no active nests are found within the survey area, no further mitigation is required.
• Establish Buffers. Should any active nests be dis covered near proposed work areas, no disturbance buffers of 250 feet around active nests of non -listed bird species and 500 feet around active nests of non-listed raptors will be established.

If work needs to occur within these no disturbance buffers, a qu alified biologist will monitor the nest daily for one week, and thereafter once a week, throughout the duration of construction activity. Should the nature of construction activity significantly change, such that a higher level of disturbance will be gener ated, monitoring will occur daily for one week and then resume the once -a-week regime. If, at any time, the biologist determines that construction activity may be compromising nesting success, construction activity within the designated buffer will be alte red or suspended until the biologist determines that the nest site is no longer susceptible to deleterious disturbance. vegetation
clearance.

Development
Department
Cultural Resources
CUL-1 Historical Resources Identification and Treatment Plan Prior to permit approval for development on the Project site, a historical resources evaluation shall be completed for that individual site to confirm if existing buildings and/or structures withing these sites qualify as historical resources as defined by Section 15064.5(a) of CEQA Guidelines. The evaluation shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards (PQS) in architectural history or history. The qual ified Prior to
permit
approval.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 156 architectural historian or historian shall conduct an intensive -level evaluation in accordance with the guidelines and best practices promulgated by the State Office of Historic Preservation to identify any potential historical resources within the p roposed project area. All properties 45 years of age or older shall be evaluated within their historic context and documented in a report meeting the State Office of Historic Preservation guidelines. All evaluated properties shall be documented on Departme nt of Parks and Recreation Series 523 Forms. The report shall be submitted to the City for review and concurrence.

Any relocation, rehabilitation, or alteration of the resource shall be implemented consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatments of Historic Properties (Standards). In accordance with CEQA, a project that has been determined to conform with the Standards generally would not cause a significant adverse direct or indirect impact to historical resources (14 CCR Section 15126.4[b][1]). Application of the Standards shall be overseen by a qualified architectural historian or historic architect meeting the PQS. In conjunction with any development application that may affect the historical resource, a report identifying a nd specifying the treatment of character - defining features and construction activities shall be provided to the City for review and concurrence, in addition to the historical resources evaluation.

If significant historical resources are identified on a de velopment site and compliance with the Standards and or avoidance is not feasible, the applicant or developer shall provide a report explaining why compliance with the Standards and or avoidance is not feasible for the City’s review and approval. Site -specific mitigation measures shall be established and undertaken, including, but not limited to, documentation of the historical resource in the form of a Historic American Buildings Survey-Like report. The report shall be commissioned by the project applicant or their consultant to comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Architectural and Engineering Documentation and shall generally follow the Historic American Buildings Survey Level III requirements, including digital photographic recordati on, detailed historic narrative report, and compilation of historic research. The documentation shall be completed by a qualified

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 157 architectural historian or historian who meets the PQS and submitted to the City prior to issuance of any permits for demolition or alteration of the historical resource.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2 Phase I Cultural Resources Study Prior to the issuance of any grading or construction permits for each individual site, a Phase I cultural resources study shall be performed by a qualified professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI’s) Professional Qualification Standards (PQS) for archaeology (National Park Service 1983). The Phase I cultural resources study shall include a pedestrian survey of the project site when appropriate and sufficient background research and field sampling to determine whether archaeological resources may be present. Archival research shall include a records search of the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) no more than two years old and a Sacred Lands File search with the NAHC. The Phase I te chnical report documenting the study shall include recommendations that shall be implemented prior to and/or during construction to avoid or reduce impacts to archaeological resources. Recommendations may include, but would not be limited to, archaeologica l construction monitoring, sensitivity training, or additional testing and mitigation (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL -3 through CUL- 7). The report shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of any grading or construct ion permits. The City shall include recommendations in the Phase I technical report as Conditions of Approval to be implemented throughout all ground disturbance activities. The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC.

Prior to
issuance of
grading or
construction
permits.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department

Mitigation Measure CUL-3 Extended Phase I Testing
If recommended by the Phase I study for each individual site (Mitigation Measure CUL - 2), the project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to conduct an Extended Phase I (XPI) study to determine the presence/absence and extent of archaeological resources on the project site. XPI testing shall include a series of shovel test pits and/or hand augured units and/or mechanical trenching to establish the boundaries of archaeological site(s) on the project site. If the boundaries of the archaeological site are already well understood from previous archaeological work, an XPI will not be required.

All archaeological excavation shall be conducted by a qualified archaeologist(s) under the direction of a principal investigator meeting the SOI’s PQS for archaeology (National Prior to the
issuance of a
grading or
construction
permit.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 158 Park Service 1983). If an XPI report is prepared, it shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of a grading or construction permit.

Recommendations therein shall be implemented for all ground disturbance activities.

Recommendations may include, but would not be limited to, site avoidance, Phase II Site Evaluation, Cultural Resources Monitoring, and/or measures for unanticipated discoveries (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL-4, CUL-5, CUL-7, and CUL-8). The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC.

Mitigation Measure CUL-4 Archaeological Site Avoidance
Any identified archaeological sites (determined after implementing Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and/or CUL-3) or archaeological resources encountered during ground-disturbing activities shall be avoided by project -related construction activities, where feasible. A barrier (temporary fencing) and flagging shall be placed between the work location and any resources within 60 feet of a work location to minimize the potential for inadvertent impacts. If the resource cannot be avoided, Mitigation Measure CUL -5 shall be implemented.

During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department

Mitigation Measure CUL-5 Phase II Site Evaluation
If the results of any Phase I and/or XPI for each individual site (Mitigation Measures CUL- 2 and/or CUL -3) indicate the presence of archaeological resources that cannot be avoided by the project (Mitigation Measure CUL -4) and that have not been adequately evaluated for the NRHP or CRHR listing at the project site, the qualified archaeologist shall conduct a Phase II investigation to determine if intact deposits remain and if they may be eligible for the CRHR or qualify as unique archaeological resources. If the archaeological resource(s) of concern are Native American in origin, the qualified archaeologist shall confer with the City and local California Native American tribe(s).

A Phase I evaluation shall include any necessary archival research to identify significant historical associations and mapping of surface artifacts, collection of functionally or temporally diagnostic tools and debris, and excavation of a sample of the cultural deposit. The sample excavation would be carried out to characterize the n ature of the site(s), define the artifact and feature contents, determine horizontal and vertical boundaries, and retrieve representative samples of artifacts and other remains.

During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 159 If the archaeologist and, if applicable, a Native American monitor or other i nterested tribal representative determine it is appropriate, cultural materials collected from the site shall be processed and analyzed in a laboratory according to standard archaeological procedures. The age of the materials shall be determined using radi ocarbon dating and/or other appropriate procedures; lithic artifacts, faunal remains, and other cultural materials shall be identified and analyzed according to current professional standards.

The significance of the site(s) shall be evaluated according to the criteria of the CRHR and if applicable, NRHP. The results of the investigations shall be presented in a technical report following the standards of the California Office of Historic Preservation publication “Archaeological Resource Management Reports: Recommended Content and Format (1990 or latest edition).” Recommendations in the Phase II report shall be implemented for all ground disturbance activities. Recommendations may include, but would not be limited to, Phase III Data Recovery, Cultural Resources Monitoring, and/or measures for unanticipated discoveries (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL -6 through CUL -8). The report shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of any grading or construction permits. The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC.

Mitigation Measure CUL-6 Phase III Data Recovery
Should the results of the Phase II site evaluation for each individual site (Mitigation Measure CUL -5) yield resources that meet CRHR significance standards and if the resource cannot be avoided by project construction in accordance with CUL-4, the project applicant shall ensure that all feasible recommendations for mitigation of archaeological impacts are incorporated into the final design and approved by the City prior to construction. Any necessary Phase III data recovery excavation, conducted to exhaust the data potential of significant archaeological sites, shall be carried out by a qualified archaeologist meeting the SOI’s PQS for archeology (National Park Service 1983). Data recovery shall be conducted in accordance with a research design reviewed and approved by the City, prepared in advance of fieldwork, and using the appropriate archaeological field and laboratory methods consistent with the California Office of Historic Preservation Planning Bulletin 5 (1991), Guidelines for Archaeological Research Design, or the latest edition thereof. If the archaeological resource(s) of concern are Native American in During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 160 origin, the qualified archaeologist shall confer with the City and local California Native American tribe(s).

As applicable, the final Phase III Data Recovery reports shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of any grading or construction permit. Recommendations contained therein shall be implemented throughout all ground disturbance activities. Recommendations may include, but would not be l imited to, Cultural Resources Monitoring, and/or measures for unanticipated discoveries (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL-7 and CUL- 8). The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC upon completion.

Mitigation Measure CUL-7 Cultural Resources Monitoring
If recommended by Phase I, XPI, Phase II, or Phase III studies for each individual site (Mitigation Measures CUL -2, CUL-3, CUL-5, and/or CUL -6), the project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor project -related, ground-disturbing activities which may include the following but not limited to: grubbing, vegetation removal, trenching, grading, and/or excavations. The archaeological monitor shall coordinate with any Native American monitor as required. Monitoring logs must be completed by the archaeologist daily. Cultural resources monitoring may be reduced for the project if the qualified archaeologist finds it appropriate to reduce the monitoring efforts. Upon completion of ground disturbance for the project, a final report must be submitted to the City for review and approval documenting the monitoring efforts, cultural resources find, and resource disposition. The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC.

During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department

Mitigation Measure CUL-8 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources If archaeological resources are encountered during ground -disturbing activities, work within 50 feet shall be halted and the project archaeologist meeting t he SOI’s PQS for archeology (National Park Service 1983) shall immediately to evaluate the find pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. If necessary, the evaluation may require preparation of a treatment plan and archaeological testing for CRHR eligibility. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA and cannot be avoided by the project, additional work may be warranted, such as data recovery excavation, to mitigate any significant impacts to significant resources. If the resource is of Native American origin, implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR-1 may be required. Any reports required to During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 161 document and/or evaluate unanticipated discoveries shall be submitted to the City for review and approval and submitted to the NWIC after completio n. Recommendations contained therein shall be implemented throughout the remainder of ground disturbance activities.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Mitigation Measure GHG-1: Future development shall install EV charging infrastructure according to the most ambitious voluntary standard in the California Green Building Standards Code at the time of project approval.

Prior to
permit
approval.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department

Mitigation Measure GHG-2: Future development shall provide no more parking spaces than the off -street parking requirements established in the City of Salinas Municipal Code. Alternatively, multi -family resi dential development can choose to unbundle parking costs with costs to rent or own a residential unit instead of meeting the maximum off-parking requirement.

Prior to
permit
approval.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department

Hydrology and Water Quality
Mitigation Measure HYD-1: Future Development projects on the subject site that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500-dwelling unit project are required to prepare a Water Supply Assessment.

