San Marcos City Council
December 9, 2025

ATTACHMENT G
UDSP EIR 2025 ADDENDUM - APPENDIX D -

GHG ANALYSIS
A

PPENDIX D
Greenhouse Gas Analysis
Project: 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2)
GR

EENHOUSE GAS ASSESSMENT
Cube Smart Self Storage Facility
City of San Marcos, CA
Prepared for:

City of San Marcos
1 Civic Center Drive
San Marcos, CA 92069
Prepared By:
2381
1 Washington Ave, C110-333
Murrieta, California 92562
Ja
nuary 15, 2025
Ldn Consulting, Inc.
ii
Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................................................... II LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................................ III LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................................................. III ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................................................. III LIST OF COMMON ACRONYMS .......................................................................................................................... IV

1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................ 1

1.2 PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT ................................................................................................................................. 1

2.0 BACKGROUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING .................................................................................... 4

2.1 UNDERSTANDING CLIMATE CHANGE AND GREENHOUSE GASES ................................................................................ 4

2.2 CLIMATE AND METEOROLOGY ........................................................................................................................... 5

3.0 CLIMATE CHANGE REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................... 6

3.1 STATE ........................................................................................................................................................... 6

3.2 GHG THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE ................................................................................................................ 18

4.0 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................... 21

4.1 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE OF THE SITE .............................................................................................................. 21

4.2 CONSTRUCTION CO2E EMISSIONS CALCULATION METHODOLOGY ........................................................................... 21

4.3 OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS CALCULATION METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 22

5.0 FINDINGS............................................................................................................................................. 23

5.1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS ............................................................................................................. 23

5.2 PROPOSED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS ............................................................................................................... 24

5.3 CEQA COMPLIANCE ...................................................................................................................................... 25

6.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................ 27

iii
Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) List of Figures

FIGURE 1-A: CUBESMART DEVELOPMENT DETAILS ............................................................................................. 2 FIGURE 1-B: PROJECT VICINITY MAP ................................................................................................................... 3

List of Tables

TABLE 4.1: EXPECTED CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT (CUBE SMART SELF STORAGE) ............................................ 21 TABLE 5.1: CUBE SMART - CONSTRUCTION CO2E EMISSIONS SUMMARY (MT CO2E/YEAR) .................................. 23 TABLE 5.2: GPBS - CONSTRUCTION CO2E EMISSIONS SUMMARY (MT CO2E/YEAR) .............................................. 23 TABLE 5.3: CUBE SMART – TOTAL CO2E EMISSIONS SUMMARY (MT CO2E/YEAR) ............................................... 24 TABLE 5.4: GPBS - TOTAL CO2E EMISSIONS SUMMARY (MT CO2E/YEAR) ............................................................ 24

Attachments

CALEEMOD EMISSION MODEL – PROPOSED PROJECT ........................................................................................ 29 CALEEMOD EMISSION MODEL – 200,000 SF OFFICE BUILDING - GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT SCENARIO ............... 30

iv
Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2)

LIST OF COMMON ACRONYMS

Assembly Bill 32 (AB32)
Business as Usual (BAU)
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s (CAPCOA) California Air Resource Board (CARB)
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Climate Action Plan (CAP)
Cubic Yards (CY)
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Electric Vehicle (EV)
Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
International Residential Code (IRC)
Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS)
Methane (CH4)
Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (MT CO2e)
Nitrous Oxide (N2O)
San Diego Air Basin (SDAB)
San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD)
Senate Bill 97 (SB97)
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)

1 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2)

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Location and Description

The proposed CubeSmart project includes the construction of a new self -storage facility on approximately 3-acres. The storage facility would provide 104,600 square feet (SF) of storage space within a 3- story building (Building A) and 6,600 SF of storage space within a 1 -story building (Building B) for a combined size of 111,200 SF. An office is proposed within the 3 - story building. The project site configuration is provided in Figure 1-A and shows the proposed site configuration. Full operations are expected sometime in 2026.

The proposed project is generally located south of State Route 78 (SR-78), south along Carmel Street, and north of Enterprise Street between Industrial Avenue and Venture Street within the University District Specific Plan (UDSP) in the City of San Marcos CA. The San Diego Northern Railroad (SDNR) consisting of Sprinter service operated by the North County Transit District is located adjacent to the Project to the west. The project vicinity can be seen in Figure 1-B.

1.2 Purpose of this Report

The purpose of this Green house Gas (GHG) Assessment is to analyze the project’s GHG emissions and evaluate its conformance with the City of San Marcos’ Climate Action Plan (CAP). As described in the City’s CAP, there is an existing framework of federal, State, regional, and local policies and regulations that identify GHG reduction requirements. The CAP provides a plan for the City to meet these requirements and achieve local reduction requirements outlined in the CAP. In addition, as identified in the CAP, showing consistency with the CAP would also demonstrate that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (City of San Marcos, 2020).

This analysis has been completed in order to compare GHG emissions from both the proposed Project and a General Plan B uildout scenario (GPBS) compatible with the UDSP . Under t he UDSP, the project site is in the Office/Commercial District designation, and could be constructed with up to 6 stories/90 foot building height of mixed use or freeway commercial use. For the purposes of this analysis, a 200,000 SF multi -story office building with 500 parking spaces would be a reasonable development scenario under the current UDSP designation.

2 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) Figure 1-A: CubeSmart Development Details

Source: (VALLI ARCHITECTURAL GROUP, 2024)

3 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) Figure 1-B: Project Vicinity Map

Source: (Google, 2025)
Project
Location

4 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2)

2.0 BACKGROUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

2.1 Understanding Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases

Climate change refers to any significant change in measures of climate, such as temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns, lasting for an extended period of time (decades or longer).

The Earth’s temperature depends on the balance between energy entering and leaving the planet’s system. Many factors, both natural and human, can cause changes in the Earth’s energy balance, including variations in the sun's energy reaching Earth, changes in the reflectivity of Earth’s atmosphere and surface, and changes in the greenhouse effect, which affects the amount of heat retained by Earth’s atmosphere. The greenhouse effect is the trapping and build-up of heat in the atmosphere (troposphere) near the Earth’s surface. The greenhouse effect traps heat in the troposphere through a threefold process as follows:

Short-wave radiation emitted by the sun is absorbed by the Earth. The Earth emits a portion of this energy in the form of long-wave radiation and GHGs in the upper atmosphere absorb this long-wave radiation and emit it into space and toward the Earth.

The greenhouse effect is a natural process that contributes to regulating the Earth’s temperature and creates a pleasant, livable environment on the Earth. Human activities that emit additional GHGs to the atmosphere increase the amount of infrared radiati on that gets absorbed before escaping into space, thus enhancing the greenhouse effect and causing the Earth’s surface temperature to rise.

Some greenhouse gases are emitted exclusively from human activities (e.g., synthetic halocarbons). Others occur naturally but are found at elevated levels due to human inputs (e.g., carbon dioxide). Anthropogenic sources result from energy -related activiti es (e.g., combustion of fossil fuels in the electric utility and transportation sectors), agriculture, land - use change, waste management and treatment activities, and various industrial processes.

Major greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and various synthetic chemicals (EPA, 2023).

The GHGs typically analyzed in a greenhouse gas study are Carbon Dioxide (CO 2), Methane
(CH4), and Nitrous Oxide (N 2O) because they are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. A brief description of each GHG follows:

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is widely reported as the most important anthropogenic greenhouse gas because it currently accounts for the greatest portion of the warming associated with human activities. Carbon dioxide occurs naturally as part of the global carbon cycle, but human activities have increased atmospheric loadings through combustion of fossil fuels and

5 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) other emissions sources. Natural sinks that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (e.g., oceans, plants) help regulate carbon dioxide concentrations, but human activities can disturb these processes (e.g., deforestation) or enhance them (EPA, 2023).

Methane comes from many sources, including human activities such as coal mining, natural gas production and distribution, waste decomposition in landfills, and digestive processes in livestock and agriculture. Natural sources of methane include wetlands and termit e mounds (EPA, 2023).

Nitrous Oxide is emitted during agricultural and industrial activities, as well as during combustion of solid waste and fossil fuels (EPA, 2023).

To simplify greenhouse gas calculations, both CH 4 and N2O are converted to an equivalent amount of carbon dioxide, or CO2e. CO2e is calculated by multiplying the calculated levels of CH4 and N2O by a Global Warming Potential (GWP). GWPs for both CH4 and N2 are presented within the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report as being 25 and 298, respectively (IPCC, 2007) . The IPCC 2007 report was updated in 2021 and now recommends adding a 100-year timeline to the GWP discussions (GWP-100). For CH4 the GWP is between 27-30 and the GWP for N2O is 273 (USEPA, 2023). Since CalEEMod is the adopted computer model for calculating GHGs, the earlier GWPs within CalEEMod were utilized.

2.2 Climate and Meteorology

Climate within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB) area often varies dramatically over short geographical distances with cooler temperatures on the western coast gradually warming to the east as prevailing winds from the west heats up. Most of southern California is dominated by high-pressure systems for much of the year, which keeps San Diego mostly sunny and warm. Typically, during the winter months, the high-pressure system drops to the south and brings cooler, moister weather from the north. It is common for inversion layers to develop within high-pressure areas, which mostly define pressure patterns over the SDAB. These inversions are caused when a thin layer of the atmosphere increases in temperature with height.

Meteorological trends within the area generally show daytime highs ranging between 64ºF in the winter to approximately 88ºF in the summer with August usually being the hottest month.

