2024-11-19 Regular — Santa Maria City Council, November 19, 2024 (part 2 of 6)

ATTACHMENT "A"

i. 1.02 PAYMENT TERMS.

City agrees to pay Contractor in accordance with the payment terms set forth in Exhibit "D-2", attached and incorporated.

It is agreed and understood that as of the Effective Date of this Amendment No. 2, this Exhibit "D-2" shall cancel, supersede, and terminate Exhibit "D" of the 2013 Agreement, as amended by Amendment No. 1, and Payment Terms shall be governed by Exhibit c. Insert new Section "1.04 DEFINITIONS".
i. 1.04 DEFINITIONS.

1.04.1 Green Waste: means solid waste containing materials originated from living organisms including green material, landscape and pruning waste, lumber, and wood waste. This material is collected at the Santa Maria Regional Landfill Recycling Park.

1.04.2 Mixed Organic Waste: means solid waste containing materials originated from living organisms including but not limited to Source Separated Food Waste, green material, landscape and pruning waste, lumber and wood waste, paper products, and printing and writing paper. This material is collected from City's residential solid waste collections customers.

1.04.3 Organic Waste: collectively refers to the definitions of Green Waste, Mixed Organic Waste, and Source Separated Food Waste.

This term also includes waste treatment by-products like biosolids, digestate, and sludges, material which is typically collected from the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant.

1.04.4 Source Separated Food Waste: means a raw, cooked, or processed edible substance, an ingredient used or intended for use or for sale in whole or in part for human consumption, as defined in Section 113781 of California Health and Safety Code. This material is collected from City's commercial solid waste collections customers.

1.04.5 Residual Materials: means the unusable waste materials that remain after the Contractor has processed the primary components of the Organic Waste.
d. Section 2.01 MINIMUM AMOUNT OF SERVICE BY CONTRACTOR shall hereby be substituted in its entirety as follows:
i. 2.01 MINIMUM AMOUNT OF SERVICE BY CONTRACTOR.

The Contractor agrees to devote the hours necessary to perform the services as set forth herein in an efficient and effective manner.

Atty Rev. 2024, Risk Rev. 2024 Page 2 of 8

e. Section 2.04 INDEMNIFICATION shall hereby be substituted in its entirety as follows:
i. 2.04 INDEMNIFICATION. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Contractor shall indemnify, defend (with independent counsel approved by the City) and hold harmless the City, and its directors, officers, and employees from and against all liabilities (including without limitation all claims, losses, damages, penalties, fines, and judgments, associated investigation and administrative expenses, and defense costs, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys' fees, court costs and costs of alternative dispute resolution) regardless of nature or type that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, reckless, or willful misconduct of Contractor or the acts or omissions of an employee, agent or subcontractor of Contractor. The provisions of this paragraph survive the completion of the services or the termination of this contract. The provisions of this section are not limited by the provisions of the section relating to insurance.
f. Section 2.05 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS shall hereby be substituted in its entirety as follows:
i. 2.05 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS.

Throughout the term of this contract, the Contractor shall maintain insurance as described in Exhibit "E-2", attached and incorporated herein. The Contractor shall submit proof of coverage with all endorsement pages to the City before commencing work under this Amendment No. 2.

It is agreed and understood that this Exhibit "E-2" shall cancel, supersede, and terminate Exhibit "E" of Amendment No. 1 as of the Effective Date of this Amendment No. 2 and the Contractor's insurance requirements to the City shall be governed by Exhibit "E-

2."
g.

Section 6.06 NOTICES shall be amended to update the City's representative as follows:

Director of Utilities
City of Santa Maria
Utilities Department
2065 East Main Street
Santa Maria, CA 93454

3. Other terms and conditions remain the same.

All other terms and conditions of the 2013 Agreement dated January 7, 2013, as modified by Amendment No. 1 to the 2013 Agreement dated April 1, 2020, and this Amendment No. 2 dated January 1, 2025, remain the same.

Atty Rev. 2024, Risk Rev. 2024 Page 3 of 8

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment No. 2 is executed by the parties on the date first written above.
"Contractor" "City"
ENGEL AND GRAY, INC. CITY OF SANTA MARIA
a California corporation a political subdivision
of the State of California
By: By:

CARL ENGEL
President
By:

ROBERT ENGEL
Secretary
SHAD S. SPRINGER, P.E., MPA
Director of Utilities
ATTEST
By:

DONNA SCHWARTZ
Chief Deputy City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM
Risk Manager
City Attorney
Atty Rev. 2024, Risk Rev. 2024 Page 4 of 8

EXHIBIT "A-2"

SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY CONTRACTOR

1. The Contractor shall accept and process Organic Waste into compost products.

2. The Contractor shall prioritize unloading of City vehicles at the Contractor's facility.

City vehicles shall not have a queue longer than twenty (20) minutes for obtaining net weights once entering Contractor's facility.

3. The Contractor's facility shall provide a safe, accessible location for City vehicles to empty load contents during all types of weather conditions Monday through Friday from 7:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. and on Saturdays during a week that includes any City - recognized holiday.

4. The Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining a net weight of material type for each City vehicle unloaded at the Contractor's facility.

5. The Contractor shall be responsible for ensuring that Green Waste material is hauled offsite from the City to the Contractor's facility, at a frequency of no less than once per week.

6. The Contractor shall provide monthly electronic reports in Microsoft Excel to the City for each incoming load - for each material type - to the Contractor. a. The information shall be reported in tons for each material type and include the inbound weight and total weight processed into compost products.

7. All Residual Materials from the Contractor shall be disposed of at the Santa Maria Regional Landfill.
a. If the weight of Residual Materials exceeds one percent (1%) of the total Green Waste delivered by the City collection vehicles to the Contractor's facility, City disposal fees will be applied according to the posted rates. These tonnages will be determined based on the monthly tonnage report and/or invoices submitted by the Contractor to the City.

Atty Rev. 2024, Risk Rev. 2024 Page 5 of 8

EXHIBIT "D-2"

PAYMENT TERMS
Processing Rates effective January 1, 2025:

Material Type
Cost Per Ton
Green Waste
$39.17
Mixed Organic Waste
$53.55
Source Separated Food Waste
$62.55
The City shall pay the Contractor a processing rate based on material type at the cost per ton indicated above.

Invoice Procedure
Monthly invoices shall be submitted to the City for each material type (i.e., three separate invoices). Each invoice shall separately itemize Contractor's processing rates in tonnages for the invoice period.

Rate Adjustments
Rate adjustments shall apply to Processing Rates and shall be based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and occur annually, with the first adjustment taking effect on January 1, 2026. The Cost Per Ton will be calculated by taking the current Cost Per Ton and multiplying it by a fraction. The numerator of this fraction will be the CPI value published in December of the current year, while the denominator will be the CPI value published in December of the prior year. All adjustments will be capped at a maximum of three percent (3%).

Additionally, the City's Cost Per Ton must always be at least one percent (1 %) lower than the price charged to any Contractor customers who deliver one hundred (100) tons or more of Organic Waste within a calendar year.

CPI Definition
The term "CPI" refers to the Price Index for All Urban Consumers for the Los Angeles, Riverside, and Orange County area, as published monthly by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

If the Bureau revises the Index, the Parties agree that the Bureau will determine the comparability of successive indexes. If the Bureau does not provide comparable indexes or if no new index is published, the Parties will negotiate an appropriate alternative published price index.

If the Parties cannot agree on an alternative index within thirty (30) calendar days after one Party requests it, the matter will be resolved through binding arbitration in accordance with California Code of Civil Procedure §§1280 to 1294.2, or any successor provisions, conducted in Santa Maria, California.

Atty Rev. 2024, Risk Rev. 2024 Page 6 of 8

EXHIBIT "E-2"

INSURANCE
Contractor shall procure and maintain, for the duration of the contract, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by Contractor, his/her agents, representatives, or employees. If Contractor maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown below, City requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or higher limits maintained by Contractor.
1) Minimum Scope of Insurance
a) Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
i) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001), including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury and personal & advertising injury.
ii) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage Form Number CA 00 01 covering any auto (Code 1); or if Contractor has no owned autos, covering hired (Code 8) and non -owned autos (Code 9).
iii) Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance.
iv) Contractor's Pollution liability insurance applicable to the work being performed. 2) Minimum Limits of Insurance
a) Contractor shall maintain limits no less than:
i) General Liability: $2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 or 25 04) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
ii) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. iii) Workers' Compensation: Statutory limits.
iv) Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. v) Contractors Pollution Liability: $2,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $2,000,000 aggregate.
3) Self -insured Retentions
Self -insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. City may require Contractor to purchase coverage with a lower retention or provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses within the retention.
4) Other Insurance Provisions
a) The commercial general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1) The City of Santa Maria, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. General Atty Rev. 2024, Risk Rev. 2024 Page 7 of 8

liability coverage can be provided in the form or an endorsement to the Contractor's insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 or both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38 and CG 20 37 forms if later revisions are used). ii) For any claims related to this project, Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance coverage at least as broad as ISO CG 20 01 04 13 as respects City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self- insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. iii) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be cancelled or reduced, except with notice stating the title of this Agreement to the City. All notices provided pursuant to this Agreement shall be given to the City representative listed for notice in this agreement and shall specify the title of this Agreement. Notice may be given by overnight mail, facsimile with confirmation of receipt, or certified mail with return -receipt requested. iv) Contractor hereby grants to City a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said Contractor may acquire against City by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
v) If any of the required policies provide claims -made coverage:
(1) The Retroactive Date must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.
(2) Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work. (3) If coverage is cancelled or non -renewed, and not replaced with another claims - made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the Agreement effective date, the Contractor must purchase "extended reporting" coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of work.
5) Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.
6) Verification of Coverage
a) Contractor shall furnish City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required by this clause. b) All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive Contractor's obligation to provide them. City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications, at any time. 7) Special Risks or Circumstances
City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.

Atty Rev. 2024, Risk Rev. 2024 Page 8 of 8

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MARIA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT NO. 2 WITH ENGEL AND GRAY, INC.

FOR OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT OF THE CITY OF SANTA MARIA
GREEN WASTE COLLECTION PROGRAM, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2025 WHEREAS, in accordance with state recycling mandates, including Assembly Bill 1826 and Senate Bill 1383, the City of Santa Maria provides organics waste collection services to both residents and businesses, and facilitates green waste and wood waste recycling diversion at the Santa Maria Regional Landfill; and WHEREAS, in early 2013, the City of Santa Maria entered into an agreement with Engel and Gray, Inc. to process organic waste into compost, and subsequently amended the agreement in 2020 to include a modest pricing adjustment; and WHEREAS, due to recent changes in regulatory requirements, advancements in processing technologies, and necessary capital investments in equipment, the costs associated with processing organic materials have significantly increased since 2020; and WHEREAS, an evaluation of alternative processing options determined that no other service providers could offer a more cost-effective solution, leading to negotiations with Engel and Gray, Inc. to amend the existing agreement, ensuring continued compliance with state recycling and diversion regulations while maintaining essential services; and
WHEREAS, concurrent with the effective date of amended agreement with Engel and Gray, Inc., an increase in the current landfill disposal fees for green waste / wood waste is necessary to generate sufficient revenues to cover a portion of the increased processing costs resulting from the amendment.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Maria, California, as follows:

1. Authorize and direct the City Manager, or designee, to enter into Amendment No. 2 with Engel and Gray, Inc. for operational management of the City of Santa Maria Green Waste Collection Program effective January 1, 2025, incorporated by reference; and

2. Authorize and direct the City Manager, or designee, to enter into extensions and modifications consistent with the terms of the agreement as determined to be in the best interest of the City of Santa Maria; and

3. Authorize and direct the City Manager, or designee, to appropriate additional budget (increase base budget) to expenditure account 010-011-052-43-10 in the amount of $275,500 for Fiscal Year 2024-25; and
1 4. Authorize and direct the City Manager, or designee, to charge and collect the following landfill disposal fees, effective January 1, 2025:

Description
Fee
Clean Green Waste / Wood Waste, up to 1,000 pounds
$65.00 (minimum)
Clean Green Waste / Wood Waste, over 1,000 pounds
$90.00/ton (prorated)

5. Authorize the Chief Deputy City Clerk to make minor changes herein to address clerical errors, so long as substantial conformance of the intent of this document is maintained. In doing so, the Chief Deputy City Clerk shall consult with the City Manager and City Attorney concerning any changes deemed necessary.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Santa Maria held on the 19th day of November 2024.

ATTEST:

Chief Deputy City Clerk
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:

Department Director
City Manager
2 FOR THE COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 19, 2024

COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council
FROM: Acting City Manager Chuen Wu
BY: Interim Community Development Director Dana Eady
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolutions and Introduction of an Ordinance for Santa Maria Public Airport District General Plan Land Use Map Amendment and Zone Change at 1494 Fairway Drive
Description:

The City Council will consider approving a General Plan Land Use Map Amendment and Zone Change (GPZ2023-0001) for RRM Design Group on behalf of the Santa Maria Public Airport District to change the land use designation on a 6.95 -acre site from A -AS (Airport -Airport Service) and the zone district of OS (Open Space) to LI (Light Industrial) land use designation and PD/M-1 (Planned Development/Light Manufacturing) zone district.

Environmental Notice: Environmental Review for this project was completed through the preparation of an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH #2024070374) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. Adopt a Resolution to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for the General Plan Land Use Policy Map Amendment and Zone Change for the Santa Maria Public Airport District project, located at 1494 Fairway Drive; and

2. Adopt a Resolution amending the General Plan Land Use Policy Map for the Santa Maria Public Airport District (GPZ2023-0001) on 6.95 -acres located at 1494 Fairway Drive from A -AS (Airport -Airport Service) to LI (Light Industrial); and

3. Introduce for first reading, and continue to a future meeting, an Ordinance amending the official Zoning Map for the Santa Maria Public Airport District (GPZ2023-0001) on a 6.95 -acre site located at 1494 Fairway Drive FROM OS (Open Space) to PD/M-1 (Planned Development/Light Manufacturing) zone district.

BACKGROUND:

The project site is located at 1494 Fairway Drive and is currently undeveloped except for a City water well and fenced yard. The site is bordered to the north, south and west by a flood control channel regulated by Santa Barbara County (Attachment A — Vicinity Map).

Beyond the flood control to the north is a business park used by VTC Enterprises, to the west and south are open space areas and to the east of the site is business park area.

The zoning immediately to the north, south, and west of the site is OS (Open Space), with PD/M-1 designations across A Street and along Fairway Drive. (Attachment B - Land Use and Zoning Map).

Planning Commission:

The Planning Commission received a presentation on this project at the Study Session held on September 19, 2024. The Planning Commissioners were generally supportive of the project and no concerns were raised. The project was reviewed by the Planning Commission at the November 6, 2024, public hearing and was recommended for approval to the City Council.

DISCUSSION:

The applicant, RRM Design Group on behalf of the Santa Maria Public Airport District, is requesting a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to allow for future industrial development of the project site. No site development is proposed currently. Any future development of the site would be subject to Planning Commission approval of a Planned Development Permit application.

In order to analyze the proposed Land Use and Zone change, the project applicant has provided an estimate of the development likely to occur under the proposed industrial designations, which includes up to 100,000 square feet of industrial or manufacturing floor area.

General Plan Amendment and Rezone
The proposed project includes a General Plan Land Use Map Amendment and Zone change that would change the land use and zoning designations on the site from A -AS (Airport -Airport Services) to LI (Light Industrial) and from OS (Open Space) to PD/M-1 (Planned Development/Light Manufacturing).

The purpose of the LI designation, as described on page LU-19 of the City's General Plan Land Use Element, is "To accommodate industrial uses which contain the process primarily within the building, do not generate negative environmental impacts, and which are most compatible with adjacent nonindustrial uses." Changing the land use designation and zoning on the project site from A -AS to LI and from OS to PD/M-1 would enable the future industrial and/or manufacturing use of the site not permitted under the current Open Space designation. The proposed LI land use designation and PD/M-1 zoning would match that of the adjacent properties east of the project site, across A Street and along Fairway Drive. There are no adjacent sensitive land uses, such as residential developments, that could create potential conflicts between uses. All of these factors make this site an appropriate location for future industrial or manufacturing development. 2 Santa Maria Public Airport District
The project site is owned by the Santa Maria Public Airport District. The General Plan Land Use Map Amendment and Zone change has been reviewed for consistency with the Airport District's Master Plan which guides the internal operations and development for the airport. The project was also reviewed in conformance with the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments' (SBCAG) Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) which is the governing document used by the Airport Land Use Commission to ensure that all airports countywide are developed safely. A detailed discussion of how the project complies with the ALUCP is included below. The City's Airport Business Park Specific Plan only encompasses areas on the southern side of the airport and therefore does not apply to this project site.

Santa Maria ALUCP
The Santa Maria ALUCP was adopted by SBCAG in January of 2023. The purpose of the ALUCP is to promote airport land use compatibility. Specifically, the plan provides for the orderly growth of the Airport and the areas surrounding the Airport and safeguards the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the Airport and the public in general.

The ALUCP requires General Plan Amendments to be reviewed by the Airport Land Use Commission for determination of compatibility with the ALUCP. On September 19, 2024, the Airport Land Use Commission and SBCAG determined that the proposed project, and the industrial Land Use and Zone designations proposed, is consistent with the noise, safety, and airspace policies listed in the ALUCP.

Alternative(s)
The City Council, through written findings, may determine that the proposed General Plan Land Use Map Amendment and Zone change are not consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, and programs of the General Plan, and deny the project, leaving the existing land use and zoning designations in place.

Environmental Review
The conceptual plan for 100,000 square feet of future industrial or manufacturing uses was used to analyze the potential environmental effects of the proposed project, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared by the City as Lead Agency. This document identifies potential project impacts in the topic areas of air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and tribal cultural resources. Mitigations are incorporated in the draft MND to reduce any of the potential impacts identified to less than significant levels.

The draft MND was circulated for public review from July 11, 2024, to August 9, 2024.

Two comment letters were received during the public review period. One letter was submitted from the California Department of Conservation, Geologic Energy Management Division (CaIGEM) and another from the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD). The CaIGEM letter clarified that no known oil wells are located on the property, but also recommended procedural steps to take if a previously unknown oil well is discovered on the property during construction. The comments 3 provided by SBCAPCD were primarily technical clarifications related to emissions quantifications and regulatory thresholds. Staff addressed each of these comments as appropriate, with changes depicted in strike-out/underline text in the MND attached to this staff report (Attachment C) as well as the Mitigation Monitoring Program (Attachment D).

For reference, the public comment letters are attached to the MND.

Fiscal Considerations
The proposed project will contribute to economic growth by providing additional developable area for an industrial project in the City of Santa Maria.

Impact to the Community
The proposed project will have a positive impact on the community through the development of a future industrial project that will contribute to employment opportunities for residents. Future development and uses on the site would be subject to the mitigation measures in the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project. Compliance with these measures would reduce any potential impacts to the community to less than significant levels.

ATTACHMENTS
A — Vicinity Map
B — Existing and Proposed Land Use and Zoning Map
C — CEQA Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration with Public Comment Letters D — Mitigation Monitoring Program
4 Existing General Plan Map Land Use Designation
Light Iudu.str_a1;LI)
Hea;',• Commercial :'.,Tiii acturing (HC`_,I)
Secondary Agricultural Open Space (AOS-II)
Consemtion Open Space (COS)
Community Facilities (CF)
Airport — Airport Service (A AS)
Attachment B — Existing and
Proposed Land Use and Zone
District Maps

Proposed General Plan Map Land Use Designation
Heavy Commercial,Manufacturing (HCM)
Secondary Agricultural Open Space (AOS-11)
Community Facilities (CF)
Airport - Airport Service (A AS)
Proposed General Plan Desi_nation

Existing Zone District
. Opera Space (PD.OS & OS) Light Manufacturing (PD111-1) Airport Services II (PD..AS-II) —1 Clear Zone (CZ)
Commercial Mianufactwme (PD CM) Public Facilities (PF) Ex s. Zonlag

Proposed Zone District
- Open Space (PD.''OS & OS)
- Airport Scr.-tees II (PD AS -II)
MICommercial Manufacturing :PD Chi:

CITY OF SANTA MARIA

INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

A STREET AND FAIRWAY DRIVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE (GPZ2023-0001)
REVISED ON SEPTEMBER 12, 2024 TO ADDRESS PUBLIC COMMENTS Vacant Lot at the Corner of A Street and Fairway Drive (APN: 111-231-016)

PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Description
General Plan Land Use Map Amendment and Zone
Change for RRM on behalf of the Santa Maria Public
Airport District to change the land use designation on a

6.95 -acre site FROM A -AS (Airport -Airport Service) and the zone district of OS (Open Space) TO LI (Light
Industrial) land use designation and M-1 (Light
Manufacturing) zone district.

A total of approximately 100,000 square -feet of floor area would be established at the site from future development.

Location
Vacant Lot at the Corner of A Street and Fairway Drive
Assessor's Parcel No.
111-231-016
General Plan
Designation
Airport — Airport Service (A -AS)
Zoning
Open Space (OS)
Size of Site

6.95 acres
Present Use
Vacant land
Proposed Uses
Future industrial or manufacturing development
Access
Not applicable'
Surrounding
Uses/Zoning
North
Flood Control & Business Park / OS & Public Facility
- No development project application has been submitted for the project site to date. However, the project applicant has provided a conceptual description of a potential development that could be constructed at the site at a future date. A future Planned Development permit will provide site specific information and shall comply with required development standards of the City's Municipal Code.

Attachment C - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 1 OF 14

South
Flood Control/ OS
East
Agriculture/ OS
West
Business Park/Light Manufacturing
Parking
Not applicable
Setbacks
Not applicable
Height
Not applicable
Building Coverage
Not applicable
Landscape Area
Not applicable
Storm Water Retardation
Not applicable
Fencing
Not applicable
Related files/Actions
A future Planned Development permit shall be submitted
for the buildout of the site with an industrial or
manufacturing use that is enabled by this GPZ.

Applicant/Owner
Pamela A. Ricci, RRM Design Group/Martin Pehl, Santa
Maria Public Airport District
Procedure
Planning Commission and City Council consideration
and action regarding a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts.

GENERAL AREA DESCRIPTION:

The project site is located in the southern area of the City and is directly across from the intersection of A Street and Fairway Drive. A mix of industrial, business park, row crops and airport development has occurred adjacent to the project area. The project site is part of the Santa Maria Public Airport and the proposed project has been reviewed for consistency with the Airport Master Plan, Airport Specific Plan and Airport Land Use Compatibility plan.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING:

The project is located within the City of Santa Maria in Santa Barbara County, approximately 2.5 miles east of US Highway 101. The topography in the project area is flat with no significant features within the project site or surrounding area. A City water well on -site is the only developed feature at the site. The project is characterized as a vacant 6.95 -acre open space designated site proposed to be developed in the future as an industrial or manufacturing project.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

A request by RRM Design Group, on behalf of the Santa Maria Public Airport District, for a General Plan Amendment and rezone (GPZ) to allow for general plan land use designation and zoning ordinance designation change. The project proposes to change GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 2 OF 14

the current land use designation from A -AS to Light Industrial (LI), and the current zoning from OS to PD/M-1 (Planned Development/Light Manufacturing). This change would allow for an expanded level of development that would consist of light industrial and manufacturing uses. Currently the OS zoning primarily only allows open space, natural resource preservation and outdoor recreation development.

The zoning designation PD/M-1 would permit light industrial and manufacturing uses, using the M-1 designation as a guide, and would be subject to the provisions and limitations of the approved planned development permit required by the PD Overlay proposed. No development project application has been submitted for the project site to date. However, the project applicant has provided a conceptual description of a potential development that could be constructed at the site at a future date. The conceptual description included up to 100,000 square -feet of industrial or manufacturing development.

PROJECT REVIEW:

The environmental impacts associated with the development of the site were determined using the City of Santa Maria Staff Project Environmental Checklist (attached), on -site inspection, various computer models, and information provided by the applicant.

Potentially significant adverse environmental impacts were identified in the area of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise and Tribal Cultural Resources.

Based on the sources above, no adverse impacts are associated with Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forest Resources, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, Utilities and Service Systems or Wildfire.

IMPACT SUMMARY TABLE
Proposed Project
Size of Site

6.95 acres
Size of Buildings
100,000 square feet
Water Demand (1)
1,100 gallons per day per acre
Sewage Generation (1)
2,780 gallons per day
Average Daily Trips (2)
579
P.M. Peak Trips (2)
70 GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 3 OF 14

Unmitigated
Long Term Emissions: (3)
Reactive Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen Oxides

3.49 pounds/day

0.71 pound/day
(1) City of Santa Maria 2015 Utility Capacity Study
(2) Traffic Impact Study (Appendix D)
(3) Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study (Appendix A) The following discussion of the potential adverse environmental impacts includes mitigation measures which would reduce all identified impacts to a level of insignificance and are recommended to be included in the conditions of approval for the project. If the decision makers wish to delete a mitigation measure which is proposed to mitigate a significant impact, an alternative mitigation measure should be agreed to by the applicant and made part of the project. Verification that these mitigation measures have been implemented will be monitored as described in Section 8 of the City of Santa Maria's Environmental Procedures. The monitoring checklist is included at the end of the final report.

Air Quality
During construction, short term air quality impacts commonly occur. The Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) has yet to establish a threshold for construction emissions. The construction phase of the project would emit Ozone precursors nitrogen oxides (NOx), reactive organic compounds (ROC) and carbon monoxide (CO) from the use of construction equipment. Additionally, ground disturbing activity including grading and excavation would emit fugitive dust (PM10) particles.

Mitigation has been identified to require implementation of fugitive dust control measures as well as diesel exhaust control measures during construction activities associated with future development onsite.

During the long-term operational phase of the project, air quality impacts would not result in exceedance of the thresholds recommended by SBCAPCD and no mitigation is necessary.

AQ-1 Construction Emissions Control Measures. The project applicant shall install the following air pollutant emissions control measures throughout the construction period:

Dust Control Measures
During construction, the applicant shall implement all of the applicable measures from the following list as standard dust control measures to avoid impacts associated with fugitive dust emissions:
a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60 -minute period.

At a minimum, this should include wetting down such areas in the late morning GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 4 OF 14

and after work is completed for the day. Increased watering frequency should be required whenever the wind speed exceeds 15 mph. Reclaimed water should be used whenever possible. However, reclaimed water should not be used in or around crops for human consumption.
b. Minimize amount of disturbed area and reduce on site vehicle speeds to 15 mph or less.
c. If importation, exportation and stockpiling of fill material is involved, soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. Trucks transporting fill material to and from the site shall be tarped from the point of origin. d. Gravel pads shall be installed at all access points to prevent tracking of mud onto public roads.
e. After clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation is completed, treat the disturbed area by watering, or revegetating, or by spreading soil binders until the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur. f. Schedule clearing, grading, earthmoving, and excavation activities during periods of low wind speed to the extent feasible. During periods of high winds (>25 mph) clearing, grading, earthmoving, and excavation operations shall be minimized to prevent fugitive dust created by onsite operations from becoming a nuisance or hazard.

The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation and land use clearance for finish grading of the structure. g.

GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 5 OF 14

d. Diesel construction equipment meeting the CARB Tier 3 or higher emission standards for off -road heavy-duty diesel engines shall be used to the maximum extent feasible.
e. Diesel powered equipment should be replaced by electric equipment whenever feasible.
f. If feasible, diesel construction equipment shall be equipped with selective catalytic reduction systems, diesel oxidation catalysts and diesel particulate filters as certified and/or verified by EPA or California.

Catalytic converters shall be installed on gasoline -powered equipment, if feasible.
h. All construction equipment shall be maintained in tune per the manufacturer's specifications.
i. The engine size of construction equipment shall be the minimum practical size. g.

The number of construction equipment operating simultaneously shall be minimized through efficient management practices to ensure that the smallest practical number is operating at any one time.

Fugitive Dust Control
The project applicant shall comply with SBCAPCD's Rule 345: Control of Fugitive Dust from Construction and Demolition Activities including all applicable standards and measures therein.

Diesel -fired Engine Permits
All portable diesel -fired construction engines rated at 50 brake horsepower (bhp) or greater must have either statewide Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP) certificates or SBCAPCD permits prior to grading/building permit issuance.

Construction engines with PERP certificates are exempt from SBCAPCD permit, provided they will be onsite for less than 12 months.

Permit to Operate
If contaminated soils are found at the project site, SBCAPCD must be contacted to determine if ATC and/or Permit to Operate permits shall be required. (SBCAPCD permits are required for all soil vapor extraction activities. SBCAPCD permits are also required for the excavation, or "dig -and -haul," of more than 1,000 cubic yards of contaminated soils.)
Equipment Idling Requirements
At all times, idling of heavy-duty diesel trucks should be minimized; auxiliary power units should be used whenever possible. State law requires that:
• Drivers of diesel -fueled commercial vehicles shall not idle the vehicle's primary diesel engine for greater than five minutes at any location. • Drivers of diesel -fueled commercial vehicles shall not idle a diesel -fueled auxiliary power system (APS) for more than five minutes to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on the vehicle. Trucks with 2007 or GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 6 OF 14

newer model year engines must meet additional requirements (verified clean APS label required).

See www.arb.ca.gov/noidle for more information.

Asphalt Paving Requirements
Asphalt paving activities shall comply with APCD Rule 329, Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt Paving Materials.

Biological Resources
Nesting Migratory Birds
Future industrial or manufacturing development on the site that would be allowed under the proposed PD/M-1 zoning may result in the removal of trees. The trees present within the project site may provide suitable foraging and nesting habitat for a variety of bird species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the California Fish and Game Code. If project construction activities are conducted between February and September, they could result in direct and indirect impacts to nesting birds, if present. Potential direct impacts to nesting birds include injury, mortality, or destruction of nests and/or eggs from the use and movement of construction equipment tree and vegetation removal. Potential indirect impacts to nesting birds include the generation of noise and dust from construction activities and the alteration of suitable nesting habitat. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 is included to minimize potential impacts to nesting migratory birds during future project construction activities.

California Red -legged Frog (CRLF)
The CRLF is a highly aquatic species associated with perennial aquatic habitat for almost its entire lifecycle. The CRLF is known for overland movements between breeding sites during rain or heavy moisture (fog) events. The adjacent County flood control ditches next to the project site have highly variable flows subject to duration and frequency of rainfall events, and at times could support suitable aquatic habitat for breeding and movement upstream and downstream through the ditches. This species may be present within the offsite drainages when water is present, and potentially in the retained mitigation golf course pond adjacent to the FedEx site. The project site lacks suitable upland refuge habitat with vegetation cover limited to herbaceous grassland habitat. No moist refuge such as riparian habitat or downed woody debris occurs on the project site suggesting only the limited probability of overland movements during or immediately after rainstorms. No loss of CRLF habitat would result from project development of the site. No designated critical habitat occurs over the project site, so none would be affected. Potential impacts to this species would occur if individuals were present during construction and were exposed to vehicle and heavy equipment traffic. Mitigation Measure BIO-2 is included to minimize potential impacts to CRLF during future project construction activities.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

BIO-1: Nesting Birds Impact Avoidance and Minimization
GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 7 OF 14

The following actions are recommended to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds:
• A nesting bird survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than two weeks prior to the onset of construction activities. The nesting bird survey should be conducted within any and all suitable habitat that occurs within the project site, within 300 feet of its immediate vicinity for raptors, and 100 feet for all other bird species (as is feasible). If no active nests are found, no further mitigation would be required.
• If active bird nests are found, then an appropriately sized avoidance buffer should be established by the biologist and all construction work within the buffer should be delayed until after the nesting season has ended or until the biologist has determined that the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site for survival.
• Limits of construction to avoid the nest shall be established in the field with flagging and stakes or construction fencing. Construction personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of the area.

Plan Requirements and Timing.

The results of the surveys shall be reported to the City Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading permits. No disturbance buffers shall be demarcated in the field (e.g., fencing, flagging) prior to initiation of construction activities in the vicinity of an active nest.

Monitoring.

The City Community Development Department staff will verify that a pre -construction nesting bird survey has been conducted, if required based on construction timing, and shall verify that no disturbance avoidance buffers have been established prior to issuance of a grading permit. The approved biologist shall be responsible for monitoring active nests, if any occur.

BIO-2: California Red -legged Frog Impact Avoidance
The following actions are recommended to avoid potential impacts to CRLF:
• A pre -construction survey of the proposed project site for CLRF shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 48 hours prior to the start of project construction to confirm this species is not present in the work area. • A qualified biological monitor familiar with CRLF will monitor all initial site disturbance (clearing, grubbing, rough grading).
• In the event the pre -construction survey or the onsite monitor identifies the presence of individuals of CRLF prior to or during construction, then all work shall stop until the CRLF leave the site of their own accord. If CRLF do not move off site on their own, the project proponent shall comply with all relevant requirements of a take authorization under the federal Endangered Species Act prior to resuming project activities.

GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 8 OF 14

Plan Requirements and Timing.

Monitoring.

The City Community Development Department staff will verify that a pre -construction survey has been conducted, if required based on construction timing, and shall verify that no disturbance avoidance buffers have been established prior to issuance of a grading permit. The approved biologist shall be responsible for monitoring all site disturbances.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 and BIO-2 would reduce potential impacts to special -status species to less than significant; therefore, potential impacts related to special status wildlife would be less than significant with mitigation.

Cultural Resources
According to the City Resource Management Element, the project site is designated as Archaeological Sensitivity Area 2 — Low Sensitivity. Nevertheless, ground disturbance associated with future construction activities have the potential to result in inadvertent disturbance of previously unknown, buried archeological deposits. Impacts are conservatively considered to be potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1 would ensure potential impacts are avoided and/or minimized. Based on the location and low sensitivity of the project area, future development of the project site would not be expected to disturb buried human remains. In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains associated with future development of the project site, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 stipulates that no further disturbances shall occur until the County of Santa Barbara (County) Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to CEQA regulations and PRC Section 5097.98. With adherence to California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, which stipulates the process to be followed when human remains are encountered, as detailed in Mitigation Measure CR-2, impacts related to the disturbance of archaeological resources and human remains would be reduced to less than significant.

CR-1 Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources. In the event that any cultural resource is encountered during subsurface earthwork activities associated with development of the project site, all construction activities within a 100 -foot radius of the find shall cease and the City shall be notified immediately. Work shall not continue until a qualified archaeologist, in conjunction with locally affiliated Native American representative(s) as necessary, determines whether the uncovered resource requires further study. Any previously unidentified resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 Series forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramic, wood, or shell artifacts; fossils; or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites.

GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 9 OF 14

If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan, in conjunction with locally affiliated Native American representative(s) as necessary that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the Central Coast Information Center, located at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered materials. These actions would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

CR-2 Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human remains are exposed during subsurface earthwork activities associated with development of the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued, and the City Community Development Department shall be notified. State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. These protocols shall be detailed on project grading and construction plans for all development on -site. These actions would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

Geology and Soils
Future industrial or manufacturing development allowed under the proposed PD/M-1 zoning would result in disturbance to the site. Based on previous site disturbance and manipulation, buried human remains are not expected in the site area. In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, California State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 stipulates that no further disturbances shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to CEQA regulations and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. With adherence to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, which stipulates the process to be followed when human remains are encountered.

The project site is underlain by Older Alluvium, which is considered to have high sensitivity for palaeontologic resources (Diblee 1994, U.S. DOT 2004). Fossils that have been historically encountered in formations of this age include tide -pool and rock -cliff mollusks and barnacles in marine deposits (Woodring et al 1950). The project site consists of previously disturbed terrain. Based on the sensitivity of underlying geologic formations, mitigation has been recommended identifying the inadvertent discovery protocol in order to reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources to less than significant; therefore, potential impacts are less than significant with mitigation.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 10 OF 14

significant, the paleontological resource(s) shall be salvaged and deposited in an accredited and permanent scientific institution where they will be properly curated and preserved.

These actions would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The project site does contain an abandoned/remnant water well structure as identified in a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment by Rincon Consultants, Inc. The Department prohibit construction of enclosed structures directly over the oil well in the event of leaking The
recommendation in the Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment is to provide a soil management plan for the future development of the project site as well as abandonment of the well structure observed in the southeastern portion of the property. The Phase I notes that no oil wells are located on the subject property. This was also confirmed in the California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) letter dated 8-6-24 that was sent to the City. However, standard mitigation is included to minimize oil facility health risks during construction in accordance with CalGem standards in case of an inadvertent discovery of an previously unknown oil well with grading and removal of the identified well structure.