Prior to
permit
approval.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department

Noise
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Prior to ground disturbing activities, the City of Salinas shall ensure the following with the Project proponent:

During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 162 • Construction equipment, fixed of mobile, shall be outfitted with properly operating and maintained mufflers.
• Construction noise reduction me thods such as shutting off idling equipment, installing temporary acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources, maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas and occupied residential areas, and using electric air co mpressors and similar power tools rather than diesel equipment shall be used. • During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be located so that emitted noise is directed away from or shielded from sensitive noise receivers.

Community
Development
Department.

Mitigation Measure NOI -2: The use of heavy construction equipment within 25 feet of existing structures shall be prohibited.

During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department.

Transportation
Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: To maintain safety standards at all intersections and roadway segments pursuant to implementation actions identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan, a traffic impact study shall be required for all development projects anticipated to generate 110 or more new daily vehicle trips within the Project Area, unless not required by the City. Depending on the results of this study, future developments may be required to construct or contribute to street safety improvements to meet the demand generated by the project. Improvements shall be in accordance with the City of Salinas’ Vision Zero Action Plan (i.e. pedestrian -activated crosswalk warning beacon, high visibility crosswalks, pedestrian hybrid beacon, reduced parking at intersection, intersection control, raised median and street trees, protected bike lanes, and lane reduction). These improvements shall be required as conditions of approval.

Prior to
permit
approval.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –Traffic
Engineering and
Plan Check Services

Tribal Cultural Resources

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 163 Mitigation Measure TCR-1 Inadvertent Discoveries During Construction In the event that cultural resources of Native American origin are identified during grading or construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until a qualified archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find; an appropriate Native American representative, based on the nature of the find, is consulted; and m itigation measures are put in place for the disposition and protection of any find pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. If the City, in consultation with local Native Americans, determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and t hus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with local Native American group(s) prior to continuation of any earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find. The plan shall include avoidance of the resource or, if avoidance of the resource is infeasible, shall outline the appropriate treatment of the resource in coordination with the appropriate local Native American tribal representative and, if applicable, a qualified archaeologist. Examples of appropriate mitigation for tribal cultural resources include, but are not limited to, protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource, protecting traditional use of the resource, protecting the confidentiality of the resource, or heritage recovery.

During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department.

Utilities and Service Systems
Mitigation Measure UTL-1: New development generating wastewater flows that results in a downstream exceedance of 0.75 d/D shall construct system upgrades for those found to be insufficient in capacity per the requirements of the Public Works Department. The flow shall be verified through a sewer modeling program during the planning and design phase, prior to entitlement approval. The model shall evaluate pipeline capacity, flow velocity, and maximum d/D ratio for normal, dry, and wet weather conditions.

Prior to
permit
approval.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 164 6 REPORT PREPARATION
Names of Persons Who Prepared or Participated in the Initial Study:

Lead Agency
Lead Agency
City of Salinas
65 West Alisal Street
Salinas, CA 93901
Lisa Brinton, Director, Community Development
Department

Oscar Resendiz, Associate Planner, Community
Development Department
Initial Study Consultant
Initial Study
Precision Civil Engineering
1234 O Street
Fresno, CA 93721
(559) 449-4500
Bonique Emerson, AICP, VP of Planning
Jenna Chilingerian, AICP, Senior Planner
Shin Tu, AICP Candidate, Associate Planner

Technical Studies

Noise Assessment WJV Acoustics, Inc. Walter J. Van Groningen, President 113 N Church Street
Visalia, CA 93291
(559) 627-4923

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 165 7 APPENDICES

7.1 Appendix A: CalEEMod Output Files
Prepared by Precision Civil Engineering, Inc. dated April 3, 2023.

Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone
Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - The project site is 13.5 acres.

Construction Phase -
Grading - The project site is 13.5 acres
Architectural Coating - Effective January 1, 2022, nonflat gloss and semigloss paints are required to meet the 50 g/l standard, providing lower VOC emissions for buildings constructed after that date.

Area Coating - Effective January 1, 2022, nonflat gloss and semigloss paints are required to meet the 50 g/l standard, providing lower VOC emissions for buildings constructed after that date.

Area Mitigation - Effective January 1, 2022, nonflat gloss and semigloss paints are required to meet the 50 g/l standard, providing lower VOC emissions for buildings constructed after that date.

Mobile Land Use Mitigation -

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Apartments Mid Rise 576.00 Dwelling Unit 13.50 576,000.00 1647 Strip Mall 147.02 1000sqft 0.00 147,020.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
4 Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.8 53

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 0.033CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 1 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied l------------------------------1------------------------------~-------------------------t------------~-------------~---------------I Energy Mitigation - PG&E is subject to the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) which requires investor-owned utilities, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase procurement from eligible renewable resources to 33 percent of total procurement by 2020 to 60 percent of total procurement by 2030
Waste Mitigation - The Project will recycle 50% of the solid waste in compliance with state requirements.

2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 150.00 50.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Interior 150.00 50.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Parking 150.00 50.00
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Residential_Exterior 100.00 50.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Residential_Interior 100.00 50.00 tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 150 50
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Nonresidential_Interior 150 50
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Parking 150 50
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Residential_Exterior 100 50
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Residential_Interior 100 50
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 90.00 13.50
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 15.00 13.50
tblLandUse LotAcreage 15.16 13.50
tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.38 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 2 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I I
I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------I------------------------------~--------------------------

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2024 0.3881 2.7296 3.6951 9.2900e-
003

0.6278 0.1028 0.7306 0.2173 0.0961 0.3133 0.0000 845.1075 845.1075 0.1082 0.0341 857.9855 2025 2.2938 0.9641 1.5863 4.0200e-
003

0.2164 0.0330 0.2494 0.0582 0.0310 0.0892 0.0000 368.6547 368.6547 0.0386 0.0162 374.4409 Maximum 2.2938 2.7296 3.6951 9.2900e-
003

0.6278 0.1028 0.7306 0.2173 0.0961 0.3133 0.0000 845.1075 845.1075 0.1082 0.0341 857.9855 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2024 0.3881 2.7296 3.6951 9.2900e-
003

0.6278 0.1028 0.7306 0.2173 0.0961 0.3133 0.0000 845.1071 845.1071 0.1082 0.0341 857.9851 2025 2.2938 0.9641 1.5863 4.0200e-
003

0.2164 0.0330 0.2494 0.0582 0.0310 0.0892 0.0000 368.6545 368.6545 0.0386 0.0162 374.4407 Maximum 2.2938 2.7296 3.6951 9.2900e-
003

0.6278 0.1028 0.7306 0.2173 0.0961 0.3133 0.0000 845.1071 845.1071 0.1082 0.0341 857.9851 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 3 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I••• • • • • .._ _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ ,_ • • • • • • ,._ _______ ..1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ ,. • • • • • • • • • • • I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I■
'
'
I
'
'
'
I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I••• • • • • .._ _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ ,_ • • • • • • ., _______ ..... _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ ,
■ • • • • • • • • • • •
I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I■

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
' I
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 1-1-2024 3-31-2024 0.9718 0.9718
2 4-1-2024 6-30-2024 0.6996 0.6996
3 7-1-2024 9-30-2024 0.7073 0.7073
4 10-1-2024 12-31-2024 0.7258 0.7258
5 1-1-2025 3-31-2025 0.6662 0.6662
6 4-1-2025 6-30-2025 1.7391 1.7391
7 7-1-2025 9-30-2025 0.8487 0.8487
Highest 1.7391 1.7391
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 4 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 3.2164 0.0684 5.9363 3.1000e-
004

0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0000 9.7067 9.7067 9.3000e- 003

0.0000 9.9392
Energy 0.0279 0.2393 0.1088 1.5200e-
003

0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0000 623.3808 623.3808 0.0615 0.0119 628.4560 Mobile 3.6050 4.1539 30.8098 0.0601 6.6044 0.0514 6.6558 1.7649 0.0480 1.8130 0.0000 5,792.502 2 5,792.502
2 0.4167 0.2932 5,890.291
6 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 85.1202 0.0000 85.1202 5.0305 0.0000 210.8817 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 15.3611 34.0639 49.4250 1.5832 0.0379 100.3066 Total 6.8493 4.4616 36.8550 0.0619 6.6044 0.1037 6.7080 1.7649 0.1003 1.8652 100.4813 6,459.653 6 6,560.134
9 7.1012 0.3430 6,839.875
1 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 5 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I I

0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0000 9.7067 9.7067 9.3000e- 003

0.0000 9.9392
Energy 0.0279 0.2393 0.1088 1.5200e-
003

0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0000 508.7421 508.7421 0.0429 9.6200e- 003
512.6837
Mobile 2.6658 2.3240 17.5655 0.0253 2.6303 0.0240 2.6542 0.7029 0.0224 0.7253 0.0000 2,438.060 8 2,438.060
8 0.2666 0.1665 2,494.348
7 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 42.5601 0.0000 42.5601 2.5152 0.0000 105.4409 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 15.3611 34.0639 49.4250 1.5832 0.0379 100.3066 Total 5.9101 2.6317 23.6107 0.0271 2.6303 0.0762 2.7064 0.7029 0.0746 0.7775 57.9212 2,990.573 5 3,048.494
7 4.4173 0.2141 3,222.719
1 Mitigated Operational

13.71 41.01 35.94 56.20 60.17 26.48 59.65 60.17 25.62 58.32 42.36 53.70 53.53 37.80 37.59 52.88 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 6 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T-------I I
I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
■ ■ I
-------~------------------------=-----------------------1------------~------------~--------~--------~------------------------- ■ ■ I I I I I
■ ■ I I I I I
-------~------------------------~----------------------+-------------~------------~--------~--------~------------------------- 4 Building Construction Building Construction 3/23/2024 5/16/2025 5 300 5 Paving Paving 5/17/2025 6/13/2025 5 20
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 6/14/2025 7/11/2025 5 20 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Residential Indoor: 1,166,400; Residential Outdoor: 388,800; Non-Residential Indoor: 220,530; Non-Residential Outdoor: 73,510; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 13.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 13.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 7 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied : :
-------•------------------------•-----------------------+------------+------------+--------+--------+-------------------------■ ■ 1 I I I I ■ ■ 1 I I I I
-------J------------------------~-----------------------1-------------~------------~--------~--------~------------------------- ■
-
I
■
-
I
I
I
I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I I I I
----------------------------~---------------------------1-----------------~ ------------1--------------~-------------- ■
-