Daytime Low temperatures range from approximately 37ºF in the winter to approximately 59ºF in the summer. Precipitation is generally about 16.2 inches per year (WRCC, 2021).

Prevailing wind patterns for the area vary during any given month during the year and also vary depending on the time of day or night. The predominant pattern though throughout the year is usually from the west or westerly (WRCC, 2018).

6 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2)

3.0 CLIMATE CHANGE REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT

3.1 State

State Greenhouse Gas Targets

Executive Order S-3-05

EO S-3-05 (June 2005) established the following statewide goals: GHG emissions should be reduced to 2000 levels by 2010, 1990 levels by 2020, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

AB 32 and CARB’s Climate Change Scoping Plan

In furtherance of the goals established in EO S- 3-05, the Legislature enacted Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 requires California to reduce its GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.

Under AB 32, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is responsible for and is recognized as having the expertise to carry out and develop the programs and regulations necessary to achieve the GHG emissions reduction mandate of AB 32. Therefore, in furth erance of AB 32, CARB adopted regulations requiring the reporting and verification of GHG emissions from specified sources, such as industrial facilities, fuel suppliers and electricity importers (see Health & Safety Code Section 35830; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 17, §§95100 et seq.). CARB is also required to adopt rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emission reductions. AB 32 authorized CARB to adopt market -based compliance mechanisms to meet the specifie d requirements. Finally, CARB is ultimately responsible for monitoring compliance and enforcing any rule, regulation, order, emission limitation, emission reduction measure, or market-based compliance mechanism adopted.

In 2007, CARB approved a limit on the statewide GHG emissions level for year 2020 consistent with the determined 1990 baseline (427 million metric tons (MMT) CO 2E). CARB’s adoption of
this limit is in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 38550.

Further, in 2008, CARB adopted the Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change (2008 Scoping Plan ) in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 38561. The 2008 Scoping Plan established an overall framework for the measures to be implemented to reduce California’s GHG emissions for various emission sources/sectors to 1990 levels by 2020. The 2008 Scoping Plan evaluated opportunities for sector -specific reductions,

7 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) integrated all CARB and Climate Action Team 1 early actions and additional GHG reduction features by both entities, identified additional measures to be pursued as regulations, and outlined the role of a cap -and-trade program.

In the
2008 Scoping Plan, CARB determined that achieving the 1990 emissions level in 2020 would require a reduction in GHG emissions of approximately 28.5 percent from the otherwise projected 2020 emissions level; i.e., those emissions that would occur in 2020, absent GHG - reducing laws and regulations (referred to as “Business -As-Usual” [BAU]). For purposes of calculating this percent reduction, CARB assumed that all new electricity generation would be supplied by natural gas plants, no further regulatory a ction would impact vehicle fuel efficiency, and building energy efficiency codes would be held at 2005 standards.

In the 2011 Final Supplement to the
2008 Scoping Plan’s Functional Equivalent Document,
CARB revised its estimates of the projected 2020 emissions level in light of the economic recession and the availability of updated information about GHG reduction regulations. Based on the new economic data, CARB determined that achieving the 1990 emissions level by 2020 would require a reduction in GHG emissions of 21.7 percent (down from 28.5 percent) from the BAU conditions. When the 2020 emissions level projection was updated to account for newly implemented regulatory measures, including Pavley I (model years 2009 –2016) and the Renewables Portfolio Standard (12 percent to 20 percent), CARB determined that achieving the 1990 emissions level in 2020 would require a reduction in GHG emissions of 16 percent (down from 28.5 percent) from the BAU conditions.

In 2014, CARB adopted the
First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan: Building on the Framework (First Update). The stated purpose of the First Update was to “highlight California’s success to date in reducing its GHG emissions and lay the foundation for establishing a broad framework for continued emission reductions beyond 2020, on the path to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.” The First Update found that California was on track to meet the 2020 emissions reduction mandate established by AB 32, n oted that California could reduce emissions further by 2030 to levels squarely in line with those needed to stay on track to reduce emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 if the state realizes the expected benefits of existing policy goals.

EO B-30-15

EO B-30-15 (April 2015) identified an interim GHG reduction target in support of targets previously identified under S -3-05 and AB 32. EO B -30-15 set an interim goal of reducing

1 The Climate Action Team is comprised of state agency secretaries and heads of state agencies, boards and departments; these members work to coordinate statewide efforts to implement GHG emissions reduction programs and adaptation programs.

8 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) statewide GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 to keep California on its trajectory toward meeting or exceeding the long -term goal of reducing statewide GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 as set forth in S -3-05. To facil itate achievement of this goal, EO B -30-15 calls for an update to CARB’s Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of MMT CO 2e. The EO also calls for state agencies to continue to develop and implement GHG emission reduction programs in support of the reduction targets. Sector -specific agencies in transportation, energy, water, and forestry were required to prepare GHG reduction plans by September 2015, followed by a report on action taken in relation to these plans in June 2016.

SB 32 and AB 197

SB 32 and AB 197 (enacted in 2016) are companion bills that set a new statewide GHG reduction target; make changes to CARB’s membership and increase legislative oversight of CARB’s climate change -based activities; and expand dissemination of GHG and other air quality-related emissions data to enhance transparency and accountability. More specifically, SB 32 codified the 2030 emissions reduction goal of EO B-30-15 by requiring CARB to ensure that statewide GHG emissions are reduced to 40 percent below 1990 l evels by 2030. AB 197 established the Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies, consisting of at least three members of the Senate and three members of the Assembly, in order to provide ongoing oversight over implementation of the state’s climate policies. AB 197 also added two members of the Legislature to CARB as nonvoting members. The legislation further requires CARB to make available and update (at least annually via its website) emissions data for GHGs, criteria air pollutants, and TACs from reporting facilities; and identify specific information for GHG emissions reduction measures when updating the scoping plan, including information regarding the range of projected GHG emissions and air pollution reductions that result from each measure and the cost -effectiveness (including avoided social costs) of each measure (see Health & Safety Code Section 38562.7).

2017 and 2022 Scoping Plan

In November 2017, CARB released California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan for public review and comment (CARB, 2017). This update includes CARB’s strategy for achieving the state’s 2030 GHG target as established in Senate Bill (SB) 32 (discussed below). The strategy includes continuing the Cap-and-Trade Program through 2030, 2 inclusive policies and broad
support for clean technologies, enhanced industrial efficiency and competitiveness, prioritization of transportation sustainability, continued leadership on clean energy, putting

2 In July 2017, AB 398 was enacted into law, thereby extending the legislatively- authorized lifetime of the Cap-and-Trade Program to December 31, 2030.

9 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) waste resources to beneficial use, supporting resilient agricultural and rural economics and natural and working lands, securing California’s water supplies, and cleaning the air and public health. When discussing project -level GHG emissions reduction acti ons and thresholds, the 2017 Scoping Plan states “[a]chieving no net additional increase in GHG emissions, resulting in no contribution to GHG impacts, is an appropriate overall objective for new development.” However, the 2017 Scoping Plan also recognizes that such an achievement “may not be feasible or appropriate for every project … and the inability of a project to mitigate its GHG emissions to net zero does not imply the project results in a substantial contribution to the cumulatively significant envi ronmental impact of climate change under CEQA.” CARB’s Governing Board adopted the 2017 Scoping Plan in December 2017.

In 2022 California released the latest scoping plan update which lays out the sector-by-sector roadmap for California to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. This plan, addressing recent legislation and direction from Governor Newsom, extends and expands upo n these earlier plans with a target of reducing anthropogenic emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045 (CARB, 2022). The plan suggests that bold steps are required by the State and calls for the need of vast research and development with respect to methods of capturing CO2. The plan calls for a need to take an unprecedented transformation and aggressively seek reductions to reduce the need of fossil fuels by moving to zero emission transportation, electrifying the cars, buses, trucks and trains. The plan relays on external controls and requires partnership and collaboration with the federal government, other U.S. states, and other jurisdictions around the world for California to succeed in achieving its climate targets.

Assembly Bill 1279

In 2022, the Governor approved Assembly Bill 1279 (AB 1279) (State of California, 2022) which requires the state board to prepare and approve a scoping plan for achieving the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and to update the scoping plan at least once every 5 years. This bill, the California Climate Crisis Act, would declare the policy of the state both to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative greenhouse gas emissions thereafter, and to ensure that by 2045, statewide anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 85 percent below the 1990 levels.

California Building Standards

Title 24, Part 6

Part 6 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations was established in 1978 and serves to enhance and regulate California’s building standards. While not initially promulgated to reduce

10 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) GHG emissions, Part 6 of Title 24 specifically establishes Building Energy Efficiency Standards that are designed to ensure new buildings and alterations or additions to existing buildings in California achieve energy efficiency and preserve outdoor and in door environmental quality.

The California Energy Commission (CEC) is required by law to adopt standards every 3 years that are cost effective for homeowners over the 30 -year lifespan of a building. These standards are updated to consider and incorporate n ew energy efficient technologies and construction methods. As a result, these standards save energy, increase electricity supply reliability, increase indoor comfort, avoid the need to construct new power plants, and help preserve the environment.

The current code requirement is based on the 2022 standards, as those standards went into effect on January 1, 2023. The 2022 standards have mandatory requirements to reduce building envelope air leakage, improve roofing through Solar Reflectance and Thermal Emittance, im prove on insulation, improve on space conditioning, water heating and plumbing, improve on lighting efficiency requirements to name a few. The project will be required to implement Title 24 2022.