HAZ-1 Stop Work Procedure. If during construction of a future project enabled by the GPZ, visual contamination or chemical odors are detected, work will be stopped immediately and the Santa Barbara County Fire Department Hazardous Materials Unit (HMU) will be contacted. Resumption of work will require the approval of HMU. In the event that previously unknown oil or gas wells and/or associated equipment is discovered, CalGEM shall be contacted immediately to assess the equipment. Recommendations of CalGEM to address the discovered equipment shall be implemented. At minimum CalGEM shall be notified regarding the oil well identified on the CaIGEM (_IS website Noise
The project is located in an urbanized area surrounded by industrial, office park development, open space, row crops, airport development and a roadway. Proposed construction activities onsite would take place adjacent to noise -sensitive land uses such as industrial spaces and associated offices and therefore would have the potential to exceed City exterior noise thresholds for those land uses.

Mitigation measures NOI-1 and NOI-2 have been recommended to minimize all potential impacts related to construction noise, associated with the future development of the site.

These measures include adherence to City construction work hours, implementation of noise control for stationary equipment, and proper maintenance of all equipment to avoid unnecessary increased noise levels. Construction related noise would be limited in duration and nature, and the project does not propose land uses that would generate excessive noise during project operation.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 11 OF 14

NOI-1 During construction of any future development within the project parcel, construction activity shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, and between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays in accordance with the General Plan Noise Element. No construction shall occur on Sundays or federal or state holidays. Construction equipment maintenance shall be limited to the same hours.

NOI-2 The applicant shall implement the following measures during construction of the project:
• Mufflers. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and all internal combustion engine driven machinery with intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, as applicable, shall be in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. During construction, all equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers' standards.
• Electrical Power. Electrical power, rather than diesel equipment, shall be used to run compressors and similar power tools and to power any temporary structures, such as construction trailers or caretaker facilities. • Equipment Staging. All stationary equipment shall be staged as far away from the adjacent offices as feasible.
• Equipment Idling. Construction vehicles and equipment shall not be left idling for longer than five minutes when not in use.
• Workers' Radios. All noise from workers' radios shall be controlled to a point that they are not audible at the adjacent offices near construction activity.
• Smart Back-up Alarms. Mobile construction equipment shall have smart back-up alarms that automatically adjust the sound level of the alarm in response to ambient noise levels. Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters to ensure safety when mobile construction equipment is moving in the reverse direction. • Disturbance Coordinator. The applicant shall designate a disturbance coordinator who shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The noise disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. A telephone number for the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site.

GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 12 OF 14

Tribal Cultural Resources
The City has notified California Native American tribes who have formally requested notification on CEQA projects under Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18. This notification affords California Native American tribes the opportunity for consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21080.3.1. The City was not contacted by any of the notified California Native American tribes after notification from the City. However, the City has added a mitigation measure for a "discovery clause" whereby work would cease and the Tribe would be notified if a tribal cultural resource was inadvertently discovered during ground -disturbing activities.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

TCR-1 Inadvertent Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resource. In the event that a potentially significant tribal cultural resource is encountered during subsurface earthwork activities, all construction activities within a 100 -foot radius of the find shall cease and the City shall be notified immediately. Work shall not continue until a qualified archaeologist, in conjunction with locally affiliated Native American representative(s) as necessary, determines whether the uncovered resource requires further study. Any previously unidentified resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramic, wood, or shell artifacts; fossils; or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites.

If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan, in conjunction with locally affiliated Native American representative(s) as necessary that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the CCIC, located at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered materials.

GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 13 OF 14

ENVIRONMENTAL RECOMMENDATION:

Based on the information available at the time of preparation this report and, without benefit of additional information which may come to light at the public hearing, the Environmental Officer recommends that a Negative Declaration be filed for A Street and Fairway Lane project based upon information contained in GPZ2023-001.

PREPARED BY:

I)'
City of Santa Maria
Community Development Department
110 South Pine Street, #101
Santa Maria, CA 93458
Cody Graybehl, Environmental Analyst
Dana Eady, Environmental Officer
GPZ2023-001

A STREET AND FAIRWAY LANE
107
Date
Date
SEPTEMBER 2024

STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 14 OF 14

CITY OF SANTA MARIA
Environmental Checklist / Initial Study
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ (GPZ2023-0001)
REVISED SEPTEMBER 12, 2024 TO ADDRESS PUBLIC COMMENTS

1. Project Title and Location
A Street and Fairway Drive General Plan Amendment and Rezone 1494 Fairway Drive
Vacant lot at the corner of A Street and Fairway Drive
Santa Maria, CA 93455
APN: 111-231-016

2. Lead Agency, Contact and Preparer
Cody Graybehl, Senior Planner
City of Santa Maria
Community Development Department
110 South Pine Street, #101
Santa Maria, CA 93458

3. Project Applicant's Name and Address
Pamela A. Ricci
RRM Design Group
3765 South Higuera Street, Suite 102
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

4. General Plan Designation
Existing: Airport — Airport Service (A -AS)
Proposed: Light Industrial (LI)

5. Zoning Designation
Existing: Open Space (OS)
Proposed: Planned Development/Light Manufacturing (PD/M-1)

6. Brief Description of Project
A request by RRM Design Group, on behalf of the Santa Maria Public Airport District, for a General Plan Amendment and rezone (GPZ) to allow for general plan land use designation and zoning ordinance designation changes on a 6.95 -acre parcel located in the southern part of the City (Figure 1) within Airport District boundaries. The site was previously a portion of a golf course with managed turfgrass and a man-made decorative water feature, however that golf course has been abandoned and the water feature no longer exists. The project site is currently vacant except for a City water well pump facility and yard are located on the eastern portion of the site (Figure 2), which will remain.

The project proposes to change the current land use classification from A -AS (Airport — Airport Service) to LI (Light Industrial), and the zoning from OS (Open Space) to PD/M-1(Planned Development/Light Manufacturing). This change would allow for an expanded level of development that would consist of light industrial and manufacturing uses. Currently the OS zoning primarily only allows open space, natural resource preservation and outdoor recreation development.

The Planned Development (PD) overlay district is intended to provide for development of land in conformance with the City of Santa Maria General Plan by permitting a flexible design approach to the development of a community environment equal to or better than that resulting from traditional lot by lot development. The PD overlay district is intended to accommodate various types of development and combinations of uses that can be appropriately made a part of a total planned development, in accordance with the general plan. Zoning designation PD/M-1 would permit light industrial and manufacturing uses, using the M-1 designation as a guide, and would be subject to the provisions and conditions of the approved planned development permit.

No development project application has been submitted for the project site to date.

However, the project applicant has provided a conceptual description of a potential development that could be constructed at the site at a future date. The conceptual description included up to 100,000 square -feet of industrial or manufacturing development. A future Planned Development permit will provide site specific information and shall comply with required development standards of the City's Municipal Code.

To facilitate potential future California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) streamlining when a development project application is submitted for the site, this environmental document analyzes the potential environmental effects of possible future development projects that could be allowed by the proposed GPA and rezone, including the conceptual description for future development of up to 100,000 square -feet of industrial or manufacturing uses. However, this analysis is not conducted on a project - specific level since future development plans and details may change. Therefore, any future changes that are not considered under the scope of the conceptual description of 100,000 square -feet of industrial or manufacturing development could require additional environmental review.

Table 1. General Plan Designation Comparison
Existing Designation:

Airport — Airport Service (A -AS)
Proposed Designation:

Light Industrial (LI)
To provide a broad category facilitating the
To accommodate industrial uses which contain the process primarily airport and airport -related commercial and
industrial uses not adversely affected by
airport operations, to provide for specific
areas for aircraft operation and navigation
aids, and to minimize the hazard to safe
landing and take -off of aircraft.
within the building, do not generate negative environmental impacts, and which are most compatible with adjacent nonindustrial uses.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 2 ends

• Full range of uses, including
airport operation and support
activities.
• Research facilities
• Light assembly plants
• Non public oriented offices
• Industrial support offices
• Tractor sales and display when adjacent to a freeway
• Churches on a temporary basis
Table 2.

Zone Designation Comparison
Existing Zoning:

OS District1
Proposed Zoning:

M-1 District
Front Yard
Setback
None Specified
20 feet
Where parking is provided in the required front
yard setback a ten (10) foot landscaped strip
shall be provided between the parking and the
public right-of-way.

Side Yard
Setback
None Specified
No side yard setback is required except for street
side yards or when adjacent to an "R" district;
then, the required side yard adjacent to the
street or "R" district shall be a minimum of ten
(10) feet.

A corner lot or parcel of land shall have a
landscaped side yard of not less than ten (10)
feet in width adjoining the street.

Rear Yard
Setback
None Specified
No rear yard setback is required, except when
adjacent to an "R" district; then, the required rear
yard adjacent to the "R" district shall be a
minimum of ten (10) feet.

Height
None Specified
35 feet
Landscaping
No Minimum Specified
15% of site area

7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
The project site is currently undeveloped (except for the City water well and yard) and is bordered to the north, south and west by a flood control channel regulated by Santa Barbara County.

Beyond the flood control channel to the north is a business park used by VTC Enterprises.

Further to the south of the flood control channel is open space designated areas adjacent to the Santa Maria Public Airport runway. To the west of the flood control channel is additional open space used for row crop production. To the east of the site across A Street is a business park with various industrial, warehouse and manufacturing uses. Surrounding land uses, general plan designations, and zoning designations are summarized in Table 3 below and are shown in Figures 3 through 6.

Table 3. Surrounding Land Uses, General Plan Designations, and Zoning Designations 1A plot plan is required for OS development which establishes setbacks, height and landscaping per Section 12-4.07 of the City of Santa Maria Municipal Code.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 3 ends

Land uses
General Plan Designations
Zoning Designations
North
Flood Control
Business Park
Secondary Agriculture OS
(AOS-II)
Community Facilities (CF)
OS
Public Facility
South
Flood Control
AOS-II
OS
East
Agriculture
AOS-II
OS
West
Business Park
LI
PD/M-1

8. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required
Agency
Permits/Other Approvals
City of Santa Maria Community Development
Department
Land use designations change proposed by
GPZ2023-0001
Airport Land Use Commission
Review of the proposed change of land use for
consistency with the adopted Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan

9. California Native American Tribes Consultation
AB 52 and SB 18 requires public agencies to consult with California Native American tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the purpose of avoiding, protecting and/or mitigating impacts to tribal cultural resources as defined for Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) projects. The City sent letters to the local Native American contacts identified on the list of tribes provided by the NAHC. The City received no requests for consultation in response to the City's December 27, 2023 letter.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 4 ends

Figure 1.

Project Vicinity Map
',an Lull,
Carnet
Math
Nalunal
Monument
L ras
Forest
Santa
Barbara

MARIA VALLEY
0 0.75 1.5
I t t I i
Delano
Oxnard
W Vbw.d Rd
Bakersfield
Tlhoilsa r -.l
W IUr.., it,
3 Miles
San
Clarrta
E\n
Sanna Matta )
Ea.
hold
.ur
L ro:Nr Rd \
'� vn V�lkv c. ny
JI
Edwards Air
Force Bass
Lancaster
Palmdale
Ang
NaIC.n..

Fore sl
F
S
E 513 dRd
I earn.. Rd
Pied Rd
a
I i-I:Iecrest
a
M
Vi ct ore i I I.z
N,sh
C Iktt.rav,a Rd
Ranch
Di
9L
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 5 ends

Figure 3.

Existing General Plan Land Use Designation Map
Light Industrial (LI)
Heavy Commercial/Manufacturing (HCM)
Secondary Agricultural Open Space (AOS-II)
Conservation Open Space (COS)
Community Facilities (CF)
Airport — Airport Service (A -AS)
Existing General Plan Designation
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 7 ends

Figure 4. Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations Map A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
Light Industrial (LI)
Heavy Commercial:Manufacturing (HCM)
Secondary Agricultural Open Space (AOS-II)
Conservation Open Space (COS)
Community Facilities (CF)
Airport — Airport Service (A AS)
Proposed General Plan Designation
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 8 ends

Figure 5.

Existing Zoning Designation Map
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 9 ends

Figure 6. Proposed Zoning Designation Map
Light Nfanufactwuga (PD M
Clem Zcae (CZ)
U- 1 Open Space (PD OS & OS)
A- .Aupcvrt Sertiices ll (PD AS,Q)
IIICornateresal Manufactwu (PD CM)
Publw Facilities (PF) Proposed Zoning
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 10 ends

1. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
X
b. Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway corridor?
X
c. In non -urbanized areas, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of
public views of the site and its surroundings?
(Public views are those that are experienced
from publicly accessible vantage point). If the
project is in an urbanized area, would the
project conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality?
X
d. Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
X
Setting:

The project site is located within the southwestern area of the city of Santa Maria to the east of the intersection of Roemer Way and North Broadway. The site is 6.95 acres and is mostly undeveloped. A City water well pump facility and yard are located on the site. The site is primarily flat and open with ruderal non-native grassland. A flood control channel maintained by the County of Santa Barbara borders the site to the north, south and east.

The site is surrounded by urbanized development to the north and east of the site. The Santa Maria Public Airport borders the site to the south and west. Development in the project vicinity includes multiple business parks and industrial uses, and airport runways and related airport infrastructure.

Discussion:
a. For purposes of determining significance under CEQA, a scenic vista is defined as a viewpoint that provides expansive views of a highly valued landscape for the benefit of the general public. According to the General Plan Resources Management Element, there are no designated scenic vistas identified in the project vicinity. The project site is relatively level and is located in an urban area within Santa Maria that is generally surrounded by existing industrial and airport development. Views from the project area are not expansive, do not portray a highly valued landscape, and would not be considered a scenic vista. Therefore, the project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista and impacts would be less than significant.
b. U.S. Route 101 (US Highway 101) and State Route 166, are identified as an eligible but not officially designated State Scenic Highway, is located approximately two miles east and north of the project site respectively. The project site would not be visible to viewers traveling along these roadways due to distance and existing intervening development. A future industrial or manufacturing development that would be enabled by the proposed land use designation and zone district change would not introduce any new structures that would obstruct views because of the distance and buildings already A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 11 ends

constructed within the viewshed. No other eligible or officially designated state scenic highways are located within proximity or viewshed to the project site. Therefore, the project would have no impact to scenic resources within a state scenic highway.
c. The project is located in an urban area of Santa Maria and is considered urbanized pursuant to CEQA Section 21071. The proposed GPZ of the parcel would allow for the development of a future industrial or manufacturing use by the proposed PD/M-1 zoning designation that were not previously allowed at this location due to the existing OS zoning regulations and A -AS general plan designation. The proposed rezone of the parcel to PD/M-1 would require front setback distances and landscaping requirements. The new zoning would limit the building height of a future industrial or manufacturing building to 35 feet. All architectural elevations, site plans, and landscape plans would be reviewed by the designated review authority for compliance with the adopted plans, policies, and ordinances of the City prior to project approval. Further, there are no notable scenic resources in close proximity to the site of which a structure of such size would block views. Therefore, the project would not result in a conflict with applicable zoning or other regulations governing scenic quality and impacts would be less than significant.
d. The project includes the GPZ to allow for the development of a industrial or manufacturing use in the proposed PD/M-1 zoning designation. A future industrial or manufacturing development will include outdoor lighting fixtures including wall sconces, parking lot poles and walkway lighting. This future project will be conditioned to comply with standard lighting requirements per the Santa Maria Municipal Code, which require that light and glare onto any adjacent properties be minimized, including Section 12-32.20. Building materials and design would be reviewed by the designated review authority for compliance with the adopted plans, policies, and ordinances of the City associated with reflectivity and glare prior to project approval. Additionally, any future project will be subject to compliance with aviation lighting limits due to the site's proximity to airport runways. Therefore, impacts to substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to aesthetics or visual resources; therefore, mitigation is not necessary.

2. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.

In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the Califomia Air Resources Board.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 12 ends

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a.

Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use?
X
b.

Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
X
c.

Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland
(as defined by Public Resources Code section
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code
section 51104(g))?
X
d.

Result in the loss of forest land or conversion
of forest land to non -forest use?
X
e.

Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest
land to non -forest use?
X
Setting:

Agriculture has historically played an important role in the economy and development of Santa Maria and the Santa Maria Valley. Soil quality, water supply, year-round growing season, and level topography have made the Santa Maria Valley one of the most productive agricultural regions in the country. A majority of the land under agricultural production within the project vicinity is located in the unincorporated areas surrounding the city. Land under agricultural production within city limits includes a small area near the Santa Maria Regional Landfill and several acres recently annexed to the City. The project site is located within a developed portion of the city that is not currently used, and has not historically been used, for agricultural purposes.

According to California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 12220(g), forest land is defined as land that can support 10% native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits. Timberland is defined as land, other than land owned by the federal government and land designated by the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, as experimental forest land, which is available for, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of a commercial species used to produce lumber and other forest products, including Christmas trees. The project site does not support any forest land or timberland.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 13 ends

Discussion:
a. According to the Califomia Department of Conservation (DOC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) Important Farmland Map for Santa Barbara County (DOC 2016), the site is mapped as Urban and Built-up Land. Urban and Built-up Land is defined as land that is occupied by structures with a building density of at least one unit to 1.5 -acres, or approximately six structures to a 10 -acre parcel. In addition, the project site does not lie within the area identified in the General Plan Resources Management Element as having prime agricultural soils. The project site does not include any land that is designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as designated by the FMMP; therefore, no conversion of these lands would result from implementation of the project and no impacts would occur.
b. According to the City's General Plan, the project site's land use is designated as A -AS and the site is currently zoned OS. The A -AS designation is meant to provide a broad category facilitating the airport and airport -related commercial and industrial uses not adversely affected by airport operations, to provide for specific areas for aircraft operation and navigation aids, and to minimize the hazard to safe landing and take -off of aircraft. The project site was formerly used as part of a golf course and does not have a history of agricultural use. The project site is not under a Williamson Act contract nor is the adjacent agricultural land. The project would not result in a conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract; therefore, no impacts would occur. c. The site is zoned OS and the project site currently is designated to support the existing airport. The former use of the site was a golf course with a water feature and currently contains ruderal non-native plants and seven ornamental pine trees associated with the prior golf course use. Given that the site is located within an urban area and is not within close proximity to forest land or timberland resources; therefore, implementation of the project would not result in a conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production and no impacts would occur.
d. The proposed project would change the General Plan Land Use designation and Zone District to industrial designations to allow the future construction of an industrial or manufacturing development.

The project site is located in an urbanized area of the city and is not located within or adjacent to forest land. Future development of uses on -site resulting from the project would likely result in the removal of existing pine trees on -site; however, these trees do not meet the criteria to meet the definition of forest land or timberland. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use and no impacts would occur. e. As discussed above, the project site does not include active agriculture, farmland designated by the FMMP, land under active Williamson Act contract, or land designated or zoned for agricultural use, forest land, or timber land. The proposed GPZ enabling the future development of a industrial or manufacturing use on the project site would not directly or indirectly adversely affect agricultural land in the vicinity; therefore, no impacts to agriculture or forest resources would occur.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to agriculture and forest resources; therefore, mitigation is not necessary.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 14 ends

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

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
X
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non -attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
X
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
X
d. Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
X
Setting:

The project includes the GPZ to allow for the future development of a manufacturing or industrial use under the Light Manufacturing zoning. The GPZ would enable the project site to be developed with up to 100,000 square -feet of building area. The project site is located in the City of Santa Maria in northern Santa Barbara County. The climate in and around Santa Maria, as well as most of southern California, is dominated by the strength and position of the semi -permanent high-pressure center over the Pacific Ocean near Hawaii. It creates cool summers, mild winters, and infrequent rainfall. It drives the cool daytime sea breeze and maintains a comfortable humidity range and ample sunshine after the frequent morning clouds dissipate.

However, the same atmospheric processes that create the desirable living climate combine to restrict the ability of the atmosphere to disperse the air pollution generated by the population attracted in part by the desirable climate.

Air pollutant emissions are generated primarily by stationary and mobile sources. Stationary sources can be divided into two major subcategories:
• Point sources occur at a specific location and are often identified by an exhaust vent or stack.

Examples include boilers or combustion equipment that produce electricity or generate heat. • Area sources are widely distributed and include such sources as residential and commercial water heaters, painting operations, lawn mowers, agricultural fields, landfills, and some consumer products.

Mobile sources refer to emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions, and can also be divided into two major subcategories:
• On -road sources that may be legally operated on roadways and highways. • Off -road sources include aircraft, ships, trains, and self-propelled construction equipment.

Air pollutants can also be generated by the natural environment, such as when high winds suspend fine dust particles. Both summer and winter air quality in the project area is generally very good. The closest air monitoring station to the project site is the Santa Maria -906 South Broadway monitoring station, located in A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 15 ends

downtown Santa Maria. This station measures ozone (03), particulate matter with diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PM10), and sulfur dioxide.

Regulatory Framework
The federal and State Clean Air Acts (CAA) mandate the control and reduction of certain air pollutants.

Under these laws, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for "criteria pollutants" and other pollutants. Some pollutants are emitted directly from a source (e.g., vehicle tailpipe, an exhaust stack of a factory, etc.) into the atmosphere, including carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds (VOC)/reactive organic compounds (ROC), nitrogen oxides (NOX), PM10, particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide, and lead. Other pollutants are created indirectly through chemical reactions in the atmosphere, such as 03, which is created by atmospheric chemical and photochemical reactions primarily between ROC and NOX. Secondary pollutants include oxidants, 03, and sulfate and nitrate particulates (smog). By law, the federal standards may be exceeded not more than once per year, while the California standards may not be exceeded at all.

Air Quality Standards and Attainment
The project site is located in the South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB), which encompasses San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura counties and is under the jurisdiction of the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD). As the local air quality management agency, the SBCAPCD is required to monitor air pollutant levels to ensure that the NAAQS and CAAQS are met and, if they are not met, to develop strategies to meet the standards. Depending on whether the standards are met or exceeded, the SCCAB is classified as being in "attainment' or "nonattainment." In areas designated as non -attainment for one or more air pollutants, a cumulative air quality impact exists for those air pollutants, and the human health impacts associated with these criteria pollutants, presented in Table 4 are already occurring in that area as part of the environmental baseline condition. Under state law, air districts are required to prepare a plan for air quality improvement for pollutants for which the district is in non-compliance. The project site is within Santa Barbara County, which currently meets the NAAQS for all criteria air pollutants. Santa Barbara County is classified as attainment/maintenance area under the CAAQS for CO, and attainment for PM2.5. Santa Barbara County is currently classified as a nonattainment area under the CAAQS for 03, and PM10 (SBCAPCD 2023). These nonattainment statuses are a result of several factors, including mobile and stationary sources in the SCCAB.

Table 4.

Health Effects Associated with Non -Attainment Criteria Pollutants Pollutant
Adverse Effects
Ozone
(1) Short-term exposures: (a) pulmonary function decrements and localized lung edema in humans and animals and (b) risk to public health implied by alterations in pulmonary morphology and host defense in animals; (2) long-term exposures: risk to public health implied by altered connective tissue metabolism and altered pulmonary morphology in animals after long-term exposures and pulmonary function decrements in chronically exposed humans; (3) vegetation damage; and (4) property damage.

Suspended
(1) Excess deaths from short-term and long-term exposures; (2) excess seasonal declines particulate
in pulmonary function, especially in children; (3) asthma exacerbation and possibly matter (PM10)
induction; (4) adverse birth outcomes including low birth weight; (5) increased infant mortality; (6) increased respiratory symptoms in children such as cough and bronchitis; and (7) increased hospitalization for both cardiovascular and respiratory disease (including asthma).'
Air Quality Management
Because Santa Barbara County is designated nonattainment for the state 03 and PM,() standards, the SBCAPCD is required to implement strategies to reduce pollutant levels to achieve attainment of the NAAQS and CAAQS. The 2022 Ozone Plan is the current SBCAPCD Board -adopted air quality management plan for the County. The 2022 Ozone Plan incorporates and builds upon the prior Clean Air Plans and predominantly focuses on achieving attainment of the state 03 standards, in addition to the federal 03 standard. The 2022 Ozone Plan focuses on reducing 03 precursor emissions through implementation of transportation control measures that serve to reduce mobile source emissions, which A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 16 ends

are the primary source of ROC and nitrogen oxides emissions in the county (SBCAPCD 2022). The major sources of 03 precursor emissions in Santa Barbara County, which includes the City of Santa Maria, are motor vehicles, the petroleum industry, and solvent usage (paints, consumer products and certain industrial processes). Sources of PM,o include mineral quarries, grading, demolition, agricultural tilling, road dust, and vehicle exhaust (County of Santa Barbara 2021a).

Sensitive Receivers
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others, depending on the population groups and the activities involved. CARB has identified the following typical groups who are most likely to be affected by air pollution: children under 14 years of age; elderly over 65 years of age; and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. Land uses typically associated with sensitive receivers include schools, parks, playgrounds, childcare centers, retirement homes, convalescent homes, hospitals, and clinics (CARB 2005). The nearest sensitive receptors are single-family homes approximately 2,170 feet north of the project site and single-family homes approximately 3,340 feet east of the project site.

Significance Thresholds
The City of Santa Maria and SBCAPCD have not adopted quantitative significance criteria for temporary construction emissions associated with conventional land development projects. However, SBCAPCD recommends quantification of construction -related emissions from construction activities and uses 25 tons per year for ROC and NOx as a guideline for determining the significance of construction impacts. For other construction projects involving standard grading and building activities, SBCAPCD (2022) notes that consistency with the Air Quality Attainment Plan requires the implementation of mitigation measures to minimize dust generation. This analysis uses 25 tons per year as a significance threshold for construction - related emissions.

Long-term air quality impacts occur during project operation and include emissions from equipment or processes used in the project. These emissions must be summed to determine the significance of the project's long-term impact on air quality. Based on the criteria suggested by the SBCAPCD (2022) a project would not have a significant air quality effect on the environment if operation of the project would:
• Emit (from all project sources, mobile and stationary), less than the daily trigger (Currently 240 pounds per day for NOx and ROC, 80 pounds per day for PM10, and 240 pounds per day for attainment pollutants (except PM2.5and carbon monoxide) for offsets set in the APCD New Source Review Rule, for any pollutant; and
• Emit Tess than 25 pounds per day of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) or reactive organic compounds (ROC) from motor vehicle trips only; and
• Not cause or contribute to a violation of any California or National Ambient Air Quality Standard (except 03); and
• Not exceed the APCD health risk public notification thresholds adopted by the APCD Board; and • Be consistent with the adopted federal and state Air Quality Plans.

Methodology
An Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study was completed in August 2023 and was prepared for the proposed project by Rincon Consultants, Inc. The purpose of this analysis is to estimate the criteria pollutants that would be emitted by the proposed project and compare the estimate to the SBCAPCD air quality regulations. The complete analysis is attached in the initial study within the appendix (Appendix A).

Impact Discussion:
a. Vehicle use, energy consumption, and associated air pollutant emissions are directly related to population and housing growth. A project may be inconsistent with the applicable air quality plan if it would result in population, housing, or employment growth that exceeds growth estimates included in the applicable air quality plan. Such growth would generate emissions not accounted for in the applicable air quality plan emissions budget. Therefore, projects need to be evaluated to determine whether they would generate population, housing, or employment growth and, if so, whether that growth would exceed the growth rates included in the applicable air quality plan. The most recent and applicable adopted air quality plan is the 2022 Ozone Plan. The 2022 Ozone Plan, prepared by the A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 17 ends

SBCAPCD in December 2022, is the tenth triennial update to the initial state Air Quality Attainment Plan that was adopted by the SBCAPCD Board of Directors in 1991. The 2022 Ozone Plan describes the air quality setting for the Santa Barbara County region, including the regional climate and meteorology, current and projected air quality, and the regulatory framework for the management of air quality. To be determined to be consistent with the current air quality attainment plan (2022 Ozone Plan), the project's direct and indirect emissions must be accounted for in the growth assumptions in the 2022 Ozone Plan and the project must be consistent with the policies adopted in the 2022 Ozone Plan.

The Ozone Plan relies primarily on the land use and population projections provided by the Santa Barbara County Association of Govemments (SBCAG) and CARB on -road emissions forecast as a basis for vehicle emission forecasting (SBCAPCD 2022). Populations that remain within the 2022 Ozone Plan and SBCAG forecasts are accounted for with regard to SBCAPCD emissions inventories.

When population growth exceeds these forecasts, emission inventories could be surpassed, affecting attainment status. The project includes the GPZ to allow for the future development of up to 100,000 square -feet of manufacturing or industrial use permitted under the M-1 zoning. The proposed project is estimated to add approximately 38 new employees. Project employees would likely be drawn from the existing labor pool in the region who are not anticipated to relocate to the city. However, to demonstrate compliance with the 2022 Ozone Plan, the analysis conservatively assumes that all 38 new employees would become new households; therefore, based on the Department of Finance persons per household estimate in Santa Maria, the project would add 138 new residents. The addition of 138 residents and 38 employees to the City of Santa Maria would not exceed SBCAG's growth forecasts of population and jobs for the City (SBCAG 2019). Therefore, the project would not result in near -term increases in population that would exceed year 2025 population projections or exceed year 2035 projections and the project would be overall consistent with the growth assumptions in the 2022 Ozone Plan (the applicable air quality plan). Potential impacts would be less than significant.

Further, the development of the site would be required to comply with all SBCAPCD rules and regulations for construction and operation. The project would be consistent with the SCAPCD 2022 Ozone Plan and thus, would not obstruct its implementation. This impact would also be less than significant.
b. The project would result in temporary construction emissions and long-term operational emissions, however none of the emissions would exceed SBCAPCD thresholds. Construction activities such as the use of construction vehicles and equipment over unpaved areas, grading, trenching, and disturbance of stockpiled soils have the potential to generate fugitive dust (PM1o) through the exposure of soil to wind erosion and dust being drawn into the air by turbulent air currents. Exhaust emissions associated with heavy construction equipment would potentially degrade regional air quality. Long- term emissions associated with operational impacts would include emissions from vehicle trips (mobile sources); natural gas use (energy sources); landscape maintenance equipment, consumer products, and architectural coating associated with on -site development (area sources); and forklifts (off -road sources). Air pollutant emissions associated with project construction and operation are discussed in the following subsections.

Construction Emissions.

Temporary air quality impacts generally occur during project construction. However, the SBCAPCD recommends lead agencies to use a 25 tons/year significance threshold for construction emissions of reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX; SBCAPCD 2017), as well as other criteria emissions with the exception of carbon monoxide. A comparison of estimated construction emissions and applicable SBCAPCD-recommended thresholds are provided in Table 5, below. Ozone precursors NOx and ROG, as well as CO, would be emitted by the operation of construction equipment.

Fugitive dust (PM10) would be emitted by activities that disturb the soil, such as grading and excavation, and roadway and project construction. Project construction emissions were estimated using CaIEEMod. For full modeling results refer to Appendix A.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 18 ends

Table 5.

Estimated Annual Construction Emissions
Construction Year
Annual Emissions (tons per year)
ROC NO,, CO SO2 PMiol PB/bs1
2025
2026
<1
1 1
1 <1
<1
1 1
<1
<1
<1
<1
SBCAPCO Thresholds
25 25 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Threshold Exceeded? No No N/A N/A N/A N/A
ROC = reactive organic compounds, NOx = nitrogen oxides, CO = carbon monoxide, SO2 = sulfur dioxide, PMlo = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less, PM., = particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter 1Total PMm fugitive dust and exhaust.

Notes: All emissions modeling was completed using CaIEEMod. See Appendix A for modeling results. Some numbers may not add up due to rounding. Emission data is pulled from "mitigated.' results, which account for compliance with regulations (including SBCAPCD Rules 345, 323.1, and 329).

As shown in
Table 5, annual emissions of all criteria pollutants would be below SBCAPCD's 25 tons per year threshold for the project construction. However, because the Santa Barbara County portion of the SCCAB is a nonattainment area for the state PM1p standard, construction emissions control measures are required for all projects involving earthmoving activities regardless of size or duration.

Therefore, Mitigation Measure AQ-1 has been identified to reduce construction emissions in accordance with local regulatory policies. With the inclusion of this measure, impacts from construction emissions would be less than significant.

Operational Emissions.

Operational emissions would include emissions associated with mobile sources (vehicle trips); energy sources (natural gas use); area sources (landscape maintenance equipment, consumer products, and architectural coating associated with on -site operational activities); and off -road sources (forklifts).

The emissions from project operations, assuming the conceptual development of 100,000 square -feet of an industrial or manufacturing use, were estimated using CaIEEMod. Table 6 summarizes the operational emissions that would result from the project and compares the emissions with the SBCAPCD significance criteria for evaluating air emissions impacts.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 19 ends

Table 6.

Estimated Average Daily Operational Emissions
Emissions Source
Maximum Daily Emissions (pounds per day)
ROC NOx CO SO2 PMto PM,5
Area 3
Energy
Mobile
<1
<1
141
4 144
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
24 24 144 <1 34 141
Total 54 34 198 <1 31 144
Threshold (area +
energy + mobile) 240
240 N/A N/A 80 N/A
Threshold Exceeded? No No N/A N/A No N/A
Threshold (mobile only) 25 25 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Threshold Exceeded? No No N/A N/A N/A N/A
ROC = reactive organic compounds, NOx = nitrogen oxides, CO = carbon monoxide, SO2 = sulfur dioxide, PMio = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less, PMz.s = particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; Ibs/day = pounds per day Notes: All emissions modeling was completed using CaIEEMod. See Appendix A for modeling results. Some numbers may not add up due to rounding. Emission data is pulled from "mitigated" results, which account for compliance with regulations (including SBCAPCD Rule 323.1) and project design features. Emissions presented are the highest of the winter and summer modeled emissions.

The project's operational emissions would not exceed SBCAPCD criteria for defining a significant air quality impact. Construction emissions would not exceed SBCAPCD thresholds for criteria pollutants and no mitigation is required. Operational emissions would not exceed SBCAPCD thresholds for a criteria pollutant and would comply with SBCAPCD criteria pollutant thresholds. The project would not result in individually or cumulatively significant impacts to air quality. This impact would be less than significant.
c. Sensitive receptors are people that have an increased sensitivity to air pollution or environmental contaminants, such as the elderly, children, people with asthma or other respiratory illnesses, and others who are at a heightened risk of negative health outcomes due to exposure to air pollution. Some land uses are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others, due to the population that occupies the uses and the activities involved. Sensitive receptor locations include schools, parks and playgrounds, day care centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residences.

The closest sensitive receptors to the project site are single-family residences approximately 2,170 feet north of the project site and single-family residences approximately 3,340 feet east of the project site. While the GPZ would not trigger any direct air pollutant emissions, future development of a manufacturing or industrial project would be enabled by the GPZ. That future project could indirectly lead to temporary air pollutant emissions during the construction phase in close proximity to sensitive receptors.

Construction -related activities would result in temporary project -generated emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) exhaust emissions from off -road, heavy-duty diesel equipment for site preparation, grading, building construction, and other construction activities. CARB's Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (2005) recommends against siting sensitive receptors within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day. While these siting distances are not particular to construction activities, the A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 20 ends

primary source of Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC) emissions from both freeways and construction equipment is DPM. Therefore, for projects within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, a refined health risk assessment should be conducted. However, as the nearest receptors to the project site are 2,170 feet north and 3,340 feet east, construction TAC emissions would have a negligible impact on the closest sensitive receptors.

Heavy equipment performing construction activities would generate fugitive dust, resulting in substantial temporary impacts. Fugitive dust emissions would result from land clearing, excavation, and equipment traffic over temporary dirt roads. Impacts from fugitive dust emissions could be significant because they could adversely affect nearby sensitive receptors. The SBCAPCD requires dust control measures for all discretionary construction activities; therefore, the SBCAPCD's standard fugitive dust control measures have been incorporated as Mitigation Measure AQ-1 to reduce fugitive dust generated during construction and to require diesel -idling control measures during construction of the project to reduce emissions of NOx and ROC in proximity to sensitive receptors. Therefore, potential impacts associated with exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial air pollutant concentrations would be less than significant with mitigation. d. The proposed project includes a GPA and rezone to allow for the future development of land uses permitted under the proposed PD/M-1 zoning designation. Future development of the project site could generate odors from heavy diesel machinery, equipment, and/or materials during the construction phase. The generation of odors during the construction period would be temporary, consistent with odors commonly associated with construction, and would dissipate within a short distance from the active work area. The project would generate oil and diesel fuel odors during construction from equipment use. The odors would be limited to the construction period and would be intermittent and temporary. Furthermore, these odors would dissipate rapidly with distance from in -use construction equipment, and the nearest sensitive receptors to project development are located approximately 2,170 feet away from the project site. Accordingly, project construction would not result in other emissions, such as those leading to odors, that would adversely affect a substantial number of people, and impacts would be less than significant.