3.2 Demolition - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0224 0.2088 0.1971 3.9000e-
004

9.6000e-
003

8.9200e-
003

0.0000 33.9961 33.9961 9.5100e-
003

0.0000 34.2338
Total 0.0224 0.2088 0.1971 3.9000e-
004

9.6000e-
003

8.9200e-
003

0.0000 33.9961 33.9961 9.5100e-
003

0.0000 34.2338
Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 462.00 86.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 92.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 8 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ' ' ' ' ' '
I
' ' ' '
I
' ' ' ,.
' ' ' ' ' '
I
' ' ' '
I
' ' ' ,.
' ' ' ' ' '
I
' ' ' '
I
' ' ' ,.
' ' ' ' ' '
I
' ' ' '
I
' ' ' ,.
.
' .
' --+--• ----------r------------------t---------1-----------t----------➔---------T---------➔-----------t--------------~---------------- 1 1 1 1 I I I I I ■
I I I I I I I I I ■
---------· t··--------1--------------1----------;-----------1-----------t----------t · ---------1-----------1---------------=---------------- I I I I I I I I I •
I I I I I I I I I ■
---------· t··--------1--------------1----------;-----------1-----------t----------t · ---------1-----------1---------------=---------------- I I I I I I I I I •
I I I I I I I I I ■
---------· t··--------1--------------1----------;-----------1-----------t----------t · ---------1-----------1---------------=---------------- I I I I I I I I I •
I I I I I I I I I ■
---------· t··--------1--------------1----------;-----------1-----------t----------t · ---------1-----------1---------------=----------------

I I I I I I I
I I I 1 ! I I
I-------------+-- - - - - - ---+-- - - - - - - --+-- - - - - - - - - - ---+-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --+-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --I

3.2 Demolition - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 4.6000e-
004

3.3000e-
004

3.8900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.1900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.2000e-
003

3.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

3.2000e-
004

0.0000 0.9800 0.9800 3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

0.9894
Total 4.6000e-
004

3.3000e-
004

3.8900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.1900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.2000e-
003

3.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

3.2000e-
004

0.0000 0.9800 0.9800 3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

0.9894
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0224 0.2088 0.1971 3.9000e-
004

9.6000e-
003

8.9200e-
003

0.0000 33.9960 33.9960 9.5100e-
003

0.0000 34.2338
Total 0.0224 0.2088 0.1971 3.9000e-
004

9.6000e-
003

8.9200e-
003

0.0000 33.9960 33.9960 9.5100e-
003

0.0000 34.2338
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 9 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
' '
'
'
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

3.3000e-
004

3.8900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.1900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.2000e-
003

3.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

3.2000e-
004

0.0000 0.9800 0.9800 3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

0.9894
Total 4.6000e-
004

3.3000e-
004

3.8900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.1900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.2000e-
003

3.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

3.2000e-
004

0.0000 0.9800 0.9800 3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

0.9894
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Site Preparation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0975 0.0000 0.0975 0.0504 0.0000 0.0504 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0133 0.1359 0.0917 1.9000e-
004

6.1500e-
003

5.6600e-
003

0.0000 16.7285 16.7285 5.4100e-
003

0.0000 16.8638
Total 0.0133 0.1359 0.0917 1.9000e-
004

0.0975 6.1500e-
003

0.1036 0.0504 5.6600e-
003

0.0561 0.0000 16.7285 16.7285 5.4100e-
003

0.0000 16.8638
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 10 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.3 Site Preparation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.7000e-
004

2.0000e-
004

2.3300e-
003

1.0000e-
005

7.2000e-
004

0.0000 7.2000e-
004

1.9000e-
004

0.0000 1.9000e-
004

0.0000 0.5880 0.5880 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.5937
Total 2.7000e-
004

2.0000e-
004

2.3300e-
003

1.0000e-
005

7.2000e-
004

0.0000 7.2000e-
004

1.9000e-
004

0.0000 1.9000e-
004

0.0000 0.5880 0.5880 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.5937
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0975 0.0000 0.0975 0.0504 0.0000 0.0504 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0133 0.1359 0.0917 1.9000e-
004

6.1500e-
003

5.6500e-
003

0.0000 16.7285 16.7285 5.4100e-
003

0.0000 16.8638
Total 0.0133 0.1359 0.0917 1.9000e-
004

0.0975 6.1500e-
003

0.1036 0.0504 5.6500e-
003

0.0561 0.0000 16.7285 16.7285 5.4100e-
003

0.0000 16.8638
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 11 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.3 Site Preparation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.7000e-
004

2.0000e-
004

2.3300e-
003

1.0000e-
005

7.2000e-
004

0.0000 7.2000e-
004

1.9000e-
004

0.0000 1.9000e-
004

0.0000 0.5880 0.5880 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.5937
Total 2.7000e-
004

2.0000e-
004

2.3300e-
003

1.0000e-
005

7.2000e-
004

0.0000 7.2000e-
004

1.9000e-
004

0.0000 1.9000e-
004

0.0000 0.5880 0.5880 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.5937
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0975 0.0000 0.0975 0.0504 0.0000 0.0504 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0483 0.4857 0.4158 9.3000e-
004

0.0200 0.0200 0.0184 0.0184 0.0000 81.7793 81.7793 0.0265 0.0000 82.4405 Total 0.0483 0.4857 0.4158 9.3000e-
004

0.0975 0.0200 0.1175 0.0504 0.0184 0.0689 0.0000 81.7793 81.7793 0.0265 0.0000 82.4405 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 12 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.4 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 9.1000e-
004

6.7000e-
004

7.7800e-
003

2.0000e-
005

2.3900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

2.4000e-
003

6.3000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

6.5000e-
004

0.0000 1.9599 1.9599 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-
005

1.9788
Total 9.1000e-
004

6.7000e-
004

7.7800e-
003

2.0000e-
005

2.3900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

2.4000e-
003

6.3000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

6.5000e-
004

0.0000 1.9599 1.9599 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-
005

1.9788
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0975 0.0000 0.0975 0.0504 0.0000 0.0504 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0483 0.4857 0.4158 9.3000e-
004

0.0200 0.0200 0.0184 0.0184 0.0000 81.7792 81.7792 0.0265 0.0000 82.4404 Total 0.0483 0.4857 0.4158 9.3000e-
004

0.0975 0.0200 0.1175 0.0504 0.0184 0.0689 0.0000 81.7792 81.7792 0.0265 0.0000 82.4404 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 13 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

6.7000e-
004

7.7800e-
003

2.0000e-
005

2.3900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

2.4000e-
003

6.3000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

6.5000e-
004

0.0000 1.9599 1.9599 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-
005

1.9788
Total 9.1000e-
004

6.7000e-
004

7.7800e-
003

2.0000e-
005

2.3900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

2.4000e-
003

6.3000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

6.5000e-
004

0.0000 1.9599 1.9599 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-
005

1.9788
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

0.0619 0.0619 0.0583 0.0583 0.0000 234.1676 234.1676 0.0554 0.0000 235.5520 Total 0.1486 1.3578 1.6329 2.7200e-
003

0.0619 0.0619 0.0583 0.0583 0.0000 234.1676 234.1676 0.0554 0.0000 235.5520 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 14 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
' '
'
'
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

3.5 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0118 0.4367 0.1343 1.7700e-
003

0.0573 2.7900e-
003

0.0601 0.0166 2.6700e-
003

0.0192 0.0000 170.0621 170.0621 1.4600e-
003

0.0250 177.5452
Worker 0.1420 0.1036 1.2094 3.2600e-
003

0.3712 2.2900e-
003

0.3735 0.0987 2.1100e-
003

0.1008 0.0000 304.8462 304.8462 9.9000e-
003

9.0400e-
003
307.7883
Total 0.1538 0.5403 1.3437 5.0300e-
003

0.4285 5.0800e-
003

0.4336 0.1153 4.7800e-
003

0.1200 0.0000 474.9082 474.9082 0.0114 0.0340 485.3335
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1486 1.3578 1.6329 2.7200e-
003

0.0619 0.0619 0.0583 0.0583 0.0000 234.1673 234.1673 0.0554 0.0000 235.5517 Total 0.1486 1.3578 1.6329 2.7200e-
003

0.0619 0.0619 0.0583 0.0583 0.0000 234.1673 234.1673 0.0554 0.0000 235.5517 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 15 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
' '
'
'
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

0.0573 2.7900e-
003

0.0601 0.0166 2.6700e-
003

0.0192 0.0000 170.0621 170.0621 1.4600e-
003

0.0250 177.5452
Worker 0.1420 0.1036 1.2094 3.2600e-
003

0.3712 2.2900e-
003

0.3735 0.0987 2.1100e-
003

0.1008 0.0000 304.8462 304.8462 9.9000e-
003

9.0400e-
003
307.7883
Total 0.1538 0.5403 1.3437 5.0300e-
003

0.4285 5.0800e-
003

0.4336 0.1153 4.7800e-
003

0.1200 0.0000 474.9082 474.9082 0.0114 0.0340 485.3335
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0670 0.6110 0.7882 1.3200e-
003

0.0259 0.0259 0.0243 0.0243 0.0000 113.6405 113.6405 0.0267 0.0000 114.3084 Total 0.0670 0.6110 0.7882 1.3200e-
003

0.0259 0.0259 0.0243 0.0243 0.0000 113.6405 113.6405 0.0267 0.0000 114.3084 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 16 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
' '
'
'
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

0.2088 0.0632 8.4000e-
004

0.0278 1.3300e-
003

0.0291 8.0400e-
003

1.2700e-
003

9.3100e-
003

0.0000 81.0662 81.0662 6.9000e-
004

0.0119 84.6330
Worker 0.0646 0.0449 0.5454 1.5300e-
003

0.1801 1.0600e-
003

0.1812 0.0479 9.7000e-
004

0.0489 0.0000 144.5435 144.5435 4.3500e-
003

4.0800e-
003
145.8671
Total 0.0701 0.2537 0.6085 2.3700e-
003

0.2079 2.3900e-
003

0.2103 0.0559 2.2400e-
003

0.0582 0.0000 225.6097 225.6097 5.0400e-
003

0.0160 230.5002
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0670 0.6110 0.7882 1.3200e-
003

0.0259 0.0259 0.0243 0.0243 0.0000 113.6404 113.6404 0.0267 0.0000 114.3082 Total 0.0670 0.6110 0.7882 1.3200e-
003

0.0259 0.0259 0.0243 0.0243 0.0000 113.6404 113.6404 0.0267 0.0000 114.3082 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 17 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
' '
'
'
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

0.2088 0.0632 8.4000e-
004

0.0278 1.3300e-
003

0.0291 8.0400e-
003

1.2700e-
003

9.3100e-
003

0.0000 81.0662 81.0662 6.9000e-
004

0.0119 84.6330
Worker 0.0646 0.0449 0.5454 1.5300e-
003

0.1801 1.0600e-
003

0.1812 0.0479 9.7000e-
004

0.0489 0.0000 144.5435 144.5435 4.3500e-
003

4.0800e-
003
145.8671
Total 0.0701 0.2537 0.6085 2.3700e-
003

0.2079 2.3900e-
003

0.2103 0.0559 2.2400e-
003

0.0582 0.0000 225.6097 225.6097 5.0400e-
003

0.0160 230.5002
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 9.1500e-
003