Title 24, Part 11

In addition to the CEC’s efforts, in 2008, the California Building Standards Commission adopted the nation’s first green building standards. The California Green Building Standards Code (Part 11 of Title 24) is commonly referred to as CALGreen and establishes minimum mandatory standards as well as voluntary standards pertaining to the planning and design of sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy Code requirements), water conservation, material conservation, and interior air quality. The CALGreen standards initially took effect in January 2011 and instituted mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground -up, new construction of commercial, low-rise residential and state -owned buildings and sch ools and hospitals. The CALGreen 2016 standards became effective on January 1, 2017. The mandatory standards require the following (24 CCR Part 11):

• Mandatory reduction in indoor water use through compliance with specified flow rates for plumbing fixtures and fittings.
• Mandatory reduction in outdoor water use through compliance with a local water efficient landscaping ordinance or the California Department of Water Resources’ Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.
• Sixty-five (65) percent of construction and demolition waste must be diverted from landfills.
• Mandatory inspections of energy systems to ensure optimal working efficiency. • Inclusion of EV charging stations or designated spaces capable of supporting future charging stations.

11 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) • Low-pollutant emitting exterior and interior finish materials, such as paints, carpets, vinyl flooring, and particle boards.

The CALGreen standards also include voluntary efficiency measures that are provided at two separate tiers and implemented at the discretion of local agencies and applicants. CALGreen’s Tier 1 standards call for a 15 percent improvement in energy requiremen ts; stricter water conservation, 10 percent recycled content in building materials, 20 percent permeable paving, 20 percent cement reduction, and cool/solar -reflective roofs. CALGreen’s more rigorous Tier 2 standards call for a 30 percent improvement in en ergy requirements, stricter water conservation, 75 percent diversion of construction and demolition waste, 15 percent recycled content in building materials, 30 percent permeable paving, 25 percent cement reduction, and cool/solar-reflective roofs.

The newest CALGreen Standards were updated in 2022 and bec ame effective on January 1, 2023. The updated Code includes modifications to current codes and will be a requirement to the Project. Mandatory requirements include many updated Electric Vehicle Charging requirements for multi and single family developments (California Title 24, Part 11, 2022).

Title 20

Title 20 of the California Code of Regulations requires manufacturers of appliances to meet state and federal standards for energy and water efficiency. Performance of appliances must be certified through the CEC to demonstrate compliance with standards. N ew appliances regulated under Title 20 include: refrigerators, refrigerator -freezers and freezers; room air conditioners and room air -conditioning heat pumps; central air conditioners; spot air conditioners; vented gas space heaters; gas pool heaters; plum bing fittings and plumbing fixtures; fluorescent lamp ballasts; lamps; emergency lighting; traffic signal modules; dishwaters; clothes washers and dryers; cooking products; electric motors; low voltage dry - type distribution transformers; power supplies; televisions and consumer audio and video equipment; and battery charger systems.

Title 20 presents protocols for testing for each type of appliance covered under the regulations and appliances must meet the standards for energy performance, energy design, water performance and water design. Title 20 contains three types of standards fo r appliances:
federal and state standards for federally regulated appliances, state standards for federally regulated appliances, and state standards for non-federally regulated appliances.

12 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) Mobile Sources

AB 1493

In response to the transportation sector accounting for more than half of California’s CO 2 emissions, AB 1493 was enacted in July 2002. AB 1493 required CARB to set GHG emission standards for passenger vehicles, light -duty trucks, and other vehicles determined by CARB to be vehicles that are primarily used for noncommercial personal transportation in the state.

The bill required that CARB set GHG emission standards for motor vehicles manufactured in 2009 and all subsequent model years. CARB adopted the standards in September 2004. When fully phased in, the near -term (2009–2012) standards will re sult in a reduction of about 22 percent in GHG emissions compared to the emissions from the 2002 fleet, while the mid-term (2013–2016) standards will result in a reduction of about 30 percent (CARB, 2017).

EO S-1-07

Issued in January 2007, EO S- 1-07 sets a declining Low Carbon Fuel Standard for GHG emissions measured in CO2e grams per unit of fuel energy sold in California. The carbon intensity measures the amount of GHG emissions in the lifecycle of a fuel, including extraction/feedstock production, processing, transportation, and final consumption, per unit of energy deliver ed. CARB adopted the implementing regulation in April 2009 and began implementation in 2011. The LCFS is designed to encourage the use of cleaner low-carbon transportation fuels in California, encourage the production of those fuels, and therefore, reduce GHG emissions and decrease petroleum dependence in the transportation sector.

The latest amendment to LCFS implementation regulations was in 2018 and CARB approved amendments which included strengthening and smoothing the carbon intensity benchmarks through 2030 in-line with California's 2030 GHG emission reduction target enacted th rough SB 32 (CARB, 2018).

SB 375

SB 375 (2008) addresses GHG emissions associated with the transportation sector through regional transportation and sustainability plans. SB 375 required CARB to adopt regional GHG reduction targets for the automobile and light- truck sector for 2020 and 20 35. Regional metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) are then responsible for preparing a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) within their Regional Transportation Plan. The goal of the SCS is to establish a forecasted development pattern for the regi on that, after considering transportation measures and policies, will achieve, if feasible and if implemented, the GHG reduction targets. If a SCS is unable to achieve the GHG reduction target, an MPO must

13 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) prepare an Alternative Planning Strategy demonstrating how the GHG reduction target would be achieved through alternative development patterns, infrastructure, or additional transportation measures or policies.

Pursuant to Government Code Section 65080(b)(2)(K), a SCS does not: (i) regulate the use of land; (ii) supersede the land use authority of cities and counties; or (iii) require that a cities or counties land use policies and regulations, including those in a general plan, be consistent with it. Nonetheless, SB 375 makes regional and local planning agencies responsible for developing those strategies as part of the federally required metropolitan transpor tation planning process and the state-mandated housing element process.

In 2010, CARB adopted the SB 375 targets for the regional metropolitan planning organizations. The targets for SANDAG adopted in 2010 are a 7 percent reduction in emissions per capita by 2020 and a 13 percent reduction by 2035; the targets are expressed as a percent change in per capita passenger vehicle GHG emissions relative to 2005.

In October 2015, SANDAG adopted
San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan . In December
2015, CARB, by resolution, accepted SANDAG’s GHG emissions quantification analysis and determination that, if implemented, the SCS would achieve CARB’s 2020 and 2035 GHG emissions reduction targets for the region. More specifically, as set fort h in CARB Executive Order G-15-075, CARB determined that SANDAG’s SCS would achieve a 15 percent per capita reduction by 2020 and a 21 percent per capita reduction by 2035.

In 2018, CARB updated the SB 375 targets. For purposes of SANDAG, the updated targets include a 15 percent reduction in emissions per capita by 2020 and a 19 percent reduction by 2035 (CARB, 2018). SANDAG is in the process of preparing its next SCS, which will consider whether and how the region could attain these reduction targets.

SANDAG approved the 2021 Regional Plan in December 2021. The Plan provides a big picture vision for how the San Diego region will grow through 2050 and beyond with an implementation program to help make the plan a reality. Within the Draft Plan, SANDAG introduced a transformative vision for transportation in San Diego County that completely reimagines how people and goods could move throughout the region in the 21st century. The plan outlines the “5 Big Moves” which are: Complete Corridors, Transit Leap, Mo bility Hubs, Flexible Fleets, and the Next OS. This plan is the region’s long -term plan which will be implemented incrementally through the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) (SANDAG, 2021).

In September 2022, the SANDAG Board directed staff to prepare an amendment to the 2021 Regional Plan without the regional road usage charge. In developing the amendment,

14 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) SANDAG will refine the financial strategies used in the 2021 Regional Plan to achieve the region's greenhouse gas emissions target set by CARB, without the road usage charge.

SANDAG will also assess the region's continued ability to meet air quality standa rds. An Amendment to the 2021 Regional Plan removing the regional road user charge was adopted by SANDAG in October 2023. The 2025 Regional Plan is currently in development and also will not include a regional road user charge.

Advanced Clean Cars Program

In January 2012, CARB approved the Advanced Clean Cars program, a new emissions-control program for model years 2015 through 2025. The program combines the control of smog - and soot -causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package. Th e package includes elements to reduce smog-forming pollution, reduce GHG emissions, promote clean cars, and provide the fuels for clean cars (CARB, 2017). To improve air quality, CARB also has implemented new emission standards to reduce smog -forming emissions beginning with 2015 model year vehicles. It is estimated that, in 2025, cars will emit 75 percent less smog-forming pollution than the average new c ar sold today. To reduce GHG emissions, CARB, in conjunction with the EPA and the NHTSA, also has adopted new GHG standards for model year 2017 to 2025 vehicles; the new standards are estimated to reduce GHG emissions by 34 percent in 2025 (California Air Resources Board, 2012).

This program was recently updated and is known as the Advanced Clean Cars II (ACC II) Program which continues the concept of increasing stringency for fuel -efficiency standards and increasing the number of zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) (CARB, 2023). The regulations are two-pronged. First, it amends the Zero- emission Vehicle (ZEV) Regulation to require an increasing number of ZEVs, and relies on currently available advanced vehicle technologies, including battery-electric, hydrogen fuel cell electric and plug -in hybrid electric -vehicles, to meet air quality and climate change emissions standards. These amendments support Governor Newsom’s 2020 Executive Order N-79-20 that requires all new passenger vehicles sold in California to be zero emissions by 2035. Second, the Low-emission Vehicle Regulations were amended to include increasingly stringent standards for gasoline cars and heavier passenger trucks to continue to reduce smog-forming emissions.