Potential sources that may emit odors during operation of the proposed project would include diesel fuel odor emissions from the delivery truck emissions. However, trucks would be required to comply with California Code of Regulations Title 13, Section 2485, which limits delivery truck idling times to five minutes or less. Limiting truck idling times would reduce the potential for nuisance odors associated with diesel exhaust emissions in the vicinity of the project site. Furthermore, the project would be required to comply with the requirements of SBCAPCD Rule 303, which prohibits the discharge of air contaminants or other material that would cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any considerable number of persons. In addition, the nearest sensitive receptors are located approximately 2,170 feet north of the project site, and odors disperse rapidly with distance.

Therefore, due to the distance of the nearest sensitive receptors from the project site and compliance with SBCAPCD Rule 303, project operation would not result in other emissions, such as those leading to odors, adversely affecting a substantial number of people, and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

AQ-1 Construction Emissions Control Measures. The project applicant shall install the following air pollutant emissions control measures throughout the construction period:

Increased watering frequency should be required whenever the wind speed exceeds 15 A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 21 ends

mph. Reclaimed water should be used whenever possible. However, reclaimed water should not be used in or around crops for human consumption. b. Minimize amount of disturbed area and reduce on site vehicle speeds to 15 mph or less. c. If importation, exportation and stockpiling of fill material is involved, soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 22 ends

generation. Trucks transporting fill material to and from the site shall be tarped from the point of origin.
d. Gravel pads shall be installed at all access points to prevent tracking of mud onto public roads.
e. After clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation is completed, treat the disturbed area by watering, or revegetating, or by spreading soil binders until the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur. f. Schedule clearing, grading, earthmoving, and excavation activities during periods of low wind speed to the extent feasible. During periods of high winds (>25 mph) clearing, grading, earthmoving, and excavation operations shall be minimized to prevent fugitive dust created by onsite operations from becoming a nuisance or hazard.

The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust offsite.

Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress.

The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD prior to land use clearance for map recordation and land use clearance for finish grading of the structure.
g.

Equipment Emissions Control Measures
During project grading and construction, the applicant shall adhere to the following measures to reduce NOx and PM2.5 emissions from construction equipment:
a. All portable diesel -powered construction equipment shall be registered with the state's portable equipment registration program OR shall obtain an APCD permit. b. Fleet owners of mobile construction equipment are subject to the CARB Regulation for In - use Off -road Diesel Vehicles (Title 13 California Code of Regulations, Chapter 9, § 2449), the purpose of which is to reduce diesel PM and criteria pollutant emissions from in -use (existing) off -road diesel -fueled vehicles. For more information, please refer to the CARB website at www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/ordiesel/ordiesel.htm . c. All commercial diesel vehicles are subject to Title 13, § 2485 of the California Code of Regulations, limiting engine idling time. Idling of heavy-duty diesel construction equipment and trucks during loading and unloading shall be limited to five minutes; electric auxiliary power units should be used whenever possible.
d. Diesel construction equipment meeting the CARB Tier 3 or higher emission standards for off -road heavy-duty diesel engines shall be used to the maximum extent feasible. e. Diesel powered equipment should be replaced by electric equipment whenever feasible. f. If feasible, diesel construction equipment shall be equipped with selective catalytic reduction systems, diesel oxidation catalysts and diesel particulate filters as certified and/or verified by EPA or California.
g. Catalytic converters shall be installed on gasoline -powered equipment, if feasible. h. All construction equipment shall be maintained in tune per the manufacturer's specifications. i. The engine size of construction equipment shall be the minimum practical size. j. The number of construction equipment operating simultaneously shall be minimized through efficient management practices to ensure that the smallest practical number is operating at any one time.

Page 23 ends

permits prior to grading/building permit issuance. Construction engines with PERP certificates are exempt from SBCAPCD permit, provided they will be onsite for less than 12 months.

Permit to Operate
If contaminated soils are found at the project site, SBCAPCD must be contacted to determine if ATC and/or Permit to Operate permits shall be required. (SBCAPCD permits are required for all soil vapor extraction activities. SBCAPCD permits are also required for the excavation, or "dig -and -haul," of more than 1,000 cubic yards of contaminated soils.)
Equipment Idling Requirements
At all times, idling of heavy-duty diesel trucks should be minimized; auxiliary power units should be used whenever possible. State law requires that:
• Drivers of diesel -fueled commercial vehicles shall not idle the vehicle's primary diesel engine for greater than five minutes at any location.
• Drivers of diesel -fueled commercial vehicles shall not idle a diesel -fueled auxiliary power system (APS) for more than five minutes to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on the vehicle. Trucks with 2007 or newer model year engines must meet additional requirements (verified clean APS label required). • See www.arb.ca.gov/noidle for more information.

Asphalt Paving Requirements
Asphalt paving activities shall comply with APCD Rule 329, Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt Paving Materials.

Effectiveness of Mitigation Measure: With implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, potential impacts from air pollutant emissions and odors would be reduced and impacts would be less than significant.

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
X
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
X
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 24 ends

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use
of native wildlife nursery sites?
X
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
X
Setting:

The project site is 6.95 -acre and a portion of the site (approximately 0.42 Acres) is developed as a City water well pump facility and concrete pad yard. The site is otherwise vacant ruderal (disturbed) herbaceous vegetation with seven small non-native pine trees located along its southern boundary, and scattered coyote brush shrubs and fan palms. No wetlands or other waters of the U.S./State or riparian habitat occurs on the project site. The site is bounded on the north, west and south perimeters by existing Santa Barbara County (County) flood control channels that flow into the east to west trending "Green Canyon" drainage. Open Space zoned Airport property is beyond to the west under annual crop agricultural use. The project site is abutted by 'A' Street, urban industrial development to the east and north. The General Plan Resources Management Element identifies sensitive habitats within the City boundaries including Central Coast Riparian Scrub and the Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh. Based on Figure RME-3 of the Resources Management Element, the project site is located within close proximity of these designated habitat areas. According to the National Wetlands Inventory from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services, the project side is adjacent to freshwater emergent wetland and riverine area.

Discussion:
a. David Wolff Environmental (DWE) conducted the review of available background data including City environmental review of nearby projects, and a biological and botanical field survey on the project site on August 28, 2023 as part of the Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix B). The purpose of the field survey and this biological resources assessment is to document the existing conditions of the project site, determine the presence/absence of suitable habitat for rare plant or wildlife species, and to evaluate the potential for any direct or indirect significant impacts on biological or wetland resources, or adverse effects on any rare, threatened, or endangered plant or wildlife species (special -status species). The search and review of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) revealed 19 special -status species composed of six special -status plants, 12 special -status wildlife species, and one natural community of special concern with recorded occurrences in the region of the proposed project site. A field survey conducted on the Project site established existing conditions of the proposed project site as disturbed/developed ruderal habitat. This biological resources assessment concludes the site does not support suitable habitat for any special -status plant or wildlife species or the potential to occur, or any significant biological resources within the project site.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 25 ends

Special -Status Botanical Resources
The search and review of the CNDDB identified six special -status plant species with recorded occurrences within an approximately five -mile radius of the project site. None have been recorded on the project site. The La Graciosa thistle (Cirsium scariosum var. loncholepis), a state threatened, federally endangered, and California Rare Plant Rank 16.1 species, is a wetland species. No wetlands occur along the project site. Five upland special -status plant species (none formally listed) known from the region were identified in the CNDDB search that includes the black -flowered figwort (Scrophularia atrata; CNPS Rank 1 B.2), Blochman's leafy daisy (Erigeron blochmaniae; CNPS Rank 1 B.2), dune larkspur (Delphinium parryi ssp. blochmaniae; CNPS Rank 1 B.2), Kellogg's horkelia (Horkelia cuneata var. sericea; CNPS Rank 1 B.2), and San Luis Obispo monardella (Monardella undulata ssp. crispa; CNPS Rank 16.2). The prior golf course use and regular discing/mowing weed control make the project site unsuitable for these species and they are not expected to occur at the site.

The CNDDB identified one natural community of special concern, Southern Vernal Pool, within a five - mile radius of the project site. No vernal pools occur on the project site. Based on the findings from database review and the DWE field survey, no designated critical habitat occurs over the project site, and no impacts to special -status botanical resources or natural communities of special concern would result from the proposed project.

Special -Status Wildlife
The search and review of the CNDDB identified 12 special -status wildlife species with recorded observations within a five -mile radius of the project site. Only the California red -legged frog (CRLF; Rana draytonii ), a federally threatened species and California Species of Special Concern (SSC), has recorded observations within the County flood control ditches near the project site. In the past, two of the former golf course ponds supported CRLF on the site that is now the adjacent FedEx facility. One of the former golf course ponds at the intersection of 'A' Street and Fairway Drive has been retained with site development as mitigation for CRLF habitat (See Figure 2). Current CRLF use in this pond is undetermined.

The CRLF is a highly aquatic species associated with perennial aquatic habitat for almost its entire lifecycle. The CRLF is known for overland movements between breeding sites during rain or heavy moisture (fog) events. The County flood control ditches have highly variable flows subject to duration and frequency of rainfall events, and at times could support suitable aquatic habitat for breeding and movement upstream and downstream through the ditches. This species may be present within the offsite drainages when water is present, and potentially in the retained mitigation golf course pond adjacent to the FedEx site. The project site lacks suitable upland refuge habitat with vegetation cover limited to herbaceous grassland habitat. No moist refuge such as riparian habitat or downed woody debris occurs on the project site suggesting only the limited probability of overland movements during or immediately after rainstorms. No loss of CRLF habitat would result from project development of the site. No designated critical habitat occurs over the project site, so none would be affected. Potential impacts to this species would occur if individuals were present during construction and were exposed to vehicle and heavy equipment traffic. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would be required to reduce impacts to CRLF to less than significant. Therefore, the potential for the project to result in impacts to candidate, sensitive or special status plants on site or habitat modifications would be less than significant with mitigation.

The project site existing conditions and proximity to USFWS identified known and potential breeding pond data were assessed for the potential of the site to support breeding or upland dispersal for the California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense; CTS), a federally listed endangered and state threatened species. The CTS is a lowland species that breeds in temporary pools with sufficient duration for metamorphosis (greater than 90 -days) and seeks upland refuge (before/after aquatic breeding and metamorphosis, etc.) in small mammal burrows during most of its lifecycle. They can be found primarily in grasslands and low foothill and oak woodland habitats within a USFWS predicted maximum upland habitat dispersal of 1.3 miles from a breeding pond. CTS breed in long-lasting rain pools (e.g., seasonal ponds, vemal pools, rarely in slow -moving streams), and occasionally in permanent ponds lacking fish or other large predators. During the nonbreeding season and most of their lifecycle, adults and juveniles (up to five years for breeding maturity) occur in upland habitats and occupy ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi) or pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) burrows.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 26 ends

They migrate nocturnally to aquatic sites to breed during relatively warm winter or spring rains.

Juveniles emigrate at night from the drying pools to upland refuge sites, such as rodent burrows and cracks in the soil.

No known CTS breeding pools have been documented within the USFWS maximum predicted 1.3 - mile CTS upland dispersal distance from the project site. However, two potential breeding pools, SAMA-11 and SAMA-12 have been identified by the USFWS approximately 1.2 miles and 0.72 mile respectively to the southwest of the project site (See Figure 1 in Appendix B). The intervening active agricultural fields are an impediment to CTS movement with the agricultural irrigation ditches, flood control ditches, and "Green Canyon" drainage representing positive barriers to CTS movement to the project site. As such, the project site does not represent suitable upland dispersal/refuge habitat, and no breeding habitat for the CTS occurs on the project site. Therefore, there would be no impact to this species from future development following the rezoning of the project site.

The offsite willow riparian habitat along "Green Canyon" and the County flood control ditches when flowing could provide suitable habitat to support the western pond turtle (Emys marmorata) that is a highly aquatic species. Upland movement into the mowed/disced project area and developed urban land uses is unlikely. The western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) is a toad that requires temporary pools for breeding and uplands for dry season refuge. No suitable breeding pools are within the project area or surrounding areas so this species would not be expected to occur. Similarly, no suitable seasonally ponded habitat occurs for the vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi).

The previous golf course use, lack of shrub cover, and discing/mowing weed control renders the site as unsuitable for the northern legless lizard (Anniella pulchra), Blainville's (coast) homed lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii), American badger (Taxidea taxus), and burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), all designated as species of special concern. No evidence of badger dens were observed during the DWE field survey. The Lompoc grasshopper (Trimerotropis occulens) requires gravelly/rocky undisturbed habitat, and the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) requires stands of trees neither of which occur on the project site. The peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) is a coastal species not expected to use the small urbanized inland site for foraging as no nesting habitat occurs onsite or nearby in the agricultural and urban landscape.

Nesting Birds
Potential but very low quality nesting habitat for ground nesting birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC Sections 3503/3503.5) occurs in the ruderal grassland habitat on the project site. Project construction may result in direct impacts to nesting bird species, should active nests be present at the time of vegetation clearance. In addition, potentially suitable nesting habitat for a wide range of birds exists within 500 feet of the site. No direct impacts to nesting birds or their habitat outside of the site are expected. Potential impacts to nesting birds could occur only if individuals were to be present during construction and be exposed to potential disruption of nesting activities from construction activities. The project would involve removal of existing trees on the site. In addition, disturbance from project demolition and construction activities may affect protected nesting birds in existing trees near the site. Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would be required to reduce impacts to nesting birds to less than significant. Therefore, the potential for the project to result in impacts to candidate, sensitive or special status plants on site or habitat modifications would be less than significant with mitigation.
b, c. The project site is graded and regularly cleared of vegetation. According to the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (Wetlands Mapper), the project site does not contain riparian habitat, state or federally protected wetlands, or any other sensitive natural community (USFWS 2018b). Additionally, the Biological Resources Assessment completed by David Wolff environmental, LLC for the project determined that no wetlands or other waters of the U.S./State or riparian habitat occurs on the project site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would have no impact on riparian habitat, other sensitive natural communities, or state or federally protected wetlands. d. The project area does not support any surface water resources, migratory corridors, or nursery sites.

As discussed in the Biological Resources Assessment completed by David Wolff environmental, LLC for the project, the project site is developed/ruderal non-native grassland habitat that is disced/mowed annually provides minimal quality wildlife habitat likely only for locally common wildlife species that have become adapted to the urban edge. The developed/ruderal habitat on the project site does not A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 27 ends

support a significant amount of wildlife habitat, and does not represent any movement corridor for wildlife as it is abutted to 'A' Street and the urban land uses to the north and east. The site was previously a golf course of managed turfgrass that has returned to the ruderal uplands disced/mowed that reduces habitat value for wildlife. Only evidence of gophers and ground squirrels were observed on the project site. A row of non-native pine trees exist at the southern boundary of the site. There are no wildlife movement corridors across the site that is surrounded by agricultural lands and abutted to urban development. The network of nearby County flood control ditches may provide wildlife dispersal and migration corridors for a variety of local wildlife species adapted to the agricultural/urban setting (i.e., racoons, opossum, skunk). However, as noted above, no ditches are on the project site and no project activities are proposed within the highly maintained ditches. This site does not contain any features which would provide a native wildlife nursery site that would attract animals or other migratory species. Implementation of the proposed project would not significantly restrict the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would have a less than significant impact to the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
e. The graded and regularly cleared project site does not contain suitable habitat for protected biological resources as discussed in section a. above. A future industrial or manufacturing project that would be enabled at the site by the proposed GPZ would be designed to preserve the trees. If preservation is infeasible, the trees shall be replaced according to the City's Landscape Ordinance requirements listed in Section 12-44.04 (n)The project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Therefore, implementation of the project would have a less than significant impact.
f. There are no habitat conservation plans, natural community conservation plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans applicable to the project site. The project would comply with the City's General Plan and local ordinances pertaining to the protection of biological resources. Therefore, no impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

The following mitigation measure would be required to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds as a result of the project.

BIO-1: California Red -legged Frog Impact Avoidance
The following actions are recommended to avoid potential impacts to CRLF:

A pre -construction survey of the proposed project site for CLRF shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 48 hours prior to the start of project construction to confirm this species is not present in the work area.

A qualified biological monitor familiar with CRLF will monitor all initial site disturbance (clearing, grubbing, rough grading).

In the event the pre -construction survey or the onsite monitor identifies the presence of individuals of CRLF prior to or during construction, then all work shall stop until the CRLF leave the site of their own accord. If CRLF do not move off site on their own, the project proponent shall comply with all relevant requirements of take authorization under the federal Endangered Species Act prior to resuming project activities.

BIO-2: Nesting Birds Impact Avoidance and Minimization
The following actions are recommended to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds:

A nesting bird survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than two weeks prior to the onset of construction activities. The nesting bird survey should be conducted within any and all suitable habitat that occurs within the project site, within 300 feet of its immediate vicinity for raptors, and 100 feet for all other bird species (as is feasible). If no active nests are found, no further mitigation would be required.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 28 ends

If active bird nests are found, then an appropriately -sized avoidance buffer should be established by the biologist and all construction work within the buffer should be delayed until after the nesting season has ended or until the biologist has determined that the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site for survival.

Limits of construction to avoid the nest shall be established in the field with flagging and stakes or construction fencing. Construction personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of the area.

Effectiveness of Mitigation Measures: With implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2, potential impacts to biological resources would be avoided and impacts would be less than significant.

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
X
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
X
c. Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
X
Setting:

The Santa Maria Valley was historically occupied by Chumash people until European contact in the mid -eighteenth century. Areas within close proximity to perennial water sources tend to have higher archeological sensitivity; the project site is not located within close proximity to any blue -line streams or bodies of water. According to the General Plan Resources Management Element, the project site is located in an area designated to have low sensitivity for archeological resources.

The establishment of Mission San Luis Obispo to the north and Mission La Purisima Concepcion near the city of Lompoc was the beginning of development and settlement in the Santa Maria area. Industrialization and the connection of the Pacific Coast Railroad to Santa Maria further stimulated commercial and residential growth in the area. Historical resources in Santa Maria consist of several landmarks and structures. The City has officially designated 10 historic structures and landmarks, with additional sites designated by the Landmark Committee, none of which are located on -site.

Discussion:
a. The project site does not contain, nor is it located near, any historic resources identified in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR). The project site is not identified on the City's Landmark Map or on the City's Objects of Historic Merit Map; therefore, potential impacts to historical resources would be less than significant. b. According to the Resources Management Element, the Santa Maria Valley is not a major archaeological or paleontological resource area, as only a few sites have been recorded or discovered in the area. The Resources Management Element delineates high, moderate, low, and negligible archaeological sensitivity areas within the city; the project site is designated as Archaeological A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 29 ends

Sensitivity Area 2 — Low Sensitivity. Nevertheless, ground disturbance associated with construction activities of a future manufacturing or industrial project enabled by the GPZ could have the potential to result in inadvertent disturbance of previously unknown, buried archeological deposits. Impacts are conservatively considered to be potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1, identified below, would ensure potential impacts are avoided and/or minimized; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
c. Based on the location and low sensitivity of the project area, development of the project site from construction activities related to a future manufacturing or industrial project enabled by the GPZ would not be expected to disturb buried human remains. In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains associated with development of the future project, California State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 stipulates that no further disturbances shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to CEQA regulations and PRC Section 5097.98. With adherence to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, which stipulates the process to be followed when human remains are encountered, as detailed in Mitigation Measure CR-2, impacts related to the disturbance of archaeological resources and human remains would be reduced to less than significant; therefore, potential impacts are less than significant with mitigation.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

CR-1 Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources. In the event that any cultural resource is encountered during subsurface earthwork activities associated with development of the project site, all construction activities within a 100 -foot radius of the find shall cease and the City shall be notified immediately. Work shall not continue until a qualified archaeologist, in conjunction with locally affiliated Native American representative(s) as necessary, determines whether the uncovered resource requires further study. Any previously unidentified resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate Califomia Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 Series forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramic, wood, or shell artifacts; fossils; or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites.

Effectiveness of Mitigation Measures: With implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2, potential impacts to archaeological resources and undiscovered buried human remains would be avoided and impacts would be less than significant.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 30 ends

6. ENERGY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a.

Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or operation?
X
b.

Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
X
Setting:

In January 2021, Santa Maria customers began to receive their electricity from Central Coast Community Energy (3CE; previously known as Monterey Bay Community Power [MBCP]), which is a community choice energy agency that has committed to providing its customers with 100% carbon -free sourced energy by 2030.

Community choice energy agencies allow local govemments to procure power on behalf of their residents, businesses, and municipal accounts from an alternative supplier while still receiving transmission and distribution service from their existing utility provider (in this case, the Pacific Gas and Electric Company [PG&E]). Per Public Utilities Code Section 366.2, customers have the right to opt out of the community choice energy program and continue to receive service from the incumbent utility (PG&E) if they so choose (City of Santa Maria 2020a). Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) is the primary provider of natural gas for development within the city. SoCalGas has committed to replacing 20% of its traditional natural gas supply with renewable natural gas by 2030 (Sempra Energy 2022). Renewable natural gas is generated from waste and agricultural byproducts and is carbon-neutral/carbon-negative, which means it can take more greenhouse gas emissions out of the atmosphere than it emits as an energy source.

The California Building Code (CBC) contains standards that regulate the method of use, properties, performance, or types of materials used in the construction, alteration, improvement, repair, or rehabilitation of a building or other improvement to real property. The CBC includes mandatory green building standards for residential and nonresidential structures, the most recent version of which are referred to as the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (effective January 1, 2023). These standards focus on four key areas: smart residential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat transfer from the interior to the exterior and vice versa), residential and nonresidential ventilation requirements, and non- residential lighting requirements.

The General Plan Resources Management Element includes goals for achieving increased energy conservation use within the city through increasing the energy efficiency of buildings, appliances, and buildings, as well as encouragement for development and the use of alternative forms of energy. Current measures applied in the city include energy -conserving building standards, recycling, and transportation system improvements. The Resources Management Element also identifies energy conservation policies, including encouraging the use of innovative site and building orientation and landscaping to maximize energy efficiency, fuel efficiency standards, and encouraging development of alternative energy sources.

Discussion:
a. The project includes the GPZ to allow for a future manufacturing or industrial project and would not result in any immediate energy use. During construction of a future project, fossil fuels, electricity, and natural gas would be used by construction vehicles and equipment. The energy consumed during construction would be temporary in nature and would be typical of other similar construction activities in the county. Federal and state regulations in place require fuel -efficient equipment and vehicles and prohibit wasteful activities, such as diesel idling.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 31 ends

The future manufacturing or industrial project would be required to be designed and constructed in compliance with the CBC, which requires that the project achieves high energy efficiency, including, but not limited to, use of low -flow, energy -efficient appliances, light emitting diode (LED) lighting, insulation and building material standards, etc. Development on the site would rely on local electricity service provider 3CE, which would provide a 100% carbon -free energy mix by 2030, unless they choose to opt -out and be served by PG&E, which provides 50% renewable energy and 89% greenhouse gas (GHG)-free energy (Pacific Gas and Electric Company 2023). Development on the site would rely on SoCalGas as a service provider for natural gas, which is committed to replacing 20% of its traditional natural gas supply with renewable natural gas by 2030. Therefore, the future development project would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources and impacts would be less than significant.
b. Development on the project site to establish a future manufacturing or industrial project enabled by the GPZ will be required to be designed in full compliance with the CBC, including applicable green building standards. The proposed GPZ would not allow for the development of a project that could potentially result in a conflict with a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to energy; therefore, mitigation is not necessary.

7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.

X
ii . Strong seismic ground shaking?
X
iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
X
iv. Landslides?
X
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
X
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 32 ends

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on-
or off -site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the most recent Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct
or indirect risks to life or property?
X
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of wastewater?
X
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
X
Setting:

The proposed project is located within the Santa Maria Valley, an east —west trending alluvial valley bounded to the north by the San Rafael Range and to the south by the Casmalia Range and the Solomon Hills. The Santa Maria River traverses the valley from east to west, emptying into the Pacific Ocean just west of the town of Guadalupe. The Santa Maria River is formed by the convergence of the Cuyama and the Sisquoc Rivers at Fugler Point near Garey.

The Santa Maria basin is a significant hydrocarbon -producing (i.e., oil and gas) coastal (and off -shore) basin in California. The basin lies at the juncture between the north —west -trending southern Coast Range province and the east —west -trending Transverse Range province. The basin contains a relatively thick Miocene through Holocene age sequence of sedimentary rocks, some of which are prolific petroleum producing formations and others that are highly productive groundwater aquifers.

The Santa Maria Valley is located within a structural fold and thrust fault area; the axes of most of the structural elements in the region run northwest —southeast, parallel to the valley. The Santa Maria basin and adjacent southern Coast Ranges have been subjected to considerable uplift during the last 2 to 5 million years and are considered to be seismically active. Relatively little direct evidence of active faulting (such as offset of bedding or structures observed at a surface fault) has been observed in the region; however, broad bands of seismicity unrelated to surface faults and other evidence indicate the region is seismically active.

According to the City of Santa Maria General Plan Safety Element, several active, potentially active, and inactive faults exist within the basin and region, and generally trend north—west. The major faults include the Santa Maria, Santa Maria River, and Casmalia Faults. None of these faults qualify for Earthquake Fault Zone status as identified by the State Geologist under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones Act.

Based on the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2023), the project site is underlain by the following soil type:
• Narlon sand hardpan variant, 2 to 9 percent slopes. Narlon soils are light brownish gray and pale brown, medium and strongly acid, loamy sand.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 33 ends

Discussion:
a. i. Several active and potentially active faults exist within the region, including the Santa Maria and Casmalia Faults, located approximately 2.5 miles and 4.0 miles away from the project site, respectively. However, based on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Maps and information available from the DOC, the city is not located within an identified Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Hazard Zone. Future development within the project site is subject to standard construction standards and the CBC to ensure buildings are constructed to withstand the magnitude of earthquakes that could potentially occur in that zone; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
ii. Seismic ground shaking is influenced by the proximity of the site to an earthquake fault, the intensity of the seismic event, and the underlying soil composition. The DOC Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Maps indicate that the entire Santa Maria Valley is located in a lower hazard area. Potential effects of seismic ground shaking on the future development of a manufacturing or industrial building enabled by the GPZ would be minimized through the implementation of the seismic requirements specified by the CBC and applicable City standards for earthquake -resistant construction; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
iii. According to the City's General Plan Safety Element, the project site does contain shallow perched groundwater. Development within the project site enabled by the proposed GPZ would be required to comply with CBC requirements and the City's building regulations to reduce risk associated with seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction; therefore, potential impacts related to liquefaction would be less than significant. iv. According to the City's General Plan Safety Element, the project site is not located within an area where landslide movements are anticipated to occur. The project site is generally flat and is not located near slopes that would be susceptible to landslides; therefore, the potential for impacts related to landslides would be less than significant b. According to the Natural Resource Conservation Service's Web Soil Survey, the primary soil type underlying the project site is Narlon sand hardpan variant, 2 to 9 percent slopes. A future construction phase activity enabled by the GPZ project may result in wind and water driven soil erosion and loss of topsoil if soil is stockpiled or exposed. Future development of the project site would be subject to the City's Landscape and Irrigation Standards to provide soil erosion control on -site. The future development would require preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which would be administered through project construction. The SWPPP would be required to incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to ensure that potential water quality impacts during construction from soil erosion would be reduced to less than significant levels. Therefore, impacts related to soil erosion and loss of topsoil would be less than significant. c. The following analysis is based on the Safety Element in the City's General Plan (1995):

Liquefaction or collapse: The soil conditions present at the project site are not susceptible to liquefaction if substantial ground shaking events were to occur. Standard construction techniques would be employed during construction of a future project enabled by the GPZ to ensure no significant risk to human life would occur; therefore, impacts related to liquefaction would be less than significant.

Landslide: Landslides typically occur in areas with steep slopes or containing escarpments. Based on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Maps and related information available from the DOC, Santa Maria is not located within a designated landslide hazard zone. According to the Safety Element, the project site is not located within an area where landslide movements are anticipated to occur; therefore, the potential for impacts related to landslides would be less than significant.

Lateral Spreading: The project site is not located within an area known to contain expansive soils.

Additionally, all future building development enabled by the GPZ would be required to comply with the most recent CBC requirements, which would ensure protection of structures and occupants from seismic hazards, such as expansive soils; therefore, impacts related to seismic soils would be less than significant.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 34 ends

Subsidence: Santa Maria area has not had significant subsidence issues despite historical oil drilling in the area. Although subsidence could occur, it is perceived to be an insignificant risk due to the absence of reported incidences (City of Santa Maria 1995); therefore, impacts related to subsidence would be less than significant.
d. According to the Safety Element, the project site is not located within an area known to contain expansive soils. Additionally, all future development enabled by the GPZ would be required to comply with the most recent CBC requirements, which would ensure protection of structures and occupants from geologic hazards, such as expansive soils; therefore, impacts related to seismic soils would be less than significant.
e. The proposed future development project enabled by the GPZ would include installation of a new service connection to existing City's wastewater treatment facilities and would not include the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems; therefore, no impacts would result from the use of an onsite septic system.
f. While there are no unique geologic features on the project site, the site is underlain by Older Alluvium, which is considered to have high sensitivity for paleontological resources (Diblee 1994; U.S.

Department of Transportation [DOT] 2004). Fossils that have been historically encountered in formations of this age include tidepool and rock -cliff mollusks and barnacles in marine deposits (Woodring et al. 1950). Based on the sensitivity of the underlying geologic formation, future development on -site enabled by the GPZ may have the potential to disturb previously unknown paleontological resources. Mitigation measure GEO-1 has been included to address inadvertent discovery protocol in order to reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources to less than significant; therefore, potential impacts are less than significant with mitigation.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

GEO-1 Inadvertent Discovery of Paleontological Resources. Should any vertebrate fossils or potentially significant finds (e.g., numerous well-preserved invertebrate or plant fossils) be encountered during work on -site, all activities in the immediate vicinity of the find shall cease until a qualified paleontologist evaluates the find for its scientific value. If deemed significant, the paleontological resource(s) shall be salvaged and deposited in an accredited and permanent scientific institution where they will be properly curated and preserved. These actions would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

Effectiveness of Mitigation Measures: With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 potential impacts to paleontological resources would be avoided and impacts would be less than significant.

8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a.

Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?
X
b.

Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?
X
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 35 ends

Setting:

Regulatory Framework:

In response to climate change, California implemented Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the "California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006." AB 32 required the reduction of statewide GHG emissions to 1990 emissions levels (essentially a 15% reduction below 2005 emission levels) by 2020 and the adoption of rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emissions reductions. On September 8, 2016, the Governor signed Senate Bill (SB) 32 into law, extending AB 32 by requiring the State to further reduce GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 (the other provisions of AB 32 remain unchanged). On December 14, 2017, the CARB adopted the 2017 Scoping Plan, which provides a framework for achieving the 2030 target. The 2017 Scoping Plan relies on the continuation and expansion of existing policies and regulations, such as the Cap -and -Trade Program and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and implementation of recently adopted policies and legislation, such as SB 1383 (aimed at reducing short-lived climate pollutants including methane, hydrofluorocarbon gases, and anthropogenic black carbon) and SB 100 (discussed further below). The 2017 Scoping Plan also puts an increased emphasis on innovation, adoption of existing technology, and strategic investment to support its strategies. As with the 2013 Scoping Plan Update, the 2017 Scoping Plan does not provide project -level thresholds for land use development. Instead, it recommends local governments adopt policies and locally -appropriate quantitative thresholds consistent with a statewide per capita goal of six metric tons (MT) of CO2e by 2030 and two MT of CO2e by 2050 (CARB 2017). 2022 Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan
The 2022 Update assesses the progress California is making toward reducing its GHG emissions by at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, as called for in SB 32 and laid out in the 2017 Scoping Plan, addresses recent legislation and direction from Govemor Newsom, extends and expands upon these earlier plans, and implements a target of reducing anthropogenic emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045, as well as taking an additional step of adding carbon neutrality as a science -based guide for California's climate work. As stated in the 2022 Update.

Other relevant state laws and regulations include:
• SB 375: The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375), signed in August 2008, enhances the state's ability to reach AB 32 goals by directing the CARB to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved from passenger vehicles by 2020 and 2035.

Metropolitan Planning Organizations are required to adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), which allocates land uses in the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). On March 22, 2018, CARB adopted updated regional targets for reducing GHG emissions from 2005 levels by 2020 and 2035.
• SB 100: Adopted on September 10, 2018, SB 100 supports the reduction of GHG emissions from the electricity sector by accelerating the state's Renewables Portfolio Standard Program. SB 100 requires electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33% of total retail sales by 2020, 60% by 2030, and 100% by 2045.
• California Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations Title 24): The California Building Standards Code (CBC) consists of a compilation of several distinct standards and codes related to building construction including plumbing, electrical, interior acoustics, energy efficiency, and handicap accessibility for persons with physical and sensory disabilities. The current iteration of the CBC is the 2022 Title 24 standards. Part 6 of the CBC is the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which establishes energy efficiency standards for residential and non-residential buildings in order to reduce California's energy demand. Part 11 of the CBC is the CALGreen, which includes mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground -up new construction of residential and non-residential structures.

SBCAG 2050 RTP/SCS
SBCAG adopted its 2050 RTP/SCS (titled Connected 2050) in August 2021. This plan shows how the region will achieve the required SB 375 targets and demonstrates the co -benefits of reducing criteria pollutants. The 2050 RTP/SCS explores the region's land use and travel patterns, accounts for the demographic growth that will force new demands on both and presents a vision for how they can work together to satisfy the goals A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 36 ends

important to the region while also meeting the State's greenhouse gas reduction targets. The 2050 RTP/SCS preferred scenario is a Transit -Oriented Development (TOD)/Infill plan in that it strives to accommodate future growth within existing urban areas along transit corridors. The intent of these proposed changes is to shorten trip distances and reduce vehicle miles traveled and emissions by; directly addressing regional jobs/housing imbalance by providing more housing on the jobs -rich South Coast and more jobs in the North County; and promoting more trips, both local and inter -city, by altemative transportation modes, including by foot, bike, or transit. The 2050 RTP/SCS meets and exceeds the California Air Resources Board -17 percent per capita targets for reduction of GHG emissions from passenger vehicles for target year 2035 (SBCAG 2021).

Methodology:

Rincon Consultants, Inc. completed a greenhouse gas emissions study in August 2023 for the project which is attached to this document as Appendix A. The purpose of this analysis is to cstimatc the estimating greenhouse gas emissions is for informational purposes. that would be emitted by the proposed project manufacturing or industrial project (up to 100,000 square feet of development) that would be enabled by the GPZ and compare the estimate to the SBCAPCD greenhouse gas regulations. The complete analysis is attached in the initial study within the appendix.

Discussion:
a -b.

Construction and operational GHG emissions associated with the future project enabled by the GPZ were quantified using CaIEEMod. Complete CaIEEMod results and assumptions are provided in Appendix A. Calculations of N20, CH4 and CO2 emissions are provided to identify the magnitude of potential project effects. The analysis focuses on CO2, CH4 and N20 because these make up 98.9% of all GHG emissions by volume and are the GHG emissions that the project would emit in the largest quantities (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2014).

Future project construction would generate GHG emissions from the operation of heavy equipment, motor vehicles, and worker trips to and from the site. The Association of Environmental Professionals (2016) has recommended amortizing construction -related emissions over a 30 -year period in conjunction with the proposed project's operational emissions since construction emissions occur for a limited period of a project's lifetime. As shown in Table 7, project construction would emit approximately 17 MT of CO2e per year.

Table 7.

Estimated GHG Emissions during Construction
Year Annual Emissions (MT of COze)
2025 309
2026 191
Total 500
Amortized over 30 years 17
MT = metric tons; COze = carbon dioxide equivalents
See Appendix A for modeling results.

In addition to future construction emissions, future project operation of a 100,000 square foot manufacturing or industrial project would generate GHG emissions from new vehicle trips, electricity and natural gas usage, area sources, and off -road equipment usage. The amortized emissions from construction were added to the operational emissions to determine the total combined annual emissions. Table 8 summarizes combined annual GHG emissions generated by project construction and operation based on the CaIEEMod output files in Appendix A. The combined annual GHG emissions from the project would be approximately 763 365 MT of CO2e per year.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001

Page 37 ends

Environmental Checklist

Table 8.

Estimated Project Construction and Operational GHG Emissions Emission Source Annual Emissions (MT of CO)e per year)
Construction
Operational
Mobile
Area
Energy
Water
Waste
Refrigerant
Total Emissions
17 746 348
338 4
1 337 149
26 3989
4 763 38&
MT = metric tons; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalents
Notes: Numbers may not add up due to rounding.

See Appendix A for modeling results.