0.0858 0.1458 2.3000e-
004

4.1900e-
003

3.8500e-
003

0.0000 20.0193 20.0193 6.4700e-
003

0.0000 20.1811
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 9.1500e-
003

0.0858 0.1458 2.3000e-
004

4.1900e-
003

3.8500e-
003

0.0000 20.0193 20.0193 6.4700e-
003

0.0000 20.1811
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 18 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.6 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 4.3000e-
004

3.0000e-
004

3.6100e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.1900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.2000e-
003

3.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

3.2000e-
004

0.0000 0.9578 0.9578 3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

0.9665
Total 4.3000e-
004

3.0000e-
004

3.6100e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.1900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.2000e-
003

3.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

3.2000e-
004

0.0000 0.9578 0.9578 3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

0.9665
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 9.1500e-
003

0.0858 0.1458 2.3000e-
004

4.1900e-
003

3.8500e-
003

0.0000 20.0192 20.0192 6.4700e-
003

0.0000 20.1811
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 9.1500e-
003

0.0858 0.1458 2.3000e-
004

4.1900e-
003

3.8500e-
003

0.0000 20.0192 20.0192 6.4700e-
003

0.0000 20.1811
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 19 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.0000e-
004

3.6100e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.1900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.2000e-
003

3.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

3.2000e-
004

0.0000 0.9578 0.9578 3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

0.9665
Total 4.3000e-
004

3.0000e-
004

3.6100e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.1900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.2000e-
003

3.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

3.2000e-
004

0.0000 0.9578 0.9578 3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

0.9665
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

0.0115 0.0181 3.0000e-
005

5.2000e-
004

0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 1.4000e-
004

0.0000 2.5567
Total 2.1445 0.0115 0.0181 3.0000e-
005

5.2000e-
004

0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 1.4000e-
004

0.0000 2.5567
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 20 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.6200e-
003

1.8200e-
003

0.0222 6.0000e-
005

7.3200e-
003

4.0000e-
005

7.3600e-
003

1.9500e-
003

4.0000e-
005

1.9900e-
003

0.0000 5.8742 5.8742 1.8000e-
004

1.7000e-
004

5.9280
Total 2.6200e-
003

1.8200e-
003

0.0222 6.0000e-
005

7.3200e-
003

4.0000e-
005

7.3600e-
003

1.9500e-
003

4.0000e-
005

1.9900e-
003

0.0000 5.8742 5.8742 1.8000e-
004

1.7000e-
004

5.9280
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 2.1428 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.7100e-
003

0.0115 0.0181 3.0000e-
005

5.2000e-
004

0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 1.4000e-
004

0.0000 2.5567
Total 2.1445 0.0115 0.0181 3.0000e-
005

5.2000e-
004

0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 1.4000e-
004

0.0000 2.5567
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 21 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I I
I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

1.8200e-
003

0.0222 6.0000e-
005

7.3200e-
003

4.0000e-
005

7.3600e-
003

1.9500e-
003

4.0000e-
005

1.9900e-
003

0.0000 5.8742 5.8742 1.8000e-
004

1.7000e-
004

5.9280
Total 2.6200e-
003

1.8200e-
003

0.0222 6.0000e-
005

7.3200e-
003

4.0000e-
005

7.3600e-
003

1.9500e-
003

4.0000e-
005

1.9900e-
003

0.0000 5.8742 5.8742 1.8000e-
004

1.7000e-
004

5.9280
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
Increase Density
Increase Diversity
Improve Walkability Design
Improve Destination Accessibility
Increase Transit Accessibility
Improve Pedestrian Network
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 22 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I I
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 2.6658 2.3240 17.5655 0.0253 2.6303 0.0240 2.6542 0.7029 0.0224 0.7253 0.0000 2,438.060 8 2,438.060
8 0.2666 0.1665 2,494.348
7 Unmitigated 3.6050 4.1539 30.8098 0.0601 6.6044 0.0514 6.6558 1.7649 0.0480 1.8130 0.0000 5,792.502 2 5,792.502
2 0.4167 0.2932 5,890.291
6 4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Apartments Mid Rise 0.533039 0.053900 0.191769 0.138335 0.024899 0.006270 0.010605 0.009380 0.001135 0.000556 0.025872 0.001193 0.003048 Strip Mall 0.533039 0.053900 0.191769 0.138335 0.024899 0.006270 0.010605 0.009380 0.001135 0.000556 0.025872 0.001193 0.003048

5.0 Energy Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 23 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
-----------.,..-------.--------.--------.--------.--------.--------.--------.--------.--------.--------• -------,--------.--------.--------.--------. -------., ., ., ., I I
I I ■ ■
~-····································=--------------~-----------t-----------~------------------------1-------------------------- : I I ■ ■
I I

I I I I I I
■ I I ■ ■ ■
• I I ■ I I ■ ■ ■
~ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ r • • • • • • • • • • T • • • • • • • • • 'I' • • • • • • • • • • .., • • • • • • • • ·r • • • • • • • • ·r • • • • • • • • • • • r • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • r • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .

I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I ; I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I
------------------------~---------=----------l----------l----------l----------l----------l----------l----------1----------1----------1----------I---------~-------- ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 232.7512 232.7512 0.0377 4.5600e- 003
235.0527
Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 347.3899 347.3899 0.0562 6.8100e- 003
350.8250
NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.0279 0.2393 0.1088 1.5200e-
003

0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0000 275.9909 275.9909 5.2900e- 003

5.0600e-
003
277.6310
NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0279 0.2393 0.1088 1.5200e-
003

0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0000 275.9909 275.9909 5.2900e- 003

5.0600e-
003
277.6310

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Percent of Electricity Use Generated with Renewable Energy Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 24 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied .. ..

I I I I I I I I I
I I I

I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••n-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------.,..-------~•••••••·-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• •• I •• I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••n-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------.,..-------~•••••••·-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• •• I •• I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -.r-------"'T"-------r--------r-------"'T"------"'T"-------r-------"'T"-------r--------r--------· - - - - - - -,--------r--------r-------"'T"------"'T - - - - - - -.. ..

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise

4.82785e
+006

0.0260 0.2225 0.0947 1.4200e-
003

0.0180 0.0180 0.0180 0.0180 0.0000 257.6323 257.6323 4.9400e- 003

4.7200e-
003
259.1633
Strip Mall 344027 1.8600e-
003

0.0169 0.0142 1.0000e-
004

1.2800e-
003

0.0000 18.3586 18.3586 3.5000e-
004

3.4000e-
004

18.4677
Total 0.0279 0.2393 0.1088 1.5200e-
003

0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0000 275.9909 275.9909 5.2900e- 003

5.0600e-
003
277.6310
Unmitigated
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise

4.82785e
+006

0.0260 0.2225 0.0947 1.4200e-
003

0.0180 0.0180 0.0180 0.0180 0.0000 257.6323 257.6323 4.9400e- 003

4.7200e-
003
259.1633
Strip Mall 344027 1.8600e-
003

0.0169 0.0142 1.0000e-
004

1.2800e-
003

0.0000 18.3586 18.3586 3.5000e-
004

3.4000e-
004

18.4677
Total 0.0279 0.2393 0.1088 1.5200e-
003

0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0000 275.9909 275.9909 5.2900e- 003

5.0600e-
003
277.6310
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 25 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 1, I
1, I
1, &
1 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••r--------------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• 1, & 1, &
1, &
I, &
I, &
I, &
I, &
I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••r--------------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I, & I, &
I, &
1, &

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise

2.22706e
+006
206.0563 0.0333 4.0400e-
003
208.0939
Strip Mall 1.52754e
+006
141.3336 0.0229 2.7700e-
003
142.7311
Total 347.3899 0.0562 6.8100e-
003
350.8250
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise

1.49213e
+006
138.0577 0.0223 2.7100e-
003
139.4229
Strip Mall 1.02345e
+006

94.6935 0.0153 1.8600e-
003

95.6298
Total 232.7512 0.0377 4.5700e-
003
235.0527
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 26 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied L
L
L
I 11 I I I
•••••••••••r--------------,-------,-------T••••••• L
L
L
L
L
L
L
I 11 I I I
•••••••••••r--------------,-------,-------T••••••• L
L
L
L
No Hearths Installed

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 3.2164 0.0684 5.9363 3.1000e-
004

0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0000 9.7067 9.7067 9.3000e- 003

0.0000 9.9392
Unmitigated 3.2164 0.0684 5.9363 3.1000e-
004

0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0000 9.7067 9.7067 9.3000e- 003

0.0000 9.9392
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 27 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - - - - - - - - - - - .,.. ______ "'T" ______ "'T" ______ "'T" ______ .,.. ______ "'T" ______ "'T" ______ "'T" ______ "'T" ______ .,.. _______ • - - - - - - -,-------"'T"------"'T"-------r-------"T - - - - - - -., ., ., .,

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

0.2143 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

2.8238 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 0.1784 0.0684 5.9363 3.1000e-
004

0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0000 9.7067 9.7067 9.3000e- 003

0.0000 9.9392
Total 3.2164 0.0684 5.9363 3.1000e-
004

0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0000 9.7067 9.7067 9.3000e- 003

0.0000 9.9392
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 28 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I I

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

0.2143 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0000 9.7067 9.7067 9.3000e- 003

0.0000 9.9392
Total 3.2164 0.0684 5.9363 3.1000e-
004

0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0329 0.0000 9.7067 9.7067 9.3000e- 003

0.0000 9.9392
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 29 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I I
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 49.4250 1.5832 0.0379 100.3066
Unmitigated 49.4250 1.5832 0.0379 100.3066

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise

37.5287 /

23.6594

38.3564 1.2272 0.0294 77.7945
Strip Mall 10.8901 /

6.6746

11.0685 0.3561 8.5300e-
003

22.5121
Total 49.4250 1.5832 0.0379 100.3066
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 30 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., .,
I I I
■ I I I I
-----------... -------.--------.--------. -------.,
.,
I,
I,
1,
I 11 I I I
- - - - - - - - - - - r- - - - - - - ... --------,--------,-------"T -------I, I,
1,
1,

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise

37.5287 /

23.6594

38.3564 1.2272 0.0294 77.7945
Strip Mall 10.8901 /

6.6746

11.0685 0.3561 8.5300e-
003

22.5121
Total 49.4250 1.5832 0.0379 100.3066
Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Institute Recycling and Composting Services

8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 31 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 1,
1,
1,
I 11 I I I
- - - - - - - - - - - r- - - - - - - ... --------,--------,-------"T - - - - - - -1, 1,
1,
I,
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 42.5601 2.5152 0.0000 105.4409
Unmitigated 85.1202 5.0305 0.0000 210.8817
Category/Year

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
264.96 53.7845 3.1786 0.0000 133.2488
Strip Mall 154.37 31.3357 1.8519 0.0000 77.6329
Total 85.1202 5.0305 0.0000 210.8817
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 32 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., .,
I I I
■ I I I I
-----------... -------.--------.--------. -------.,
.,
I,
I,
1,
I 11 I I I
- - - - - - - - - - - I"' - - - - - - ··--------,--------,-------"T -------I, I,
1,
1,

11.0 Vegetation

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
132.48 26.8922 1.5893 0.0000 66.6244
Strip Mall 77.185 15.6679 0.9259 0.0000 38.8165
Total 42.5601 2.5152 0.0000 105.4408
Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 33 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 1,
1,
1,
I I ■ I I I
- - - - - - - - - - - I"' - - - - - - ... --------,--------,-------"T -------1, 1,
1,
I,
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 10:57 AMPage 34 of 34 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone
Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - The project site is 13.5 acres.