In October 2023, staff launched a new effort to consider potential amendments to the Advanced Clean Cars II regulations, including updates to the tailpipe greenhouse gas emission standard and limited revisions to the Low-emission Vehicle and ZEV regulations.

EO N -79-20, Zero Emission by 2035, calls for elimination of new internal combustion passenger vehicles by 2035 (CARB, 2023) . By setting a course to end sales of internal combustion passenger vehicles by 2035, the Governor’s Executive Order establishes a target

15 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) for the transportation sector that helps put the state on a path to carbon neutrality by 2045.

It is important to note that the Executive Order focuses on new vehicle sales for automakers, and therefore does not require Californians to give up the existing cars and trucks they already own. The primary mechanism for achieving the ZEV target for passenger cars and light trucks is the Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Program.

As part of the Executive Order, the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz) was tasked with preparing a ZEV Market Development Strategy along with the accompanying California State agency ZEV Action Plans.

In addition to ACC II, the Clean Miles Standard regulation will also help enable the goal of 100% ZEV sales in 2035 by creating demand for ZEVs. This regulation will have aggressive requirements for electric miles that will transition ride -hailing fleets to zero -emission operations starting in 2023 and ramping up through 2030. This regulation was approved by the CARB Board in 2021.

EO B-16-12

EO B-16-12 (March 2012) directs state entities under the Governor’s direction and control to support and facilitate development and distribution of ZEVs. This EO also sets a long- term target of reaching 1.5 million zero -emission vehicles on California’s roadways by 2025. On a statewide basis, EO B -16-12 also establishes a GHG emissions reduction target from the transportation sector equaling 80 percent less than 1990 levels by 2050. In furtherance of this EO, the Governor convened an Interagency Working Gr oup on Zero- Emission Vehicles that has published multiple reports regarding the progress made on the penetration of ZEVs in the statewide vehicle fleet.

SB 350

In 2015, SB 350 – the Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act – was enacted into law. As one of its elements, SB 350 establishes a statewide policy for widespread electrification of the transportation sector, recognizing that such electrification is requ ired for achievement of the state’s 2030 and 2050 reduction targets (see Public Utilities Code Section 740.12).

Renewable Energy Procurement

SB 1078

SB 1078 (2002) established the Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) program, which requires an annual increase in renewable generation by the utilities equivalent to at least 1 percent of sales, with an aggregate goal of 20 percent by 2017. This goal was subsequently accelerated, requiring utilities to obtain 20 percent of their power from renewable sources by 2010.

16 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) SB X1 2

SB X1 2 (2011) expanded the RPS by establishing that 20 percent of the total electricity sold to retail customers in California per year by December 31, 2013, and 33 percent by December 31, 2020, and in subsequent years be secured from qualifying renewable energy sources. Under the bill, a renewable electrical generation facility is one that uses biomass, solar thermal, photovoltaic, wind, geothermal, fuel cells using renewable fuels, small hydroelectric generation of 30 megawatts or less, digester gas, mun icipal solid waste conversion, landfill gas, ocean wave, ocean thermal, or tidal current, and that meets other specified requirements with respect to its location. In addition to the retail sellers previously covered by the RPS, SB X1 2 added local, public ly owned electric utilities to the RPS.

SB 350

SB 350 (2015) further expanded the RPS by establishing that 50 percent of the total electricity sold to retail customers in California per year by December 31, 2030 be secured from qualifying renewable energy sources . In addition, SB 350 includes the goal to double the energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas final end uses (such as heating, cooling, lighting, or class of energy uses on which an energy -efficiency program is focused) of retail customers through energy conservation and efficiency.

SB 100

SB 100 (2018) has further accelerated and expanded the RPS, requiring achievement of a 50 percent RPS by December 31, 2026 and a 60 percent RPS by December 31, 2030. SB 100 also established a new statewide policy goal that calls for eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources to supply 100 percent of electricity retail sales within the State of California by December 31, 2045.

SB 1020

In 2022, the Governor approved SB 1020 (State of California, 2022) . This bill requires the state board to conduct a series of public workshops to give interested parties an opportunity to comment on the plan and requires a portion of those workshops to be conducted in regions of the state that have the most significant exposure to pollutants. This bill includes as regions for these workshops federal extreme nonattainment areas that have communities with minority populations, communities with low-income populations, or both.

Under existing law, it was the policy of the state that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100 percent of all retail sales of electricity to California end-use

17 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) customers and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve all state agencies by December 31, 2045.

This bill revised the state policy to instead provide that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 90 percent of all retail sales of electricity to California end- use customers by December 31, 2035, 95 percent of all retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers by December 31, 2040, 100 percent of all retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers by December 31, 2045, and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve all state agencies by December 31, 2035, as specified.

Water

EO B-29-15

In response to drought- related concerns, EO B -29-15 (April 2015) set a goal of achieving a statewide reduction in potable urban water usage of 25 percent relative to water use in 2013.

The term of the EO extended through February 28, 2016, although many of the directives have since become permanent water-efficiency standards and requirements. The EO includes specific directives that set strict limits on water usage in the state. In response to EO B -29- 15, the California Department of Water Resources has modified and adopted a revised version of the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance that, among other changes, significantly increases the requirements for landscape water use efficiency and broadens its applicab ility to include new development projects with smaller landscape areas.

Solid Waste

AB 939 and AB 341

AB 939 (1989), known as the Integrated Waste Management Act (Public Resources Code Sections 40000 et seq.), was passed because of the increase in waste stream and the decrease in landfill capacity. The statute established the California Integrated Waste Management Boar d, which oversees a disposal reporting system. AB 939 mandated a reduction of waste being disposed where jurisdictions were required to meet diversion goals of all solid waste through source reduction, recycling, and composting activities of 25 percent by 1995 and 50 percent by the year 2000.

AB 341 (2011) amended the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 to include a provision declaring that it is the policy goal of the state that not less than 75 percent of solid waste generated be source -reduced, recycled, or composted by the ye ar 2020, and annually thereafter. In addition, AB 341 required the California Department of Resources

18 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to develop strategies to achieve the state’s policy goal.

CalRecycle has conducted multiple workshops and published documents that identify priority strategies that CalRecycle believes would assist the state in reaching the 75 percent goal by 2020.

Increasing the amount of commercial solid waste that is recycled, reused, or composted will reduce GHG emissions primarily by 1) reducing the energy requirements associated with the extraction, harvest, and processing of raw materials and 2) using recyclab le materials that require less energy than raw materials to manufacture finished products (CalRecycle, 2020) Increased diversion of organic materials (green and food waste) will also reduce GHG emissions (CO
2 and CH4) resulting from decomposition in landfills by redirecting this material to processes that use the solid waste material to produce vehicle fuels, heat, electricity, or compost.

AB 1826 (2014)

In October 2014 Governor Brown signed AB 1826 which requires businesses to recycle their organic waste as of April 1, 2016. The law also required that after January 1, 2016, local jurisdictions across the state were required to implement an organic waste recycling program to divert organic waste generated by businesses, including multifamily residential dwellings that consist of five or more units. This requires business generating over 8 cubic yards (CY) of waste per week to arrange organic waste recycling services. The law also contained a trigger that allowed for increased implementation. For example, in 2019 CalRecycle changed the 8 CY threshold to 4 CY and then in 2020 to CY for business to implement organic recycling programs (CalRecycle, 2023).

Senate Bill 1383

Short-Lived Climate Pollutants: Organic (2016) is a statewide effort to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants (SLCP) (CalRecycle, 2016) . Specifically, the law sets the following targets: 1) Reduce statewide disposal of organic waste by 50% by January 1, 2020 and by 75% by January 1, 2025 (based on 2014 levels), and 2) rescue at least 20% of currently disposed of edible food for human consumption by 2025.

3.2 GHG Thresholds of Significance

The City of San Marcos (City) adopted an updated Climate Action Plan (CAP) on December 8, 2020. The CAP outlines strategies and measures that the City will undertake to achieve its proportional share of State GHG emissions reduction targets. The CAP is a p lan for the reduction of GHG emissions in accordance with (CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5. Pursuant

19 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064(h)(3), 15130(d), and 15183(b), a project’s incremental contribution to a cumulative GHG emissions effect may be determined not to be cumulatively considerable if it is consistent with the City’s CAP. The CAP set the following citywide targets (City of San Marcos, 2020).

• 4 percent below 2012 levels (575,000 MT CO2e) by 2020 • 42 percent below 2012 levels (347,000 MT CO2e) by 2030

The City has also developed a Climate Action Plan Consistency Review Checklist (CAP Consistency Checklist), in conjunction with the CAP, to provide a streamlined review process for proposed new development projects that are subject to discretionary review and trigger environmental review pursuant to CEQA. The CAP Consistency Guidance Memo dated July 15, 2020 summarizes the methodology and application of a GHG screening threshold which is set at 500 metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent [ MT CO
2e] per year as outlined in the CAP
(Ascent, 2020). Projects that are projected to emit fewer than 500 MT CO2e annually would not make a considerable contribution to the cumulative impact of climate change and would not need to provide additional analysis to demonstrate consistency with the CAP. It should be noted that this screening threshold is for new development projects consistent with the City’s General Plan. When such a project exceeds the screening threshold, the project would be required to demonstrate consistency with the CAP through the CAP Consistency Checklist.