The future proposed project operations enabled by the GPZ would include numerous energy and water efficiency measures, as required by CALGreen. Additionally, the SBCAG has incorporated a sustainable community strategy into its 2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (Connected 2050 RTP/SCS), which is designed to help the region achieve its SB 375 GHG emissions reduction target. The Connected 2050 RTP/SCS includes strategies intended to increase jobs within the City of Santa Maria. The future project would increase employment within the city which would improve the City's jobs -housing ratio and therefore reduce vehicle emissions. The future project would also be required to comply with existing State regulations, which include increased energy conservation measures and other actions adopted to achieve the overall GHG emissions reduction goals identified in SB 32. Although there is no locally adopted GHG Reduction Plan to reduce emissions from new development, the future project would not conflict with any State regulations intended to reduce GHG emissions statewide and would be generally consistent with local plans and programs designed to reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions; therefore, the project would have less than significant impact and mitigation is not necessary.

9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a.

Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
X
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 38 ends

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
X
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
X
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
X
e. For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard or excessive noise for people
residing or working in the project area?
X
f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
g. Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
X
Setting:

In the City of Santa Maria, the use and storage of hazardous materials is primarily regulated by the Uniform Fire Code. Transport of hazardous materials and waste on public streets is primarily regulated by the California Vehicle Code and the SMMC. Storage and disposal of hazardous wastes is primarily regulated by the Santa Barbara County Environmental Health Services Division (EHS) through their Hazardous Waste Generator Program as authorized by the State Health and Safety Code. Any business that stores hazardous materials in accordance with Article 80 of the Uniform Fire Code must provide either a hazardous materials inventory statement (HMIS) or a hazardous materials management plan (HMMP) to the Fire Chief of the City of Santa Maria and the County of Santa Barbara. In addition, the City of Santa Maria Fire Department and the County EHS require a Business Plan in accordance with State regulations for businesses that store and use hazardous waste (City of Santa Maria 1995).

A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Appendix C) was completed by Rincon Consultants, Inc. on August 22, 2023. The assessment meets the guidelines outlined in the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process (ASTM Standard E1527-21). Based on the findings of this Phase I ESA, it is Rincon Consultants, Inc. opinion that that no recognized environmental conditions (RECs), historical recognized environmental A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 39 ends

conditions (HRECs), or controlled recognized environmental conditions (CRECs) were identified for the subject property. However, there are environmental concerns in connection with the subject property as follows:
• The subject property is located within the Santa Maria Airport Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Investigation site, but is outside of a one -mile radius of identified PFAS sources and impacts. • An abandoned/remnant water well structure is located in the southeastern portion of the subject property.
• Historical use of the subject property as part of a military base and a golf course may be associated with unidentified subsurface debris and/or structures.
• The former Santa Maria oil field is located between 0.5 and 1.5 miles north and east of the subject property.

There is no evidence indicating that the subject property has been impacted by hazardous materials or petroleum products, no additional assessment is recommended. However, based on the notable findings above, Rincon recommends preparation of a soil management plan prior to activities that will disturb soil at the subject property. We also recommend proper abandonment of the water well structure observed in the southeastern portion of the subject property.

Discussion:
a. Future development of the project site enabled by the GPZ would include the temporary use and storage of limited quantities of hazardous substances, including gasoline, diesel fuel, hydraulic fluid, solvents, oils, paints, etc. during construction. Construction contractors would be required to comply with applicable federal and state environmental and workplace safety laws. Additionally, the construction contractor would be required to implement BMPs for the storage, use, and transportation of hazardous materials during all construction activities. During operation any future development that would store, handle, or routinely transport fuels or other hazardous materials would need to comply with applicable requirements as set by governing authorities ' Therefore, impacts related to the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant.
b. Construction of a proposed project enabled by the GPZ would require the use of some hazardous materials such as fuels, oils, paints, solvents, and glues. All potentially hazardous materials used during construction of the proposed project would be handled, stored, and disposed of in accordance with the manufacturers' specifications and applicable regulations.

The project site contains an abandoned/remnant water well structure located in the southeastern portion of the subject property as identified by Rincon Consultants, Inc. during completion of the Phase 1 ESA. The Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment recommendation is to properly abandon the water well structure. Additionally, mitigation shall be required to minimize oil facility health risks during construction in accordance with CalGem standards if any oil well is inadvertently discovered.

Historical use of the subject property as part of a military base and a golf course may be associated with unidentified subsurface debris and/or structures. A soil management plan shall be submitted prior to future development of an industrial or manufacturing building that would be enabled by this GPZ. Therefore, the impacts to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
c. No existing or proposed schools are located within a quarter mile of the proposed project. Construction of a future industrial or manufacturing project enabled by the GPZ would include the temporary use and storage of limited quantities of hazardous substances, including gasoline, diesel fuel, hydraulic fluid, solvents, oils, paints, etc. during construction. Construction contractors would be required to comply with applicable federal and state environmental and workplace safety laws. Additionally, the construction contractor would be required to implement BMPs for the storage, use, and transportation of hazardous materials during all construction activities. During operation it is not anticipated that the future industrial or manufacturing development enabled by the GPZ would store or handle fuels or hazardous materials. The project would not involve the routine transport of hazardous materials.

Therefore, impacts related to hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous materials, substances or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school would be less than significant.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 40 ends

d. California Government Code Section 65962.5 requires various state agencies to compile lists of hazardous waste disposal facilities, unauthorized release from underground storage tanks, contaminated drinking water wells and solid waste facilities from which there is known migration of hazardous waste and submit such information to the Secretary for Environmental Protection on at least an annual basis. As discussed above, the project site does not contain a hazardous waste disposal facility, a known underground storage tank, a contaminated drinking water well or a solid waste facility from which there is known migration of hazardous waste. The proposed zoning and development of a future industrial or manufacturing use would not create any conditions that would lead to the project location being listed as a hazardous materials site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.

Therefore, no impacts related to significant hazards to the public or the environment from hazardous materials pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 would occur. e. There are no private airstrips within or in the vicinity of the project site. The project site is located within the airport property boundary along the northern edge. Based on the Santa Maria Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Santa Barbara County 2023), the project site would not be located within the airport's noise contours, therefore no specific noise mitigation related to airport related noise is necessary. The site is located in Zone 3 of the airport safety zones, and within airport influence area review 1. A future industrial or manufacturing building enabled by the project would be limited in height to the requirements of the M-1 zone as well as 14 CFR Part 77.

Given the project location is within Zone 3, the Santa Maria Airport Safety Compatibility Criteria (Table 3-2) listed in the Santa Maria Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan would apply to a future industrial or manufacturing project enabled by the GPZ. Limited industrial is a compatible use based upon Table 3-2, and manufacturing is conditionally compatible. The maximum intensity of people/acre allowed is 150 and the maximum lot coverage is 60% for all conditionally compatible industrial, manufacturing and warehouse uses. The Santa Maria Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan provides example calculations in Appendix E to determine the concentration of people for a project. One example calculation recommends using the City's Parking Ordinance (Section 12-32.03) and the spaces required. Staff utilized the manufacturing parking demand of one space per 520 square feet of gross area and assumed 1.5 people occupy a car. A future 100,000 square -foot manufacturing development enabled by the GPZ would require 192 parking spaces. 288 people represent the maximum concentration of people at the site. Over the 6.95 -acre project area that equates to 42 people per acre.

This concentration of people per acre is well under the maximum number allowed of 150. The future development would also be limited in size to 60% of the site as also required by Table 3-2. Therefore, impacts related to a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area would be less than significant.
f. The proposed project does not include any characteristics or features that would interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project would not result in the closure of any roads. Development of the project site would utilize new access driveways that would be developed in compliance with local and state safety regulations. All access improvements would be required to comply with applicable CBC and California Fire Code requirements pertaining to emergency access. Therefore, impacts related to interference with an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan would be less than significant. g. The project site is surrounded by industrial development. The project site is not located adjacent to a wildland fire area. Based on the Safety Element, the most significant wildland fire hazards for development within the city are associated with the coastal sage scrub and grass -covered slopes in the Casmalia and Solomon Hills south of the city. The project site is located approximately 11 miles north of these areas and is located within a heavily urbanized area; therefore, impacts related to wildland fires would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 41 ends

10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground water
quality?
X
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
X
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would:
i. result in substantial erosion or siltation on-
or off -site;
X
ii. substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or offsite;
X
iii. create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
X
iv. impede or redirect flood flows?
X
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
X
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
X
Setting:

The proposed project would enable the future construction of a 100,000 square -foot industrial or manufacturing building that would require on -site grading, which could result in the erosion of onsite soils and sedimentation during heavy wind or rain events. The future construction would be required to comply with all local, state, and federal requirements, including a state Construction General Permit, which requires the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP would include BMPs to control the discharge of pollutants, including sediment from erosion, into local surface water drainages. The construction project would further be required to comply with the adopted standards contained within the City of Santa Maria's Municipal Code, Section 8-12 (wastewater) and 8-12A (stormwater). Section 8-12A.04 also incorporates the Post - A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 42 ends

Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region (Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, Resolution No. R3-2013-0032). By incorporating these design provisions and permit review and procedures by the City, the future project enabled by the GPZ would not violate water quality standards and waste discharge requirements.

The project site is located within the Santa Maria Watershed, one of the largest coastal drainage basins in California, and includes all areas tributary to the Cuyama, Siquoc, and Santa Maria Rivers. The Santa Maria Watershed overlies the Santa Maria Valley Groundwater Basin, covering more than 280 square miles in the southwestern comer of San Luis Obispo County and the northwestern corner of Santa Barbara County.

Historically, the City pumped water from the Santa Maria Valley Groundwater Basin as its sole water supply until the City began receiving State Water Project (SWP) water from the Central Coast Water Authority (CCWA) in 1997. The Santa Maria Valley Groundwater Basin is currently under a 2008 court -ordered stipulation that allows the City to derive its water supply from local groundwater, associated return flows from imported SWP water that may be recaptured in the basin, and a share of the yield of Twitchell Reservoir operations.

The stipulation divided the Santa Maria Valley Groundwater Basin into three management areas, the largest being the Santa Maria Valley Management Area (SMVMA), which overlies the city. Since the late 1960s, the basin has alternately experienced significant recharge (recovery) and decline, which, collectively, reflect a general long-term stability as groundwater levels in both aquifer zones have fluctuated between historical -low and near historical -high levels over alternating 5- to 15 -year periods. Groundwater levels throughout the SMVMA have shown this trend, but with different ranges of fluctuation and groundwater levels have repeatedly recovered to near or above previous historical -high levels, most recently in 2002 (Luhdorff and Scalmaninin Consulting Engineers 2018).

The provisions of the 2008 court -ordered stipulation require that an annual assessment be prepared for the Santa Maria Valley Management Area. According to the 2017 Annual Report (Luhdorff and Scalmaninin Consulting Engineers 2018), the conditions in the SMVMA do not satisfy all the criteria delineated in the Stipulation for defining a severe water shortage as a result, it was concluded that there is no finding of severe water shortage conditions in the SMVMA in 2017.

In 2016, groundwater resource planning and data reporting requirements under the California Department of Water Resource (DWR) Sustainable Groundwater Management Program (SGMA) commenced. Since the SMVMA is part of an adjudicated basin, the DWR considers it already managed by the court and, thus, SGMA groundwater resource planning requirements do not apply (Luhdorff and Scalmaninin Consulting Engineers 2018).

The closest body of water to the project site is the Santa Maria River, located approximately 5 miles northeast of the project site. According to the National Wetlands Inventory from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services, the project side is adjacent to freshwater emergent wetland and riverine area. Based on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) Viewer, the project site is not located within a 100 -year floodplain. Based on the DOC Santa Barbara County Tsunami Inundation Maps, the project site is not located within an area with the potential for tsunami inundation.

Discussion:
a. Development of a future industrial or manufacturing project enabled by the GPZ would be required to comply with all federal, state, and local requirements, including a state Construction General Permit, which requires the preparation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP would include BMPs to control the discharge of pollutants, including sediment from erosion, into local surface water drainages. Future development of the industrial or manufacturing project would also be required to comply with the adopted standards contained within the City's Municipal Code, Section 8-12 (wastewater) and 8-12A (stormwater).

Section 8-12 incorporates the Post -Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region (Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB] Resolution No. R3-2013-0032). By incorporating these design provisions and permit review and approval procedures by the City, the future industrial or manufacturing project would not violate water quality standards and waste discharge requirements, and impacts would be less than significant.
b. Future uses of industrial or manufacturing on -site enabled by the GPZ would require new connections to the City's water services. The City utilizes the following available water supply sources: local groundwater, purchased water from the SWP, associated return flows recaptured from the SMGB, A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 43 ends

assigned rights to water from the SMGB, and assigned rights to augmented yield from Twitchell Reservoir. The City's water supply is expected to reliably meet the projected city water demands and have an available supply in excess through 2040, with the majority of this demand being met by imported state water (City of Santa Maria 2016). Based on the type of potential future development to be allowed onsite, such as development of a industrial or manufacturing use, and the sources of future water supply, the project would not result in a substantial decrease of groundwater supplies or substantial interference with groundwater recharge, and impacts would be less than significant. c. i-iv. The future industrial or manufacturing project enabled by the GPZ would be required to provide landscaped open area to address infiltration and water quality requirements. By incorporating these design provisions, and permit review and procedures by the City, the project would not violate water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. Based on the FEMA NFHL Viewer, the project site is not located within a 100 -year floodplain. However, the project site is adjacent to a County of Santa Barbara flood control channel. A future site plan for the industrial or manufacturing development enabled by the GPZ shall be designed to consider the easements and avoid any encroachment into the adjacent flood control channel. Therefore, the project would not have the potential to result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site, substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site, create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, or impede or redirect flood flows; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. d. In 2017, the City of Santa Maria prepared a Hazard Mitigation Plan (an annex to the Santa Barbara County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan) which describes specific hazard prevention measures and floodplain development requirements for projects that could be subject to flooding.

Principally, the Santa Maria River levee, built by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, has been designed to protect the city from a "100 -year" flood event. Further, all potential development occurring within a floodplain would be required to follow an established development review process and may be subject to additional federal, state, and local review and permits as required by the Floodplain Administrator and the Santa Maria Municipal Code. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) indicates that the project area is located entirely within an area of minimal flood hazard. No potential impacts from flood hazards are expected.

Twitchell Dam is the closest potential source of dam inundation in the City of Santa Maria, located approximately 9 miles northeast of the project site. The dam was constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation in 1958 and is primarily used for groundwater recharge and flood control. Twitchell Dam is not used for perennial water storage. In the event of dam or levee failure, a significant portion of the city would be inundated by flooding. However, the probability of total dam failure and levee failure is remote, and the dam only periodically holds water and is not a reservoir. Therefore, potential impacts from dam failure are considered to be less than significant.

The project site is approximately 10 miles east from the Pacific Ocean and would not be at risk of inundation by a tsunami. There are no bodies of water in the vicinity of the project site that are large enough to produce a seiche and the project site is not located in an area prone to landslides, mud slides, soil slips, or slumps; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. e. As discussed in the threshold analysis above, the project would not deplete groundwater supplies, or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. A future industrial or manufacturing project shall be required to include stormwater treatment and storage facilities and would not conflict with the Central Coastal Basin Plan, or other water quality control plans. The project would not conflict with SGMA, or other local or regional plans or policies intended to manage water quality or groundwater supplies; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to hydrology or water quality; therefore, mitigation is not necessary.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 44 ends

11. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

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

The project site is currently undeveloped and is bordered to the north, south and west by a flood control channel regulated by Santa Barbara County. Beyond the flood control channel to the north is a business park used by VTC Enterprises. Further to the south of the flood control channel is open space area adjacent to the Santa Maria Public Airport runway. To the west of the flood control channel is more open space that is also adjacent to the Santa Maria Public Airport runway. To the east of the site across A Street is a business park with various industrial, warehouse and manufacturing uses.

The project site has an A -AS general plan land use designation and OS zoning designation. The purpose of the A -AS general plan designation is to provide a broad category facilitating the airport and airport -related commercial and industrial uses not adversely affected by airport operations, to provide for specific areas for aircraft operation and navigation aids, and to minimize the hazard to safe landing and take -off of aircraft. Typical uses within the A -AS general plan designation include a full range of uses, including airport operation and support activities.

Discussion:
a. The project does not propose project elements or components that would physically divide the site from surrounding areas and uses because the project site already is separated from the adjacent airport by a drainage channel. The project would allow for the development of a future industrial or manufacturing use and would not conflict with the surrounding industrial development adjacent to the project site. The project has been reviewed for compatibility with surrounding uses and would not create, close or impede any existing public or private roads, or create any other barriers to movement or accessibility within the community. Therefore, the proposed project would not physically divide an established community and would have no impact.
b. The project proposes to change the current land use designation from A -AS to LI, and the current zoning from OS to PD/M-1. This change would allow a range of light industrial and design research facilities, including manufacturing within a parcel where previously only open space uses were allowed.

Examples of potential industrial land uses that could be established at the site include scientific research labs, warehousing/wholesaling, light assembly or other uses permitted under the proposed LI general plan designation. While the project site is currently zoned for open space uses including natural resource preservation and outdoor recreation, the surrounding development has already established industrial zoning and development of a similar intensity to the proposed project's concept.

Therefore, introducing a new industrial use on the project site would not conflict with surrounding land uses in the project vicinity.

The proposed changes have been reviewed for consistency with the Airport's Master Plan, Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and Airport Specific Plan and no conflicts would be created from the project. The future development of the site would require a Planned Development permit reviewed by A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 45 ends

the Planning Commission reviewed for conformance with City development standards and policies and procedures. No future Planned Development project would be approved by the Planning Commission and introduced into the project area that is contrary to the City's Zoning Code and General Plan. The future industrial or manufacturing project would undergo review for consistency with the proposed LI general plan designation and PD/M-1 zoning standards, as well as the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and shall not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding compatibility issues or mitigating environmental effects. Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to land use or planning; therefore, mitigation is not necessary.

12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a.

Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
X
b.

Result in the loss of availability of a locally -
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
X
Setting:

Santa Maria's primary mineral resources are sand, rock, and oil. The Santa Maria River channel is considered to be a valuable mineral resource. The river contains the largest resources of Portland Cement Concrete -grade aggregate and almost 90% of the available alluvial sand and gravel resources in the Santa Barbara/San Luis Obispo County region. The Santa Maria Basin is also a significant hydrocarbon (i.e., oil and gas) producing basin in California, historically allowing for the development of the oil industry throughout the region. Many of the areas oil wells have since been capped and abandoned due to the development and urbanization of the city. Based on the General Plan Resources Management Element, the project site is located within the City's area where the significance of mineral deposits cannot be evaluated from available data. (City of Santa Maria 2001). A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Appendix C) was completed by Rincon Consultants, Inc. on August 22, 2023, and an abandoned/remnant well structure was identified during a site inspection in the southeastern portion of the project site.

Discussion:
a -b. The project parcel is located in an urban area of Santa Maria. The California Department of Conservation Well Finder (CaIGEM GIS) confirms that there are no active oil wells within the project site. The potential for impacts to occur to mineral resources is insignificant considering the project site is located within a developed area of the City and is not a conducive location for mineral resource extraction or mining. Therefore, the impact on known mineral resources of value to the region and to residents of the state or the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan would be less than significant.

The area within the project vicinity has been entirely built out with urban and airport uses within.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 46 ends

Therefore, the potential for future mining uses at the site is very low and potential impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to mineral resources; therefore, mitigation is not necessary.

13. NOISE
Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
X
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration
or groundborne noise levels?
X
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
X
Setting:

Community noise levels are typically measured in terms of A -weighted decibels (dBA). A -weighting is a frequency correction that correlates overall sound pressure levels with the frequency response of the human ear. Equivalent noise level (Leg) is the average noise level on an energy basis for a specific time period. The duration of noise and the time of day at which it occurs are important factors in determining the impact of noise on communities. The CNEL and Day -Night Average Level (Ldn) account for the time of day and duration of noise generation. These indices are time -weighted average values equal to the amount of acoustic energy equivalent to a time -varying sound over a 24 -hour period. The Noise Element includes noise compatibility standards for noise exposure by land use, including interior and exterior noise standards.

Table 9.

Interior and Exterior Noise Standards
Land Use Categories
Standard dB CNEL
Category
Uses
Interior
Exterior
Residential
Single Family, Duplex, Multiple Family, Mobile Home
45 60
Noise -Sensitive Land Uses
Motel, Hospital, School, Nursing Home, Church, Library, and Other
45 60
Commercial
Retail, Restaurant, Professional Offices
55 65
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 47 ends

Land Use Categories
Standard dB CNEL
Category
Uses
Interior
Exterior
Industrial
Manufacturing, Utilities, Warehousing, Agriculture
65 70
Open Space
Passive Outdoor Recreation
--
65 Source: City of Santa Maria General Plan Noise Element, Table N-4.

The nearest sensitive receptors are single-family homes approximately 2,170 feet north of the project site and single-family homes approximately 3,340 feet east of the project site.

Discussion:
a. The project site is currently undeveloped and is bordered to the north, south and west by a flood control channel regulated by Santa Barbara County. Beyond the flood control channel to the north is a business park used by VTC Enterprises. Further to the south of the flood control channel is open space area adjacent to the Santa Maria Public Airport runway. To the west of the flood control channel is more open space that is also adjacent to the Santa Maria Public Airport runway. To the east of the site across A Street is a business park with various industrial, warehouse and manufacturing uses.

Proposed construction activities onsite and associated construction -related noise would be temporary but will take place adjacent to industrial areas and support offices and therefore would have the potential to exceed City exterior noise thresholds. In accordance with the General Plan Noise Element, during any future development within the project parcel, construction activity shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, and between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction shall occur on Sundays or federal or state holidays. Construction equipment maintenance shall be limited to the same hours. With adherence to City these construction work hours, and with the implementation mitigation measure NOI-1, which includes noise control for construction related tools and equipment , and requirements for proper maintenance of all equipment, unnecessary temporary increased noise levels can be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.

Following construction, future development uses would not result in a significantly noticeable increase over existing vehicle noise in the area. The project site is surrounded by some noise generating uses such as industrial development. However, the industrial development likely under the proposed M-1 zone designation is not heavy in nature but would likely be a light industrial type of use. The daily operations do not include noisy elements that generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels. Therefore, impacts related to generation of permanent operational noise levels in excess of standards established in local plans would be less than significant. b. Potential future development of the project parcel would include the construction of an industrial or manufacturing building and installation of new utility connections. The future development of the site will not include pile driving or other high impact activities that would generate substantial groundborne noise or groundborne vibration during construction. Heavy equipment used during construction would generate groundborne noise and vibration, but these activities would be limited in duration and consistent with other standard construction activities. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
c. There are no private airstrips within or in the vicinity of the project site. The project site is located within the airport property boundary along the northern edge. Based on the Santa Maria Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Santa Barbara County 2023), the project site would not be located within the airport's noise contours. Therefore, no specific noise mitigation related to airport related noise is necessary, and impacts associated with future development of an industrial or manufacturing use and the project workers or occupants exposure to excessive noise levels from aircraft would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

NOI-1 The applicant shall implement the following measures during construction of the project:

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 48 ends

• Mufflers. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and all internal combustion engine driven machinery with intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, as applicable, shall be in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. During construction, all equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers' standards. • Electrical Power. Electrical power, rather than diesel equipment, shall be used to run compressors and similar power tools and to power any temporary structures, such as construction trailers or caretaker facilities.
• Equipment Staging. All stationary equipment shall be staged as far away from the adjacent offices as feasible.
• Equipment Idling. Construction vehicles and equipment shall not be left idling for longer than five minutes when not in use.
• Workers' Radios. All noise from workers' radios shall be controlled to a point that they are not audible at the adjacent offices near construction activity. • Smart Back-up Alarms. Mobile construction equipment shall have smart back-up alarms that automatically adjust the sound level of the alarm in response to ambient noise levels.

Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters to ensure safety when mobile construction equipment is moving in the reverse direction. • Disturbance Coordinator. The applicant shall designate a disturbance coordinator who shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The noise disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. A telephone number for the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site.

Effectiveness of Mitigation Measures: Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 and NOI-2 would reduce overall noise levels from construction activity and would reduce residual impacts to less than significant.

14. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

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

Santa Maria consistently has been the fastest growing city in Santa Barbara County over the last two decades.

From Census 2000 to Census 2010, 90% of the county's population growth occurred in the City of Santa Maria.

It is anticipated that this trend will continue throughout the current decade as Santa Maria continues to be the hub for Northern Santa Barbara County.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 49 ends

Discussion:
a. The project includes the GPZ to allow for the construction of an industrial or manufacturing use that would be permitted or conditionally permitted under the proposed PD/M-1 zoning designation. The future industrial or manufacturing project estimated to add approximately 38 new employees which would not induce substantial unplanned population growth and would not result in the need for development of new housing. Lastly, future development of the project site would not result in the extension of roads or other infrastructure to a previously undeveloped area. Therefore, the project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth and impacts would be less than significant. b. The project site is undeveloped, and no housing currently exists on the site. Therefore, the project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing. No impact would occur.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to population or housing; therefore, mitigation is not necessary.

15. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need
for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives for any of
the public services:
i. Fire protection?
X
ii . Police protection?
X
iii. Schools?
X
iv. Parks?
X
v. Other public facilities?
X
Setting:

Fire and police protection services are provided by the city. The city is served by six fire stations, where emergency services, public education programs, fire prevention, and life safety services are provided to the city's residents by the Santa Maria City Fire Department (SMFD). The Santa Maria Police Department (SMPD) provides law enforcement services for the city. SMPD provides a full range of professional police services, including civil order, preventative patrol, investigations, traffic control and enforcement, criminalistics, crime prevention, drug enforcement and drug abuse prevention. The city's elementary and junior high schools are within the Santa Maria -Bonita School District, and the city's high schools are within the Santa Maria Joint Union High School District.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 50 ends

Discussion:
a. i. Future development of the project site with industrial or manufacturing uses enabled by the GPZ would be served by the SMFD. The nearest fire station is Fire Station #6, located at 3339 Terminal Drive, approximately 1.50 miles southeast of the project site. The proposed change in general plan designation and zoning to LI and PD/M-1 would not substantially increase demand on fire services. Any future development permit applications submitted for development on the project site would be reviewed by the SMFD for conformance with applicable regulations and standards. Development impact fees would be collected at the time of approval of development permits for the provision of capital facilities for fire services. No new or physically altered public service facilities or personnel would be required as a result of the proposed project; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. ii. Future development of the project site of industrial or manufacturing uses enabled by the GPZ would be served by the SMPD, located at 1111 West Betteravia Road, approximately 0.80 miles northeast of the project site. Any future development at the project site would not propose a new use or activity that would require additional police services above what is normally provided for similar surrounding industrial and manufacturing uses. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
iii. The project site is located within the Santa Maria -Bonita and Santa Maria Joint Union High School Districts. Under the proposed PD/M-1 zoning, future development on the project site would be for an industrial or manufacturing use up to 100,000 square -feet in size. The future development is estimated to add approximately 38 new employees. Project employees would likely be drawn from the existing labor pool in the region who are not anticipated to relocate to the city. However, the analysis conservatively assumes that all 38 new employees would become new households; therefore, based on the Department of Finance persons per household estimate in Santa Maria, the project would add 138 new residents. The number of school aged residents potentially introduced to the area by the future development can be adequately serviced by the existing school facilities. Therefore, the project would not result in a need for new or physically altered school facilities, and impacts would be less than significant.
iv. The City's recreation system is comprised of several local parks and recreational facilities.

The nearest public park to the project site is Marilyn Stanly, located approximately 1.20 miles to the east. Future development of the site into an industrial or manufacturing project enabled by the GPZ would not result in an increased demand on existing park facilities in the vicinity and would not result in the need for new or physically altered park facilities; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
v. As discussed above, the proposed future development project would be subject to applicable fees to offset negligible increased demands on public facilities; therefore, impacts related to other public facilities would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to public services; therefore, mitigation is not necessary.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 51 ends

16. RECREATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact
a.

Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
X
b.

Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
X
Setting:

The City's recreation system is comprised of several local parks and recreational facilities, which are managed by the City Department of Recreation and Parks. The department operates 234 acres of developed parkland in 27 neighborhood and community parks.

Discussion:
a -b.

The City's recreation system is comprised of several local parks and recreational facilities. Future development of an industrial or manufacturing use enabled by the GPZ would not result in increased usage of existing park facilities in the vicinity to the point that would result in the need for new or physically altered park facilities. The proposed project and future development would not significantly increase use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. Future development of the project site would include a industrial or manufacturing use that does not include, and would not require development or expansion of existing recreational facilities; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to recreation; therefore, mitigation is not necessary.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 52 ends

17. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:

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

The CEQA Guidelines use Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as the basis for determining significant impacts unless the Guidelines provide specific exceptions. Based on the City of Santa Maria's adopted VMT Thresholds, transportation impacts are considered significant if the proposed project would result in a VMT per capita or office VMT per employee above 85% of the countywide average, consistent with technical guidance published by the Office of Planning and Research (OPR). OPR's Technical Advisory lists the following screening thresholds for land use projects. These types of development projects are presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT and therefore, a less than significant adverse impact on transportation. OPR's Technical Advisory suggests that lead agencies may screen out VMT impacts using project size, maps, transit accessibility, and provision of affordable housing. The City's Environmental Procedures include screening criteria consistent with OPR and are as follows:
• A discretionary retail development project that is 50,000 square feet or less. Does not apply to regional shopping centers that predominately serve customers that live outside of the City limits. • Affordable housing projects where a minimum of 20 percent of the units are deed restricted for low or very low income residents.
• Small discretionary development projects that would generate or attract fewer than 110 daily trips (per CEQA). Examples include a project with 11 or fewer single family residential units, 20 or fewer multi- family units, or an office of 6,800 square feet or less.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 53 ends

• Residential and non-residential land uses located in the green Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) areas of the Countywide Average Home -Based VMT per Capita and per Employee Maps are expected to generate VMT at 85 percent or less of the baseline average rate and are presumed to have less than significant VMT impacts.
• Infrastructure projects
The City of Santa Maria's adopted threshold is 85% of the existing countywide baseline VMT per capita, as calculated within the City of Santa Maria for non-residential uses. The City threshold based on 85% of the countywide average would be 9.41 VMT (one-way trip). The applicant has provided a transportation impact study titled A Street at Fairway General Plan Amendment and Rezone (Study) completed by Central Coast Transportation Consulting in September 2023 which is summarized below. The complete Study is attached to this document in the appendices (Appendix D).

Discussion:
a -b.

The project includes a GPZ to allow for the future development of an industrial or manufacturing use permitted under the proposed M-1 zone district. The project applicant has provided a project description for the future development of a industrial or manufacturing use and estimates the maximum square footage would be up to 100,000. The VMT analysis addresses the project by applying the Technical Memo for VMT Thresholds and Procedures in the City of Santa Maria which divides the city into Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) and illustrates the mean VMT per employee for each TAZ. The project area is mapped showing that VMT per employee is less than or equal to 85 percent of the area - wide average. Therefore, the anticipated development facilitated by this GPZ project has been prescreened and is not expected to have a significant impact on VMT.

The City is required to review projects for policy consistency with the City's General Plan Circulation Element to determine if the additional traffic generated by the project will result in a delay in intersection operations or excessive queuing into adjacent upstream intersections. This analysis uses a Level of Service (LOS) metric, which is a different analysis than the VMT analysis used to determine a potential environmental impact under CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b). If an intersection or roadway segment deteriorates to a LOS "E" or worse as a result of the project, the project will need to improve the operational deficiency to maintain roadway operations at a LOS "D" or better. This is required on a case -by -case basis as determined by the City and the operational implications of projects shall be reviewed through the submittal of a Local Traffic Study specific to the individual project. Since the LOS analysis and improvements are distinct from the VMT metric identified by the CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b), as 'the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts', actions necessary to correct the operational deficiencies may be addressed through the City's project entitlement process as conditions of approval and not as CEQA impacts. The project's traffic and circulation analyzed the following intersections: A Street/Betteravia Road (Traffic Signal), A Street/McCoy Lane (Stop Controlled) and the Skyway Drive/Fairway Drive (Traffic Signal). The study determined that with the additional trips generated by the project, including cumulative levels of traffic with existing surrounding development, that the area intersections would operate at or above LOS D for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, which is an acceptable LOS. This determination is based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11'' edition trip rates for manufacturing. Therefore, the project does not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities and impacts would be less than significant.
c. The project would be developed on an existing parcel and would not alter or affect existing street and intersection networks. The project would be required to comply with City design standards for vehicular access and circulation, including construction and remediation haul trips, and the current Fire Code. A future industrial or manufacturing development shall be required to meet City standards as a requirement of the future conditions of approval of a PD permit. Compliance with these standards would prevent hazardous design features and would ensure adequate and safe site access and circulation. The project would not introduce incompatible uses, including vehicles or equipment, to the site or the surrounding area. There would be no impact.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 54 ends

d. Access to the future industrial or manufacturing project enabled by the GPZ would be provided from A Street. The future project would be required to comply with all building, fire, and safety codes and development plans would be subject to review and approval by the City's Municipal Code. Required review by these departments would ensure the circulation system for the project site would provide adequate emergency access. In addition, the proposed project would not require temporary or permanent closures to roadways and would result in no impacts.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to transportation; therefore, mitigation is not necessary.

18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources Code
section 21074 as either a site, feature, place or
cultural landscape that is geographically defined
in terms of the size and scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a
local register of historical resources as
defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
X
ii . A resource determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native American
tribe.

X
Setting:

Approved in 2014, AB 52 added tribal cultural resources to the categories of resources that must be evaluated under CEQA. Tribal cultural resources are defined as either of the following:
1) Sites, features, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
a) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the CRHR; or b) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k). 2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in PRC Section 5024.1(c). In applying these criteria for the A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 55 ends

purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe.

Recognizing that tribes have expertise with regard to their tribal history and practices, AB 52 requires lead agencies to provide notice to tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project if they have requested notice of projects proposed within that area. If the tribe requests consultation within 30 days upon receipt of the notice, the lead agency must consult with the tribe regarding the potential for adverse impacts on tribal cultural resources as a result of a project. Consultation may include discussing the type of environmental review necessary, the presence and/or significance of tribal cultural resources, the level of significance of a project's impacts on the tribal cultural resources, and available project altematives and mitigation measures recommended by the tribe to avoid or lessen potential impacts on tribal cultural resources.

Passed in 2004, Senate Bill (SB) 18 requires cities and counties to consult with Native American tribes to help protect traditional tribal cultural places as part of a general plan adoption or amendment. Unlike AB 52, SB 18 is not an amendment to, or otherwise associated with, CEQA. Instead, SB 18 requires that, prior to the adoption or amendment of a city or county's general plan, the city or county must conduct consultations with California Native American tribes for the purpose of preserving specified places, features, and objects that are located within the city or county's jurisdiction. Under SB 18, cities and counties must notify the appropriate Native American tribe(s) of intended adoption or amendments to general plans and offer the opportunity for the tribe(s) to consult regarding traditional tribal cultural places within the proposed plan area.

The City sent letters to the local Native American contacts identified by the NAHC on December 27, 2023. The City did not receive any requests for consultation from local tribes regarding the proposed project.

Discussion:
a -b.

The project site does not contain any known tribal cultural resources that have been listed, or are eligible for listing, in the CRHR, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k). The potential for the existence of buried archaeological materials within the project area is considered low based on the historic physical setting and extent of previous disturbance. In addition, the City provided notification to local tribes regarding the proposed project and received no requests for consultation. Despite the low sensitivity of the site, discovery of unknown subsurface resources during future earthmoving activities associated with future development of the project site is always a possibility. Unknown significant subsurface resources, as described in Section 5, Cultural Resources, would be considered significant tribal cultural resources, as well. Standard mitigation has been proposed to ensure impacts to any unknown resources that may be encountered during project development would be avoided and/or minimized; therefore, potential project impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Any previously unidentified resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramic, wood, or shell artifacts; fossils; or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites.

If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan, in conjunction with locally affiliated Native American representative(s) as necessary that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant. The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analysis, prepare a comprehensive report, and file it with the CCIC, located at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered materials.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 56 ends

19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a.

Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
X
b.

Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
X
c.

Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to
serve the project's projected demand in addition
to the provider's existing commitments?
X
d.

Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment
of solid waste reduction goals?
X
e.

Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
X
Setting:

The City operates its own wastewater collection and treatment system. The City's wastewater collection system consists of eight wastewater basins with associated trunk sewers and one treatment plant. The Department of Utilities is responsible for delivering water, treating wastewater, refuse collection, recycling, operating the Santa Maria Regional Landfill and its Household Hazardous Waste Facility, street sweeping, and regulatory compliance. The Water Resources Operation and Maintenance Section is responsible for supplying residents with potable water for domestic, industrial, and fire protection purposes. Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services consist of six distinct areas: refuse collection/residential, refuse collection/commercial, landfill disposal operations, street sweeping, recycling operations, and regulatory compliance. PG&E is the primary electricity provider and SoCalGas is the primary natural gas provider for the city.

Discussion:
a. The project site is located in a fully urbanized area with existing utility infrastructure in place. The City provides water, wastewater treatment, and solid waste services to the City of Santa Maria. Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) provides electricity to the project site. Additionally, natural gas on the project site would be provided by the Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas), and the City has access to multiple telecommunications providers including Verizon, T -Mobile, AT&T, etc. that would provide service.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 57 ends

The existing infrastructure noted above has adequate capacity to support the proposed project.

Therefore, no additional facilities would be required as a result of project implementation and this impact would be less than significant.
b. The City's 2015 Utility Capacity Study provides zoning demand factors for estimated water usage. The site's existing OS Zone designation was estimated to use 1,500 gallons per day per acre (gpd/acre) and the proposed M-1 zone designation was estimated to use 1,100 gpd/acre. Additionally, according to the City's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the City's water supply would meet projected water demands through 2045 (City of Santa Maria 2020). Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. The City Utilities Department owns and operates the wastewater system for the City of Santa Maria.

Currently, the City disposes of all of its treated wastewater through percolation ponds under its Waste Discharge Requirements permit. The City's wastewater treatment plant was expanded in 2009 and has a current capacity of 13.5 million gallons per day, allowing the City to serve a population of up to 120,000 people. The future light industrial manufacturing project enabled by the GPZ is not expected to trigger impacts to the capacity constrained sewer segments identified in the 2012 Utilities Study.

Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
d -e. The City currently disposes of solid waste at the Santa Maria Regional Landfill, located at 2065 East Main Street in Santa Maria. The City has also initiated development of a new landfill —the Santa Maria Integrated Waste Management Facility (Los Flores Ranch Landfill; Facility No. 42 -AA -0076), located in the Solomon Hills approximately 8 miles southwest of the city and 0.5 mile east of US 101 in an unincorporated portion of Santa Barbara County. The new facility will have a design capacity of approximately 131 million cubic yards of waste with an estimated closure date of 2105. The permit for the new facility is consistent with the Santa Barbara County Integrated Waste Management Plan, which was approved by the California Department of Resource Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) on October 18, 2011, as well as the standards adopted by CalRecycle, pursuant to PRC Section 44010. In addition, the design and planned operation of the facility is consistent with the State Minimum Standards for Solid Waste Handling and Disposal as determined by the enforcement agency based on review of the January 11, 2011, Joint Technical Document, pursuant to PRC Section 44009.

The project would rely on the City's solid waste collection services and facilities. Based on the existing and projected available capacity, the proposed future industrial or manufacturing development enabled by the GPZ would not result in the need for new or expanded solid waste facilities. Therefore, potential impacts associated with generation of solid waste in excess of local infrastructure capacity and compliance with state and local solid waste regulations would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to utilities and service systems; therefore, mitigation is not necessary.

20. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility areas or
lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a.

Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
X
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ
GPZ2023-0001
September 2024
Environmental Checklist

Page 58 ends

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

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b.

Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby
expose project occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
c.

Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines
or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or
that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts
to the environment?
X
d.

Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
Setting:

The project is located in an urban area within Santa Maria. The Integrated Regional Multi -Hazard Emergency Response Plan for the Cities of Santa Maria and Guadalupe was established in order to clearly delineate the planning areas procedures and policies when responding to a major emergency event. This includes any significant threat or potential disaster which could impact the health, safety, and property of the public within the planning area. The objectives of this plan include, but are not limited to, identifying authorities and their respective responsibilities for planning and response activities, establishing the policies for providing emergency information to the public, and describing the resources available to support emergency response activities.

The urbanized areas of Santa Maria are generally protected from most aspects of grassland and brush fires.

However, accumulating weeds along roadsides and in vacant lots make even urban locations potentially hazardous from a wildland fire standpoint. For these reasons, an enforceable weed abatement program was established in 2017 to reduce these risks whenever structures are present.

The California Fire Code provides minimum standards for many aspects of fire prevention and suppression activities. These standards include provisions for emergency vehicle access, water supply, fire protection systems, and the use of fire-resistant building materials.

Discussion:
a. Implementation of a future industrial or manufacturing building from the proposed project would not result in a significant temporary or permanent impact on any adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans. No breaks in utility service or road closures would occur as a result of project implementation; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. b. The project site is located within a developed site located within an urban area of Santa Maria. Future development of the project site would not substantially change the existing topography of the project site. Future development would be required to meet all applicable standards for fire prevention within the CBC and California Fire Code, including having adequate access to water for fire protection purposes, provision of fire detection equipment, fire sprinklers, etc. Future development would also be required to comply with the City weed abatement program. Therefore, the project would not exacerbate A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 59 ends

wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire, and potential impacts would be less than significant. c. The future development project would include the installation of new electricity, water, wastewater, stormwater, and natural gas infrastructure and connections to City infrastructure. These proposed infrastructure components would occur within existing developed land and would be required to be installed in full compliance with applicable CBC and California Fire Code regulations; therefore, potential impacts associated with exacerbation of fire risk from installation of new infrastructure would be less than significant.
d. The project site is generally flat and would not be located near a hillslope or in an area subject to downstream flooding or landslides. A future industrial or manufacturing development shall not include any design elements that would expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s) incorporated into the project:

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts related to wildfire; therefore, mitigation is not necessary.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 60 ends

CONSULTATION AND DATA SOURCES

CONSULTATION SOURCES
City Departments Consulted
Administrative Services
Attorney
Fire
Library
City Manager
Police
Public Works
Utilities
Recreation and Parks
X
X
X
X
County Agencies/Departments Consulted
Air Pollution Control District
Association of Governments
Flood Control District
Environmental Health
Fire (Hazardous Materials)
LAFCO
Public Works
Planning and Development
Other (list)
X
X
Special Districts Consulted
Santa Maria Public Airport
Airport Land Use Commission
Cemetery
Santa -Maria Bonita School District
Santa Maria Joint Union High School
Laguna County Sanitation District
Cal Cities Water Company
State/Federal Agencies Consulted
Army Corps of Engineers
Caltrans
CA Fish and Game
Federal Fish and Wildlife
FAA
Regional Water Quality Control Bd.

Integrated Waste Management Bd.

Other (list)
X
X
General Plan
Land Use Element
Circulation Element
Safety Element
Noise Element
Housing Element
Resources Management Element
X
X
X
X
X
Other
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

DATA SOURCES
Agricultural Preserve Maps
Archaeological Maps/Reports
Architectural Elevations
Biology Reports
CA Oil and Gas Maps
FEMA Maps (Flood)
Grading Plans
Site Plan
Topographic Maps
Aerial Photos
Traffic Studies
Trip Generation Manual (ITE)
URBEMIS Air Quality Model
Zoning Maps
Other: Airport Land Use Compatibility
Plan
Appendix
A - August 2023 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Study - Rincon Consultants, Inc
B- October 2023 Biological Resources Assessment —
David Wolff Environmental, LLC
C August 2023 Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment - Rincon Consultants, Inc
D- September 2023 Transportation Impact Study —
Central Coast Transportation Consulting
E- Response to Public Comments
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 61 ends

OTHER SOURCES CONSULTED:

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2016a. Ambient Air Quality Standards. May 4, 2016. Available at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf .

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2016b. Area Designation Maps / State and National. October 2020.

Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm .

California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2010. Fault Activity Map of Califomia (2010). Available at:
http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/ .

California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2016. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ .

California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2021. Santa Barbara County Tsunami Inundation Maps.

Available at: http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Pages/Tsunami/Maps/SantaBarbara.aspx .

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2018. California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project: A Strategy for Conserving a Connected California. Available at:
https://www.wildl ife.ca.gov/conservation/planning/con nectivity/CEH C.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2020. California Natural Diversity Database Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). Available at: https://wildlife.ca.gov/data/BIOS .

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2018b. Special Plant and Animal Lists. Available at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/list.html >
California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTCS). 2023. EnviroStor. Available at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/ .

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2022. California Scenic Highway Mapping System.

Available at: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community- livability/lap-Iiv-i-scenic-highways.

California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA). 2023. Cortese List Data Resources. Available at:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/ .

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2023. GeoTracker. Available at:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ .

City of Santa Maria. 2019. Zoning Ordinance/Map. Available at:
https://www.cityofsantamaria.org/home/showpubl isheddocu ment/10037/636837414217430000.

City of Santa Maria. 2015. 2012 Utilities Capacity Study. Available at:
https://www.cityofsantamaria.org/home/showpubl isheddocu ment/12210/635763605040230000 City of Santa Maria. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2021. Available at:
https://www.cityofsantamaria.org/home/showpubl isheddocu ment/28900/637613361539900000.

City of Santa Maria. 2022. Santa Maria Municipal Code. Available at:
https://library.qcode.us/lib/santa_maria_ca/pub/municipal_code .

City of Santa Maria. 2020. City of Santa Maria Environmental Procedures and Guidelines. Available at:
https://www.cityofsantamaria.org/home/showpublisheddocument/6941 /637481268778030000.

Diblee, T. W. 1994. Geologic Map of the Santa Maria and Twitchell Dam Quadrangles. Available at:
https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_71688.htm .

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2023. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Available at:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home .

Luhdorff and Scalmaninin Consulting Engineers. 2017 Annual Report of Hydrogeologic Conditions, Water Requirements, Supplies and Disposition — Santa Maria Valley Management Area. April 2018.

Available at: https://www.cityofsantamaria.org/home/showdocument?id=24051 .

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 62 ends

Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). 2023. Delivering Low -Emission Energy. Available at:
https://www . pge.com/en_US/about-pge/environ ment/what-we-are-doing/clean-energy- solutions/clean-energy-solutions.page.

Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD). 2022. Scope and Content of Air Quality Sections in Environmental Documents. January 2022 Limited Update. Available at:
https://www.ourair.org/wp-content/uploads/ScopeContentJanuary2022-LimitedU pdates.pdf.

Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD). 2022. 2022 Ozone Plan. Available at:
https://www.ourair.org/wp-content/uploads/2022-Ozone-Plan.pdf .

Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG). 2012. Regional Growth Forecast 2010-2040.

Available at: http://www.sbcag.org/uploads/2/4/5/4/24540302/regional_growth forecast_2010- 2040.pdf.

Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG). 2023. Santa Maria Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Available at:
http://www.sbcag.org/uploads/2/4/5/4/24540302/smx alucp_v2_final.pdf.

U.S. Department of Agricultural, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2019. Web Soil Survey.

Available at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/ .

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. National Wetlands Inventory (Wetlands Mapper). Accessed on https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/ .

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2020. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPAC). Available at:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/ .

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2019. Amphibian & Reptiles: Species Information for California Red -Legged Frog and California Tiger Salamander. Available at:
https://www.fws.gov/sacramento/es_species/Accounts/Amphibians-Reptiles/ >.

Woodring, W.P. and Bramlette, M.N. 1950. Geology and Paleontology of the Santa Maria District California, Geological Survey Professional Paper 222. Available at: https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/0222/report.pdf > A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 63 ends

MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant Impact
No Impact

1. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
X

2. Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects.)
X

3. Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
X
Discussion:

Proposed development of the land uses permitted under the proposed PD/M-1 zoning designation within the project site have the potential to result in temporary construction related impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and tribal cultural resources. However, mitigation measures have been identified to reduce potential impacts to a less -than - significant level, including but not limited to, fugitive dust controls, diesel -idling minimization, nesting bird avoidance, California Red -Legged Frog avoidance, inadvertent discovery of archaeological and paleontological resources protocol, soil management and noise control measures.

When a project's impacts are considered along or in combination with other reasonably foreseeable impacts, a project's potential cumulative impacts may be found to be significant. However, in this case, mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce project -related impacts to a less -than -significant level. Based on implementation of identified project -specific mitigation measures and the relatively limited number and extent of potential impacts, the cumulative effects of the proposed project would not be cumulatively considerable and would be less than significant.

With incorporation of mitigation measures identified in this Initial Study, potential environmental effects of the project would not directly or indirectly result in any substantial adverse effects on human beings and this impact would be less than significant.

A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 64 ends

SUMMARY OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
X
X
X
X
X
Aesthetics
Agriculture and Forest Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Energy
Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use and Planning
X
X
X
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation
Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and Services Systems
Wildfire
Mandatory Findings of Significance
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 65 ends

DETERMINATION
On the basis of the Initial Study, the staff of the Community Development Department:

Finds that the proposed project is a Class CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION and no further environmental review is required.

Finds that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

X Finds that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

Finds that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

Finds that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to acceptable standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on the attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR)/SUBSEQUENT EIR/SUPPLEMENTAL EIR/ADDENDUM is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

Finds that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to acceptable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

CodytGraybehl Dana Eady
Environmental Analyst
(o/c6( 2`l
Date
City of Santa Maria
Community Development Department
110 South Pine Street, #101
Santa Maria, CA 93458
805-925-0951
Environmental Officer
/217
Date
A Street and Fairway Drive GPZ September 2024
GPZ2023-0001 Environmental Checklist

Page 66 ends

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study
prepared for
RRM Design Group
3765 South Higuera Street, Suite 102
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Contact: Pam A. Ricci
prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
319 East Carrillo Street, Suite 105
Santa Barbara, California 93101
August 2023
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.

Environmental Scientists I Planners I Engineers
rinconconsultants.com
Appendix A

Table of Contents
Table of Contents
1 Project Description 1

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Project Summary 1
2 Air Quality 5

2.1 Environmental and Regulatory Setting 5

2.1.1 Local Climate and Meteorology 5

2.1.2 Air Pollutants of Primary Concern 6

2.2 Air Quality Regulation 8

2.3 Current Air Quality 14

2.4 Impact Analysis 15

2.4.1 Methodology 15

2.4.2 Significance Thresholds 16

2.4.3 Project Impacts 18
3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 23

3.1 Environmental and Regulatory Setting 23

3.1.1 Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases 23

3.1.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory 24

3.1.3 Potential Effects of Climate Change 25

3.1.4 Regulatory Setting 27

3.2 Impact Analysis 34

3.2.1 Methodology 34

3.2.2 Significance Thresholds 35

3.2.3 Project -Level Impact Analysis 36
4 References 39
Tables
Table 1 Summary of Impacts 1
Table 2 Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards 10 Table 3 Ambient Air Quality at the Nearest Monitoring Station 14 Table 4 SBCAG Population and Job Projections for Santa Maria 18 Table 5 Estimated Annual Construction Emissions 20
Table 6 Estimated Average Daily Operational Emissions 21 Table 7 Estimated GHG Emissions during Construction 37
Table 8 Combined Annual GHG Emissions 38
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study i

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
Figures
Figure 1 Regional Location 3
Figure 2 Project Site Location 4
Appendices
Appendix A California Emissions Estimator Model Outputs ii

Project Description
1 Project Description

1.1 Introduction
This study analyzes the potential air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impacts of the proposed Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project (herein referred to as "project" or "proposed project") in Santa Maria, California. Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) prepared this study under contract to RRM Design Group in support of environmental documentation being prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The purpose of this study is to analyze the project's air quality and GHG emissions impacts related to both temporary construction activity and long-term operation of the project. The conclusions of this study are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1 Summary of Impacts
Impact Statement
Proposed Project's Applicable
Level of Significance Recommendations
Air Quality
Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of Less than significant Impact None the applicable air quality plan?
Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable net Less than significant impact None increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is in non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Would the Project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less than significant impact None
Less than significant impact None
Less than significant impact None
Less than significant impact None

1.2 Project Summary
Project Location
The project site is a mostly vacant 6.95 -acre parcel located on the west side of A Street, opposite the intersection of Fairway Drive in the City of Santa Maria (City). The project site's land use classification is Airport Service (AS -1) and zoning designation is Open Space (OS). Nearby land uses include commercial uses to the north, commercial and industrial uses to the east, Santa Maria Airport and open space to the south, and open space to the west. Figure 1 shows the project site's regional location, and Figure 2 shows an aerial view of the project site.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 1

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
Project Description
The project would consist of changing the site's land use classification from Airport Service (AS -1) to Light Industrial (LI) and rezoning from Open Space (OS) to Light Manufacturing (M-1). The goal of rezoning the project site is to provide the opportunity to develop the site with a light industrial use that is compatible to those in the near vicinity. Development of the project site would have a maximum build -out range of 75,000 to 100,000 square feet of buildings.

Construction
Construction activities are anticipated to occur over the course of 14 months from June 2025 through July 2026. Construction would involve demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. The Project would involve construction of a maximum buildout range of 75,000 to 100,000 square feet of buildings. The Project site is vacant; however, approximately 15,000 to 20,000 cubic yards would be imported onsite to elevate the site above the adjacent flood elevation.
2 Project Description
Figure 1 Regional Location
Uceano Dunes
State Vehicular
Recreation Area
o Nr
nr
Willow Rd
P
fr
Nipomo io
N o, 5:7
St p "iyRo,
W Main St
Pa
aJ
P h' _avia Rd m
oe
ro
tya
u(ifir O( E'u/i
god
Qo
oc
Vandenberg Air
Force Base
0 2.5 5 Miles
I I I
SOS
if
W Donovan Rd
E Alvin Avp
n E Main St S
Santa Maria
E, bane, IV, I lid
r
oY aI"Or v
E Foster Rd
Orcutt
E (lark Ave
Dominion Rd
1135)
e§
i
)
Santa
Mamma
�Pf
oT'v
fPKPn
(anYo
C
Imagery prey! y Esri on 'censor © 2023.

Project Location
Coalinga
Avenal
San Luis Obispo
Santa Maria
Lompoc
'101S
Santa Barbara
Bakersfie::

Los Padres
National
Forest
Oxnard
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study
3 dirsb
de b

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
Figure 2 Project Site Location
Imagery provided by Microsoft Bing and its licensors (D 2023.

Project Boundary
4 Air Quality
2 Air Quality

2.1 Environmental and Regulatory Setting

2.1.1 Local Climate and Meteorology
California is divided geographically into 15 air basins for managing the air resources of the state on a regional basis. Areas within each air basin are considered to share the same air masses and, therefore, are expected to have similar ambient air quality. The Project site is located in the South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB), which covers San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura counties.

The Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) monitors and regulates local air quality in Santa Barbara County. The climate of the SCCAB is strongly influenced by its proximity to the Pacific Ocean and the location of the high-pressure cell in the northeastern Pacific. With a Mediterranean type climate, Santa Maria is characterized by warm, dry summers and cool winters with occasional rainy periods.

Cool, humid, marine air causes frequent fog and low clouds along the coast, generally during the night and morning hours in the late spring and early summer months. The Project area is subject to a diurnal cycle in which daily onshore winds from the west and northwest are replaced by mild offshore breezes flowing from warm inland valleys during night and early morning hours. This alternating cycle can create a situation where suspended pollutants are swept offshore at night, and then carried back onshore the following day. Dispersion of pollutants is further degraded when the wind velocity for both day and nighttime breezes is low. The region is also subject to seasonal "Santa Ana" winds. These are typically hot, dry northerly winds which blow offshore at 15 to 20 miles per hour (mph), but can reach speeds in excess of 60 mph.

Two types of temperature inversions (warmer air on top of cooler air) are created in the area:
subsidence and radiational. The subsidence inversion is a regional effect created by the Pacific high in which air is heated as it is compressed when it flows from a high-pressure area to low pressure areas inland. This type of inversion generally forms at about 1,000 to 2,000 feet and can occur throughout the year, but it is most evident during the summer months. Radiational, or surface, inversions are formed by the more rapid cooling of air near the ground during the night, especially during winter. This type of inversion is typically lower (0 to S00 feet at Vandenberg Air Force Base, for example) and is generally accompanied by stable air. Both types of inversions limit the dispersal of air pollutants within the regional airshed, with the more stable the air (low wind speeds, uniform temperatures), the lower the amount of pollutant dispersion.

Air pollutant emissions in the SCCAB are generated primarily by stationary and mobile sources.

Stationary sources can be divided into two major subcategories: point and area sources. Point sources occur at a specific location and are often identified by an exhaust vent or stack. Examples include boilers or combustion equipment that produce electricity or generate heat. Area sources are widely distributed and include such sources as residential and commercial water heaters, painting operations, lawn mowers, agricultural fields, landfills, and some consumer products. Mobile sources refer to emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions, and are classified as either on -road or off -road. On -road sources may be legally operated on roadways and highways. Off -road sources include aircraft, ships, trains, and self-propelled construction equipment. Air pollutants can also be generated by the natural environment, such as when high winds suspend fine dust particles.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 5

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
The predominant wind direction in the vicinity of project site is from the northwest, and the average wind speed is approximately 7 mph (Western Regional Climate Center 2023). The average daily high temperature in the project area is approximately 69 degrees Fahrenheit (°F), and the minimum average daily temperature is approximately 46°F. Total precipitation in the project area averages approximately 13.95 inches annually (U.S. Climate Data 2023).

2.1.2 Air Pollutants of Primary Concern
Primary criteria pollutants are emitted directly from a source (e.g., vehicle tailpipe, an exhaust stack of a factory, etc.) into the atmosphere. Primary criteria pollutants include carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), fine particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.$), sulfur dioxide (S02), and lead.

Ozone is considered a secondary criteria pollutant because it is created by atmospheric chemical and photochemical reactions between reactive organic compounds (ROC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). The Project would generate CO, PMlo, PM2.5, S02, and lead as well as ozone precursors ROC and NOx (including NO2) during construction and operation. These pollutants can have adverse impacts on human health at certain levels of exposure. The following subsections describe the characteristics, sources, and health and atmospheric effects of air pollutants.

Ozone
Ozone (03) is produced by a photochemical reaction (triggered by sunlight) between NOx and ROC.1 NOx is formed during the combustion of fuels, while ROC is formed during the combustion and evaporation of organic solvents. As a highly reactive molecule, 03 readily combines with many different atmosphere components. Consequently, high 03 levels tend to exist only while high ROC and NOx levels are present to sustain the 03 formation process. Once the precursors have been depleted, 03 levels rapidly decline. Because these reactions occur on a regional rather than local scale, 03 is considered a regional pollutant. In addition, because 03 requires sunlight to form, it mainly occurs in concentrations considered serious between April and October. People most at risk from 03 include people with asthma, children, older adults, and people who are active outdoors, especially outdoor workers. In addition, people with reduced intake of certain nutrients, such as vitamins C and E, are at greater risk from 03 exposure. Depending on the level of exposure, 03 can cause coughing and a sore or scratch throat; make it more difficult to breathe deeply and vigorously and cause pain when taking a deep breath; inflame and damage the airways; make the lungs more susceptible to infection; aggravate lung diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and chronic bronchitis; and increase the frequency of asthma attacks (United States Environmental Protection Agency [U.S. EPA] 2023a).

Carbon Monoxide
CO is a localized pollutant found in high concentrations only near its source. The primary source of CO, a colorless, odorless, poisonous gas, is automobile traffic's incomplete combustion of petroleum fuels. Therefore, elevated concentrations are usually only found near areas of high traffic volumes.

When CO levels are elevated outdoors, they can be of particular concern for people with some types of heart disease. These people already have a reduced ability to get oxygenated blood to their 1 Organic compound precursors of ozone are routinely described by a number of variations of three terms: hydrocarbons (HC), organic gases (OG), and organic compounds (OC). These terms are often modified by adjectives such as total, reactive, or volatile, and result in a rather confusing array of acronyms: HC, THC (total hydrocarbons), RHC (reactive hydrocarbons), TOG (total organic gases), ROG (reactive organic gases), TOC (total organic compounds), ROC (reactive organic compounds), and VOC (volatile organic compounds). While most of these differ in some significant way from a chemical perspective, two groups are important from an air quality perspective: non- photochemically reactive in the lower atmosphere, or photochemically reactive in the lower atmosphere (HC, RHC, ROG, ROC, and VOC).

SBCAPCD uses the term ROC to denote organic precursors. 6 Air Quality
hearts in situations where they need more oxygen than usual. As a result, they are especially vulnerable to the effects of CO when exercising or under increased stress. In these situations, short- term exposure to elevated CO may result in reduced oxygen to the heart accompanied by chest pain, also known as angina (U.S. EPA 2023b)
Nitrogen Dioxide
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is a by-product of fuel combustion. The primary sources are motor vehicles and industrial boilers, and furnaces. The principal form of NOX produced by combustion is nitric oxide (NO), but NO reacts rapidly to form NO2, creating the mixture of NO and NO2, commonly called NOX. NO2 is a reactive, oxidizing gas and an acute irritant capable of damaging cell linings in the respiratory tract. Breathing air with a high concentration of NO2 can irritate airways in the human respiratory system. Such exposures over short periods can aggravate respiratory diseases leading to respiratory symptoms (such as coughing, wheezing, or difficulty breathing), hospital admissions, and visits to emergency rooms. Longer exposures to elevated concentrations of NO2 may contribute to the development of asthma and potentially increase susceptibility to respiratory infections. People with asthma, such as children and the elderly are generally at greater risk for the health effects of NO2 (U.S. EPA 2023c). NO2 absorbs blue light and causes a reddish -brown cast to the atmosphere and reduced visibility. It can also contribute to the formation of 03 (smog) and acid rain.

Sulfur Dioxide
SO2 is included in a group of highly reactive gases known as "oxides of sulfur." The largest sources of SO2 emissions are from fossil fuel combustion at power plants (73 percent) and other industrial facilities (20 percent). Smaller sources of SO2 emissions include industrial processes such as extracting metal from ore and burning fuels with a high sulfur content by locomotives, large ships, and off -road equipment. Short-term exposures to SO2 can harm the human respiratory system and make breathing difficult. People with asthma, particularly children, are sensitive to these effects of SO2 (U.S. EPA 2023d).

Particulate Matter
Suspended atmospheric PM10 and PM2.5 are comprised of finely divided solids and liquids such as dust, soot, aerosols, fumes, and mists. Both PM10 and PM2.5 are emitted into the atmosphere as by- products of fuel combustion and wind erosion of soil and unpaved roads. The atmosphere, through chemical reactions, can form particulate matter. The characteristics, sources, and potential health effects of PM1.0 and PM2.5 can be very different. PM10 is generally associated with dust mobilized by wind and vehicles. In contrast, PM2.s is generally associated with combustion processes and formation in the atmosphere as a secondary pollutant through chemical reactions. PM1.0 can cause increased respiratory disease, lung damage, cancer, premature death, reduced visibility, surface soiling. For PM2.5, short-term exposures (up to 24 -hours duration) have been associated with premature mortality, increased hospital admissions for heart or lung causes, acute and chronic bronchitis, asthma attacks, emergency room visits, respiratory symptoms, and restricted activity days. These adverse health effects have been reported primarily in infants, children, and older adults with preexisting heart or lung diseases (California Air Resource Board [CARB] 2023a]).

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 7

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
Lead
Lead (Pb) is a metal found naturally in the environment, as well as in manufacturing products. The major sources of lead emissions historically have been mobile and industrial. However, due to the United States EPA's regulatory efforts to remove lead from gasoline, atmospheric Pb concentrations have declined substantially over the past several decades. The most dramatic reductions in Pb emissions occurred before 1990 due to the removal of Pb from gasoline sold for most highway vehicles. Pb emissions were further reduced substantially between 1990 and 2008, with reductions occurring in the metals industries at least partly due to national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants (U.S. EPA 2014). As a result of phasing out leaded gasoline, metal processing is currently the primary source of Pb emissions. The highest Pb level in the air is generally found near Pb smelters. Other stationary sources include waste incinerators, utilities, and Pb-acid battery manufacturers. Pb can adversely affect the nervous system, kidney function, immune system, reproductive and developmental systems, and cardiovascular system depending on exposure. Pb exposure also affects the oxygen -carrying capacity of the blood. The Pb effects most likely encountered in current populations are neurological in children. Infants and young children are susceptible to Pb exposures, contributing to behavioral problems, learning deficits, and lowered IQ (U.S. EPA 2023e).

Toxic Air Contaminants
In addition to the criteria pollutants discussed above, Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC) are airborne substances diverse group of air pollutants that may cause or contribute to an increase in deaths or serious illness, or that may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. TACs include both organic and inorganic chemical substances that may be emitted from a variety of common sources, including gasoline stations, motor vehicles, dry cleaners, industrial operations, painting operations, and research and teaching facilities. One of the main sources of TACs in California is diesel engine exhaust that contains solid material known as diesel particulate matter (DPM). More than 90 percent of DPM is less than one micron in diameter (about 1/70th the diameter of a human hair) and thus is a subset of PM2.s. Because of their extremely small size, these particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar regions of the lungs (CARB 2023a). TACs are different than criteria pollutants because ambient air quality standards have not been established for TACs. TACs occurring at extremely low levels may still cause health effects and it is typically difficult to identify levels of exposure that do not produce adverse health effects. TAC impacts are described by carcinogenic risk and by chronic (i.e., long duration) and acute (i.e., severe but of short duration) adverse effects on human health. People exposed to TACs at sufficient concentrations and durations may have an increased chance of getting cancer or experiencing other serious health effects. These health effects can include damage to the immune system, as well as neurological, reproductive (e.g., reduced fertility), developmental, respiratory, and other health problems (U.S.

EPA 2023f).

2.2 Air Quality Regulation
The federal and state governments have authority under the federal and state Clean Air Act (CAA) to regulate emissions of airborne pollutants and have established ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for the protection of public health. An air quality standard is defined as "the maximum amount of a pollutant averaged over a specified period of time that can be present in outdoor air without harming public health" (CARB 2023b). The U.S. EPA is the federal agency designated to administer air quality regulation, while CARB is the state equivalent in California. Federal and state AAQS have 8 Air Quality
been established for six criteria pollutants: 03, CO, NO2, S02, PMlo, PM2.s, and Pb. AAQS are designed to protect those segments of the public most susceptible to respiratory distress, such as children under the age of 14, the elderly (over the age of 65), persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases (U.S. EPA 2016). In addition, the State of California has established health -based ambient air quality standards for these and other pollutants, some of which are more stringent than the federal standards (CARB 2023c).

The federal and state Clean Air Acts are described in more detail below.

Federal Air Quality Regulations
The federal CAA was enacted in 1970 and amended in 1977 and 1990 (42 United States Code [USC] 7401) for the purposes of protecting and enhancing the quality of the nation's air resources to benefit public health, welfare, and productivity. In 1971, to achieve the purposes of Section 109 of the CAA (42 USC 7409), the U.S. EPA developed primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). NAAQS have been designated for the following criteria pollutants: ozone, CO, NO2, S02, PMlo, PM2.s, and lead.

The primary NAAQS "in the judgment of the Administrator2, based on such criteria and allowing an adequate margin of safety, are requisite to protect the public health," and the secondary standards are to "protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects associated with the presence of such air pollutant in the ambient air" (42 USC 7409[b][2]). The U.S. EPA classifies specific geographic areas as either "attainment" or "nonattainment" areas for each pollutant based on the comparison of measured data with the NAAQS. States are required to adopt an enforceable plan, known as a State Implementation Plan (SIP), to achieve and maintain air quality meeting the NAAQS. State plans also must control emissions that drift across state lines and adversely affect air quality in downwind states. Once a nonattainment area has achieved the air quality standards for a particular pollutant, it may be redesignated to an attainment area for that pollutant. To be redesignated, the area must meet air quality standards and have a 10 -year plan for continuing to meet and maintain air quality standards, as well as satisfy other requirements of the federal CAA.

Areas that have been redesignated to attainment are called maintenance areas. Table 2 lists the current federal standards for regulated pollutants.
2 The term "Administrator" means the Administrator of the U.S. EPA.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 9

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
Table 2 Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards Pollutant
NAAQS
CAAQS
Ozone
Carbon Monoxide
Nitrogen Dioxide
Sulfur Dioxide
Lead
Particulate Matter (PMIo)
Particulate Matter (PM2s)
Visibility -Reducing Particles
Sulfates
Hydrogen Sulfide
Vinyl Chloride

0.070 ppm (8 -hr avg)

35.0 ppm (1 -hr avg)

9.0 ppm (8 -hr avg)

0.100 ppm (1 -hr avg)

0.053 ppm (annual avg)

0.075 ppm (1 -hr avg)

0.5 ppm (3 -hr avg)

0.14 ppm (24 -hr avg)

0.030 ppm (annual avg)

0.15 µg/m3 (rolling 3 -month avg)

1.5 µg/m3 (calendar quarter)
150 µg/m3 (24 -hr avg)
35 µg/m3 (24 -hr avg)
12 µg/m3 (annual avg)
No Federal Standards
No Federal Standards
No Federal Standards
No Federal Standards

0.09 ppm (1 -hr avg)

0.070 ppm (8 -hr avg)

20.0 ppm (1 -hr avg)

9.0 ppm (8 -hr avg)

0.18 ppm (1 -hr avg)

0.030 ppm (annual avg)

0.25 ppm (1 -hr avg)

0.04 ppm (24 -hr avg)

1.5 µg/m3 (30 -day avg)
50 µg/m3 (24 -hr avg)
20 µg/m3 (annual avg)
12 µg/m3 (annual avg)
Extinction coefficient of 0.23 per kilometer —
visibility of ten miles or more (0.07 - 30 miles or
more for Lake Tahoe) due to particles when
relative humidity is less than 70 percent.

Method: Beta Attenuation and Transmittance
through Filter Tape. (8 -hr avg)
25 µg/m3 (24 -hr avg)

0.03 ppm (1 -hr avg)

0.01 ppm (24 -hr avg)
NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards; CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standards; ppm = parts per million; avg = average; µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter
Source: CARB 2016
To derive the NAAQS, the U.S. EPA reviews data from integrated science assessments and risk/exposure assessments to determine the ambient pollutant concentrations at which human health impacts occur, then reduces these concentrations to establish a margin of safety (U.S. EPA 2022a). As a result, human health impacts caused by the air pollutants discussed above may affect people when ambient air pollutant concentrations are at or above the concentrations established by the NAAQS. The closer a region is to attainting a particular NAAQS, the lower the human health impact is from that pollutant (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2015). Accordingly, ambient air pollutant concentrations below the NAAQS are considered to be protective of human health (CARB 2023b and 2023c). The NAAQS and the underlying science that forms the basis of the 10 Air Quality
NAAQS are reviewed every five years to determine whether updates are necessary to continue protecting public health with an adequate margin of safety (U.S. EPA 2015).

State Air Quality Regulations

CALIFORNIA CLEAN AIR ACT
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) was enacted in 1988 (California Health & Safety Code §39000 et seq.). Under the CCAA, the state has developed the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), which are generally more stringent than the NAAQS. Table 2 lists the current state standards for regulated pollutants. In addition to the federal criteria pollutants, the CAAQS also specify standards for visibility -reducing particles, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride.

Similar to the federal CAA, the CCAA classifies specific geographic areas as either "attainment" or "nonattainment" areas for each pollutant, based on the comparison of measured data within the CAAQS.

Toxic AIR CONTAMINANTS
A toxic air contaminant (TAC) is an air pollutant that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. TACs may result in long-term health effects such as cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, asthma, or genetic damage, or short-term acute effects such as eye watering, respiratory irritation, runny nose, throat pain, and headaches. TACs are considered either carcinogenic or non -carcinogenic based on the nature of the health effects associated with exposure. For carcinogenic TACs, potential health impacts are evaluated in terms of overall relative risk expressed as excess cancer cases per one million exposed individuals. Non -carcinogenic TACs differ in that there is generally assumed to be a safe level of exposure below which no negative health impact is believed to occur. These levels are determined on a pollutant -by -pollutant basis.

TACs include both organic and inorganic chemical substances. One of the main sources of TACs in California is diesel engines that emit exhaust containing solid material known as DPM; however, TACs may be emitted from a variety of common sources, including gasoline stations, motor vehicles, dry cleaners, industrial operations, painting operations, and research and teaching facilities.

In 1983, the California Legislature enacted a program to identify the health effects of TACs and to reduce exposure to these contaminants to protect the public health (Assembly Bill [AB] 1807: Health and Safety Code Sections 39650-39674). The Legislature established a two-step process to address the potential health effects from TACs. The first step is the risk assessment (or identification) phase.

The second step is the risk management (or control) phase of the process.

The California Air Toxics Program establishes the process for the identification and control of TACs and includes provisions to make the public aware of significant toxic exposures and for reducing risk.