Area Coating - Effective January 1, 2022, nonflat gloss and semigloss paints are required to meet the 50 g/l standard, providing lower VOC emissions for buildings constructed after that date.

Area Mitigation - Effective January 1, 2022, nonflat gloss and semigloss paints are required to meet the 50 g/l standard, providing lower VOC emissions for buildings constructed after that date.

Mobile Land Use Mitigation -

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Apartments Mid Rise 576.00 Dwelling Unit 13.50 576,000.00 1647 Strip Mall 147.02 1000sqft 0.00 147,020.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
4 Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.8 53

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 0.033CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 1 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied l------------------------------1------------------------------~-------------------------t------------~-------------~---------------I Energy Mitigation - PG&E is subject to the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) which requires investor-owned utilities, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase procurement from eligible renewable resources to 33 percent of total procurement by 2020 to 60 percent of total procurement by 2030
Waste Mitigation - The Project will recycle 50% of the solid waste in compliance with state requirements.

2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 150.00 50.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Interior 150.00 50.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Parking 150.00 50.00
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Residential_Exterior 100.00 50.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Residential_Interior 100.00 50.00 tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 150 50
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Nonresidential_Interior 150 50
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Parking 150 50
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Residential_Exterior 100 50
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Residential_Interior 100 50
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 90.00 13.50
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 15.00 13.50
tblLandUse LotAcreage 15.16 13.50
tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.38 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 2 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I I
I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------I------------------------------~--------------------------

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2024 3.2799 32.4159 30.0253 0.0784 19.6458 1.3364 20.8760 10.1245 1.2295 11.2563 0.0000 7,912.208 4 7,912.208
4 1.9481 0.3627 8,038.351
7 2025 214.7177 17.3799 28.9943 0.0770 4.3778 0.5761 4.9540 1.1744 0.5420 1.7164 0.0000 7,800.789 9 7,800.789
9 0.7167 0.3516 7,923.282
1 Maximum 214.7177 32.4159 30.0253 0.0784 19.6458 1.3364 20.8760 10.1245 1.2295 11.2563 0.0000 7,912.208 4 7,912.208
4 1.9481 0.3627 8,038.351
7 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2024 3.2799 32.4159 30.0253 0.0784 19.6458 1.3364 20.8760 10.1245 1.2295 11.2563 0.0000 7,912.208 4 7,912.208
4 1.9481 0.3627 8,038.351
7 2025 214.7177 17.3799 28.9943 0.0770 4.3778 0.5761 4.9540 1.1744 0.5420 1.7164 0.0000 7,800.789 9 7,800.789
9 0.7167 0.3516 7,923.282
1 Maximum 214.7177 32.4159 30.0253 0.0784 19.6458 1.3364 20.8760 10.1245 1.2295 11.2563 0.0000 7,912.208 4 7,912.208
4 1.9481 0.3627 8,038.351
7 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 3 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I••• • • • • .._ _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ ,_ • • • • • • ,._ _______ ..1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ ,. • • • • • • • • • • • I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I■
'
'
I
'
'
'
I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I••• • • • • .._ _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ ,_ • • • • • • ., _______ ..... _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ ,
■ • • • • • • • • • • •
I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I■

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
' I
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 4 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 18.0736 0.5470 47.4907 2.5100e-
003

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.0000 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 0.0000 87.6489 Energy 0.1528 1.3114 0.5963 8.3400e-
003

0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 1,667.002
3 1,667.002
3 0.0320 0.0306 1,676.908
4 Mobile 22.9834 22.6075 175.7666 0.3685 40.1831 0.3037 40.4868 10.7111 0.2836 10.9946 39,176.84 44 39,176.84
44 2.5337 1.8079 39,778.94
45 Total 41.2098 24.4659 223.8536 0.3794 40.1831 0.6727 40.8558 10.7111 0.6526 11.3637 0.0000 40,929.44 50 40,929.44
50 2.6476 1.8385 41,543.50
18 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 18.0736 0.5470 47.4907 2.5100e-
003

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.0000 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 0.0000 87.6489 Energy 0.1528 1.3114 0.5963 8.3400e-
003

0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 1,667.002
3 1,667.002
3 0.0320 0.0306 1,676.908
4 Mobile 17.5909 12.6544 94.9486 0.1547 16.0033 0.1417 16.1449 4.2658 0.1320 4.3978 16,446.07 78 16,446.07
78 1.5627 1.0207 16,789.30
13 Total 35.8173 14.5127 143.0356 0.1655 16.0033 0.5107 16.5140 4.2658 0.5011 4.7669 0.0000 18,198.67 83 18,198.67
83 1.6767 1.0512 18,553.85
86 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 5 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ' '

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
••••••-~-------L-------L-------L-------•••••••••-------•-------L-------L-------L-------L-------L-------L-------L-------L-------•••••••••••• I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I■ '
'
I
' ' ' I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I
••••••-~-------L-------L-------L-------•••••••••-------•-------L-------L-------L-------L-------L-------L-------L-------L-------•••••••••••• I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I■

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
' I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I
••••••-~-------L-------L-------L-------•••••••••-------•-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------~-------•-----------1 I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I■

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
' I

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 1/1/2024 1/26/2024 5 20
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/27/2024 2/9/2024 5 10 3 Grading Grading 2/10/2024 3/22/2024 5 30
4 Building Construction Building Construction 3/23/2024 5/16/2025 5 300 5 Paving Paving 5/17/2025 6/13/2025 5 20
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 6/14/2025 7/11/2025 5 20 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

13.09 40.68 36.10 56.36 60.17 24.08 59.58 60.17 23.22 58.05 0.00 55.54 55.54 36.67 42.82 55.34 Residential Indoor: 1,166,400; Residential Outdoor: 388,800; Non-Residential Indoor: 220,530; Non-Residential Outdoor: 73,510; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 13.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 13.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 6 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
■ ■ I
-------J------------------------l-----------------------l------------~------------~--------4--------4-------------------------■ ■ 1 I I I I ■ ■ I I I I I
-------J------------------------l-----------------------l------------~------------~--------4--------4-------------------------■ ■ 1 I I I I ■ ■ I I I I I
-------J------------------------l-----------------------l------------~------------~--------4--------4-------------------------■ ■ 1 I I I I ■ ■ I I I I I
-------J------------------------l-----------------------l------------~------------~--------4--------4-------------------------■ ■ 1 I I I I ■ ■ I I I I I
-------1------------------------~----------------------..... ------------~------------~--------~--------~-------------------------

I I I I
I
I I
----------------------------1---------------------------~--------------- ·-------------1---------+--------------I I I I
----------------------------1---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------1---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I I I
-••----••----••----••----••-~--------------------------..,_ ________________ ~ -----------~-------------r-••----••----•

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 462.00 86.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 92.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 7 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied :
----------------------------•--------------------------+-----------------------~-------------~--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------1---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------T-------------- 1 I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------1---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------T-------------- 1 I
----------------------------1---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------T-------------- 1 I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------1---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------T-------------- 1 I I I
----------------------------~---------------------------1----------------- ~ ------------1--------------~-------------- ■ I I I I I I I I I
• I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------■ I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------■ I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------■ I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------■ I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------~---------------1-----------~----------l----------~-----------l-----------~----------l-------------+----------I-----------

3.2 Demolition - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.2437 20.8781 19.7073 0.0388 0.9602 0.9602 0.8922 0.8922 3,747.422 8 3,747.422
8 1.0485 3,773.634
5 Total 2.2437 20.8781 19.7073 0.0388 0.9602 0.9602 0.8922 0.8922 3,747.422 8 3,747.422
8 1.0485 3,773.634
5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0463 0.0292 0.4074 1.1000e-
003

0.1232 7.4000e-
004

0.1240 0.0327 6.8000e-
004

0.0334 113.6977 113.6977 3.3100e-
003

2.9400e-
003
114.6553
Total 0.0463 0.0292 0.4074 1.1000e-
003

0.1232 7.4000e-
004

0.1240 0.0327 6.8000e-
004

0.0334 113.6977 113.6977 3.3100e-
003

2.9400e-
003
114.6553
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 8 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.2 Demolition - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.2437 20.8781 19.7073 0.0388 0.9602 0.9602 0.8922 0.8922 0.0000 3,747.422 8 3,747.422
8 1.0485 3,773.634
5 Total 2.2437 20.8781 19.7073 0.0388 0.9602 0.9602 0.8922 0.8922 0.0000 3,747.422 8 3,747.422
8 1.0485 3,773.634
5 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0463 0.0292 0.4074 1.1000e-
003

0.1232 7.4000e-
004

0.1240 0.0327 6.8000e-
004

0.0334 113.6977 113.6977 3.3100e-
003

2.9400e-
003
114.6553
Total 0.0463 0.0292 0.4074 1.1000e-
003

0.1232 7.4000e-
004

0.1240 0.0327 6.8000e-
004

0.0334 113.6977 113.6977 3.3100e-
003

2.9400e-
003
114.6553
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 9 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.3 Site Preparation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.4979 0.0000 19.4979 10.0853 0.0000 10.0853 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6609 27.1760 18.3356 0.0381 1.2294 1.2294 1.1310 1.1310 3,688.010 0 3,688.010
0 1.1928 3,717.829
4 Total 2.6609 27.1760 18.3356 0.0381 19.4979 1.2294 20.7273 10.0853 1.1310 11.2163 3,688.010 0 3,688.010
0 1.1928 3,717.829
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0556 0.0351 0.4889 1.3200e-
003

0.1479 8.8000e-
004

0.1488 0.0392 8.1000e-
004

0.0400 136.4372 136.4372 3.9700e-
003

3.5200e-
003
137.5863
Total 0.0556 0.0351 0.4889 1.3200e-
003

0.1479 8.8000e-
004

0.1488 0.0392 8.1000e-
004

0.0400 136.4372 136.4372 3.9700e-
003

3.5200e-
003
137.5863
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 10 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.3 Site Preparation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.4979 0.0000 19.4979 10.0853 0.0000 10.0853 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6609 27.1760 18.3356 0.0381 1.2294 1.2294 1.1310 1.1310 0.0000 3,688.010 0 3,688.010
0 1.1928 3,717.829
4 Total 2.6609 27.1760 18.3356 0.0381 19.4979 1.2294 20.7273 10.0853 1.1310 11.2163 0.0000 3,688.010 0 3,688.010
0 1.1928 3,717.829
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0556 0.0351 0.4889 1.3200e-
003