In most cases, compliance with the CAP Consistency Checklist would provide the CEQA streamlining path to allow project specific environmental documents, if eligible, to tier from and/or incorporate by reference the CAP’s programmatic review of GHG impacts. Projects that are consistent with the General Plan and implement CAP GHG reduction measures may incorporate by reference the CAP’s cumulative GHG analysis. The City’s CAP meets the requirements under Section 15183.5 of the CEQA Guidelines as a qualified plan for the reduction of GHG emissions for use in cumulative impact analysis pertaining to development projects. The CAP Consistency Checklist provides a streamlined review process for the GHG emissions analysis of proposed new development projects that are subject to discretionary review and trigger environmental review pursuant to CEQA.

If a project is consistent with the existing General Plan land use designation(s), it can be determined to be consistent with the CAP projections and can move forward to Step 2 of the CAP Consistency Checklist.

In addition, some projects may seek a General Plan amendment. For these projects, the CAP Consistency Checklist requires a determination on whether the amendment would result in an equivalent or less GHG-intensive project when compared to the existing land use designations.

In addition to providing evidence to support the conclusion that the project would generate

20 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) fewer emissions than existing land use designations, these projects would demonstrate consistency with the CAP through completion of Step 2 of the CAP Consistency Checklist.

If a land use designation amendment results in a more GHG- intensive project, the project is required to prepare a quantitative GHG analysis based on applicable sections of the CEQA Guidelines.

21 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2)

4.0 METHODOLOGY

4.1 General Plan Land Use of the Site

The CubeSmart project does not seek a GPA or rezone. An amendment to the UDSP is proposed to create a self -storage overaly zone to allow for the development of the project.

In addition, per conversations with the project Architect, this site could reasonably also support a multi-story 200,000 SF office space with 500 parking locations. This scenario is referred to as the General Plan Buildout Scenario (GPBS) as described above.

4.2 Construction CO2e Emissions Calculation Methodology

GHGs related to construction and daily operations were calculated using the latest CalEEMod 2022.1 GHG model. The purpose of this analysis is to show compliance with CEQA through analysis using the City’s CAP. This analysis focuses on the relative comparison between what is Proposed and the GPBS consisting of a 200,000 SF office building with 500 parking locations.

The construction module in CalEEMod was used to calculate the emissions associated with the construction for both scenarios . The CalEEMod input/output model is shown in Attachment A for the Proposed Project and Attachment B for the GPBS.

The project was estimated to start grading sometime in 2025 and be completed in roughly one year . Table 4.1 below describes the construction equipment and durations for the Proposed Project and would be slightly shorter than the GPBS CalEEMod defaults were utilized for construction for both scenarios. Please see Attachment B to see the estimated construction durations and equipment for the GPBS.

Table 4.1: Expected Construction Equipment (Cube Smart Self Storage) Equipment Identification Proposed Start Proposed Complete Quantity Site Preparation 6/30/2025 7/4/2025
Graders 1
Scrapers 1
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1
Grading 7/5/2025 7/13/2025
Graders 1
Rubber Tired Dozers 1
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2
Building Construction 7/14/2025 5/18/2026
Cranes 1
Forklifts 2

22 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) Generator Sets 1
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1
Welders 3
Paving 5/19/2026 6/2/2026
Cement and Mortar Mixers 1
Pavers 1
Paving Equipment 1
Rollers 2
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1
Architectural Coating 6/3/2026 6/30/2026
Air Compressors 1
This equipment list is based upon equipment inventory within CalEEMod. The quantity and types are based upon assumptions provided by the project applicant.

4.3 Operational Emissions Calculation Methodology

Once construction is complete, the proposed project would generate GHG emissions from daily operations which would include sources such as e nergy usage from electricity and natural gas , mobile sources from vehicular traffic , municipal waste, water uses , and area sources such as emissions generated from onsite landscaping. Emissions resulting from all of these sources are calculated within CalEEMod.

CalEEMod utilizes 2019 Title 24 building standard efficiencies as defaults, though the project will need to comply with the latest Title 24 standards in effect at the time building permits are issued. Since the current 2022 Title 24 building standards increase efficiencies , this analysis based on 2019 building standards is conservative.

Solid municipal waste generated in the form of trash is also considered within this analysis as the decomposition of organic material breaks down to form GHGs. GHGs from water are also indirectly generated through the conveyance of the resource via pumping throughout the state and as necessary for wastewater treatment.

Again, two models were created for this analysis which are both used to compare project intensities as it relates to GHGs. The comparison is based on construction starting at the same time and operations starting and completing at essentially the same time as well .

Default settings were utilized for the operations of both scenarios as well. The operational modeling results for the proposed development and the GPBS are also shown in Attachments A and -B respectively.

23 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2)

5.0 FINDINGS

5.1 Proposed Construction Emissions

Utilizing the CALEEMOD 2022.1 construction inputs as shown in Table 5 .1, we find that construction of the project will produce approximately 330 MT of CO2e over the construction life of the project. Given the fact that the total emissions would ultimately contribute to cumulative levels, construction emissions of GHGs were annualized to allow for inclusion in operational emissions estimates, consistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) recommendations for construction GHG emissions (SCAQMD, 2008) .

Construction emissions were annualized over a 30 -year period, per SCAQMD recommendations, to account for emissions generated over the assumed project lifetime.

Given this, the Project would add approximately 11 MT CO2e per year from construction which were added to annual operational emissions estimates as can be seen i n Table 5.1. The proposed construction from the GPBS would be 19.3 MT CO2e per year as shown in Table 5.2 below.

Table 5.1: Cube Smart - Construction CO2e Emissions Summary (MT CO2e/year) Year Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
2025 181 0.01 0.01 183
2026 145 0.01 < 0.005 147
Total Cumulative Construction Emissions (MT CO2e) 330
Yearly Average Construction Emissions (MT CO2e /year over 30 years) 11

Table 5.2: GPBS - Construction CO
2e Emissions Summary (MT CO2e/year)
Year Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
2025 292 0.01 0.02 298
2026 277 0.01 0.02 282
Total Cumulative Construction Emissions (MT CO2e) 580
Yearly Average Construction Emissions (MT CO2e /year over 30 years) 19.3

24 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2)

5.2 Proposed Operational Emissions

Once construction is completed the proposed project would generate GHG emissions from daily operations which would include sources such as area, energy, mobile, solid waste and water uses, which are calculated within CalEEMod.

As noted above, this analysis strategy modeled both the Project and a GPBS both consistent with the UDSP. The operational emissions from both scenarios are provided in Table 5.3 and Table 5.4 below:

Table 5.3: Cube Smart – Total CO2e Emissions Summary (MT CO2e/year) Source Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
(MT/Yr)
Mobile 222 0.01 0.01 225
Area 1.62 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.63
Energy 96.5 0.01 < 0.005 97.2
Water 11.9 0.84 0.02 38.9
Waste 9.33 0.93 0 32.6
Operations Total 395.3
Construction Emissions (See Table 5.1 above) 11.0
Construction and Operations (MT CO2e / Year) 406.33
Data is presented in decimal format and may have rounding errors. * No Data Provided

Table 5.4: GPBS - Total CO2e Emissions Summary (MT CO2e/year) Source Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
(MT/Yr)
Mobile 1692 0.09 0.07 1718
Area 5.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.86
Energy 423 0.09 0.01 427
Water 11.8 0.84 0.02 38.8
Waste 16.6 1.66 0 58.1
Operations Total 2,247.76
Construction Emissions (See Table 5.2 above) 19.3
Construction and Operations 2,267.06
Data is presented in decimal format and may have rounding errors. * No Data Provided

25 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) Table 5.3 indicates that the Project operations and construction would generate 406.33 MT CO2e per year. Table 5.4 indicates that the GPBS would generate 2,267.06 MT CO2e. Based on this analysis, the proposed Project would be less intense than the GPBS as it relates to the CAP. Normally the comparison approach is utilized when projects seek a GPA or an amendment that would normally seek a modification to any approved or adopted plans.

The proposed Project would also generate fewer than 500 MT per year when both construction and operational emissions are combined. The Project would generate 406.33 MT CO 2e per
year. Per the CAP this project would not make a considerable contribution to the cumulative impact of climate change and would not need to provide additional analysis to demonstrate consistency with the CAP . Given this, the Project would have a less than significant GHG impact under CEQA. No mitigation measures would be required.

It should be noted that the Project has intentions to reduce energy demand to cut future operational costs through the installation of a rooftop photovoltaic (PV) solar panel system.

Since PV systems generate fully renewable energy, any electrical energy g enerated would similarly reduce or offset demand from non -renewable energy sources which would be expected from electrical grid operators. This in turn would reduce cumulative GHG emissions.

No GHG reductions were included in this analysis as it relates to the solar proposed and solar generation is not a required mitigation measure for this project.

5.3 CEQA Compliance

SB 97 directed amendments to the CEQA statute to specifically establish that GHG emissions and their impacts are appropriate subjects for CEQA analysis. Under SB 97 the project should be able to answer the following questions for CEQA compliance.

1. Will the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

The City is committed to reducing its GHG emissions consistent with SB 32. Based on this requirement, the City’s CAP concludes that proposed General Plan amendments would be consistent with the CAP so long as the GHG emission generated by the amendment are less than would otherwise be produced by a consistent General Plan buildout scenario.

The proposed project was found to emit 406.33 MT CO
2e per year and the GPBS was
estimated to generate at least 2,267.06 MT CO2e per year. The Project would therefore have a less intense carbon footprint when compared to what could otherwise be assumed as allowed under the UDSP. Given this the Project as proposed would be less than significant in terms of GHG intensity. In addition, it should be noted, the project would generate fewer than

26 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) 500 MT CO2e per year which is the screening threshold for Projects deemed to generate a less than significant GHG impact cumulatively under the CAP with no additional requirements to further reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact on the environment.