Additionally, the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act (AB 2588, 1987, Connelly Bill) was enacted in 1987 and requires stationary sources to report the types and quantities of certain substances routinely released into the air. The goals of the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Act are to collect emission data, identify facilities having localized impacts, ascertain health risks, notify nearby residents of significant risks, and reduce those significant risks to acceptable levels. The Children's Environmental Health Protection Act, California Senate Bill (SB) 25 (Chapter 731, Escutia, Statutes of 1999), focuses on children's exposure to air pollutants. The act requires the CARB to review its air quality standards from a children's health perspective, evaluate the statewide air quality monitoring network, and develop any additional air toxic control measures needed to protect children's health.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 11

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project

STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The SIP is a collection of documents that set forth the state's strategies for achieving the AAQS. In California, the SIP is a compilation of new and previously submitted plans, programs (such as monitoring, modeling, and permitting), district rules, state regulations, and federal controls. The CARB is the lead agency for all purposes related to the SIP under state law. Local air districts and other agencies, such as the Department of Pesticide Regulation and the Bureau of Automotive Repair, prepare SIP elements and submit them to CARB for review and approval. CARB then forwards SIP revisions to the United States EPA for approval and publication in the Federal Register.

The items included in the California SIP are listed in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR

52.220.

The 2022 Santa Barbara County Ozone Plan is the SIP for Santa Barbara County. The 2022 Ozone Plan (2022 Plan) accommodates growth by projecting the growth in emissions based on different indicators. For example, population forecasts adopted by the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) are used to forecast population -related emissions. Through the planning process, emissions growth is offset by basin -wide controls on stationary, area, and transportation sources of air pollution.

In addition, the following California Code of Regulations would be applicable to the proposed Project:
• Engine Idling. In accordance with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, the idling of all diesel -fueled commercial vehicles (weighing over 10,000 pounds) during construction shall be limited to five minutes at any location. • Emission Standards. In accordance with Section 93115 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations, operation of any stationary, diesel -fueled, compression -ignition engines shall meet specified fuel and fuel additive requirements and emission standards.

NAAQS and CAAQS Attainment Status
California is divided geographically into 15 air basins for managing the air resources of the state on a regional basis. Areas within each air basin are considered to share the same air masses and, therefore, are expected to have similar ambient air quality. If an air basin is not in either federal or state attainment for a particular pollutant, the basin is classified as a nonattainment area for that pollutant. Under the federal and state CAA, once a nonattainment area has achieved the air quality standards for a particular pollutant, it may be redesignated to an attainment area for that pollutant.

To be redesignated, the area must meet air quality standards and have a 10 -year plan for continuing to meet and maintain air quality standards, as well as satisfy other requirements of the federal CAA.

Areas that have been redesignated to attainment are called maintenance areas.

California is divided geographically into 15 air basins for managing the air resources of the state on a regional basis. Areas within each air basin are considered to share the same air masses and, therefore, are expected to have similar ambient air quality. If an air basin is not in either federal or state attainment for a particular pollutant, the basin is classified as a nonattainment area for that pollutant. Under the federal and state CAA, once a nonattainment area has achieved the air quality standards for a particular pollutant, it may be redesignated to an attainment area for that pollutant.

Areas that have been redesignated to attainment are called maintenance areas. 12 Air Quality
The project site is within Santa Barbara County, which currently meets the NAAQS for all criteria air pollutants. Santa Barbara County is classified as attainment/maintenance area under the CAAQS for CO, and attainment for PM2.s. Santa Barbara County is currently classified as a nonattainment area under the CAAQS for 03, and PM10 (SBCAPCD 2023).

Local Air Quality Regulations

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
As the local air quality management agency, the SBCAPCD is required to monitor air pollutant levels to ensure that state and federal air quality standards are met and, if they are not met, to develop strategies to meet the standards. Depending on whether the standards are met or exceeded, the SCCAB is classified as being in "attainment" or "nonattainment." In areas designated as non - attainment for one or more air pollutants, a cumulative air quality impact exists for those air pollutants, and the human health impacts described in Section 2.1, Environmental and Regulatory Setting, are already occurring in that area as part of the environmental baseline condition.

Under state law, air districts are required to prepare a plan for air quality improvement for pollutants for which the district is in non-compliance. The 2001 Clean Air Plan (2002) was the first plan prepared by SBCAPCD and established specific planning requirements to maintain the state one -hour 03 standard. In 2006, CARB revised the CAAQS and added an 8 -hour average to the 03 standard. Both components of the standard must now be met before CARB can designate an area as in attainment. The most recent 2022 Ozone Plan was adopted by SBCAPCD in December 2022 and was the seventh update to the 2001 Clean Air Plan. The 2022 Ozone Plan addresses the state 03 standards only because SBCAPCD is designated "attainment" for the federal 8 -hour 03 standards, including the most recent standard of 0.070 ppm promulgated by the United States EPA in 2015.

To minimize potential impacts from Project emissions, the SBCAPCD implements rules and regulations for emissions that may be generated by various uses and activities. The rules and regulations detail pollution -reduction measures that must be implemented during construction and operation of Projects. Rules and regulations relevant to the Project include the following:
• Rule 345 (Control of Fugitive Dust from Construction and Demolition Activities). This rule establishes fugitive dust control requirements for any activity associated with construction or demolition of a structure or structures.
• Rule 323.1 (Architectural Coatings). This rule establishes volatile organic content limits for architectural coatings that are manufactured, blended, repackaged, supplied, sold, or offered for sale within the SBCAPCD. Rule 323.1 limits the volatile organic content to 50 grams per liter for flat coatings and 100 grams per liter for nonflat coatings and traffic marking coatings. • Rule 329 (Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt Paving Materials). This rule establishes ROC content limits pertaining to the manufacture, application, and sale of cutback and emulsified asphalt materials for paving, construction, and maintenance of streets, highways, parking lots, and driveways.

CITY OF SANTA MARIA
The City of Santa Maria's General Plan, adopted in 1996, lists several air quality policies as part of its Resource Management Element that supplement those of the SBCAPCD. The following policy is applicable to the proposed project (City of Santa Maria 2001):

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 13

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
Policy 2. Improve and maintain the quality of air to ensure the health of all residents in the Santa Maria Valley by reducing mobile and stationary source air pollutant emissions through the use of efficient land use patterns, the implementation and promotion of alternative transportation modes and other transportation system management programs. (Refer to the Circulation Element for related policies and programs.)

2.3 Current Air Quality
Table 3 summarizes the annual air quality data for the local airshed. CARB maintains over 250 air quality monitoring stations throughout California, including 11 stations in Santa Barbara County.

Other monitoring stations in Santa Barbara County are maintained by SBCAPCD. The nearest monitoring station to the project site is the Santa Maria -906 S Broadway station, located at 906 South Broadway approximately 2.5 -miles northeast of the project site. The pollutants monitored at this station include 03, PM1o, PM2.5, and NO2. As shown in Table 3, PM10 measurements exceeded the State standards in the years 2019 through 2021. In addition, PM2.5 measurements exceeded the federal PM2.5 standard exceedances in 2020. No other state or federal standards were exceeded at this monitoring station. Since CO and SO2 are in attainment in the Santa Barbara County region, it's not monitored at the nearest air monitoring station and therefore ambient air quality is not reported for this pollutant.

Table 3 Ambient Air Quality at the Nearest Monitoring Station Pollutant 2019 2020 2021
Ozone (ppm), Worst Hour
Number of days of state exceedances (>0.09 ppm)
Number of days of federal exceedances (>0.12 ppm)
Ozone (ppm), 8 -Hour Average
Number of days of state and federal exceedances (>0.07 ppm) NO2 (ppm), Worst Hour
Number of days of state exceedances (>0.18 ppm)
Number of days of federal exceedances (>0.10 ppm)
PMIo (µg/m3), Worst 24 Hours
Number of days of state exceedances (>50 µg/m3)
Number of days of federal exceedances (>150 µg/m3)
PM2s (µg/m3), Worst 24 Hours
Number of days of federal exceedances (>35 µg/m3)

0.059 0.063 0.075
0 0 0
0 0 0

0.052 0.059 0.50
0 0 0

0.034 0.036 0.025
0 0 0
O 0 0
132.5 113.3 54.3
15 32 1
O 0 0

14.7 88.4 12.4
O 9 0
ppm= parts per million, µg/m3= microgram per cubic meter, NO2= nitrogen dioxide, PMio= particulate matter with 10 microns in diameter or less, PM2.s = particulate matter with 2.5 microns in diameter or less.

Source: CARB 2023d
Sensitive Receptors
CARB and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) have identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, infants (including in utero in the third trimester of pregnancy), and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis (CARB 2005; OEHHA 2015). Some land uses considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to 14 Air Quality
the types of population groups present or activities involved are referred to as sensitive receptors.

Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools/daycare centers, and hospitals. The nearest sensitive receptors are single-family homes approximately 2,170 feet north of the project site and single-family homes approximately 3,340 feet east of the project site.

2.4 Impact Analysis

2.4.1 Methodology
Air pollutant emissions generated by project construction and operation were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod), version 2022.1. CaIEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and GHG emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects.

CaIEEMod allows for the use of standardized data (e.g., emission factors, trip lengths, meteorology, source inventory) provided by the various California air districts to account for local requirements and conditions, and/or user -defined inputs. The calculation methodology and input data used in CaIEEMod can be found in the CaIEEMod User's Guide Appendices C, D, and G (California Air Pollution Control Officers Associated CAPCOA 2022). The analysis reflects construction and operation of the proposed project as described in Section 1.2, Project Summary.

Construction
Project construction would primarily generate temporary criteria pollutant emissions from construction equipment operation on -site, construction worker vehicle trips to and from the site, and import of materials off -site. Construction of the proposed Project was analyzed based on the land use type and square footage provided by the applicant, which includes a maximum range of 100,000 square feet of building square footage. It is assumed a parking lot would be included in the ultimate project; therefore, the project conservatively assumes the remaining project area would be constructed as a parking lot.3 Construction of the proposed Project was assumed to begin in June 2025 and end in July 2026. The analysis used CaIEEMod assumptions for construction schedule, equipment lists, and vehicle trips, based on applicant -provided information. The project would import approximately 20,000 cubic yards of soil import during the grading phase. It is assumed that the existing water pump facility and yard would be removed; therefore, approximately 300 square feet of building material would be demolished, and 14,810 square feet of asphalt material would be removed, based on aerial Google Earth images. In addition, construction equipment used would be diesel -powered and the Project would comply with applicable regulatory standards, such as SBCAPCD fugitive dust control measures and Rule 323.1 Architectural Coating.

Operation
Operational emissions modeled include mobile source emissions, energy emissions, and area source emissions. Mobile source emissions are generated by vehicle trips to and from the project site. The trip generation rates for unrefrigerated no -rail warehouse developments were based on average trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 10th edition of the Trip Generation 3 The project site is approximately 6.95 acres. A minimum 75,000 square foot building would cover approximately 1.71 acres of land (one acre = 43,560 square feet).. Therefore, it is conservatively assumed a parking lot would be 5.23 acres of land (6.95 —1.71 acres = 5.23 acres).

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 15

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
Manual utilized in CaIEEMod (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association [CAPCOA] 2022).4 Emissions attributed to energy use include natural gas consumption by appliances and space and water heating. In addition, area source emissions are generated by consumer products and architectural coatings.

CO Hotspots
According to SBCAPCD's Scope and Content of Air Quality Sections in Environmental Documents, due to the relatively low background ambient CO levels in Santa Barbara County, localized CO impacts associated with congested intersections are not expected to exceed the CO health -related air quality standards. Therefore, CO "Hotspot" analyses are not required anymore (SBCAPCD 2022).

2.4.2 Significance Thresholds
To determine whether a project would have a significant air quality impact, Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines requires consideration of whether a project would:

1. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan;

2. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard;

3. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or

4. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

As stated in the State CEQA Guidelines, the significance criteria established by the regional air quality management or air quality pollution control district may be relied upon to make determinations. SBAPCD's recommended significance criteria are described in its Environmental Review Guidelines and are summarized below.

Construction Emissions Thresholds
SBCAPCD does not currently have quantitative thresholds of significance for short-term construction emissions. However, CEQA requires that the short-term impacts such as exhaust emissions from construction equipment and fugitive dust generation during grading be analyzed. SBAPCD recommends that construction -related NOx, ROC, PMlo, and PM2.s emissions, from diesel and gasoline powered equipment, paving, and other activities, be quantified.

According to the SBAPCD's Scope and Content of Air Quality Sections in Environmental Documents, it recommends quantification of construction -related emissions and suggests a 25 -tons -per -year threshold for ROC or NOx as a guideline for determining the significance of construction impacts (SBCAPCD 2022). This is a limit that requires offsets if the construction activity is for a project that requires SBCAPCD permits and also provides guidance for other construction projects involving standard grading and building activities. The City of Santa Maria has elected to use this threshold.

Based on SBCAPCD 1979 Air Quality Attainment Plan, standard dust control measures must be implemented for any discretionary project involving earthmoving activities, regardless of size or duration. According to the SBAPCD, proper implementation of these required measures reduces 4 The project area would be rezoned to a to -be -determined industrial land use; therefore, unrefrigerated warehouse no rail land use provides general industrial assumptions for future development onsite. 16 Air Quality
fugitive dust emissions to a level that is less than significant (SBAPCD 2022). Therefore, all construction activity would be required to incorporate the SBAPCD requirements pertaining to minimizing construction -related emissions and demolition of existing structures.

Operational Emissions Thresholds
As described in SBCAPCD's Scope and Content of Air Quality Sections in Environmental Documents and in Environmental Review Guidelines, a project will not have a significant air quality effect on the environment if operational activities would:
• Emit from all project sources (both stationary and mobile) less than 240 pounds per day of ROC; • Emit from all project sources (both stationary and mobile) less than 240 pounds per day of NOx; • Emit from all project sources (both stationary and mobile) less than 80 pounds per day of PM10; • Emit less than 25 pounds per day of ROC from motor vehicle trips only; • Emit less than 25 pounds per day of NOx from motor vehicle trips only; and • Not cause or contribute to a violation of any California or National Ambient Air Quality Standard (except ozone); or
• Not exceed the public notification health risk thresholds adopted by the SBCAPCD of 10 excess cancer cases in a million for cancer risk or a Hazard Index of more than 1.0 for non -cancer risk; or
• Be consistent with the latest adopted in federal and state air quality plans for Santa Barbara County.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 17

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project

2.4.3 Project Impacts
Threshold 1: Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Impact AQ-1 THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CONFLICT WITH OR OBSTRUCT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE AIR QUALITY PLAN. IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

The SBCAPCD Guidelines state that a project is consistent with the Clean Air Plan if its direct and indirect emissions have been accounted for in the Clean Air Plan's emissions forecast assumptions and if it would incorporate the standard fugitive dust control measures recommended by SBCAPCD during construction activities. The 2022 Ozone Plan's direct and indirect emissions inventory for the County is reliant on population projections provided by the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG). SBCAG generates population projections based on local General Plans. In this case, SBCAG utilized population projections contained in the City of Santa Maria General Plan, which are based on existing and anticipated land uses in the city.

The 2022 Ozone Plan is based on countywide employment data provided by the California Department of Finance. The 2022 Ozone Plan also states that its growth projections are similar to that of the 2019 SBCAG Regional Growth Forecast 2050, in which assumptions about future land development patterns were used to generate future population and jobs forecasts for Santa Barbara County (SBCAG 2019). These growth projections for Santa Maria are shown in Table 4.

Table 4 SBCAG Population and Job Projections for Santa Maria Year
Population Forecast Job Forecast
2020
2025
2030
111,900
121,900
127,600
43,270
46,040
47,310
Source: SBCAG 2019
The proposed project would involve the construction and operation of an industrial building. The proposed project has no residential uses and would not directly increase population growth.

However, the proposed project could potentially increase the number of new employees in Santa Maria. SBCAG does not have an employment density study for the area, therefore, new employees were estimated using Southern California Association of Governments' Employment Density Study, adjacent region to SBCAG. The project is estimated to add approximately 38 new employees (SCAG 2001)5. Project employees would likely be drawn from the existing labor pool in the region who are not anticipated to relocate to the city. However, to demonstrate compliance with the 2022 Ozone Plan, the analysis conservatively assumes that all 38 new employees would become new households; therefore, based on the Department of Finance persons per household estimate in Santa Maria, the project would add 138 new residents6. SBCAG's growth forecast projects population in Santa Maria to increase from 111,900 population in 2020 to 121,900 by 2025 and 127,600 by 2030, an increase of 15,700 residents by 2030. In addition, the growth forecast for jobs 5 The average employees per acre for Manufacturing, Assembly, and Industrial Services land uses would be approximately 16.34. The project's max industrial building range is 100,000 square feet or 2.3 acres. Therefore, the project would generate approximately 38 new employees (16.34 x 2.3 = 37.58 employees).
6 Based on Department of Finance data, the City of Santa Maria has a persons per household of 3.61 (38 new households x 3.61 persons per household =137.18 new residents).
18 Air Quality
would increase from 43,270 jobs in 2020 to 46,040 by 2025, and 47,310 by 2030, an increase of 4,040 jobs by 2030. The addition of 138 residents and 38 employees to the City of Santa Maria would not exceed SBCAG's growth forecasts of population and jobs for the City (SBCAG 2019).

Projects are expected to manage fugitive dust emissions such that emissions do not exceed SBCAPCD's visible emissions limit (Rule 302), create a public nuisance (Rule 303), and are in compliance with the SBCAPCD's requirements and standards for visible dust (Rule 345). Based on these rules, the following standard SBCAPCD fugitive dust control measures would be required for project implementation:
• During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site and from exceeding SBCAPCD's limit of 20 percent opacity for greater than three minutes in any 30 -minute period. At a minimum, this should include wetting down such areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day. Increased watering frequency shall be required whenever the wind speed exceeds 15 mph. Reclaimed water shall be used whenever possible. However, reclaimed water shall not be used in or around crops for human consumption. • The amount of disturbed area shall be minimized.
• On -site vehicle speeds shall be no greater than 15 mph when traveling on unpaved surfaces. • A track -out prevention device shall be installed and operated where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved streets. The track -out prevention device can include any device or combination of devices that are effective at preventing track out of dirt such as gravel pads, pipe -grid track -out control devices, rumble strips, or wheel washing systems. • If stockpiling of material is involved, soil stockpiled for more than one day shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. • After clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation is completed, the disturbed area shall be treated by watering, or using roll -compaction, or revegetating, or by spreading soil binders until the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur. All driveways and sidewalks to be paved/surfaced shall be completed as soon as possible. • The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent the transport of dust off -site.

Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the SBCAPCD prior to grading/building permit issuance and/or map clearance.
• The project applicant shall comply with SBCAPCD Rule 345: Control of Fugitive Dust from Construction and Demolition Activities, including all applicable standards and measures therein.

Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable air quality plan, and impacts would be less than significant.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 19

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
Threshold 2: Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Impact AQ-2 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION WOULD NOT RESULT IN A CUMULATIVELY

CONSIDERABLE NET INCREASE OF A CRITERIA POLLUTANT FOR WHICH THE PROJECT REGION IS IN NON - ATTAINMENT UNDER AN APPLICABLE FEDERAL OR STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD. IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

Construction
Construction activities would generate temporary air pollutant emissions associated with fugitive dust (PMloand PM2.$), exhaust emissions from heavy construction vehicles, and ROC that would be released during the drying phase after application of architectural coatings. Table 5 summarizes emissions that would be generated under project construction. As shown therein, construction emissions generated under construction would not exceed the SBCAPCD threshold of 25 tons per year for ROC or NOx.

Table 5 Estimated Annual Construction Emissions
Annual Emissions (tons per year)
Construction Year
2025
2026
SBCAPCD Thresholds
Threshold Exceeded?
ROC NO. CO SO2
<1
1 25
No
1 1
25 No
1 1
N/A
N/A
<1
<1
N/A
N/A
PM 101
<1
<1
N/A
N/A
PM2.51
<1
<1
N/A
N/A
ROC = reactive organic compounds, NOx = nitrogen oxides, CO = carbon monoxide, S02 = sulfur dioxide, PMio = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less, PM2.s = particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter 1Total PMio fugitive dust and exhaust.

Notes: All emissions modeling was completed using CalEEMod. See Appendix A for modeling results. Some numbers may not add up due to rounding. Emission data is pulled from "mitigated" results, which account for compliance with regulations (including SBCAPCD Rules 345, 323.1, and 329).

Operation
Table 6 summarizes the project's operational emissions by emission source (area, energy, mobile and off -road equipment) under project operation. As shown in Table 6, operational emissions from the project would not exceed SBCAPCD thresholds. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
20 Air Quality
Table 6 Estimated Average Daily Operational Emissions
Average Daily Emissions (pounds per day)
Emissions Source
Area
Energy
Mobile
ROC NOx CO SO2 PMIo PMz.s
3 <1
<1
<1
4 <1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
1 1 4 <1 1 <1
Total 4 1 8 <1 1 <1
Threshold (area +
energy + mobile) 240
Threshold Exceeded? No
Threshold (mobile only) 25
Threshold Exceeded? No
240 N/A N/A
No N/A N/A
25 N/A N/A
No N/A N/A
80 No
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ROC = reactive organic compounds, NOx = nitrogen oxides, CO = carbon monoxide, S02 = sulfur dioxide, PMio = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less, PM2.s = particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; Ibs/day = pounds per day Notes: All emissions modeling was completed using CaIEEMod. See Appendix A for modeling results. Some numbers may not add up due to rounding. Emission data is pulled from "mitigated" results, which account for compliance with regulations (including SBCAPCD Rule 323.1) and project design features. Emissions presented are the highest of the winter and summer modeled emissions.

Threshold 3: Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Impact AQ-3 THE PROJECT WOULD NOT EXPOSE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS TO SUBSTANTIAL CONCENTRATIONS OF TAC EMISSIONS. IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

As discussed under Section 2.3, Current Air Quality, the closest sensitive receptors to the project site single-family residences approximately 2,170 feet north of the project site and single-family residences approximately 3,340 feet east of the project site. The SBCAPCD states that localized air quality impacts to sensitive receptors typically result from TACs (SBCAPCD 2022). The proposed project's impacts related to TACs is detailed below for construction and operational activities.

Construction
Construction -related activities would result in temporary project -generated emissions of DPM exhaust emissions from off -road, heavy-duty diesel equipment for site preparation, grading, building construction, and other construction activities.

CARB's Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (2005) recommends against siting sensitive receptors within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day. While these siting distances are not particular to construction activities, the primary source of TAC emissions from both freeways and construction equipment is DPM. Therefore, for projects within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, a refined health risk assessment should be conducted. However, as the nearest receptors to the project site are 2,170 feet north and 3,340 feet east, construction TAC emissions would have a negligible impact on the closest sensitive receptors. This impact would be less than significant.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 21

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
Operational
CARB's Air Quality and Land Use Handbook (2005) recommends siting sensitive receptors more than 1,000 feet away from distribution centers that generate more than 100 diesel -fueled truck trips per day. Air modeling analysis performed by CARB and SCAQMD showed an 80 percent drop off from diesel particulate emissions from large distribution centers at approximately 1,000 feet (CARB 2005). Based on the average truck ITE trip generation rate for Warehousing (ITE #150), the proposed project would generate approximately 60 two-way truck trips per day to the project site. These trips are assumed to all be diesel -fueled heavy -heavy-duty truck trips. In addition, the nearest sensitive receptor is approximately 2,170 feet north of the project site. Therefore, the project would be well below CARB's threshold of 100 diesel -fueled truck trips per day and outside the recommended siting distance. Thus, the project is consistent with CARB's siting recommendations for TAC emitting sources. In addition, idling of each truck would be limited to five consecutive minutes and operation of diesel -fueled internal combustion engine auxiliary power systems would not be allowed for greater than five minutes within 100 feet of residences pursuant to 13 California Code of Regulations Section 2485. It is unknown if the occupants would require emergency back-up generators or other stationary sources of TAC emissions, however these sources would be permitted through the SBCAPCD and would be required to maintain risk levels below the regulatory thresholds. As such, project operation would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial TAC emissions, and impacts would be less than significant.

Threshold 4: Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Impact AQ-4 THE PROJECT WOULD NOT GENERATE OTHER EMISSIONS, SUCH AS THOSE LEADING TO ODORS, ADVERSELY AFFECTING A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE DURING CONSTRUCTION OR OPERATION.

IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

The project would generate oil and diesel fuel odors during construction from equipment use. The odors would be limited to the construction period and would be intermittent and temporary.

Furthermore, these odors would dissipate rapidly with distance from in -use construction equipment, and the nearest sensitive receptors to project development are located approximately 2,170 feet away from the project site. Accordingly, project construction would not result in other emissions, such as those leading to odors, that would adversely affect a substantial number of people, and impacts would be less than significant.

3.1 Environmental and Regulatory Setting

3.1.1 Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases
Gases that absorb and re -emit infrared radiation in the atmosphere are called GHGs. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human -induced climate change include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxides (N2O), fluorinated gases such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs because it is short-lived in the atmosphere and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation.

Different types of GHGs have varying global warming potentials (GWP). The GWP of a GHG is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere over a specified timescale (generally, 100 years). Because GHGs absorb different amounts of heat, a common reference gas (CO2) is used to relate the amount of heat absorbed to the amount of the gas emitted, referred to as "carbon dioxide equivalent" (CO2e), which is the amount of GHG emitted multiplied by its GWP. Carbon dioxide has a 100 -year GWP of one. By contrast, methane has a GWP of 30, meaning its global warming effect is 30 times greater than CO2 on a molecule per molecule basis (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2021).'
Climate change is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth's atmosphere and oceans along with other substantial changes in climate (such as wind patterns, precipitation, and storms) over an extended period. The term "climate change" is often used interchangeably with the term "global warming," but climate change is preferred because it conveys that other changes are happening in addition to rising temperatures. The baseline against which these changes are measured originates in historical records that identify temperature changes that occurred in the past, such as during previous ice ages. The global climate is changing continuously, as evidenced in the geologic record which indicates repeated episodes of substantial warming and cooling. The rate of change has typically been incremental, with warming or cooling trends occurring over the course of thousands of years. The past 10,000 years have been marked by a period of incremental warming, as glaciers have steadily retreated across the globe. However, scientists have observed acceleration in the rate of warming over the past 150 years. The IPCC expressed that the rise and continued growth of atmospheric CO2 concentrations is unequivocally due to human activities in the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report (2021). Human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean, and land, which has led the climate to warm at an unprecedented rate in the last 2,000 years. It is estimated that between the period of 1850 through 2019, that a total of 2,390 gigatonnes of anthropogenic CO2 was emitted. It is likely that anthropogenic activities have increased the global surface temperature by approximately 1.07 degrees Celsius between the years 2010 through 2019 (IPCC 2021).
7 The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (2021) Sixth Assessment Report determined that methane has a GWP of 30.

However, the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan published by the California Air Resources Board uses a GWP of 25 for methane, consistent with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (2007) Fourth Assessment Report. Therefore, this analysis utilizes a GWP of 25.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 23

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
The accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere regulates the earth's temperature. Without the natural heat -trapping effect of GHGs, the earth's surface would be about 33 degrees Celsius (°C) cooler (World Meteorological Organization 2023). However, since 1750, estimated concentrations of CO2, CH4, and N2O in the atmosphere have increased by 47 percent, 156 percent, and 23 percent, respectively, primarily due to human activity (IPCC 2021). GHG emissions from human activities, particularly the consumption of fossil fuels for electricity production and transportation, are believed to have elevated the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere beyond the level of concentrations that occur naturally.

3.1.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory
Global Emissions Inventory
In 2015, worldwide anthropogenic GHG emissions totaled 47,000 million metric ton (MT) of CO2e, which is a 43 percent increase from 1990 GHG levels (U.S. EPA 2022b). Specifically, 34,522 MT of CO2e of CO2, 8,241 MT of CO2e of CH4, 2,997 MT of CO2e of N2O, and 1,001 MT of CO2e of fluorinated gases were emitted in 2015. The largest source of GHG emissions were energy production and use (includes fuels used by vehicles and buildings), which accounted for 75 percent of the global GHG emissions. Agriculture uses and industrial processes contributed 12 percent and six percent, respectively. Waste sources contributed three percent. These sources account for approximately 96 percent (U.S. EPA 2022b).

United States Emissions Inventory
Total U.S. GHG emissions were 6,347.7 MMTCO2e in 2021. Total U.S. emissions decreased by 2.0 percent from 1990 to 2021. Overall, net emissions increased by 6.8 percent from 2020 to 2021 and decreased 16.3 percent from 2005 levels. From 2019 to 2020, there 8 was a sharp decline in emissions largely due to the impacts of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on travel and other economic activity. Between 2020 and 2021, the increase in total greenhouse gas emissions was driven largely by an increase in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion due to economic activity rebounding after the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2021, the largest source of CO2 and of overall emissions, was fossil fuel combustion, representing approximately 79.5 percent of U.S. GHG emissions. CH4 accounted for nearly 11.5 percent, N2O accounted for approximately 6.1 percent, and the remaining 3.0 percent of U.S. GHG emissions were HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and NF3 (U.S. EPA 2023g).

California Emissions Inventory
Based on CARB California Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2000-2020, California produced 369.2 MT of CO2e in 2020, which is 35.3 MT of CO2e lower than 2019 levels. The 2019 to 2020 decrease in emissions is likely due in large part to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. The major source of GHG emissions in California is the transportation sector, which comprises 37 percent of the state's total GHG emissions. The industrial sector is the second largest source, comprising 20 percent of the state's GHG emissions while electric power accounts for approximately 16 percent (CARB 2022a).

The magnitude of California's total GHG emissions is due in part to its large size and large population compared to other states. However, a factor that reduces California's per capita fuel use and GHG emissions as compared to other states is its relatively mild climate. In 2016, the state of California achieved its 2020 GHG emission reduction target of reducing emissions to 1990 levels as emissions 24 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
fell below 431 MT of CO2e. The annual 2030 statewide target emissions level is 260 MT of CO2e (CARB 2017).

3.1.3 Potential Effects of Climate Change
Globally, climate change has the potential to affect numerous environmental resources though potential impacts related to future air temperatures and precipitation patterns. Scientific modeling predicts that continued GHG emissions at or above current rates would induce more extreme climate changes during the 21St century than were observed during the 20th century. The year 2022 was the sixth warmest year since global records began in 1880 at 0.86°C (1.55°F) above the 20th century average of 13.9°C (57.0°F). This value is 0.13°C (0.23°F) less than the record set in 2016 and it is only 0.02°C (0.04°F) higher than the last year's (2021) value, which now ranks as the seventh highest (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2023). Furthermore, several independently analyzed data records of global and regional Land -Surface Air Temperature obtained from station observations jointly indicate that Land Surface Air Temperature and sea surface temperatures have increased. Due to past and current activities, anthropogenic GHG emissions are increasing global mean surface temperature at a rate of 0.2°C per decade. In addition to these findings, there are identifiable signs that global warming is currently taking place, including substantial ice loss in the Arctic over the past two decades (IPCC 2014, 2018).

Potential impacts of climate change in California may include reduced water supply from snowpack, sea level rise, more extreme heat days per year, more large forest fires, and more drought years (California Natural Resource Agency 2019). California's Fourth Climate Change Assessment includes regional reports that summarize climate impacts and adaptation solutions for nine regions of the state and regionally specific climate change case studies. However, while there is growing scientific consensus about the possible effects of climate change at a global and statewide level, current scientific modeling tools are unable to predict what local impacts may occur with a similar degree of accuracy (California Natural Resource Agency 2019). A summary follows of some of the potential effects that climate change could generate in California.

Air Quality
Scientists project that the annual average maximum daily temperatures in California could rise by

2.4 to 3.2°C in the next SO years and by 3.1 to 4.9°C in the next century (California Natural Resource Agency 2019). Higher temperatures are conducive to air pollution formation and rising temperatures could therefore result in worsened air quality in California. As a result, climate change may increase the concentration of ground -level ozone, but the magnitude of the effect, and therefore its indirect effects, are uncertain. In addition, as temperatures have increased in recent years, the area burned by wildfires throughout the state has increased, and wildfires have occurred at higher elevations in the Sierra Nevada Mountains (California Natural Resource Agency 2019). If higher temperatures continue to be accompanied by an increase in the incidence and extent of large wildfires, air quality could worsen. Severe heat accompanied by drier conditions and poor air quality could increase the number of heat -related deaths, illnesses, and asthma attacks throughout the state. With increasing temperatures, shifting weather patterns, longer dry seasons, and more dry fuel loads, the frequency of large wildfires and area burned is expected to increase (California Natural Resources Agency 2021).

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 25

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
Water Supply
Analysis of paleoclimatic data (such as tree -ring reconstructions of stream flow and precipitation) indicates a history of naturally and widely varying hydrologic conditions in California and the west, including a pattern of recurring and extended droughts. Uncertainty remains with respect to the overall impact of climate change on future precipitation trends and water supplies in California.

Year-to-year variability in statewide precipitation levels has increased since 1980, meaning that wet and dry precipitation extremes have become more common (California Department of Water Resources 2018). For example, the winter of 2022-2023 had severe storms and flooding from increased rainfall and snowmelt, which the California Department of Water Resources identified as "the latest example that California's climate is becoming more extreme" (California Department of Water Resources 2023). This uncertainty regarding future precipitation trends complicates the analysis of future water demand, especially where the relationship between climate change and its potential effect on water demand is not well understood. The average early spring snowpack in the western United States, including the Sierra Nevada Mountains, decreased by about 10 percent during the last century. During the same period, sea level rose over 0.15 meter along the central and southern California coasts (California Natural Resource Agency 2019). The Sierra snowpack provides the majority of California's water supply as snow that accumulates during wet winters is released slowly during the dry months of spring and summer. A warmer climate is predicted to reduce the fraction of precipitation that falls as snow and the amount of snowfall at lower elevations, thereby reducing the total snowpack (California Natural Resource Agency 2019). Projections indicate that the average spring snowpack in the Sierra Nevada and other mountain catchments in central and northern California will decline by approximately 66 percent from its historical average by 2050 (California Natural Resource Agency 2019).

Hydrology and Sea Level Rise
Climate change could affect the intensity and frequency of storms and flooding (California Natural Resource Agency 2019). Furthermore, climate change could induce substantial sea level rise in the coming century. Rising sea level increases the likelihood of and risk from flooding. The rate of increase of global mean sea levels between 1993 to 2022, observed by satellites, is approximately

3.4 millimeters per year, double the twentieth century trend of 1.6 millimeters per year (World Meteorological Organization 2013; National Aeronautics and Space Administration 2023). Global mean sea levels in 2013 were about 0.23 meter higher than those of 1880 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2022). Sea levels are rising faster now than in the previous two millennia, and the rise will probably accelerate, even with robust GHG emission control measures.

The most recent IPCC report predicts a mean sea level rise ranging between 0.25 to 1.01 meters by 2100 with the sea level ranges dependent on a low, intermediate, or high GHG emissions scenario (IPCC 2021). A rise in sea levels could erode 31 to 67 percent of southern California beaches and cause flooding of approximately 370 miles of coastal highways during 100 -year storm events. This would also jeopardize California's water supply due to saltwater intrusion and induce groundwater flooding and/or exposure of buried infrastructure (California Natural Resource Agency 2019).

Furthermore, increased storm intensity and frequency could affect the ability of flood -control facilities, including levees, to handle storm events.

Agriculture
California has an over $51.1 billion annual agricultural industry that produces over a third of the country's vegetables and three-quarters of the country's fruits and nuts (California Department of 26 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Food and Agriculture 2022). Higher CO2 levels can stimulate plant production and increase plant water -use efficiency. However, if temperatures rise and drier conditions prevail, certain regions of agricultural production could experience water shortages of up to 16 percent, which would increase water demand as hotter conditions lead to the loss of soil moisture. In addition, crop yield could be threatened by water -induced stress and extreme heat waves, and plants may be susceptible to new and changing pest and disease outbreaks (California Natural Resource Agency 2019). Temperature increases could also change the time of year certain crops, such as wine grapes, bloom or ripen, and thereby affect their quality (California Climate Change Center 2006).

Ecosystems and Wildlife
Climate change and the potential resultant changes in weather patterns could have ecological effects on the global and local scales. Soil moisture is likely to decline in many regions due to higher temperatures, and intense rainstorms are likely to become more frequent. Rising temperatures could have four major impacts on plants and animals: timing of ecological events; geographic distribution and range of species; species composition and the incidence of nonnative species within communities; and ecosystem processes, such as carbon cycling and storage (Parmesan 2006; California Natural Resource Agency 2019).