0.1479 8.8000e-
004

0.1488 0.0392 8.1000e-
004

0.0400 136.4372 136.4372 3.9700e-
003

3.5200e-
003
137.5863
Total 0.0556 0.0351 0.4889 1.3200e-
003

0.1479 8.8000e-
004

0.1488 0.0392 8.1000e-
004

0.0400 136.4372 136.4372 3.9700e-
003

3.5200e-
003
137.5863
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 11 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.4 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 6.4993 0.0000 6.4993 3.3618 0.0000 3.3618 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 1.3354 1.3354 1.2286 1.2286 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Total 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 6.4993 1.3354 7.8347 3.3618 1.2286 4.5903 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0618 0.0390 0.5432 1.4700e-
003

0.1643 9.8000e-
004

0.1653 0.0436 9.0000e-
004

0.0445 151.5969 151.5969 4.4100e-
003

3.9100e-
003
152.8737
Total 0.0618 0.0390 0.5432 1.4700e-
003

0.1643 9.8000e-
004

0.1653 0.0436 9.0000e-
004

0.0445 151.5969 151.5969 4.4100e-
003

3.9100e-
003
152.8737
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 12 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.4 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 6.4993 0.0000 6.4993 3.3618 0.0000 3.3618 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 1.3354 1.3354 1.2286 1.2286 0.0000 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Total 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 6.4993 1.3354 7.8347 3.3618 1.2286 4.5903 0.0000 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0618 0.0390 0.5432 1.4700e-
003

0.1643 9.8000e-
004

0.1653 0.0436 9.0000e-
004

0.0445 151.5969 151.5969 4.4100e-
003

3.9100e-
003
152.8737
Total 0.0618 0.0390 0.5432 1.4700e-
003

0.1643 9.8000e-
004

0.1653 0.0436 9.0000e-
004

0.0445 151.5969 151.5969 4.4100e-
003

3.9100e-
003
152.8737
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 13 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.5 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1189 4.1660 1.3114 0.0175 0.5826 0.0276 0.6101 0.1677 0.0264 0.1941 1,854.620 3 1,854.620
3 0.0161 0.2723 1,936.161
3 Worker 1.4270 0.8997 12.5471 0.0340 3.7952 0.0227 3.8179 1.0067 0.0209 1.0275 3,501.889 1 3,501.889
1 0.1020 0.0904 3,531.382
7 Total 1.5458 5.0657 13.8585 0.0514 4.3778 0.0502 4.4280 1.1744 0.0473 1.2216 5,356.509 5 5,356.509
5 0.1180 0.3627 5,467.544
0 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 14 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.5 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1189 4.1660 1.3114 0.0175 0.5826 0.0276 0.6101 0.1677 0.0264 0.1941 1,854.620 3 1,854.620
3 0.0161 0.2723 1,936.161
3 Worker 1.4270 0.8997 12.5471 0.0340 3.7952 0.0227 3.8179 1.0067 0.0209 1.0275 3,501.889 1 3,501.889
1 0.1020 0.0904 3,531.382
7 Total 1.5458 5.0657 13.8585 0.0514 4.3778 0.0502 4.4280 1.1744 0.0473 1.2216 5,356.509 5 5,356.509
5 0.1180 0.3627 5,467.544
0 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 15 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1141 4.1066 1.2705 0.0172 0.5826 0.0270 0.6096 0.1677 0.0259 0.1936 1,822.245 8 1,822.245
8 0.0156 0.2675 1,902.363
4 Worker 1.3363 0.8036 11.6391 0.0329 3.7952 0.0216 3.8168 1.0067 0.0199 1.0265 3,422.069 7 3,422.069
7 0.0920 0.0841 3,449.420
7 Total 1.4504 4.9102 12.9097 0.0500 4.3778 0.0486 4.4264 1.1744 0.0457 1.2201 5,244.315 5 5,244.315
5 0.1077 0.3516 5,351.784
0 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 16 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1141 4.1066 1.2705 0.0172 0.5826 0.0270 0.6096 0.1677 0.0259 0.1936 1,822.245 8 1,822.245
8 0.0156 0.2675 1,902.363
4 Worker 1.3363 0.8036 11.6391 0.0329 3.7952 0.0216 3.8168 1.0067 0.0199 1.0265 3,422.069 7 3,422.069
7 0.0920 0.0841 3,449.420
7 Total 1.4504 4.9102 12.9097 0.0500 4.3778 0.0486 4.4264 1.1744 0.0457 1.2201 5,244.315 5 5,244.315
5 0.1077 0.3516 5,351.784
0 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 17 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.6 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0434 0.0261 0.3779 1.0700e-
003

0.1232 7.0000e-
004

0.1239 0.0327 6.4000e-
004

0.0333 111.1062 111.1062 2.9900e-
003

2.7300e-
003
111.9942
Total 0.0434 0.0261 0.3779 1.0700e-
003

0.1232 7.0000e-
004

0.1239 0.0327 6.4000e-
004

0.0333 111.1062 111.1062 2.9900e-
003

2.7300e-
003
111.9942
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 18 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.6 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 0.0000 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 0.0000 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0434 0.0261 0.3779 1.0700e-
003

0.1232 7.0000e-
004

0.1239 0.0327 6.4000e-
004

0.0333 111.1062 111.1062 2.9900e-
003

2.7300e-
003
111.9942
Total 0.0434 0.0261 0.3779 1.0700e-
003

0.1232 7.0000e-
004

0.1239 0.0327 6.4000e-
004

0.0333 111.1062 111.1062 2.9900e-
003

2.7300e-
003
111.9942
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 19 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 214.2807 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003

0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 214.4516 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003

0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.2661 0.1600 2.3178 6.5400e-
003

0.7558 4.2900e-
003

0.7601 0.2005 3.9500e-
003

0.2044 681.4511 681.4511 0.0183 0.0167 686.8976
Total 0.2661 0.1600 2.3178 6.5400e-
003

0.7558 4.2900e-
003

0.7601 0.2005 3.9500e-
003

0.2044 681.4511 681.4511 0.0183 0.0167 686.8976
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 20 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 214.4516 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003

0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.2661 0.1600 2.3178 6.5400e-
003

0.7558 4.2900e-
003

0.7601 0.2005 3.9500e-
003

0.2044 681.4511 681.4511 0.0183 0.0167 686.8976
Total 0.2661 0.1600 2.3178 6.5400e-
003

0.7558 4.2900e-
003

0.7601 0.2005 3.9500e-
003

0.2044 681.4511 681.4511 0.0183 0.0167 686.8976
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 21 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 17.5909 12.6544 94.9486 0.1547 16.0033 0.1417 16.1449 4.2658 0.1320 4.3978 16,446.07 78 16,446.07
78 1.5627 1.0207 16,789.30
13 Unmitigated 22.9834 22.6075 175.7666 0.3685 40.1831 0.3037 40.4868 10.7111 0.2836 10.9946 39,176.84 44 39,176.84
44 2.5337 1.8079 39,778.94
45 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Mid Rise 3,133.44 2,828.16 2355.84 8,581,427 3,417,626 Strip Mall 6,515.93 6,180.72 3003.62 9,188,271 3,659,307 Total 9,649.37 9,008.88 5,359.46 17,769,698 7,076,933
Increase Density
Increase Diversity
Improve Walkability Design
Improve Destination Accessibility
Increase Transit Accessibility
Improve Pedestrian Network
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 22 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - - ■ r--------r--------r--------r--------r--------r--------r--------r--------r--------r--------• - - - - - - -,--------r--------r--------r-------"T - - - - - - - I I
I I
~- ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■l--------------~-----------t-----------4------------------------1-------------------------- : I I ■ ■
I I
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Apartments Mid Rise 10.80 7.30 7.50 44.00 18.80 37.20 86 11 3 Strip Mall 9.50 7.30 7.30 16.60 64.40 19.00 45 40 15

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

0.1528 1.3114 0.5963 8.3400e-
003

0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 1,667.002
3 1,667.002
3 0.0320 0.0306 1,676.908
4 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.1528 1.3114 0.5963 8.3400e-
003

0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 1,667.002
3 1,667.002
3 0.0320 0.0306 1,676.908
4 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Percent of Electricity Use Generated with Renewable Energy Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 23 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I
■ I I ■ ■ ■
• I I ■ I I ■ ■ ■
~ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ •r - - - - - - - - - - T - - - - - - - - - T - - - - - - - - - - .., - - - - - - - - ·r - - - - - - - - ·r - - - - - - - - - - - .- - - - - - - - - - - - • - - - - - - - - - - r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - •

I I I I I I I I I I I I I
; I

I I I I I I I I I I I
------------------------~---------=---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------~--------

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - -..-------"'T"-------r--------r-------"'T"------"'T"-------r-------"'T"-------r--------r--------• - - - - - - -,--------r--------r-------"'T"------"'T - - - - - - -.. .. .. ..

6.0 Area Detail

0.0986 0.0986 0.0986 0.0986 1,556.115
3 1,556.115
3 0.0298 0.0285 1,565.362
5 Strip Mall 942.539 0.0102 0.0924 0.0776 5.5000e-
004

7.0200e-
003

7.0200e-
003
110.8870 110.8870 2.1300e-
003

2.0300e-
003
111.5459
Total 0.1528 1.3114 0.5963 8.3300e-
003

0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 1,667.002
3 1,667.002
3 0.0320 0.0306 1,676.908
4 Unmitigated
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Apartments Mid
Rise

13.227 0.1426 1.2190 0.5187 7.7800e-
003

0.0986 0.0986 0.0986 0.0986 1,556.115
3 1,556.115
3 0.0298 0.0285 1,565.362
5 Strip Mall 0.942539 0.0102 0.0924 0.0776 5.5000e-
004

7.0200e-
003

7.0200e-
003
110.8870 110.8870 2.1300e-
003

2.0300e-
003
111.5459
Total 0.1528 1.3114 0.5963 8.3300e-
003

0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 1,667.002
3 1,667.002
3 0.0320 0.0306 1,676.908
4 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 24 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 1, I
1, I
1, &
1 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••r--------------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• 1, & 1, &
1, &
I, &
I, &
I, &
I, &
I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••r--------------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I, & I, &
I, &
1, &
No Hearths Installed

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 18.0736 0.5470 47.4907 2.5100e-
003

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.0000 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 0.0000 87.6489 Unmitigated 18.0736 0.5470 47.4907 2.5100e-
003

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.0000 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 0.0000 87.6489 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 25 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

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

1.1741 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

15.4726 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.4268 0.5470 47.4907 2.5100e-
003

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 87.6489 Total 18.0736 0.5470 47.4907 2.5100e-
003

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.0000 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 0.0000 87.6489 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 26 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I I

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

1.1741 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 87.6489 Total 18.0736 0.5470 47.4907 2.5100e-
003

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.0000 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 0.0000 87.6489 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:02 AMPage 27 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I I

11.0 Vegetation

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Institute Recycling and Composting Services

8.0 Waste Detail

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

Area Coating - Effective January 1, 2022, nonflat gloss and semigloss paints are required to meet the 50 g/l standard, providing lower VOC emissions for buildings constructed after that date.