2. Will the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

The proposed project was found to emit 406.33 MT CO 2e per year and the GPBS was estimated to generate at least 2,267.06 MT CO2e per year. The Project would therefore have a less intense carbon footprint when compared to what could otherwise be assumed as allowed under the UDSP. Given this, the Project would have a lower GHG intensity than the BPBS. In addition, the project would generate fewer than 500 MT CO2e per year which is the screening threshold for Projects deemed to generate a less than significant GHG impact cumulatively under the CAP with no additional requirements to further reduce GHG emissions.

Based on this, a less than significant impact would be expected by the project since the Project is consistent with the City’s CAP.

27 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2)

6.0 REFERENCES

Ascent. (2020). CAP Consistency Guidance Memo.

California Air Resources Board. (2012). www.arb.ca.gov. Retrieved from California Air Resources Board Approves Advanced Clean Car Rules:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/california-air-resources-board-approves-advanced- clean-car-rules
California Title 24, Part 11. (2022). Retrieved from
https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Resources/2022-Title-24-California-Code-Changes CalRecycle. (2016). California’s Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy. Retrieved from https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/#
CalRecycle. (2020). https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov. Retrieved from https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Climate/
CARB. (2017). California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Retrieved from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf CARB. (2017). Clean Car Standards - Pavley, Assembly Bill 1493. Retrieved from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccms/ccms.htm
CARB. (2017). The Advanced Clean Cars Program. Retrieved from https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/acc/acc_conceptdraft.htm
CARB. (2018). https://ww2.arb.ca.gov. Retrieved 2021, from https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our- work/programs/sustainable-communities-program/regional-plan-targets:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov
CARB. (2018). ww2.arb.ca.gov. Retrieved 2021, from
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/lcfs-basics:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/low-carbon-fuel-standard/about CARB. (2022). 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. Retrieved from https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2023-04/2022-sp.pdf CARB. (2023). https://ww2.arb.ca.gov. Retrieved from Advanced Clean Cars Program:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program CARB. (2023). https://ww2.arb.ca.gov. Retrieved from California moves to accelerate to 100% new zero-emission vehicle sales by 2035:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/california-moves-accelerate-100-new-zero-emission- vehicle-sales-
2035#:~:text=General%20requirements,and%20reach%20100%25%20in%202035 .

City of San Marcos. (2020). Appendix D - Guidance to Demonstrating Consistency with the City of San Marcos Climate tion Plan for Discretionary Projects Subject to CEQA and City of San Marcos Climate Action Plan Consistency Review Checklist. Retrieved from https://www.san-marcos.net/home/showpublisheddocument?id=25086 City of San Marcos. (2020). Final Climate Action Plan. Retrieved from https://www.san- marcos.net/home/showpublisheddocument/25084/637435406644270000

28 Ldn Consulting, Inc. 3/31/25 24-82 CubeSmart San Marcos GHG (2) EPA. (2023). https://www.epa.gov. Retrieved from Greenhouse Gases:
https://www.epa.gov/report-environment/greenhouse-gases Google. (2023). Retrieved 2022, from maps.google.com
Google Earth Pro. (2025).

IPCC. (2007). IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007 : Working Group I:

The Physical Science Basis. Retrieved from
https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch2s2-10-2.html SANDAG. (2021). 2021 Regional Plan. Retrieved from https://www.sandag.org/- /media/SANDAG/Documents/PDF/regional-plan/2021-regional-plan/final-2021- regional-plan/final-2021-regional-plan-flipbook.pdf
SCAQMD. (2008). Retrieved 2018, from http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year- 2008-2009/ghg-meeting-6/ghg-meeting-6-guidance-document-discussion.pdf State of California. (2022). Assembly Bill No. 1279. Retrieved from https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1279 State of California. (2022). Senate Bill No. 1020. Retrieved from https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1020 USEPA. (2023). Understanding Global Warming Potentials. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials VALLI ARCHITECTURAL GROUP. (2024). CubeSmart Self Storage Site Plan.

WRCC. (2018). Retrieved from
https://wrcc.dri.edu/Climate/comp_table_show.php?stype=wind_dir_avg WRCC. (2021). Retrieved from https://wrcc.dri.edu/summary/Climsmsca.html:
https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca2862

ATTACHMENT A

CalEEMod Emission Model – Proposed Project

CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
1 / 38
CubeSmart Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated

3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated

3.5. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated

3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
2 / 38

3.11. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
3 / 38

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
4 / 38

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
5 / 38

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
6 / 38

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
7 / 38

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name CubeSmart
Construction Start Date 6/1/2025
Operational Y ear 2026
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.20
Precipitation (days) 9.80
Location E Carmel St, San Marcos, CA, USA
County San Diego
City San Marcos
Air District San Diego County APCD
Air Basin San Diego
TAZ 6292
EDFZ 12
Electric Utility San Diego Gas & Electric
Gas Utility San Diego Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.29

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
111 1000sqft 2.55 111,200 5,000 — — —
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
8 / 38
Parking Lot 12.0 Space 0.11 0.00 5,000 — — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. — 3,101 3,101 0.13 0.10 3,136
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. — 3,076 3,076 0.13 0.10 3,109
Average Daily (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. — 1,095 1,095 0.05 0.03 1,107
Annual (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. — 181 181 0.01 0.01 183

2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Y ear BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily - Summer (Max) — — — — — —
2025 — 3,101 3,101 0.13 0.10 3,136
2026 — 3,083 3,083 0.13 0.10 3,118
Daily - Winter (Max) — — — — — —
2025 — 3,076 3,076 0.13 0.10 3,109
2026 — 3,059 3,059 0.13 0.10 3,092
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
9 / 38
Average Daily — — — — — —
2025 — 1,095 1,095 0.05 0.03 1,107
2026 — 877 877 0.04 0.03 886
Annual — — — — — —
2025 — 181 181 0.01 0.01 183
2026 — 145 145 0.01 < 0.005 147

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. 106 2,019 2,125 10.9 0.18 2,455
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. 106 1,937 2,043 10.9 0.18 2,370
Average Daily (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. 106 1,957 2,062 10.9 0.18 2,390
Annual (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. 17.5 324 341 1.80 0.03 396

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Mobile — 1,394 1,394 0.06 0.05 1,416
Area — 19.9 19.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 20.0
Energy — 583 583 0.09 0.01 587
Water 49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Waste 56.3 0.00 56.3 5.63 0.00 197
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
10 / 38
Total 106 2,019 2,125 10.9 0.18 2,455
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Mobile — 1,332 1,332 0.07 0.06 1,350
Area — — — — — —
Energy — 583 583 0.09 0.01 587
Water 49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Waste 56.3 0.00 56.3 5.63 0.00 197
Total 106 1,937 2,043 10.9 0.18 2,370
Average Daily — — — — — —
Mobile — 1,341 1,341 0.07 0.06 1,362
Area — 9.81 9.81 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.84
Energy — 583 583 0.09 0.01 587
Water 49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Waste 56.3 0.00 56.3 5.63 0.00 197
Total 106 1,957 2,062 10.9 0.18 2,390
Annual — — — — — —
Mobile — 222 222 0.01 0.01 225
Area — 1.62 1.62 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.63
Energy — 96.5 96.5 0.01 < 0.005 97.2
Water 8.16 3.70 11.9 0.84 0.02 38.9
Waste 9.33 0.00 9.33 0.93 0.00 32.6
Total 17.5 324 341 1.80 0.03 396

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
11 / 38
Onsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,717 2,717 0.11 0.02 2,726
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 22.3 22.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 22.4
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 3.70 3.70 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.71
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 71.2 71.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 72.2
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Worker — 0.56 0.56 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.57
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Worker — 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
12 / 38
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Onsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,455 2,455 0.10 0.02 2,463
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 40.4 40.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 40.5
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 6.68 6.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.70
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 94.9 94.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 96.3
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
13 / 38
Average Daily — — — — — —
Worker — 1.49 1.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.51
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Worker — 0.25 0.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.25
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Onsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 2,209
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 2,209
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 737 737 0.03 0.01 739
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 122 122 < 0.005 < 0.005 122
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 443 443 0.02 0.02 450
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
14 / 38
Vendor — 456 456 0.02 0.06 477
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 418 418 0.02 0.02 424
Vendor — 456 456 0.02 0.06 476
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — —
Worker — 141 141 0.01 0.01 143
Vendor — 153 153 0.01 0.02 159
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Worker — 23.4 23.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 23.7
Vendor — 25.3 25.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 26.4
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Onsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 2,208
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 2,208
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 594 594 0.02 < 0.005 596
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
15 / 38
Annual — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 98.4 98.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 98.7
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 434 434 0.02 0.02 441
Vendor — 448 448 0.02 0.06 468
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 410 410 0.02 0.02 415
Vendor — 448 448 0.02 0.06 468
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — —
Worker — 112 112 0.01 < 0.005 113
Vendor — 121 121 < 0.005 0.02 126
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Worker — 18.5 18.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 18.8
Vendor — 20.0 20.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 20.9
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Onsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 1,244 1,244 0.05 0.01 1,248
Paving — — — — — —
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
16 / 38
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 34.1 34.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 34.2
Paving — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 5.64 5.64 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.66
Paving — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 139 139 0.01 < 0.005 142
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Worker — 3.64 3.64 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.69
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Worker — 0.60 0.60 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.61
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.11. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
17 / 38
Onsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 134
Architectural Coatings — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 7.32 7.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 7.34
Architectural Coatings — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 1.21 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.22
Architectural Coatings — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 86.8 86.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 88.1
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Worker — 4.53 4.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.60
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Worker — 0.75 0.75 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.76
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
18 / 38