3.1.4 Regulatory Setting
Federal Regulations
Federal Clean Air Act
The U.S. Supreme Court determined in Massachusetts et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency et al. ([2007] 549 U.S. 05-1120) that the U.S. EPA has the authority to regulate motor vehicle GHG emissions under the federal Clean Air Act. The U.S. EPA issued a Final Rule for mandatory reporting of GHG emissions in October 2009. This Final Rule applies to fossil fuel suppliers, industrial gas suppliers, direct GHG emitters, and manufacturers of heavy-duty and off -road vehicles and vehicle engines and requires annual reporting of emissions. In 2012, the U.S. EPA issued a Final Rule that established the GHG permitting thresholds that determine when Clean Air Act permits under the New Source Review Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Operating Permit programs are required for new and existing industrial facilities.

In Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency (134 Supreme Court 2427 [2014]), the U.S. Supreme Court held the U.S. EPA may not treat GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a source can be considered a major source required to obtain a Prevention of Significant Deterioration or Title V permit. The Court also held that Prevention of Significant Deterioration permits otherwise required based on emissions of other pollutants may continue to require limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of Best Available Control Technology.

State Regulations
CARB is responsible for the coordination and oversight of state and local air pollution control programs in California. There are numerous regulations aimed at reducing the state's GHG emissions. These initiatives are summarized below. For more information on the Senate and Assembly Bills, executive orders, building codes, and reports discussed below, and to view reports and research referenced below, please refer to the following websites:

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 27

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/reports/californias-fourth-climate-change-assessment , www.arb.ca.gov/cc/cc.htm , and https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Codes .

California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 32 and Senate Bill 32)
The "California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006," (AB 32), outlines California's major legislative initiative for reducing GHG emissions. AB 32 codifies the statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and requires CARB to prepare a Scoping Plan that outlines the main State strategies for reducing GHG emissions to meet the 2020 deadline. In addition, AB 32 requires CARB to adopt regulations to require reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions. Based on this guidance, CARB approved a 1990 statewide GHG level and 2020 target of 431 MMT of CO2e, which was achieved in 2016. CARB approved the Scoping Plan on December 11, 2008, which included GHG emission reduction strategies related to energy efficiency, water use, and recycling and solid waste, among others (CARB 2008). Many of the GHG reduction measures included in the Scoping Plan (e.g., Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Advanced Clean Car standards, and Cap -and -Trade) have been adopted since the Scoping Plan's approval.

The CARB approved the 2013 Scoping Plan update in May 2014. The update defined CARB's climate change priorities for the next five years, set the groundwork to reach post -2020 statewide goals, and highlighted California's progress toward meeting the "near -term" 2020 GHG emission reduction goals defined in the original Scoping Plan. It also evaluated how to align the state's longer term GHG reduction strategies with other state policy priorities, including those for water, waste, natural resources, clean energy, transportation, and land use (CARB 2014).

On September 8, 2016, the governor signed Senate Bill (SB) 32 into law, extending the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 by requiring the state to further reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (the other provisions of AB 32 remain unchanged). On December 14, 2017, CARB adopted the 2017 Scoping Plan, which provides a framework for achieving the 2030 target. The 2017 Scoping Plan relies on the continuation and expansion of existing policies and regulations, such as the Cap -and -Trade Program, and implementation of recently adopted policies and legislation, such as SB 1383 and SB 100 (discussed later). The 2017 Scoping Plan also puts an increased emphasis on innovation, adoption of existing technology, and strategic investment to support its strategies. As with the 2013 Scoping Plan update, the 2017 Scoping Plan does not provide project -level thresholds for land use development. Instead, it recommends that local governments adopt policies and locally appropriate quantitative thresholds consistent with statewide per capita goals of six MT of CO2e by 2030 and two MT of CO2e by 2050 (CARB 2017). As stated in the 2017 Scoping Plan, these goals may be appropriate for plan -level analyses (city, county, sub -regional, or regional level), but not for specific individual projects because they include all emissions sectors in the state (CARB 2017).
2022 Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan
In response to the passage of AB 1279 and the identification of the 2045 GHG reduction target, CARB published the Final 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan in November 2022 (CARB 2022b). The 2022 Update builds upon the framework established by the 2008 Climate Change Scoping Plan and previous updates while identifying new, technologically feasible, cost-effective, and equity -focused path to achieve California's climate target. The 2022 Update includes policies to achieve a significant reduction in fossil fuel combustion, further reductions in short-lived climate pollutants, support for 28 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
sustainable development, increased action no natural and working lands (NWL) to reduce emissions and sequester carbon, and the capture and storage of carbon.

The 2022 Update assesses the progress California is making toward reducing its GHG emissions by at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, as called for in SB 32 and laid out in the 2017 Scoping Plan, addresses recent legislation and direction from Governor Newsom, extends and expands upon these earlier plans, and implements a target of reducing anthropogenic emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045, as well as taking an additional step of adding carbon neutrality as a science -based guide for California's climate work. As stated in the 2022 Update, "The plan outlines how carbon neutrality can be achieved by taking bold steps to reduce GHGs to meet the anthropogenic emissions target and by expanding actions to capture and store carbon through the state's NWL and using a variety of mechanical approaches" (CARB 2022b). Specifically, the 2022 Update:
• Identifies a path to keep California on track to meet its SB 32 GHG reduction target of at least 40 percent below 1990 emissions by 2030.
• Identifies a technologically feasible, cost-effective path to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 and a reduction in anthropogenic emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels. • Focuses on strategies for reducing California's dependency on petroleum to provide consumers with clean energy options that address climate change, improve air quality, and support economic growth and clean sector jobs.
• Integrates equity and protecting California's most impacted communities as driving principles throughout the document.
• Incorporates the contribution of NWL to the state's GHG emissions, as well as their role in achieving carbon neutrality.
• Relies on the most up-to-date science, including the need to deploy all viable tools to address the existential threat that climate change presents, including carbon capture and sequestration, as well as direct air capture.
• Evaluates the substantial health and economic benefits of taking action. • Identifies key implementation actions to ensure success.

In addition to reducing emissions from transportation, energy, and industrial sectors, the 2022 Update includes emissions and carbon sequestration in NWL and explores how NWL contributes to long-term climate goals. Under the Scoping Plan Scenario, California's 2030 emissions are anticipated to be 48 percent below 1990 levels, representing an acceleration of the current SB 32 target. Cap -and -Trade regulation continues to play a large factor in the reduction of near -term emissions for meeting the accelerated 2030 reduction target. Every sector of the economy will need to begin to transition in this decade to meet our GHG reduction goals and achieve carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The 2022 Update approaches decarbonization from two perspectives, managing a phasedown of existing energy sources and technologies, as well as increasing, developing, and deploying alternative clean energy sources and technology.

Senate Bill 375
The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375), signed in August 2008, enhances the state's ability to reach AB 32 goals by directing the CARB to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved from passenger vehicles by 2020 and 2035. SB 375 aligns Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 29

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG reduction targets, and affordable housing allocations. Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) are required to adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), which allocates land uses in the MPO's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).

Qualified projects consistent with an approved SCS or Alternative Planning Strategy (categorized as "transit priority projects") can receive incentives to streamline CEQA processing.

On March 22, 2018, CARB adopted updated regional targets for reducing per capita passenger vehicle GHG emissions from 2005 levels by 2020 and 2035. SBCAG was assigned targets of a 13 percent reduction in per capita GHG emissions from passenger vehicles relative to 2005 levels by 2020 and a 17 percent reduction in per capita GHG emissions from passenger vehicles relative to 2005 levels by 2035. The SBCAG Connected 2050 RTP/SCS (2021) demonstrated that the SBCAG region would achieve its initial regional emissions reduction targets for the 2020 and 2035 target years.

Senate Bill 1383
Adopted in September 2016, SB 1383 (Lara, Chapter 395, Statutes of 2016) requires the CARB to approve and begin implementing a comprehensive strategy to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants. SB 1383 requires the strategy to achieve the following reduction targets by 2030:
• Methane — 40 percent below 2013 levels
• Hydrofluorocarbons — 40 percent below 2013 levels
• Anthropogenic black carbon — 50 percent below 2013 levels SB 1383 also requires the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), in consultation with the CARB, to adopt regulations that achieve specified targets for reducing organic waste in landfills.

Senate Bill 100
Adopted on September 10, 2018, SB 100 supports the reduction of GHG emissions from the electricity sector by accelerating the state's Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program, which was last updated by SB 350 in 2015. SB 100 requires electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045.

Executive Order B-55-18
On September 10, 2018, the former Governor Brown issued Executive Order (EO) B-55-18, which established a new statewide goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 and maintaining net negative emissions thereafter. This goal is in addition to the existing statewide GHG reduction targets established by SB 375, SB 32, SB 1383, and SB 100.

California Building Standards Code
The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 is referred to as the California Building Standards Code. It consists of a compilation of several distinct standards and codes related to building construction including plumbing, electrical, interior acoustics, energy efficiency, and handicap accessibility for persons with physical and sensory disabilities. The current iteration is the 2022 Title 24 standards. The California Building Standards Code's energy -efficiency and green building standards are outlined below.
30 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
PART 6 — BUILDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS/ENERGY CODE CCR Title 24, Part 6 is the Building Energy Efficiency Standards or California Energy Code. This code, originally enacted in 1978, establishes energy -efficiency standards for residential and non- residential buildings in order to reduce California's energy demand. New construction and major renovations must demonstrate their compliance with the current Energy Code through submittal and approval of a Title 24 Compliance Report to the local building permit review authority and the California Energy Commission (CEC). The 2022 Title 24 standards are the applicable building energy efficiency standards for the proposed project because they became effective on January 1, 2023.

PART 11 — CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS
The California Green Building Standards Code, referred to as CALGreen, was added to Title 24 as Part 11, first in 2009 as a voluntary code, which then became mandatory effective January 1, 2011 (as part of the 2010 California Building Standards Code). The 2022 CALGreen includes mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground -up new construction of residential and non-residential structures. It also includes voluntary tiers with stricter environmental performance standards for these same categories of residential and non-residential buildings. Local jurisdictions must enforce the minimum mandatory CALGreen standards and may adopt additional amendments for stricter requirements.

The mandatory standards applicable to the project require:
• 20 percent reduction in indoor water use relative to specified baseline levels;$ • Waste Reduction:
• Non-residential: Reuse and/or recycling of 100 percent of trees, stumps, rocks, and associated vegetation soils resulting from primary land clearing; • Inspections of energy systems to ensure optimal working efficiency; • Low -pollutant emitting exterior and interior finish materials such as paints, carpets, vinyl flooring, and particleboards;
• Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging for New Construction:9 • Non-residential land uses shall comply with the following EV charging requirements based on the number of passenger vehicle parking spaces:
• 0-9: no EV capable spaces or charging stations required; • 10-25: 4 EV capable spaces but no charging stations required; • 26-50: 8 EV capable spaces of which 2 must be equipped with charging stations; • 51-75: 13 EV capable spaces of which 3 must be equipped with charging stations;
8 Similar to the compliance reporting procedure for demonstrating Energy Code compliance in new buildings and major renovations, compliance with the CALGreen water -reduction requirements must be demonstrated through completion of water use reporting forms.

Buildings must demonstrate a 20 percent reduction in indoor water use by either showing a 20 percent reduction in the overall baseline water use as identified in CALGreen or a reduced per -plumbing -fixture water use rate. 9 EV Capable = a vehicle space with electrical panel space and load capacity to support a branch circuit and necessary raceways to support EV charging; EV-ready = a vehicle space which is provided with a branch circuit and any necessary raceways to accommodate EV charging stations, including a receptacle for future installation of a charger (see 2022 California Green Building Standard Code, Title 24 Part 11 for full explanation of mandatory measures, including exceptions).

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 31

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
• 76-100: 17 EV capable spaces of which 4 must be equipped with charging stations;
• 101-150: 25 EV capable spaces of which 6 must be equipped with charging stations;
• 151-200: 35 EV capable spaces of which 9 must be equipped with charging stations; and
• More than 200: 20 percent of the total available parking spaces of which 25 percent must be equipped with charging stations;
Non-residential land uses shall comply with the following EV charging requirements for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles: warehouses, grocery stores, and retail stores with planned off-street loading spaces shall install EV supply and distribution equipment, spare raceway(s) or busway(s) and adequate capacity for transformer(s), service panel(s), or subpanel(s) at the time of construction based on the number of off-street loading spaces as indicated in Table 5.106.5.4.1 of the California Green Building Standards;
• Bicycle Parking:

Non-residential short-term bicycle parking for projects anticipated to generate visitor traffic: permanently anchored bicycle racks within 200 feet of visitor entrance for 5 percent of new visitor motorized vehicle parking spaces with a minimum of one 2 -bike capacity rack; and/or
Non-residential buildings with tenant spaces of 10 or more employees/tenant- occupants: secure bicycle parking for 5 percent of the employee/tenant-occupant vehicle parking spaces with a minimum of one bicycle parking facility. • Shade Trees (Non -Residential):

Surface parking: minimum No. 10 container size or equal shall be installed to provide shade over 50 percent of the parking within 15 years (unless parking area covered by appropriate shade structures and/or solar);
Landscape areas: minimum No. 10 container size or equal shall be installed to provide shade of 20 percent of the landscape area within 15 years; and/or • Hardscape areas: minimum No. 10 container size or equal shall be installed to provide shade of 20 percent of the landscape area within 15 years (unless covered by applicable shade structures and/or solar or the marked area is for organized sports activities).

The voluntary Tier I and Tier II standards require:
• Tier I:

Stricter energy efficiency requirements;
Stricter water conservation requirements for specific fixtures; minimum 65 percent reduction in construction waste with third -party verification, Minimum 10 percent recycled content for building materials; • Minimum 20 percent permeable paving;
• Minimum 20 percent cement reduction;
• Tier II:
• Stricter energy efficiency requirements,
• Stricter water conservation requirements for specific fixtures; 32 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Minimum 75 percent reduction in construction waste with third -party verification, • Minimum 15 percent recycled content for building materials; • Minimum 30 percent permeable paving;
• Minimum 25 percent cement reduction; and/or
California Integrated Waste Management Act (Assembly Bill 341) The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, as modified by AB 341 in 2011, requires each jurisdiction's source reduction and recycling element to include an implementation schedule that shows: (1) diversion of 25 percent of all solid waste by January 1, 1995 through source reduction, recycling, and composting activities and (2) diversion of 50 percent of all solid waste on and after January 1, 2000.

Executive Order N-79-20
On September 23, 2020, Governor Newsom issued EO N-79-20, which established the following new statewide goals:
• All new passenger cars and trucks sold in -state to be zero -emission by 2035; • All medium- and heavy-duty vehicles in the state to be zero -emission by 2045 for all operations where feasible and by 2035 for drayage trucks; and
• All off -road vehicles and equipment to be zero -emission by 2035 where feasible.

EO N-79-20 directs CARB, the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development, the CEC, the California Department of Transportation, and other state agencies to take steps toward drafting regulations and strategies and leveraging agency resources toward achieving these goals.

The California Climate Crisis Act (Assembly Bill 1279)
AB 1279 was passed on September 16, 2022 and declares the State would achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, but no later than 2045. In addition, achieve and maintain net negative greenhouse gas emissions and ensure that by 2045, statewide anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 85% below the 1990 levels. The bill would require updates to the scoping plan (once every five years) to implement various policies and strategies that enable carbon dioxide removal solutions and carbon capture, utilization, and storage technologies.

Clean Energy, Jobs, and Affordability Act of 2022 (Senate Bill 1020) Adopted on September 16, 2022, SB 1020 creates clean electricity targets for eligible renewable energy resources and zero -carbon resources to supply 90 percent of retail sale electricity by 2035, 95 percent by 2040, 100 percent by 2045, and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve all state agencies by 2035. This bill shall not increase carbon emissions elsewhere in the western grid and shall not allow resource shuffling.

Local Regulations
SBCAG 2050 RTP/SCS
SBCAG adopted its 2050 RTP/SCS (titled Connected 2050) in August 2021. This plan shows how the region will achieve the required SB 375 targets and demonstrates the co -benefits of reducing Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 33

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
criteria pollutants. The 2050 RTP/SCS explores the region's land use and travel patterns, accounts for the demographic growth that will force new demands on both and presents a vision for how they can work together to satisfy the goals important to the region while also meeting the State's greenhouse gas reduction targets. The 2050 RTP/SCS preferred scenario is a Transit -Oriented Development (TOD)/Infill plan in that it strives to accommodate future growth within existing urban areas along transit corridors. The intent of these proposed changes is to shorten trip distances and reduce vehicle miles traveled and emissions by; directly addressing regional jobs/housing imbalance by providing more housing on the jobs -rich South Coast and more jobs in the North County; and promoting more trips, both local and inter -city, by alternative transportation modes, including by foot, bike, or transit. The 2050 RTP/SCS meets and exceeds the California Air Resources Board -17 percent per capita targets for reduction of GHG emissions from passenger vehicles for target year 2035 (SBCAG 2021).

3.2 Impact Analysis

3.2.1 Methodology
Calculations of CO2, CH4, and N20 emissions are provided to identify the magnitude of potential project effects. The analysis focuses on CO2, CH4, and N20 because these comprise 98 percent of all GHG emissions by volume and are the GHG emissions the proposed project would emit in the largest quantities (IPCC 2014). Emissions of all GHGs are converted into their equivalent GWP in terms of CO2 (i.e., CO2e). Minimal amounts of other GHGs (such as chlorofluorocarbons [CFCs]) would be emitted; however, these other GHG emissions would not substantially add to the total.

Emissions from refrigerants used for cooling systems are also incorporated into the emissions quantifications. GHG emissions associated with project construction and operational activity were calculated using the CaIEEMod version 2022.1 (see Appendix A for calculations).

Construction Emissions
During construction, the proposed project would generate GHG emissions primarily from the use of internal combustion engines to power on -site equipment as well as off -site transportation of workers and materials. The Association of Environmental Professionals (2016) has recommended amortizing construction -related emissions over a 30 -year period in conjunction with the proposed project's operational emissions since construction emissions occur for a limited period of a project's lifetime. This guidance is used in this analysis. See Section 2.4.1, Methodology, for the area and mobile source assumptions that inform the air quality and GHG emissions estimates. The methodology described in Section 2.4.1, Methodology, for air quality construction emissions remain the same for estimating constructing GHG emissions.

Operational Emissions
The analysis uses CaIEEMod assumptions for mobile, energy, area sources, waste, and water for a warehouse and landscaping.

Electric Use Emissions
GHGs are emitted on -site during the generation of electricity from fossil fuels in power plants.

CaIEEMod estimates GHG emissions from energy use by multiplying average rates of residential and non-residential energy consumption by the quantities of residential units and non-residential square footage entered in the land use module to obtain total projected energy use. This value is then 34 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
multiplied by electricity and natural gas GHG emission factors applicable to the project location and utility provider.

Building energy use is typically divided into energy consumed by the built environment and energy consumed by uses that are independent of the building, such as plug-in appliances. Non -building energy use, or "plug-in energy use," can be further subdivided by specific end -use (refrigeration, cooking, office equipment, etc.). In California, Title 24 governs energy consumed by the built environment, mechanical systems, and some types of fixed lighting. CaIEEMod currently incorporates California's 2019 Title 24 building energy efficiency standards.

The project would be served by either Central Coast Community Energy or Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E). The project is assumed to procure electricity from PG&E. As the project is planned for construction in June 2025, with an assumed operational date of 2026 it would be subject to at least 2022 Title 24 standards.

Water and Wastewater Emissions
GHG emissions from water and wastewater usage calculated in CaIEEMod were based on project - specific consumption of the pool areas and ancillary facilities. In addition, default electricity intensity from the CEC's 2006 Refining Estimates of Water -Related Energy Use in California using the average values for northern and southern California for landscaping water usage.

Solid Waste Emissions
GHG emissions from waste generation were also calculated in CaIEEMod and are based on CARB's methods for quantifying GHG emissions from solid waste using the degradable organic content of waste (CARB 2010). Waste disposal rates by land use and overall composition of municipal solid waste in California was primarily based on data provided by CalRecycle.

3.2.2 Significance Thresholds
The majority of individual projects do not generate sufficient GHG emissions to directly influence climate change. However, physical changes caused by a project can contribute incrementally to cumulative effects that are significant, even if individual changes resulting from a project are limited. The issue of climate change typically involves an analysis of whether a Project's contribution towards an impact would be cumulatively considerable. "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects (CEQA guidelines, Section 15064[h][1]).

According to the state CEQA guidelines, projects can tier from a qualified GHG reduction plan, which allows for project -level evaluation of GHG emissions through the comparison of the proposed project's consistency with the GHG reduction policies included in a qualified GHG reduction plan.

This approach is considered by the Association of Environmental Professionals (2016) in its white paper, Beyond Newhall and 2020, to be the most defensible approach presently available under CEQA to determine the significance of a project's GHG emissions.

The City of Santa Maria has not adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing impacts related to GHG emissions. Neither the SBCAPCD, the California Office of Planning and Research, CARB, CAPCOA, or any other state or applicable regional agency has adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing GHG emissions that is applicable to the project. In the absence of any adopted numeric threshold, the significance of the project's GHG emissions is evaluated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 35

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4(b) by considering whether the project complies with applicable plans, policies, regulations and requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions. For this project, the most directly applicable adopted regulatory plans to reduce GHG emissions are the 2022 Scoping Plan and SBCAG 2050 RTP/SCS. GHG emissions from the construction and operation of the project are provided for informational purposes.

3.2.3 Project -Level Impact Analysis
Threshold 1: Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Threshold 2: Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs?
Impact GHG-1 ALTHOUGH CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD

GENERATE GHG EMISSIONS, THE PROJECT WOULD INCORPORATE FEATURES THAT REDUCE GHG EMISSIONS

AND ALIGN WITH THE GOALS OF THE APPLICABLE PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO GHG EMISSIONS. THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT CONFLICT WITH THE APPLICABLE PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATIONS ADOPTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF REDUCING GHG EMISSIONS. IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies
2022 SLOPING PLAN
The principal state plans and policies are AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, and the subsequent legislation, SB 32. The quantitative goal of AB 32 is to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The goal of SB 32 is to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and to Net Zero by 2045. Pursuant to these targets, the 2022 Scoping Plan was created to outline goals and measures for the State to achieve the reductions. The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on outcomes needed to achieve carbon neutrality by assessing paths for clean technology, energy deployment, natural and working lands, and others, and is designed to meet the state's long-term climate objectives and support a range of economic, environmental, energy security, environmental justice, and public health priorities. The proposed project would be consistent with these goals through project design, such as a PV system and electric vehicle charging stations consistent with the latest Title 24 Green Building Code and Building Efficiency Energy Standards. In addition, the project would be required to install electric vehicle charging stations consistent with the City of Santa Maria Municipal Code Section 9-56.060., Electric Vehicle Charging Station Installation Requirements. The proposed project would be served by Pacific Gas & Electric, which is required to increase its renewable energy procurement in accordance with SB 100 targets.

The project is an infill development and would contribute to the job and housing balance. In addition, the project site would be within a half mile of Santa Maria Regional Transit and existing commercial uses, which could potentially reduce the reliance of vehicle motor use and efficiency of transportation, consistent with Goal C.1 Comprehensive Transportation System of the City's Circulation Element. The proposed project will not conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan. 36 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
SBCAG 2050 RTP/SCS
SBCAG has incorporated a sustainable community strategy into its RTP/SCS, which is designed to help the region achieve its SB 375 GHG emissions reduction target. The SBCAG 2050 RTP/SCS demonstrates that the SBCAG region would achieve its regional emissions reduction targets for the 2020 and 2035 target years. The RTP/SCS states that one of the intents of the SCS is "directly addressing regional jobs/housing imbalance by providing more housing on the jobs -rich South Coast and more jobs to communities in the North County [e.g., Santa Maria]". In addition, SBCAG second goal, Mobility & System Reliability, aims increase bike, walk, and transit transportation to reduce travel times (SBCAG 2021). The proposed project would be within a half mile of bus transits and commercial uses, which would potentially decrease the reliance of personal vehicle transportation.

In addition, the project site would be consistent with latest Title 24 Standards for electric vehicle charging stations and bicycling parking spaces, which would further promote alternative modes of transportation and reduce reliance of motor vehicles. The project would potentially generate 38 employment opportunities at the industrial buildings. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the RTP/SCS by creating job opportunities in Santa Maria and potentially reducing travel times through the promotion of alternative modes of transportation. Thus, the proposed project would be consistent with the GHG emission reduction strategies contained in the 2050 RTP/SCS.

GHG Emissions
Construction and operation of the project would generate GHG emissions. This analysis considers the combined impact of GHG emissions from both construction and operation. Calculations of CO2, CH4, and N20 emissions are provided for informational purposes to identify the magnitude of project's emissions.

CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
GHG emissions are provided for informational purposes. Construction of the proposed project would generate temporary GHG emissions primarily as a result of operation of construction equipment on -site as well as from vehicles transporting construction workers to and from the project site and heavy trucks to transport building materials and soil export. As shown in Table 7, construction of the project would generate an estimated total of 500 MT of CO2e. Amortized over a 30 -year period per Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP) guidance, construction of the project would generate an estimated total of 17 MT of CO2e per year (AEP 2016).

Table 7 Estimated GHG Emissions during Construction
Year Annual Emissions (MT of CO2e)
2025
2026
Total
Amortized over 30 years
309
191
500
17 MT = metric tons; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalents
See Appendix A for modeling results.

Operation of the proposed project would generate GHG emissions associated with vehicle trips, area sources, energy, water usage and wastewater, and solid waste generation. As shown in Table 8, total combined annual GHG emissions generated by the project would be approximately 365 MT of CO2e per year.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 37

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
Table 8 Combined Annual GHG Emissions
Emission Source Annual Emissions (MT of CO2e per year)
Construction
Operational
Mobile
Area
Energy
Water
Waste
Total Emissions
17 348
142
1 149
26 29
365
MT = metric tons; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalents
Notes: Numbers may not add up due to rounding.

See Appendix A for modeling results.
38 References
4 References
Association of Environmental Professionals. 2016. Final White Paper - Beyond 2020 and Newhall: A Field Guide to New CEQA Greenhouse Gas Thresholds and Climate Action Plan Targets for California. October 18, 2016.

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. 2022. California Emissions Estimator Model User Guide Version 2022.1. April 2022. https://www.caleemod.com/documents/user- guide/CaIEEMod_User_Guide_v2022.1.pdf (accessed June 2023).

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April 2005. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/ceqa/handbook/california-air-resources-board-air-quality-and-land-use-handbook-a- community-health-perspective.pdf (accessed June 2023).
. 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan. Sacramento, CA. December 2008. . 2010. Local Government Operations Protocol for the Quantification and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories. Version 1.1. May 2010. https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/protocols/loca Igov/pubs/Igo_protocol_v1_1_2010-05-03.pdf (accessed June 2023).
. 2014. AB 32 Scoping Plan Website. Updated June 2014.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scopingplan.htm (accessed June 2023). . 2016. Ambient Air Quality Standards. Last modified: May 4, 2016. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aags/aags2.pdf (accessed June 2023). . 2017. California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. December 14, 2017. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf (accessed June 2023). 2022a. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2020 Trends of Emissions and Other Indicators. October 26, 2022.
https://ww2.a rb. ca.gov/sites/defa u It/files/classic/cc/inventory/2000- 2020_ghg_inventory_trends.pdf (accessed June 2023).
2022b. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. November 16, 2022. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/2022-sp.pdf (accessed June 2023). . 2023a. "Overview: Diesel Exhaust & Health." https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview- diesel-exhaust-and-health (accessed June 2023).
. 2023b. "National Ambient Air Quality Standards." https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/national- ambient-air-quality-standards (accessed June 2023).
. 2023c. "California Ambient Air Quality Standards."
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/california-ambient-air-quality-standards (accessed June 2023).
. 2023d. "Top 4 Summary: Select Pollutant, Years, & Area." http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfourl.php (accessed June 2023).

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 39

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
California Climate Change Center (CCCC). 2006. Climate Scenarios for California. https://research.fit.edu/media/site-specific/researchfitedu/coast-climate-adaptation- i b ra rv/u n ited-states/west-coast-amp-h awa ix27 i/ca l ifo rn i a---statewide/CCCC.--2006.-- Climate-Scenarios-for-California.pdf
California Department of Finance. 2023. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/estimates-e5-2010- 2021/
California Department of Food and Agriculture. 2022. "California Agricultural Production Statistics." https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/statistics/ (accessed June 2023).

California Department of Water Resources. Indicators of Climate Change in California. May 2018. https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/climate-
change/report/2018caindicatorsreportmay2018.pdf
. 2023. California's Snowpack is Now One of the Largest Ever, Bringing Drought Relief, Flooding Concerns. April 3. https://water.ca.gov/News/News-Releases/2023/April-23/Snow- Survey-April-
2023#::text=The%20manual%20survey%20recorded%20126.5,of%20DW R's%20water%20s upply%20forecast. (accessed August 2023).

California Natural Resources Agency. 2019. California's Fourth Climate Change Assessment Statewide Summary Report. August 27, 2018. http://www.climateassessment.ca.gov/state/ . 2021. Draft California Climate Adaptation Strategy. October 2021. https://resources.ca.gov/- /media/CNRA-Website/Files/Initiatives/Climate-Resilience/SAS-Workshops/Draft-CA- Cl imate-Adaptation-Strategy-ada.pdf
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. . 2014a. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Summary for Policymakers - Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
. 2014b. Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and I II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland. . 2018. Summary for Policymakers. In: Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre -industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ (accessed March 2022).
. 2021. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson- Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Pean, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L.

Goldfarb, M. I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T.

Waterfield, O. Yelekci, R. Yu and B. Zhou (eds.)] Cambridge University Press. https://www.i pcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/I PCC_AR6_WGI_Full_Report.pdf 40 References
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 2023. "Global Climate Change - Vital Signs of the Planet - Sea Level." Last modified: January 12, 2023. https://climate.nasa.gov/vital- signs/sea-level/ (accessed June 2023).

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2022. Climate Change: Global Sea Level. April 19, 2022. https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change- global-sea-level (accessed June 2023).
. 2023. "Global Climate Report for Annual 2022." State of the Climate. January 2023. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201813 (accessed June 2023).

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2015. Guidance Manuel for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.
https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf Parmesan, C. 2006. Ecological and Evolutionary Responses to Recent Climate Change. August 2006.

Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD). 2022. Scope and Content of Air Quality Sections in Environmental Documents. January 2022. https://www.ourair.org/wp- content/uploads/ScopeContentJanuary2022-LimitedUpdates.pdf (accessed June 2023). . 2023. "Meeting Air Quality Standards" [website] N.d. https://www.ourair.org/air-quality- standards/ (accessed June 2023).

Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG). 2019. Regional Growth Forecast 2050 Santa Barbara County. January 2019.
http://www.sbcag.org/uploads/2/4/5/4/24540302/regional_growth_forecast_2050.pdf (accessed June 2023).
. 2021. Connected 2050 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). August 2021.
http://www.sbcag.org/uploads/2/4/5/4/24540302/connected_2050_final.pdf (accessed June 2023).

Santa Barbara, County of. 2021. Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual. https://www.sblafco.org/files/f2915ea5d/Information_Item_No_1 Attachment_B_Enviro nmental_Thresholds_Amended_January_2021.pdf (accessed June 2023).

Santa Maria, City of. 2001. City of Santa Maria Resource Management Element. January https://www.cityofsantamaria.org/home/showdocument?id=598 (accessed June 2023). . 2018. Annual Traffic County Summary Santa Maria - Urbanized Area. https://www.cityofsantamaria.org/home/showpublisheddocument/10033/6368512775053 70000 (accessed June 2023).
. 2019. Zoning Designations.
https://www.cityofsantamaria.org/home/showpublisheddocument/10037/6368374142174 30000 (accessed June 2023).

Southern California Association of Governments. 2001. Employment Density Study. October 31, 2001.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2003 Air Quality Management Plan.

August. https://www.agmd.gov/home/air-quality/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt- plan/2003-aqmp (accessed June 2023).

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 41

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
U.S. Climate Data. 2023. Climate Santa Maria - California. Website [N.d]. https://www.uscli matedata.com/climate/santa-maria/california/united-states/usca1023 (accessed June 2023)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2014. Policy Assessment for the Review of the Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards, External Review Draft. January 2013. https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naags/standards/pb/data/010913_pb-draft-pa.pdf (accessed June 2023).
. 2015. Overview of EPA's Updates to the Air Quality Standards for Ground -Level Ozone.

October 2015. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015- 10/documents/overview of 2015_rule.pdf (accessed June 2023). . 2016. "NAAQS Table." https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/naags-table (accessed June 2023).
. 2022a. "Process of Reviewing the National Ambient Air Quality Standards." Last modified:

October 26, 2022. https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/process-reviewing-national- ambient-air-quality-standards (accessed June 2023).
. 2022b. Climate Change Indicators: Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Last Modified: August 1, 2022. https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-global- greenhouse-gas-emissions (accessed June 2023).
. 2023a. Health Effect of Ozone Pollution. Last Modified: May 24,2023 https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-poll ution/health-effects-ozone-pollution (accessed July 2023).
. 2023b. Basic Information about Carbon Monoxide (CO) Outdoor Air Pollution. Last Modified:

July 13,2023 https://www.epa.gov/co-pollution/basic-information-about-carbon-monoxide- co-outdoor-air-pollution#Effects (accessed July 2023).
. 2023c. Basic Information about NO2. Last Modified: July 25, 2023 https://www.epa.gov/no2- pollution/basic-information-about-not#Effects (accessed July 2023). . 2023d. Sulfur Dioxide Basics. Last Modified: February 16, 2023 https://www.epa.gov/so2- pollution/sulfur-dioxide-basics (accessed February 2023). . 2023e. Basic Information about Lead Air Pollution. Last Modified: July 5, 2023 https://www.epa.gov/lead-air-pollution/basic-information-about-lead-air- pollution#health%20effects (accessed July 2023).
. 2023f. Health and Environmental Effects of Hazardous Air Pollutants. Last Modified: March 27, 2023. https://www.epa.gov/haps/health-and-environmental-effects-hazardous-air- pollutants (accessed July 2023).
. 2023g. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2021. February 2023. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-02/US-G HG -Inventory -2023 -Mai n- Text.pdf (accessed June 2023).

Western Regional Climate Center. 2023. Santa Maria Public Airport. https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi- bin/cIiMAIN.pl?ca7946 (accessed April 2023).
42 References
World Meteorological Organization. 2013. A summary of current and climate change findings and figures: a WMO information note. March 2013.
https://library.wmo.int/opac/index.php?Ivl=notice_display&id=15892#.Wt9-Z8gvzIU (accessed June 2023).
. 2023. "Greenhouse Gases." Website [N.d.]. https://public.wmo.int/en/our-mandate/focus- areas/environment/greenhouse%20gases (accessed June 2023).

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 43

RRM Design Group
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
This page intentionally left blank.
44 Appendix A
California Emissions Estimator Model Outputs

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project 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 Year, Unmitigated

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated

3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated
1 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated

3.4. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated

3.6. Grading (2025) - Mitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.8. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated

3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated

3.10. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated

3.11. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated

3.12. Paving (2026) - Mitigated

3.13. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated

3.14. Architectural Coating (2026) - Mitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.1.2. Mitigated

4.2. Energy
2/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.3.2. Mitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.4.2. Mitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.5.2. Mitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.6.2. Mitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
3/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.7.2. Mitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.8.2. Mitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.9.2. Mitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

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

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated

4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated

4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
4/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

5.2. Off -Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.2.2. Mitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.3.2. Mitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.9.2. Mitigated
5/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.11.2. Mitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.12.2. Mitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.13.2. Mitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment 6/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.14.2. Mitigated

5.15. Operational Off -Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.15.2. Mitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration
7/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2.2. Mitigated

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

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
8/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field
Project Name
Construction Start Date
Operational Year
Lead Agency
Land Use Scale
Analysis Level for Defaults
Windspeed (m/s)
Precipitation (days)
Location
County
City
Air District
Air Basin
TAZ
EDFZ
Electric Utility
Gas Utility
App Version
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
6/1/2025
2026
Project/site
County

2.90 10.0

34.91407087770109,-120.46527041228927
Santa Barbara
Santa Maria
Santa Barbara County APCD
South Central Coast
3380
6 Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Southern California Gas
2022.1.1.17

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
9/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Unrefrigerated 100 1000sgft 2.30 100,000 0.00 0.00
Warehouse -No Rail
Parking Lot

5.23 Acre

5.23 0.00

1.3. User -Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

0.00 0.00
Sector
Measure Title
Construction
Construction
Construction
C-2*
C -10-A
C-11
* Qualitative or supporting measure. Emission reductions not included in the mitigated emissions results.

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit.