Area Mitigation - Effective January 1, 2022, nonflat gloss and semigloss paints are required to meet the 50 g/l standard, providing lower VOC emissions for buildings constructed after that date.

Mobile Land Use Mitigation -

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Apartments Mid Rise 576.00 Dwelling Unit 13.50 576,000.00 1647 Strip Mall 147.02 1000sqft 0.00 147,020.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
4 Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.8 53

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 0.033CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 1 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied l------------------------------1------------------------------~-------------------------t------------~-------------~---------------I Energy Mitigation - PG&E is subject to the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) which requires investor-owned utilities, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase procurement from eligible renewable resources to 33 percent of total procurement by 2020 to 60 percent of total procurement by 2030
Waste Mitigation - The Project will recycle 50% of the solid waste in compliance with state requirements.

2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 150.00 50.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Interior 150.00 50.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Parking 150.00 50.00
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Residential_Exterior 100.00 50.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Residential_Interior 100.00 50.00 tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 150 50
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Nonresidential_Interior 150 50
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Parking 150 50
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Residential_Exterior 100 50
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Residential_Interior 100 50
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 90.00 13.50
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 15.00 13.50
tblLandUse LotAcreage 15.16 13.50
tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.38 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 2 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I I
I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I
■ ■ I
-----------------------------4------------------------------I------------------------------~--------------------------

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2024 3.2840 32.4257 29.9891 0.0766 19.6458 1.3364 20.8760 10.1245 1.2295 11.2563 0.0000 7,728.362 1 7,728.362
1 1.9487 0.3783 7,859.470
3 2025 214.7360 17.8220 29.0002 0.0753 4.3778 0.5762 4.9541 1.1744 0.5421 1.7165 0.0000 7,621.626 6 7,621.626
6 0.7205 0.3661 7,748.727
3 Maximum 214.7360 32.4257 29.9891 0.0766 19.6458 1.3364 20.8760 10.1245 1.2295 11.2563 0.0000 7,728.362 1 7,728.362
1 1.9487 0.3783 7,859.470
3 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2024 3.2840 32.4257 29.9891 0.0766 19.6458 1.3364 20.8760 10.1245 1.2295 11.2563 0.0000 7,728.362 1 7,728.362
1 1.9487 0.3783 7,859.470
3 2025 214.7360 17.8220 29.0002 0.0753 4.3778 0.5762 4.9541 1.1744 0.5421 1.7165 0.0000 7,621.626 6 7,621.626
6 0.7205 0.3661 7,748.727
3 Maximum 214.7360 32.4257 29.9891 0.0766 19.6458 1.3364 20.8760 10.1245 1.2295 11.2563 0.0000 7,728.362 1 7,728.362
1 1.9487 0.3783 7,859.470
3 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 3 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I••• • • • • .._ _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ ,_ • • • • • • ,._ _______ ..1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ 1,, _______ ,. • • • • • • • • • • • I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I■
'
'
I
'
'
'
I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I••• • • • • .._ _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ ,_ • • • • • • ., _______ ..... _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ 1,. _______ ,
■ • • • • • • • • • • •
I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I■

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
' I
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 4 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.0000 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 0.0000 87.6489 Energy 0.1528 1.3114 0.5963 8.3400e-
003

0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 1,667.002
3 1,667.002
3 0.0320 0.0306 1,676.908
4 Mobile 21.2800 25.8729 196.5709 0.3537 40.1831 0.3039 40.4870 10.7111 0.2838 10.9948 37,601.00 81 37,601.00
81 2.8920 1.9852 38,264.90
72 Total 39.5064 27.7313 244.6579 0.3646 40.1831 0.6729 40.8561 10.7111 0.6528 11.3639 0.0000 39,353.60 86 39,353.60
86 3.0059 2.0158 40,029.46
45 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 18.0736 0.5470 47.4907 2.5100e-
003

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.0000 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 0.0000 87.6489 Energy 0.1528 1.3114 0.5963 8.3400e-
003

0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 1,667.002
3 1,667.002
3 0.0320 0.0306 1,676.908
4 Mobile 15.5561 14.5511 115.1845 0.1491 16.0033 0.1419 16.1451 4.2658 0.1322 4.3980 15,845.86 49 15,845.86
49 1.8971 1.1346 16,231.41
05 Total 33.7825 16.4094 163.2715 0.1599 16.0033 0.5109 16.5142 4.2658 0.5013 4.7671 0.0000 17,598.46 55 17,598.46
55 2.0110 1.1652 17,995.96
78 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 5 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ' '

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
' I

14.49 40.83 33.27 56.14 60.17 24.08 59.58 60.17 23.21 58.05 0.00 55.28 55.28 33.10 42.20 55.04 Residential Indoor: 1,166,400; Residential Outdoor: 388,800; Non-Residential Indoor: 220,530; Non-Residential Outdoor: 73,510; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 13.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 13.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 6 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 462.00 86.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 92.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 7 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied :
----------------------------•--------------------------+-----------------------~-------------~--------------' I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------1---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------T-------------- 1 I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------1---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------T-------------- 1 I
----------------------------1---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------T-------------- 1 I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------+--------------I I
----------------------------1---------------------------~---------------- -------------1---------T-------------- 1 I I I
----------------------------~---------------------------1----------------- ~ ------------1--------------~-------------- ■ I I I I I I I I I
• I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------■ I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------■ I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------■ I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------:---------------~----------l----------~----------l-----------l----------~----------1--------------1----------~----------■ I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I
----------------~---------------1-----------~----------l----------~-----------l-----------~----------l-------------+----------I-----------

0.1232 7.4000e-
004

0.1240 0.0327 6.8000e-
004

0.0334 107.6173 107.6173 3.7400e-
003

3.4100e-
003
108.7277
Total 0.0494 0.0365 0.4049 1.0400e-
003

0.1232 7.4000e-
004

0.1240 0.0327 6.8000e-
004

0.0334 107.6173 107.6173 3.7400e-
003

3.4100e-
003
108.7277
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 8 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.2 Demolition - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.2437 20.8781 19.7073 0.0388 0.9602 0.9602 0.8922 0.8922 0.0000 3,747.422 8 3,747.422
8 1.0485 3,773.634
5 Total 2.2437 20.8781 19.7073 0.0388 0.9602 0.9602 0.8922 0.8922 0.0000 3,747.422 8 3,747.422
8 1.0485 3,773.634
5 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0494 0.0365 0.4049 1.0400e-
003

0.1232 7.4000e-
004

0.1240 0.0327 6.8000e-
004

0.0334 107.6173 107.6173 3.7400e-
003

3.4100e-
003
108.7277
Total 0.0494 0.0365 0.4049 1.0400e-
003

0.1232 7.4000e-
004

0.1240 0.0327 6.8000e-
004

0.0334 107.6173 107.6173 3.7400e-
003

3.4100e-
003
108.7277
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 9 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

0.1479 8.8000e-
004

0.1488 0.0392 8.1000e-
004

0.0400 129.1407 129.1407 4.4800e-
003

4.1000e-
003
130.4732
Total 0.0593 0.0438 0.4858 1.2500e-
003

0.1479 8.8000e-
004

0.1488 0.0392 8.1000e-
004

0.0400 129.1407 129.1407 4.4800e-
003

4.1000e-
003
130.4732
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 10 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.3 Site Preparation - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.4979 0.0000 19.4979 10.0853 0.0000 10.0853 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6609 27.1760 18.3356 0.0381 1.2294 1.2294 1.1310 1.1310 0.0000 3,688.010 0 3,688.010
0 1.1928 3,717.829
4 Total 2.6609 27.1760 18.3356 0.0381 19.4979 1.2294 20.7273 10.0853 1.1310 11.2163 0.0000 3,688.010 0 3,688.010
0 1.1928 3,717.829
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0593 0.0438 0.4858 1.2500e-
003

0.1479 8.8000e-
004

0.1488 0.0392 8.1000e-
004

0.0400 129.1407 129.1407 4.4800e-
003

4.1000e-
003
130.4732
Total 0.0593 0.0438 0.4858 1.2500e-
003

0.1479 8.8000e-
004

0.1488 0.0392 8.1000e-
004

0.0400 129.1407 129.1407 4.4800e-
003

4.1000e-
003
130.4732
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 11 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

0.1643 9.8000e-
004

0.1653 0.0436 9.0000e-
004

0.0445 143.4897 143.4897 4.9800e-
003

4.5500e-
003
144.9703
Total 0.0659 0.0487 0.5398 1.3900e-
003

0.1643 9.8000e-
004

0.1653 0.0436 9.0000e-
004

0.0445 143.4897 143.4897 4.9800e-
003

4.5500e-
003
144.9703
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 12 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.4 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 6.4993 0.0000 6.4993 3.3618 0.0000 3.3618 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 1.3354 1.3354 1.2286 1.2286 0.0000 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Total 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 6.4993 1.3354 7.8347 3.3618 1.2286 4.5903 0.0000 6,009.748 7 6,009.748
7 1.9437 6,058.340
5 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0659 0.0487 0.5398 1.3900e-
003