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
— 1,394 1,394 0.06 0.05 1,416
Parking Lot — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 1,394 1,394 0.06 0.05 1,416
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
— 1,332 1,332 0.07 0.06 1,350
Parking Lot — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 1,332 1,332 0.07 0.06 1,350
Annual — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
— 222 222 0.01 0.01 225
Parking Lot — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 222 222 0.01 0.01 225

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
19 / 38
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
— 59.9 59.9 0.04 0.01 62.6
Parking Lot — 0.51 0.51 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.53
Total — 60.4 60.4 0.04 0.01 63.1
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
— 59.9 59.9 0.04 0.01 62.6
Parking Lot — 0.51 0.51 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.53
Total — 60.4 60.4 0.04 0.01 63.1
Annual — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
— 9.92 9.92 0.01 < 0.005 10.4
Parking Lot — 0.08 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09
Total — 10.0 10.0 0.01 < 0.005 10.4

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
— 523 523 0.05 < 0.005 524
Parking Lot — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 523 523 0.05 < 0.005 524
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
— 523 523 0.05 < 0.005 524
Parking Lot — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 523 523 0.05 < 0.005 524
Annual — — — — — —
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
20 / 38

86.8< 0.0050.0186.586.5—Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
Parking Lot — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 86.5 86.5 0.01 < 0.005 86.8

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Consumer Products — — — — — —
Architectural Coatings — — — — — —
Landscape Equipment — 19.9 19.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 20.0
Total — 19.9 19.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 20.0
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Consumer Products — — — — — —
Architectural Coatings — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Consumer Products — — — — — —
Architectural Coatings — — — — — —
Landscape Equipment — 1.62 1.62 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.63
Total — 1.62 1.62 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.63

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
21 / 38
Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Parking Lot 0.00 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05
Total 49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Parking Lot 0.00 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05
Total 49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Annual — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

8.16 3.69 11.8 0.84 0.02 38.8
Parking Lot 0.00 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01
Total 8.16 3.70 11.9 0.84 0.02 38.9

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

56.3 0.00 56.3 5.63 0.00 197
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 56.3 0.00 56.3 5.63 0.00 197
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

56.3 0.00 56.3 5.63 0.00 197
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
22 / 38
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 56.3 0.00 56.3 5.63 0.00 197
Annual — — — — — —
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail

9.33 0.00 9.33 0.93 0.00 32.6
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 9.33 0.00 9.33 0.93 0.00 32.6

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
23 / 38
Annual — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
24 / 38

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetation BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — —
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
25 / 38
Subtotal — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
— — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
— — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
— — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Site Preparation Site Preparation 6/30/2025 7/4/2025 5.00 3.00 — Grading Grading 7/5/2025 7/13/2025 5.00 6.00 —
Building Construction Building Construction 7/14/2025 5/18/2026 5.00 220 — CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
26 / 38
Paving Paving 5/19/2026 6/2/2026 5.00 10.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 6/3/2026 6/30/2026 5.00 20.0 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Site Preparation Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Site Preparation Scrapers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 423 0.48 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 2.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 2.00 7.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 10.0 0.56
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48 CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
27 / 38

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 7.50 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 10.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 46.7 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 18.2 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 15.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 9.34 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
28 / 38
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

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

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 166,800 55,600 282

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Site Preparation — — 4.50 0.00 —
Grading — — 6.00 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0%
Parking Lot 0.11 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
29 / 38
kWh per Y ear and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Y ear kWh per Y ear CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 589 0.03 < 0.005
2026 0.00 589 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No Rail
193 193 193 70,623 1,685 1,685 1,685 615,155
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 166,800 55,600 282

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
30 / 38

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail
484,827 45.1 0.0330 0.0040 1,630,984
Parking Lot 4,121 45.1 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 25,715,000 1,000,000
Parking Lot 0.00 74,721

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 105 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
31 / 38

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Y ear Horsepower Load Factor

5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
32 / 38

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 14.7 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 5.15 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 10.5 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
33 / 38
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding 0 0 0 N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding 1 1 1 2
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
34 / 38

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 45.0
AQ-PM 13.0
AQ-DPM 26.6
Drinking Water 42.5
Lead Risk Housing 8.67
Pesticides 45.5
Toxic Releases 15.2
Traffic 47.6
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 64.7
Groundwater 64.2
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 89.2
Impaired Water Bodies 96.3
Solid Waste 66.7
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 4.85
Cardio-vascular 24.9
Low Birth Weights 51.3
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 15.8
Housing 76.0
Linguistic 24.8
Poverty 42.6
Unemployment 26.9
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
35 / 38

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 51.4307712
Employed 45.27139741
Median HI 41.7425895
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 62.78711664
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 58.10342615
Transportation —
Auto Access 68.11240857
Active commuting 53.07327088
Social —
2-parent households 7.301424355
Voting 59.822918
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 92.87822405
Park access 48.03028359
Retail density 31.46413448
Supermarket access 39.13768767
Tree canopy 56.26844604
Housing —
Homeownership 52.53432568
Housing habitability 41.44745284
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 15.62941101 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 33.7482356
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
36 / 38
Uncrowded housing 68.66418581
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 60.27203901
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 98.8
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 69.2
Cognitively Disabled 43.0
Physically Disabled 68.4
Heart Attack ER Admissions 99.4
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 62.4
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
37 / 38
Children 81.0
Elderly 49.5
English Speaking 57.5
Foreign-born 12.3
Outdoor Workers 84.7
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 77.2
Traffic Density 67.0
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 28.4
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 74.6

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 34.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 51.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

CubeSmart Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
38 / 38

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Operations: Water and Waste Water water
Construction: Construction Phases Estimated Construction

ATTACHMENT B

CalEEMod Emission Model – 200,000 SF Office Building - General Plan Buildout Scenario CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
1 / 38
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated

3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated

3.5. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated

3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
2 / 38

3.11. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
3 / 38

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
4 / 38

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
5 / 38

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
6 / 38

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
7 / 38

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name CubeSmart 200KSF Office
Construction Start Date 6/1/2025
Operational Y ear 2026
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.20
Precipitation (days) 9.80
Location E Carmel St, San Marcos, CA, USA
County San Diego
City San Marcos
Air District San Diego County APCD
Air Basin San Diego
TAZ 6292
EDFZ 12
Electric Utility San Diego Gas & Electric
Gas Utility San Diego Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.29

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
General Office
Building
200 1000sqft 1.50 200,000 10,000 — — —
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
8 / 38
Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
500 Space 1.50 200,000 0.00 — — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. — 5,246 5,246 0.23 0.30 5,350
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. — 5,169 5,169 0.23 0.30 5,265
Average Daily (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. — 1,767 1,767 0.08 0.10 1,799
Annual (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. — 292 292 0.01 0.02 298

2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Y ear BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily - Summer (Max) — — — — — —
2025 — 5,246 5,246 0.23 0.30 5,350
2026 — 5,187 5,187 0.22 0.30 5,290
Daily - Winter (Max) — — — — — —
2025 — 5,169 5,169 0.23 0.30 5,265
2026 — 5,112 5,112 0.22 0.30 5,207
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
9 / 38
Average Daily — — — — — —
2025 — 1,767 1,767 0.08 0.10 1,799
2026 — 1,671 1,671 0.07 0.09 1,703
Annual — — — — — —
2025 — 292 292 0.01 0.02 298
2026 — 277 277 0.01 0.02 282

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. 150 16,681 16,830 16.3 0.70 17,495
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. 150 15,985 16,135 16.3 0.74 16,764
Average Daily (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. 150 12,833 12,983 16.2 0.59 13,579
Annual (Max) — — — — — —
Unmit. 24.8 2,125 2,149 2.67 0.10 2,248

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Mobile — 14,033 14,033 0.65 0.53 14,255
Area — 71.5 71.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 71.8
Energy — 2,554 2,554 0.55 0.05 2,582
Water 49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Waste 100 0.00 100 10.0 0.00 351
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
10 / 38
Refrig. — — — — — 0.49
Total 150 16,681 16,830 16.3 0.70 17,495
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Mobile — 13,409 13,409 0.69 0.57 13,596
Area — — — — — —
Energy — 2,554 2,554 0.55 0.05 2,582
Water 49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Waste 100 0.00 100 10.0 0.00 351
Refrig. — — — — — 0.49
Total 150 15,985 16,135 16.3 0.74 16,764
Average Daily — — — — — —
Mobile — 10,222 10,222 0.52 0.42 10,376
Area — 35.3 35.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 35.4
Energy — 2,554 2,554 0.55 0.05 2,582
Water 49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Waste 100 0.00 100 10.0 0.00 351
Refrig. — — — — — 0.49
Total 150 12,833 12,983 16.2 0.59 13,579
Annual — — — — — —
Mobile — 1,692 1,692 0.09 0.07 1,718
Area — 5.84 5.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.86
Energy — 423 423 0.09 0.01 427
Water 8.16 3.69 11.8 0.84 0.02 38.8
Waste 16.6 0.00 16.6 1.66 0.00 58.1
Refrig. — — — — — 0.08
Total 24.8 2,125 2,149 2.67 0.10 2,248

3. Construction Emissions Details
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
11 / 38

3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Onsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,717 2,717 0.11 0.02 2,726
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 37.2 37.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 37.3
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 6.16 6.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.18
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 71.2 71.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 72.2
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Worker — 0.93 0.93 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.94
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
12 / 38
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Worker — 0.15 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Onsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,455 2,455 0.10 0.02 2,463
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 53.8 53.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 54.0
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 8.91 8.91 < 0.005 < 0.005 8.94
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 94.9 94.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 96.3
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
13 / 38
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Worker — 1.98 1.98 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.01
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Worker — 0.33 0.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.33
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Onsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 2,209
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 2,209
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 711 711 0.03 0.01 713
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 118 118 < 0.005 < 0.005 118
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
14 / 38
Offsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 1,404 1,404 0.07 0.05 1,426
Vendor — 1,641 1,641 0.07 0.23 1,716
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 1,326 1,326 0.07 0.05 1,343
Vendor — 1,642 1,642 0.07 0.23 1,713
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — —
Worker — 432 432 0.02 0.02 438
Vendor — 530 530 0.02 0.07 553
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Worker — 71.5 71.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 72.6
Vendor — 87.7 87.7 < 0.005 0.01 91.6
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Onsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 2,208
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,201 2,201 0.09 0.02 2,208
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
15 / 38
Average Daily — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 681 681 0.03 0.01 683
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 113 113 < 0.005 < 0.005 113
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 1,376 1,376 0.07 0.05 1,397
Vendor — 1,610 1,610 0.06 0.23 1,685
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 1,299 1,299 0.07 0.05 1,317
Vendor — 1,611 1,611 0.06 0.23 1,682
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — —
Worker — 405 405 0.02 0.02 411
Vendor — 498 498 0.02 0.07 520
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Worker — 67.1 67.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 68.1
Vendor — 82.5 82.5 < 0.005 0.01 86.2
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Onsite — — — — — —
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
16 / 38
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 1,244 1,244 0.05 0.01 1,248
Paving — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 61.3 61.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 61.5
Paving — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 10.2 10.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.2
Paving — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 139 139 0.01 < 0.005 142
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Worker — 6.55 6.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.65
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Worker — 1.08 1.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.10
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
17 / 38

3.11. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Onsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 134
Architectural Coatings — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 6.58 6.58 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.61
Architectural Coatings — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 1.09 1.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.09
Architectural Coatings — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Worker — 275 275 0.01 0.01 279
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — —
Worker — 12.9 12.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 13.1
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — —
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
18 / 38
Worker — 2.14 2.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.17
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
General Office Building — 14,033 14,033 0.65 0.53 14,255 Enclosed Parking with
Elevator
— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 14,033 14,033 0.65 0.53 14,255
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
General Office Building — 13,409 13,409 0.69 0.57 13,596 Enclosed Parking with
Elevator
— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 13,409 13,409 0.69 0.57 13,596
Annual — — — — — —
General Office Building — 1,692 1,692 0.09 0.07 1,718
Enclosed Parking with
Elevator
— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 1,692 1,692 0.09 0.07 1,718

4.2. Energy
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
19 / 38

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
General Office Building — 410 410 0.30 0.04 428
Enclosed Parking with
Elevator
— 91.2 91.2 0.07 0.01 95.3
Total — 501 501 0.37 0.04 524
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
General Office Building — 410 410 0.30 0.04 428
Enclosed Parking with
Elevator
— 91.2 91.2 0.07 0.01 95.3
Total — 501 501 0.37 0.04 524
Annual — — — — — —
General Office Building — 67.9 67.9 0.05 0.01 70.9
Enclosed Parking with
Elevator
— 15.1 15.1 0.01 < 0.005 15.8
Total — 83.0 83.0 0.06 0.01 86.7

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
General Office Building — 2,053 2,053 0.18 < 0.005 2,058 Enclosed Parking with
Elevator
— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 2,053 2,053 0.18 < 0.005 2,058
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
General Office Building — 2,053 2,053 0.18 < 0.005 2,058 CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
20 / 38
Enclosed Parking with
Elevator
— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 2,053 2,053 0.18 < 0.005 2,058
Annual — — — — — —
General Office Building — 340 340 0.03 < 0.005 341
Enclosed Parking with
Elevator
— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 340 340 0.03 < 0.005 341

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Consumer Products — — — — — —
Architectural Coatings — — — — — —
Landscape Equipment — 71.5 71.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 71.8
Total — 71.5 71.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 71.8
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Consumer Products — — — — — —
Architectural Coatings — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Consumer Products — — — — — —
Architectural Coatings — — — — — —
Landscape Equipment — 5.84 5.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.86
Total — 5.84 5.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.86
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
21 / 38

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
General Office Building 49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Enclosed Parking with
Elevator

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
General Office Building 49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Enclosed Parking with
Elevator

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 49.3 22.3 71.6 5.07 0.12 235
Annual — — — — — —
General Office Building 8.16 3.69 11.8 0.84 0.02 38.8
Enclosed Parking with
Elevator

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 8.16 3.69 11.8 0.84 0.02 38.8

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
General Office Building 100 0.00 100 10.0 0.00 351
Enclosed Parking with
Elevator

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
22 / 38
Total 100 0.00 100 10.0 0.00 351
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
General Office Building 100 0.00 100 10.0 0.00 351
Enclosed Parking with
Elevator

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 100 0.00 100 10.0 0.00 351
Annual — — — — — —
General Office Building 16.6 0.00 16.6 1.66 0.00 58.1
Enclosed Parking with
Elevator

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 16.6 0.00 16.6 1.66 0.00 58.1

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
General Office Building — — — — — 0.49
Total — — — — — 0.49
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
General Office Building — — — — — 0.49
Total — — — — — 0.49
Annual — — — — — —
General Office Building — — — — — 0.08
Total — — — — — 0.08

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
23 / 38

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
24 / 38
Total — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetation BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Total — — — — — —
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
25 / 38

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
— — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
— — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — —
— — — — — — —
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
26 / 38

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Site Preparation Site Preparation 6/30/2025 7/7/2025 5.00 5.00 — Grading Grading 7/8/2025 7/19/2025 5.00 8.00 —
Building Construction Building Construction 7/20/2025 6/7/2026 5.00 230 — Paving Paving 6/8/2026 7/3/2026 5.00 18.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 7/4/2026 7/29/2026 5.00 18.0 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Site Preparation Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Site Preparation Scrapers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 423 0.48 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 2.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 2.00 7.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
27 / 38

0.5610.08.001.00AverageDieselPaving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 7.50 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 10.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 148 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 65.6 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
28 / 38
Paving Worker 15.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 29.6 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

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

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 302,940 100,327 3,920

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Site Preparation — — 7.50 0.00 —
Grading — — 8.00 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
29 / 38
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
General Office Building 0.00 0%
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 1.50 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Y ear and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Y ear kWh per Y ear CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 589 0.03 < 0.005
2026 0.00 589 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear General Office
Building
1,948 442 140 538,219 16,968 3,850 1,219 4,688,097
Enclosed Parking
with Elevator

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
30 / 38
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 302,940 100,327 3,920

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) General Office Building 3,318,913 45.1 0.0330 0.0040 6,404,605 Enclosed Parking with
Elevator
738,286 45.1 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) General Office Building 25,715,000 1,000,000
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
31 / 38
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
General Office Building 186 —
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced General Office
Building
Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.02 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Office
Building
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Y ear Horsepower Load Factor

5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

5.17. User Defined
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
32 / 38
Equipment Type Fuel Type

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 14.7 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 5.15 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 10.5 annual hectares burned
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
33 / 38
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding 0 0 0 N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
34 / 38
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding 1 1 1 2
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 45.0
AQ-PM 13.0
AQ-DPM 26.6
Drinking Water 42.5
Lead Risk Housing 8.67
Pesticides 45.5
Toxic Releases 15.2
Traffic 47.6
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 64.7
Groundwater 64.2
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
35 / 38
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 89.2
Impaired Water Bodies 96.3
Solid Waste 66.7
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 4.85
Cardio-vascular 24.9
Low Birth Weights 51.3
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 15.8
Housing 76.0
Linguistic 24.8
Poverty 42.6
Unemployment 26.9

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 51.4307712
Employed 45.27139741
Median HI 41.7425895
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 62.78711664
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 58.10342615
Transportation —
Auto Access 68.11240857
Active commuting 53.07327088
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
36 / 38
Social —
2-parent households 7.301424355
Voting 59.822918
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 92.87822405
Park access 48.03028359
Retail density 31.46413448
Supermarket access 39.13768767
Tree canopy 56.26844604
Housing —
Homeownership 52.53432568
Housing habitability 41.44745284
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 15.62941101 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 33.7482356
Uncrowded housing 68.66418581
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 60.27203901
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 98.8
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 69.2
Cognitively Disabled 43.0
Physically Disabled 68.4
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
37 / 38
Heart Attack ER Admissions 99.4
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 62.4
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 81.0
Elderly 49.5
English Speaking 57.5
Foreign-born 12.3
Outdoor Workers 84.7
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 77.2
Traffic Density 67.0
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 28.4
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 74.6
CubeSmart 200KSF Office Detailed Report, 1/14/2025
38 / 38

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 34.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 51.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Operations: Water and Waste Water water
Construction: Construction Phases Estimated Construction Land Use 200,000 SF office builiding could be supported onsite 6 stories with 500 parking stalls