0.1643 9.8000e-
004

0.1653 0.0436 9.0000e-
004

0.0445 143.4897 143.4897 4.9800e-
003

4.5500e-
003
144.9703
Total 0.0659 0.0487 0.5398 1.3900e-
003

0.1643 9.8000e-
004

0.1653 0.0436 9.0000e-
004

0.0445 143.4897 143.4897 4.9800e-
003

4.5500e-
003
144.9703
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 13 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.5 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1151 4.4109 1.3531 0.0175 0.5826 0.0277 0.6102 0.1677 0.0265 0.1942 1,858.051 9 1,858.051
9 0.0158 0.2732 1,939.849
7 Worker 1.5215 1.1251 12.4693 0.0321 3.7952 0.0227 3.8179 1.0067 0.0209 1.0275 3,314.611 3 3,314.611
3 0.1151 0.1051 3,348.813
0 Total 1.6367 5.5361 13.8223 0.0497 4.3778 0.0503 4.4281 1.1744 0.0473 1.2217 5,172.663 2 5,172.663
2 0.1309 0.3783 5,288.662
7 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 14 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.5 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1151 4.4109 1.3531 0.0175 0.5826 0.0277 0.6102 0.1677 0.0265 0.1942 1,858.051 9 1,858.051
9 0.0158 0.2732 1,939.849
7 Worker 1.5215 1.1251 12.4693 0.0321 3.7952 0.0227 3.8179 1.0067 0.0209 1.0275 3,314.611 3 3,314.611
3 0.1151 0.1051 3,348.813
0 Total 1.6367 5.5361 13.8223 0.0497 4.3778 0.0503 4.4281 1.1744 0.0473 1.2217 5,172.663 2 5,172.663
2 0.1309 0.3783 5,288.662
7 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 15 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1101 4.3476 1.3123 0.0172 0.5826 0.0271 0.6097 0.1677 0.0259 0.1937 1,825.674 7 1,825.674
7 0.0153 0.2684 1,906.036
7 Worker 1.4282 1.0047 11.6033 0.0311 3.7952 0.0216 3.8168 1.0067 0.0199 1.0265 3,239.477 5 3,239.477
5 0.1043 0.0977 3,271.192
5 Total 1.5383 5.3524 12.9155 0.0483 4.3778 0.0487 4.4265 1.1744 0.0458 1.2202 5,065.152 2 5,065.152
2 0.1196 0.3661 5,177.229
2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 16 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.5 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 0.0000 2,556.474 4 2,556.474
4 0.6010 2,571.498
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1101 4.3476 1.3123 0.0172 0.5826 0.0271 0.6097 0.1677 0.0259 0.1937 1,825.674 7 1,825.674
7 0.0153 0.2684 1,906.036
7 Worker 1.4282 1.0047 11.6033 0.0311 3.7952 0.0216 3.8168 1.0067 0.0199 1.0265 3,239.477 5 3,239.477
5 0.1043 0.0977 3,271.192
5 Total 1.5383 5.3524 12.9155 0.0483 4.3778 0.0487 4.4265 1.1744 0.0458 1.2202 5,065.152 2 5,065.152
2 0.1196 0.3661 5,177.229
2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 17 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' ' ., ' ' '
I
' ' '
'
I
'
I
'
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

0.1232 7.0000e-
004

0.1239 0.0327 6.4000e-
004

0.0333 105.1778 105.1778 3.3900e-
003

3.1700e-
003
106.2076
Total 0.0464 0.0326 0.3767 1.0100e-
003

0.1232 7.0000e-
004

0.1239 0.0327 6.4000e-
004

0.0333 105.1778 105.1778 3.3900e-
003

3.1700e-
003
106.2076
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 18 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

3.6 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 0.0000 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 0.0000 2,206.745 2 2,206.745
2 0.7137 2,224.587
8 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0464 0.0326 0.3767 1.0100e-
003

0.1232 7.0000e-
004

0.1239 0.0327 6.4000e-
004

0.0333 105.1778 105.1778 3.3900e-
003

3.1700e-
003
106.2076
Total 0.0464 0.0326 0.3767 1.0100e-
003

0.1232 7.0000e-
004

0.1239 0.0327 6.4000e-
004

0.0333 105.1778 105.1778 3.3900e-
003

3.1700e-
003
106.2076
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 19 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 214.4516 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003

0.7558 4.2900e-
003

0.7601 0.2005 3.9500e-
003

0.2044 645.0908 645.0908 0.0208 0.0195 651.4063
Total 0.2844 0.2001 2.3106 6.1900e-
003

0.7558 4.2900e-
003

0.7601 0.2005 3.9500e-
003

0.2044 645.0908 645.0908 0.0208 0.0195 651.4063
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 20 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319 Total 214.4516 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003

0.7558 4.2900e-
003

0.7601 0.2005 3.9500e-
003

0.2044 645.0908 645.0908 0.0208 0.0195 651.4063
Total 0.2844 0.2001 2.3106 6.1900e-
003

0.7558 4.2900e-
003

0.7601 0.2005 3.9500e-
003

0.2044 645.0908 645.0908 0.0208 0.0195 651.4063
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 21 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I I
I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • ■1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I I
I

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 15.5561 14.5511 115.1845 0.1491 16.0033 0.1419 16.1451 4.2658 0.1322 4.3980 15,845.86 49 15,845.86
49 1.8971 1.1346 16,231.41
05 Unmitigated 21.2800 25.8729 196.5709 0.3537 40.1831 0.3039 40.4870 10.7111 0.2838 10.9948 37,601.00 81 37,601.00
81 2.8920 1.9852 38,264.90
72 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Mid Rise 3,133.44 2,828.16 2355.84 8,581,427 3,417,626 Strip Mall 6,515.93 6,180.72 3003.62 9,188,271 3,659,307 Total 9,649.37 9,008.88 5,359.46 17,769,698 7,076,933
Increase Density
Increase Diversity
Improve Walkability Design
Improve Destination Accessibility
Increase Transit Accessibility
Improve Pedestrian Network
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 22 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- - - - - - - - - - - ■ r--------r--------r--------r--------r--------r--------r--------r--------r--------r--------• - - - - - - -,--------r--------r--------r-------"T - - - - - - - I I
I I
~- ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■l--------------~-----------t-----------4------------------------1-------------------------- : I I ■ ■
I I
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Apartments Mid Rise 10.80 7.30 7.50 44.00 18.80 37.20 86 11 3 Strip Mall 9.50 7.30 7.30 16.60 64.40 19.00 45 40 15

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

0.1528 1.3114 0.5963 8.3400e-
003

0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 1,667.002
3 1,667.002
3 0.0320 0.0306 1,676.908
4 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.1528 1.3114 0.5963 8.3400e-
003

0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 1,667.002
3 1,667.002
3 0.0320 0.0306 1,676.908
4 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Percent of Electricity Use Generated with Renewable Energy Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 23 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

I I I I I I I I I I I I I
; I

I I I I I I I I I I I
------------------------~---------=---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------~--------

6.0 Area Detail

0.0986 0.0986 0.0986 0.0986 1,556.115
3 1,556.115
3 0.0298 0.0285 1,565.362
5 Strip Mall 942.539 0.0102 0.0924 0.0776 5.5000e-
004

7.0200e-
003

7.0200e-
003
110.8870 110.8870 2.1300e-
003

2.0300e-
003
111.5459
Total 0.1528 1.3114 0.5963 8.3300e-
003

13.227 0.1426 1.2190 0.5187 7.7800e-
003

0.0986 0.0986 0.0986 0.0986 1,556.115
3 1,556.115
3 0.0298 0.0285 1,565.362
5 Strip Mall 0.942539 0.0102 0.0924 0.0776 5.5000e-
004

7.0200e-
003

7.0200e-
003
110.8870 110.8870 2.1300e-
003

2.0300e-
003
111.5459
Total 0.1528 1.3114 0.5963 8.3300e-
003

0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 0.1056 1,667.002
3 1,667.002
3 0.0320 0.0306 1,676.908
4 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 24 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 1, I
1, I
1, &
1 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••r--------------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• 1, & 1, &
1, &
I, &
I, &
I, &
I, &
I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••r--------------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I, & I, &
I, &
1, &
No Hearths Installed

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.0000 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 0.0000 87.6489 Unmitigated 18.0736 0.5470 47.4907 2.5100e-
003

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.0000 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 0.0000 87.6489 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 25 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

1.1741 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 87.6489 Total 18.0736 0.5470 47.4907 2.5100e-
003

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.0000 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 0.0000 87.6489 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 26 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I I

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

1.1741 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 87.6489 Total 18.0736 0.5470 47.4907 2.5100e-
003

0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.2635 0.0000 85.5983 85.5983 0.0820 0.0000 87.6489 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 4/3/2023 11:03 AMPage 27 of 28 Large Shopping Centers/Foods Co GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I
■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I
I I

11.0 Vegetation

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Institute Recycling and Composting Services

8.0 Waste Detail

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Foods Co | 166

7.2 Appendix B: CNDDB Occurrence Report
Downloaded from the California Natural Diversity Database dated March 15, 2023.

Sources:

BEC95R0001 BECHTA, S. (JONES AND STOKES ASSOCIATES) - REPORT OF SPECIMENS CAPTURED DURING 1993-1995 (FAIRY SHRIMP SPECIES) 1995-XX-XX
SHA93R0001 SHAFFER, H.B. ET AL. - STATUS REPORT FOR CALIFORNIA TIGER SALAMANDER, AMBYSTOMA CALIFORNIENSE (CONTRACT FG 9422 & FG 1383). 1993-XX-XX
USA92R0001 USACE - ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, SACRAMENTO DIST. - FLORA AND FAUNA BASELINE STUDY OF FORT ORD, CALIFORNIA. 290PP. PREPARED BY US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, AND JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES. 1992-12-XX Map Index Number: 26012 EO Index: 1758
Key Quad: Marina (3612167) Element Code: AAAAA01181
Occurrence Number: 17 Occurrence Last Updated: 1996-04-23 Scientific Name: Ambystoma californiense pop. 1 Common Name: California tiger salamander - central California DPS Listing Status: Federal: Threatened Rare Plant Rank:

State: Threatened
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G2G3T3
State: S3
Other Lists: CDFW_WL-Watch List
IUCN_VU-Vulnerable
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

LIVES IN VACANT OR MAMMAL-OCCUPIED BURROWS THROUGHOUT
MOST OF THE YEAR; IN GRASSLAND, SAVANNA, OR OPEN WOODLAND HABITATS.

NEED UNDERGROUND REFUGES, ESPECIALLY GROUND SQUIRREL

BURROWS, AND VERNAL POOLS OR OTHER SEASONAL WATER
SOURCES FOR BREEDING.

Last Date Observed: 1995-02-24 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1995-02-24 Occurrence Rank: Unknown
Owner/Manager: BLM-FORT ORD Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

WESTERN-MOST POOL ON MACHINE GUN FLATS, FORT ORD MILITARY RESERVATION.

Detailed Location:

IN 1995-WATER DEPTH: 29 INCHES, SURFACE AREA: ABOUT 20,000 SQ FEET.

Ecological:

HABITAT CONSISTS OF A LARGE VERNAL POOL WITHIN A VERNAL POOL COMPLEX; UPLAND HABITAT CONSISTS OF OAK WOODLAND & COASTAL SCRUB.

Threats:

POSSIBLE THREAT OF DEVELOPMENT AFTER BASE CLOSURE.

General:
5/28/1991-CTS PRESENT AT SHAFFER SITE #252, NUMBER AND LIFESTAGE UNKNOWN; 1992-CTS OBSERVED BY JSA, MAPPED BASED ON PROVIDED GRAPHICS IN REPORT, WILDLIFE TEXT MISSING FROM REPORT; 2/24/1995-CTS LARVAE PRESENT DURING SURVEY FOR FAIRY SHRIMP.

PLSS: T15S, R02E, Sec. 09 (M) Accuracy: non-specific area Area (acres): 8 430Elevation (feet):Latitude/Longitude: 36.63829 / -121.75223UTM: Zone-10 N4055473 E611548 Monterey Salinas (3612166), Marina (3612167)
Quad Summary:County Summary:

Query Criteria: Quad<span style='color:Red'> IS </span>(Salinas (3612166)) Report Printed on Wednesday, March 15, 2023

Page 1 of 81 ends

Salinas City CouncilOctober 24, 2023

Salinas City Council
October 24, 2023