ROG
NOx
co
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
Limit Heavy -Duty Diesel Vehicle Idling
Water Exposed Surfaces
Limit Vehicle Speeds on Unpaved Roads
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Unmit. 52.5 31.9 30.9 0.14 1.37 19.8 21.2 1.26 10.1 11.4 Mit. 52.5 31.9 30.9 0.14 1.37 7.82 9.18 1.26 3.98 5.24
- - - - - 61% 57% - 61% 54%
Reduced
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
- 12,260 12,260 0.67 1.49 18.1 12,739
- 12,260 12,260 0.67 1.49 18.1 12,739
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unmit. 1.32 11.1 14.9 0.03 0.44 0.33 0.77 0.40 0.08 0.48 - 2,948 2,948 0.13 0.07 0.05 2,973 Mit. 1.32 11.1 14.9 0.03 0.44 0.33 0.77 0.40 0.08 0.48 - 2,948 2,948 0.13 0.07 0.05 2,973 10/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Reduced
Average
Daily
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unmit. 3.25 6.77 7.32 0.02 0.26 1.16 1.42 0.23 0.53 0.76 - 1,831 1,831 0.09 0.11 0.68 1,866 Mit. 3.25 6.77 7.32 0.02 0.26 0.59 0.85 0.23 0.24 0.48 - 1,831 1,831 0.09 0.11 0.68 1,866 - - - - - 49% 40% - 54% 37% - - - - -
Reduced
Annual
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unmit. 0.59 1.24 1.34 < 0.005 0.05 0.21 0.26 0.04 0.10 0.14 - 303 303 0.01 0.02 0.11 309 Mit. 0.59 1.24 1.34 < 0.005 0.05 0.11 0.16 0.04 0.04 0.09 - 303 303 0.01 0.02 0.11 309 - - - - - 49% 40% - 54% 37% - -
Reduced

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Daily -
Summer
(Max)
2025 3.39 31.9 30.9 0.14 1.37 19.8 21.2 1.26 10.1 11.4 - 12,260 12,260 0.67 1.49 18.1 12,739 2026 52.5 18.5 26.5 0.04 0.73 0.48 1.20 0.67 0.12 0.78 - 4,730 4,730 0.20 0.09 2.37 4,765 Daily - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
2025 1.32 11.1 14.9 0.03 0.44 0.33 0.77 0.40 0.08 0.48
2026 1.26 10.4 14.7 0.03 0.38 0.33 0.72 0.35 0.08 0.43
Average - - - - - -
Daily
- 2,948 2,948 0.13 0.07 0.05 2,973
- 2,937 2,937 0.12 0.07 0.05 2,961
11/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 2025 0.70 6.77 7.32 0.02 0.26 1.16 1.42 0.23 0.53 0.76 - 1,831 1,831 0.09 0.11 0.68 1,866 2026 3.25 4.16 5.85 0.01 0.16 0.13 0.28 0.14 0.03 0.17 - 1,144 1,144 0.05 0.03 0.29 1,153 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2025 0.13 1.24 1.34 < 0.005 0.05 0.21 0.26 0.04 0.10 0.14 - 303 303 0.01 0.02 0.11 309 2026 0.59 0.76 1.07 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.03 - 189 189 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 191

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM 10D
PM 10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Daily - -
Summer
(Max)
2025 3.39 31.9 30.9 0.14 1.37 7.82 9.18 1.26 3.98 5.24 - 12,260 12,260 0.67 1.49 18.1 12,739 2026 52.5 18.5 26.5 0.04 0.73 0.48 1.20 0.67 0.12 0.78 - 4,730 4,730 0.20 0.09 2.37 4,765 Daily - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
2025 1.32 11.1 14.9 0.03 0.44 0.33 0.77 0.40 0.08 0.48 - 2,948 2,948 0.13 0.07 0.05 2,973 2026 1.26 10.4 14.7 0.03 0.38 0.33 0.72 0.35 0.08 0.43 - 2,937 2,937 0.12 0.07 0.05 2,961 Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
2025 0.70 6.77 7.32 0.02 0.26 0.59 0.85 0.23 0.24 0.48 - 1,831 1,831 0.09 0.11 0.68 1,866 2026 3.25 4.16 5.85 0.01 0.16 0.13 0.28 0.14 0.03 0.17 - 1,144 1,144 0.05 0.03 0.29 1,153 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2025 0.13 1.24 1.34 < 0.005 0.05 0.11 0.16 0.04 0.04 0.09 - 303 303 0.01 0.02 0.11 309 2026 0.59 0.76 1.07 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.03 - 189 189 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 191

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) 12/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Un/Mit.

ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Daily, -
Summer
(Max)
Unmit. 3.86 0.69 8.47 0.01 0.03 0.75 0.78 0.02 0.19 0.21 100 1,836 1,936 5.43 0.17 3.33 2,125 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unmit. 3.15 0.70 4.37 0.01 0.02 0.75 0.77 0.02 0.19 0.21 100 1,805 1,905 5.43 0.17 0.09 2,092 Average
Daily
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unmit. 3.49 0.71 6.37 0.01 0.02 0.75 0.77 0.02 0.19 0.21 100 1,815 1,915 5.43 0.17 1.44 2,102 Annual
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unmit. 0.64 0.13 1.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 16.6 300 317 0.90 0.03 0.24 348

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Daily, - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Mobile 0.70 0.49 3.99 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.19 0.20 - 854 854 0.05 0.04 3.33 871 Area 3.14 0.04 4.35 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 17.9 Energy 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 894 894 0.13 0.01 - 902 Water - - - - - - - - - - 49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156 Waste - - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00 - 177 Total 3.86 0.69 8.47 0.01 0.03 0.75 0.78 0.02 0.19 0.21 100 1,836 1,936 5.43 0.17 3.33 2,125 13/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Mobile 0.71 0.54 4.24 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.19 0.20 - 841 841 0.06 0.05 0.09 857 Area 2.43 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Energy 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 894 894 0.13 0.01 - 902 Water - - - - - - - - - - 49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156 Waste - - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00 - 177 Total 3.15 0.70 4.37 0.01 0.02 0.75 0.77 0.02 0.19 0.21 100 1,805 1,905 5.43 0.17 0.09 2,092 Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Mobile 0.70 0.53 4.10 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.75 0.01 0.19 0.20 - 842 842 0.06 0.05 1.44 858 Area 2.78 0.02 2.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 8.82 8.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 8.85 Energy 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 894 894 0.13 0.01 - 902 Water - - - - - - - - - - 49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156 Waste - - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00 - 177 Total 3.49 0.71 6.37 0.01 0.02 0.75 0.77 0.02 0.19 0.21 100 1,815 1,915 5.43 0.17 1.44 2,102 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mobile 0.13 0.10 0.75 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 - 139 139 0.01 0.01 0.24 142 Area 0.51 < 0.005 0.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 1.46 1.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 1.47 Energy < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 148 148 0.02 < 0.005 - 149 Water - - - - - - - - - - 8.18 11.6 19.8 0.03 0.02 - 25.9 Waste - - - - - - - - - - 8.39 0.00 8.39 0.84 0.00 - 29.3 Total 0.64 0.13 1.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 16.6 300 317 0.90 0.03 0.24 348

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
14/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Mobile 0.70 0.49 3.99 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.19 0.20 - 854 854 0.05 0.04 3.33 871 Area 3.14 0.04 4.35 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 17.9 Energy 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 894 894 0.13 0.01 - 902 Water - - - - - - - - - - 49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156 Waste - - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00 - 177 Total 3.86 0.69 8.47 0.01 0.03 0.75 0.78 0.02 0.19 0.21 100 1,836 1,936 5.43 0.17 3.33 2,125 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Mobile 0.71 0.54 4.24 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.19 0.20 - 841 841 0.06 0.05 0.09 857 Area 2.43 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Energy 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 894 894 0.13 0.01 - 902 Water - - - - - - - - - - 49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156 Waste - - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00 - 177 Total 3.15 0.70 4.37 0.01 0.02 0.75 0.77 0.02 0.19 0.21 100 1,805 1,905 5.43 0.17 0.09 2,092 Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Mobile 0.70 0.53 4.10 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.75 0.01 0.19 0.20 - 842 842 0.06 0.05 1.44 858 Area 2.78 0.02 2.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 8.82 8.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 8.85 Energy 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 894 894 0.13 0.01 - 902 Water - - - - - - - - - - 49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156 Waste - - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00 - 177 Total 3.49 0.71 6.37 0.01 0.02 0.75 0.77 0.02 0.19 0.21 100 1,815 1,915 5.43 0.17 1.44 2,102 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mobile 0.13 0.10 0.75 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 - 139 139 0.01 0.01 0.24 142 Area 0.51 < 0.005 0.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 1.46 1.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 1.47 15/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Energy < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 148 148 0.02 < 0.005 - 149 Water - - - - - - - - - - 8.18 11.6 19.8 0.03 0.02 - 25.9 Waste - - - - - - - - - - 8.39 0.00 8.39 0.84 0.00 - 29.3 Total 0.64 0.13 1.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 16.6 300 317 0.90 0.03 0.24 348

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Onsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 2.40 22.2 19.9 0.03 0.92 - 0.92 0.84 - 0.84 - 3,425 3,425 0.14 0.03 - 3,437 Equipment
Demolitio - - - - - 0.02 0.02 - < 0.005 < 0.005 -
n
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Daily, -
Winter
(Max)
Average -
Daily
Off -Road 0.13
Equipment

1.22 1.09
< 0.005 0.05 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.05
Demolitio - - - - - < 0.005 < 0.005 -
n
-
-
- 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 - 188
< 0.005 < 0.005 -
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
16/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Annual - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.02 0.22 0.20 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 31.1 31.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 31.2 Equipment
Demolitio - - - - - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - n
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Offsite - - - - - - - - - -
Daily, - - - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.07 0.05 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 - 94.4 94.4 0.01 < 0.005 0.42 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 14.7 14.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 5.07 5.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.81 0.81 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.84 0.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005

3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (Ib/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (Ib/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
17/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Onsite - - - - - - - - - -
Daily, - - - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Off -Road 2.40 22.2 19.9 0.03 0.92 - 0.92 0.84 - 0.84 - 3,425 3,425 0.14 0.03 - 3,437 Equipment
Demolitio - - - - - 0.02 0.02 - < 0.005 < 0.005 -
n
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Daily, - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Off -Road 0.13 1.22 1.09 < 0.005 0.05 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.05 - 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 - 188 Equipment
Demolitio - - - - - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - n
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Annual - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.02 0.22 0.20 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 31.1 31.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 31.2 Equipment
Demolitio - - - - - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - n
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Offsite - - - - - - - - - -
Daily, - - - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.07 0.05 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 - 94.4 94.4 0.01 < 0.005 0.42 18/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 14.7 14.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 Daily, - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - - -
Daily
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 5.07 5.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.81 0.81 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.84 0.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
ROG
NOx
co
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM 10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Onsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 1.37
Equipment
Dust
From
Material
Movement

1.37 1.26 - 1.26

19.7 19.7

10.1 10.1
5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 - 5,314
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
19/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Off -Road 0.09 0.87 0.83 < 0.005 0.04 - 0.04 0.03 - 0.03 - 145 145 0.01 < 0.005 - 146 Equipment
Dust - - - - - 0.54 0.54 - 0.28 0.28 - - - - - - -
From
Material
Movement
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.02 0.16 0.15 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 24.0 24.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 24.1 Equipment
Dust - - - - - 0.10 0.10 - 0.05 0.05 - - - - - - -
From
Material
Movement
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Offsite - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.08 0.06 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.03 - 110 110 0.01 < 0.005 0.49 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.23 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 - 168 168 0.01 0.03 0.32 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
20 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 2.96 2.96 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 4.61 4.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.49 0.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.76 0.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005

3.4. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Onsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 1.37
Equipment

1.37 1.26 - 1.26
Dust - - - - - 7.67 7.67 - 3.94 3.94
From
Material
Movement
5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 - 5,314
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Daily, -
Winter
(Max)
Average -
Daily
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.09 0.87 0.83 < 0.005 0.04 - 0.04 0.03 - 0.03 - 145 145 0.01 < 0.005 - 146 Equipment
21 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Dust - - - - - 0.21 0.21 - 0.11 0.11
From
Material
Movement
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Annual - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.02 0.16 0.15 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 24.0 24.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 24.1 Equipment
Dust - - - - - 0.04 0.04 - 0.02 0.02
From
Material
Movement
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Offsite
Daily, -
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.08 0.06 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.03 - 110 110 0.01 < 0.005 0.49 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.23 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 - 168 168 0.01 0.03 0.32 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 2.96 2.96 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 4.61 4.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.49 0.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 22/79
-
-

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.76 0.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 -

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (Ib/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (Ib/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
PM10E
PM10D
PM 10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Onsite
Daily, -
Summer
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 1.74 16.3 17.9 0.03 0.72
Equipment

0.72 0.66 - 0.66 - 2,959 2,959 0.12 0.02 - 2,970
Dust - - - - - 7.15 7.15 - 3.43 3.43
From
Material
Movement
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Daily, - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - -
Daily
Off -Road 0.10 0.89 0.98 < 0.005 0.04 - 0.04 0.04 - 0.04 - 162 162 0.01 < 0.005 - 163 Equipment
Dust - - - - - 0.39 0.39 - 0.19 0.19
From
Material
Movement
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Annual -
Off -Road 0.02
Equipment

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

0.16 0.18 < 0.005 0.01

0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 26.8 26.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 26.9
23 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Dust - - - - - 0.07 0.07 - 0.03 0.03
From
Material
Movement
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Offsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker 0.07 0.05 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 - 94.4 94.4 0.01 < 0.005 0.42 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.19 12.8 4.45 0.11 0.17 2.26 2.43 0.11 0.63 0.74 - 9,206 9,206 0.54 1.46 17.7 Daily, - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - - -
Daily
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 5.07 5.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.01 0.73 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.13 0.01 0.03 0.04 - 505 505 0.03 0.08 0.42 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.84 0.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.13 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 - 83.5 83.5 < 0.005 0.01 0.07

3.6. Grading (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Onsite
24/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Off -Road 1.74 16.3 17.9 0.03 0.72 - 0.72 0.66 - 0.66 - 2,959 2,959 0.12 0.02 - 2,970 Equipment
Dust - - - - - 2.79 2.79 - 1.34 1.34 - - - - - - -
From
Material
Movement
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Off -Road 0.10 0.89 0.98 < 0.005 0.04 - 0.04 0.04 - 0.04 - 162 162 0.01 < 0.005 - 163 Equipment
Dust - - - - - 0.15 0.15 - 0.07 0.07 - - - - - - -
From
Material
Movement
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.02 0.16 0.18 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 26.8 26.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 26.9 Equipment
Dust - - - - - 0.03 0.03 - 0.01 0.01 - - - - - - -
From
Material
Movement
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Offsite - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
25 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.07 0.05 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 - 94.4 94.4 0.01 < 0.005 0.42 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.19 12.8 4.45 0.11 0.17 2.26 2.43 0.11 0.63 0.74 - 9,206 9,206 0.54 1.46 17.7 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 5.07 5.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.01 0.73 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.13 0.01 0.03 0.04 - 505 505 0.03 0.08 0.42 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.84 0.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.13 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 - 83.5 83.5 < 0.005 0.01 0.07

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
Onsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Off -Road
Equipment
Onsite
truck
ROG

1.13 0.00
NOx

10.4 0.00
CO

13.0 0.00
S02

0.02 0.00
PM10E

0.43 0.00
PM10D

0.00 PM10T

0.43 0.00
PM2.5E

0.40 0.00
PM2.5D

0.00 PM2.5T

0.40 0.00
BCO2
NBCO2
2,398

0.00 CO2T
2,398

0.00 CH4

0.10 0.00
N20

0.02 0.00
R

0.00 CO2e
2,406
26 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Off -Road 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 - 0.43 0.40 - 0.40 - 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 - 2,406 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Off -Road 0.31 2.88 3.60 0.01 0.12 - 0.12 0.11 - 0.11 - 662 662 0.03 0.01 - 664 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.06 0.53 0.66 < 0.005 0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.02 - 110 110 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 110 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Offsite - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.19 0.13 1.57 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 - 264 264 0.02 0.01 1.17 - Vendor 0.01 0.46 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 - 291 291 0.01 0.04 0.74 - Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.18 0.15 1.61 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 - 259 259 0.02 0.01 0.03 - Vendor 0.01 0.47 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 - 291 291 0.01 0.04 0.02 - Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
27/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Worker 0.05 0.04 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.02 - 71.5 71.5 0.01 < 0.005 0.14 Vendor < 0.005 0.13 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 - 80.3 80.3 < 0.005 0.01 0.09 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 11.8 11.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 Vendor < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 13.3 13.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.8. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
Onsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 - 0.43 0.40 - 0.40 - 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 - 2,406 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Off -Road 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 - 0.43 0.40 - 0.40 - 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 - 2,406 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Average -
Daily
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.31 2.88 3.60 0.01 0.12
Equipment

0.12 0.11 - 0.11
662 662 0.03 0.01 - 664
28 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Annual - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.06 0.53 0.66 < 0.005 0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.02 - 110 110 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 110 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Offsite - - - - - - - - - -
Daily, - - - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.19 0.13 1.57 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 - 264 264 0.02 0.01 1.17 Vendor 0.01 0.46 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 - 291 291 0.01 0.04 0.74 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.18 0.15 1.61 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 - 259 259 0.02 0.01 0.03 Vendor 0.01 0.47 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 - 291 291 0.01 0.04 0.02 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.02 - 71.5 71.5 0.01 < 0.005 0.14 Vendor < 0.005 0.13 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 - 80.3 80.3 < 0.005 0.01 0.09 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 11.8 11.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 Vendor < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 13.3 13.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
Onsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 - 0.38 0.35 - 0.35 - 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 - 2,405 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Off -Road 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 - 0.38 0.35 - 0.35 - 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 - 2,405 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Off -Road 0.38 3.51 4.62 0.01 0.13 - 0.13 0.12 - 0.12 - 854 854 0.03 0.01 - 857 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.07 0.64 0.84 < 0.005 0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.02 - 141 141 0.01 < 0.005 - 142 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Offsite
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
30 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Daily, -
Summer
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker 0.17 0.12 1.44 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 - 259 259 0.02 0.01 1.08 Vendor 0.01 0.44 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 - 286 286 0.01 0.04 0.69 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.17 0.14 1.48 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 - 254 254 0.01 0.01 0.03 Vendor 0.01 0.45 0.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 - 286 286 0.01 0.04 0.02 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 - 90.4 90.4 0.01 < 0.005 0.17 Vendor < 0.005 0.16 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 - 102 102 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 15.0 15.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 Vendor < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 16.9 16.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.10. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (Ib/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (Ib/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM 10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Onsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
31 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Off -Road 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 - 0.38 0.35 - 0.35 - 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 - 2,405 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Off -Road 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 - 0.38 0.35 - 0.35 - 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 - 2,405 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Off -Road 0.38 3.51 4.62 0.01 0.13 - 0.13 0.12 - 0.12 - 854 854 0.03 0.01 - 857 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.07 0.64 0.84 < 0.005 0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.02 - 141 141 0.01 < 0.005 - 142 Equipment
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Offsite - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.17 0.12 1.44 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 - 259 259 0.02 0.01 1.08 Vendor 0.01 0.44 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 - 286 286 0.01 0.04 0.69 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.17 0.14 1.48 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 - 254 254 0.01 0.01 0.03 32/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Vendor 0.01 0.45 0.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 - 286 286 0.01 0.04 0.02 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 - 90.4 90.4 0.01 < 0.005 0.17 Vendor < 0.005 0.16 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 - 102 102 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 15.0 15.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 Vendor < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 16.9 16.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.11. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Onsite
Daily, -
Summer
(Max)
Off -Road 0.76 7.12 9.94 0.01 0.32
Equipment
Paving 0.69 - - -
-
- 0.32 0.29 - 0.29 - 1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 - 1,516
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
-
-
33 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Off -Road 0.04
Equipment
Paving 0.04
Onsite 0.00
truck
Annual
Off -Road 0.01
Equipment
Paving 0.01
Onsite 0.00
truck
Offsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Annual
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

0.06 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.39 0.54 < 0.005 0.02
- 0.02 0.02

0.02 - 82.8 82.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 -

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.07 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 -
< 0.005 < 0.005 -
- 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
< 0.005 -

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.04 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.52 0.00

0.00 0.03

0.00 0.00

0.01 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.09 0.00

0.00 0.09

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.02

0.00 0.00

0.02 0.00

0.00 13.7 13.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 -
- 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

92.4 0.00

0.00 92.4

0.00 0.00

0.01 0.00

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.00

0.39 0.00

0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 4.97 4.97 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.82 0.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

83.1 13.8
34/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

3.12. Paving (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
Onsite
ROG
Daily, -
Summer
(Max)
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.76 7.12 9.94 0.01 0.32
Equipment
Paving 0.69 - - -

0.32 0.29 - 0.29 - 1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 - 1,516
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Daily, -
Winter
(Max)
Average -
Daily
Off -Road 0.04
Equipment
Paving 0.04
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

0.39 0.54 < 0.005 0.02

0.02 0.02 - 0.02 - 82.8 82.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 83.1
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Annual -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.01 0.07 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 13.7 13.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 13.8 Equipment
Paving 0.01
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Offsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
35 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Worker 0.06 0.04 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 - 92.4 92.4 0.01 < 0.005 0.39 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - - -
Daily
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 4.97 4.97 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.82 0.82 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.13. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Onsite
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
-
Off -Road 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.02 - 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 - 134 Equipment
Architectu 49.5 - - -
ral
Coatings
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
36 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Off -Road 0.01 0.05 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 7.32 7.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 7.34 Equipment
Architectu 2.71 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ral
Coatings
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 1.21 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 1.22 Equipment
Architectu 0.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ral
Coatings
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Offsite - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.03 0.02 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 - 51.8 51.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.22 - Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 2.78 2.78 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 - 37/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.46 0.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.14. Architectural Coating (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM1OD
PM 10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Onsite
Daily, -
Summer
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.02 - 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 - 134 Equipment
Architectu 49.5 - - -
ral
Coatings
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - truck
Daily, - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - -
Daily
Off -Road 0.01 0.05 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 7.32 7.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 7.34 Equipment
Architectu 2.71 - - - - - - - -
ral
Coatings
38 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Off -Road < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 1.21 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 1.22 Equipment
Architectu 0.50 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ral
Coatings
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Offsite - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.03 0.02 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 - 51.8 51.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.22 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Daily
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 2.78 2.78 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 0.46 0.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Daily, - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Unrefriger 0.70 0.49 3.99 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.19 0.20 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
- 854 854 0.05 0.04 3.33 871
Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lot
Total 0.70 0.49 3.99 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.19 0.20 - 854 854 0.05 0.04 3.33 871 Daily, - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Unrefriger 0.71 0.54 4.24 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.19 0.20 - 841 841 0.06 0.05 0.09 857 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lot
Total 0.71 0.54 4.24 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.19 0.20 - 841 841 0.06 0.05 0.09 857 Annual - - - - - - - - - -
40 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Unrefriger 0.13 0.10 0.75 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 - 139 139 0.01 0.01 0.24 142 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lot
Total 0.13 0.10 0.75 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 - 139 139 0.01 0.01 0.24 142

4.1.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM 10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Daily, - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Unrefriger 0.70 0.49 3.99 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.19 0.20 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
854 854 0.05 0.04 3.33 871
Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lot
Total 0.70 0.49 3.99 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.19 0.20 - 854 854 0.05 0.04 3.33 871 Daily, - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Unrefriger 0.71 0.54 4.24 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.19 0.20 - 841 841 0.06 0.05 0.09 857 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lot
Total 0.71 0.54 4.24 0.01 0.01 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.19 0.20 - 841 841 0.06 0.05 0.09 857 41 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Annual -
Unrefriger
ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking
Lot

0.13 0.00

0.10 0.00

0.75 0.00
< 0.005

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.14

0.00 < 0.005

0.00 0.03

0.00 0.04

0.00 139

0.00 0.01

0.00 0.24

0.00 -
142

0.00 Total 0.13 0.10 0.75 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 - 139 139 0.01 0.01 0.24 142

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
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Unrefriger
ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking
Lot
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
592
112
CO2T
592
112
CH4

0.10 0.02
N2O

0.01 < 0.005
R
CO2e
598
113
Total - - - - - - - - - - - 704 704 0.11 0.01 - 711
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Unrefriger
ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
592
592

0.10 0.01
598
42/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Parking — — — — — — — — — — — 112 112 0.02 < 0.005 — 113 Lot
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 704 704 0.11 0.01 — 711
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unrefriger — — — — — — — — — — — 98.0 98.0 0.02 < 0.005 — 99.0 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking — — — — — — — — — — — 18.5 18.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 18.6 Lot
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 117 117 0.02 < 0.005 — 118

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Unrefriger
ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking
Lot
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM1OD
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
592 592 0.10 0.01 — 598
112 112 0.02 < 0.005 — 113
704 704 0.11 0.01 — 711
-
43 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Unrefriger - - - - - - - - - - - 592 592 0.10 0.01 - 598 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking - - - - - - - - - - - 112 112 0.02 < 0.005 - 113 Lot
Total - - - - - - - - - - - 704 704 0.11 0.01 - 711
Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unrefriger - - - - - - - - - - - 98.0 98.0 0.02 < 0.005 - 99.0 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking - - - - - - - - - - - 18.5 18.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 18.6 Lot
Total - - - - - - - - - - - 117 117 0.02 < 0.005 - 118

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Daily, - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Unrefriger 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
- 190 190 0.02 < 0.005 - 191
Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
Total 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 190 190 0.02 < 0.005 - 191 44/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Unrefriger 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 190 190 0.02 < 0.005 - 191 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
Total 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 190 190 0.02 < 0.005 - 191 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unrefriger < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 31.5 31.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 31.6 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
Total < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 31.5 31.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 31.6

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use
ROG
NOx
Daily, - -
Summer
(Max)
CO
SO2
PM10E
Unrefriger 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01
ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
PM10D
PM 10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
- 0.01 0.01 - 0.01
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
- 190 190 0.02 < 0.005 - 191
Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
45 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Total 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 190 190 0.02 < 0.005 - 191 Daily, - - -
Winter
(Max)
-
Unrefriger 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 190 190 0.02 < 0.005 - 191 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
Total 0.01 0.16 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 190 190 0.02 < 0.005 - 191 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unrefriger < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 31.5 31.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 31.6 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
Total < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 31.5 31.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 31.6

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (Ib/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (Ib/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM 10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Consume 2.16
r
Products
-
46 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Architectu 0.27 - - -
Coatings
Landscap 0.71 0.04 4.35 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 17.9 e
Equipme
nt
Total 3.14 0.04 4.35 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 17.9 Daily, - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Consume 2.16 - - - - - - - - -
r
Products
Architectu 0.27 - - - - - - - -
ral
Coatings
Total 2.43 - - - - - - - -
Annual - - - - - - -
Consume 0.39 - - - - - -
r
Products
Architectu 0.05 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ral
Coatings
Landscap 0.06 < 0.005 0.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 1.46 1.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 1.47 e
Equipme
nt
Total 0.51 < 0.005 0.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 1.46 1.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 1.47

4.3.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM 10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
47/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - -
Summer
(Max)
Consume 2.16 - - - - - - - - - - -
r
Products
Architectu 0.27 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ral
Coatings
Landscap 0.71 0.04 4.35 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 17.9 e
Equipme
nt
Total 3.14 0.04 4.35 < 0.005 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 - 0.01 - 17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 17.9 Daily, - - - - - - - - - - - -
Winter
(Max)
Consume 2.16 - - - - - - - - - - -
r
Products
Architectu 0.27 - - - - - - - - - - -
ral
Coatings
Total 2.43 - - - - - - - - - - -
Annual - - - - - - - - - - - -
Consume 0.39 - - - - - - - - - - -
r
Products
Architectu 0.05 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ral
Coatings
Landscap 0.06 < 0.005 0.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 1.46 1.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 1.47 e
Equipme
nt
Total 0.51 < 0.005 0.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 < 0.005 - < 0.005 - 1.46 1.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 - 1.47 48 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Unrefriger
ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking
Lot
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Unrefriger
ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
- - - - - - - - - - 49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156
- - - - - - - - - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00
- - - - - - - - - - 49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156
-
- - - - - - - - - - 49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156
Parking - - - - - - - - - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
Total - - - - - - - - - - 49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unrefriger - - - - - - - - - - 8.18 11.6 19.8 0.03 0.02 - 25.9 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
49 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Parking
Lot
Total

4.4.2. Mitigated

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00

8.18 11.6 19.8 0.03 0.02 - 25.9
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Unrefriger
ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking
Lot
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Unrefriger
ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking
Lot
Total
Annual
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e

49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00

49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156
-

49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00

49.4 69.9 119 0.18 0.11 - 156
-
50 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Unrefriger - - - - - - - - - - 8.18 11.6 19.8 0.03 0.02 - 25.9 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking - - - - - - - - - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
Total - - - - - - - - - - 8.18 11.6 19.8 0.03 0.02 - 25.9

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Unrefriger - - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00 - 177 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking - - - - - - - - - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
Total - - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00 - 177 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
-
Unrefriger - - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00 - 177 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking - - - - - - - - - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
51 /79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Total - - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00 - 177 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unrefriger - - - - - - - - - - 8.39 0.00 8.39 0.84 0.00 - 29.3 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking - - - - - - - - - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
Total - - - - - - - - - - 8.39 0.00 8.39 0.84 0.00 - 29.3

4.5.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (Ib/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (Ib/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Unrefriger
ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking
Lot
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
- - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00
- - - - - - - - - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
- - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00
-
Unrefriger - - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
177

0.00 177
177
52 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Parking - - - - - - - - - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
Total - - - - - - - - - - 50.7 0.00 50.7 5.06 0.00 - 177 Annual - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unrefriger - - - - - - - - - - 8.39 0.00 8.39 0.84 0.00 - 29.3 ated
Warehou
se -No
Rail
Parking - - - - - - - - - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 Lot
Total - - - - - - - - - - 8.39 0.00 8.39 0.84 0.00 - 29.3

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total
Annual
Total
ROG

4.6.2. Mitigated
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
-
-
-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) 53 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Land Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM1OD
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total
Annual
Total
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total
Annual
Total
ROG
NOx
co
SO2
PM10E
PM1OD
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.7.2. Mitigated
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
54/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T B0O2 NBCO2 CO2T nt
Type
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total
Annual
Total

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
B002
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total
Annual
Total
55/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
PM10E
PM1OD
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total
Annual
Total
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) -
-
-
Equipme
nt
Type
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
PM10E
PM1OD
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
56/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Annual
Total — — — — — —

4.9.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (Ib/day for daily, MT/yr for annual Equipme
nt
Type
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM1OD
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total
Annual
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual Vegetatio
n
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM1OD
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total
57/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 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
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM10T
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
B002
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
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM10D
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
B002
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N2O
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Avoided
Subtotal
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
58/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Sequeste
red
Subtotal
Removed
Subtotal
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Avoided —
Subtotal —
Sequeste
red
Subtotal
Removed
Subtotal
Annual
Avoided
Subtotal
Sequeste
red
Subtotal
Removed
Subtotal
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) 59 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Vegetatio
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM1OD
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total
Annual
Total
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (1b/clay for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM1OD
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Total
Annual
Total
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (1b/clay for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) -
-
-
Species
ROG NOx
CO
SO2
PM10E
PM1OD
PM1OT
PM2.5E
PM2.5D
PM2.5T
BCO2
NBCO2
CO2T
CH4
N20
R
CO2e
60 / 79

Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Avoided
Subtotal
Sequeste
red
Subtotal
Removed
Subtotal
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Avoided
Subtotal
Sequeste
red
Subtotal
Removed
Subtotal
Annual
Avoided
Subtotal
Sequeste
red
Subtotal
Removed
Subtotal
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
-
-
-
- - - - - - - - - -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
61 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name
Demolition
Site Preparation
Grading
Building Construction
Paving
Architectural Coating
Phase Type
Demolition
Site Preparation
Grading
Building Construction
Paving
Architectural Coating
Start Date
6/1/2025
6/30/2025
7/15/2025
8/13/2025
7/1/2026
7/1/2026
End Date
6/29/2025
7/14/2025
8/12/2025
7/1/2026
7/28/2026
7/28/2026
Days Per Week

5.00 5.00

5.00 5.00
Work Days per Phase

20.0 10.0

20.0 230

20.0 20.0
Phase Description

5.2. Off -Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name
Demolition
Demolition
Demolition
Site Preparation
Site Preparation
Grading
Grading
Grading
Equipment Type
Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Rubber Tired Dozers
Excavators
Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Rubber Tired Dozers
Graders
Rubber Tired Dozers
Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Fuel Type
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Engine Tier
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Number per Day

1.00 2.00

3.00 4.00

3.00 1.00

1.00 3.00
Hours Per Day

8.00 8.00

8.00 8.00
Horsepower

33.0 367

36.0 84.0
367
148
367

84.0 Load Factor

0.73 0.40

0.38 0.37

0.40 0.41

0.40 0.37
62/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Grading
Building Construction
Building Construction
Building Construction
Building Construction
Building Construction
Paving
Paving
Paving
Architectural Coating

5.2.2. Mitigated
Excavators
Cranes
Forklifts
Generator Sets
Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Welders
Pavers
Paving Equipment
Rollers
Air Compressors
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average

1.00 1.00

3.00 1.00

2.00 2.00

2.00 1.00

8.00 7.00

8.00 8.00

7.00 8.00

8.00 8.00

8.00 6.00

36.0 367

82.0 14.0

84.0 46.0

81.0 89.0

36.0 37.0

0.38 0.29

0.20 0.74

0.37 0.45

0.42 0.36

0.38 0.48
Phase Name
Equipment Type
Fuel Type
Engine Tier
Number per Day
Hours Per Day
Horsepower
Load Factor
Demolition
Demolition
Demolition
Site Preparation
Site Preparation
Grading
Grading
Grading
Grading
Building Construction
Building Construction
Building Construction
Concrete/Industrial Diesel
Saws
Rubber Tired Dozers
Excavators
Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Rubber Tired Dozers
Graders
Rubber Tired Dozers
Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Excavators
Cranes
Forklifts
Generator Sets
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average

1.00 2.00

3.00 4.00

3.00 1.00

1.00 3.00

1.00 1.00

3.00 1.00

8.00 8.00

8.00 7.00

8.00 8.00

33.0 367

36.0 84.0
367
148
367

84.0 36.0
367

82.0 14.0

0.73 0.40

0.38 0.37

0.40 0.41

0.40 0.37

0.38 0.29

0.20 0.74
63 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Building Construction
Building Construction
Paving
Paving
Paving
Architectural Coating
Tractors/Loaders/Backh
Welders
Pavers
Paving Equipment
Rollers
Air Compressors
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Average 3.00
Average 1.00
Average 2.00
Average 2.00
Average 2.00
Average 1.00

7.00 8.00

8.00 8.00

8.00 6.00

84.0 46.0

81.0 89.0

36.0 37.0

0.37 0.45

0.42 0.36

0.38 0.48

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name
Site Preparation
Site Preparation
Site Preparation
Site Preparation
Site Preparation
Grading
Grading
Grading
Grading
Grading
Building Construction
Building Construction
Building Construction
Building Construction
Building Construction
Paving
Trip Type
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Onsite truck
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Onsite truck
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Onsite truck
One -Way Trips per Day

17.5 2.29

15.0 125

42.0 16.4

0.00 Miles per Trip

8.80 5.30

20.0 8.80

5.30 20.0

8.80 5.30

20.0 Vehicle Mix
LDA,LDT1,LDT2

HHDT,MHDT
HHDT
HHDT
LDA,LDT1,LDT2

HHDT,MHDT
HHDT
HHDT
64/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Paving
Paving
Paving
Paving
Architectural Coating
Architectural Coating
Architectural Coating
Architectural Coating
Architectural Coating
Demolition
Demolition
Demolition
Demolition
Demolition
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Onsite truck
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Onsite truck
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Onsite truck

15.0 0.00

8.40 0.00

15.0 0.20

8.80 5.30

20.0 8.80

5.30 20.0

8.80 5.30

20.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2

HHDT,MHDT
HHDT
HHDT
LDA,LDT1,LDT2

HHDT,MHDT
HHDT
HHDT

5.3.2. Mitigated
Phase Name
Trip Type
One -Way Trips per Day
Miles per Trip
Vehicle Mix
Site Preparation
Site Preparation
Site Preparation
Site Preparation
Site Preparation
Grading
Grading
Grading
Grading
Worker
Vendor
Hauling
Onsite truck
Worker
Vendor
Hauling

17.5 2.29

15.0 125

8.80 5.30

20.0 8.80

5.30 20.0
LDA,LDT1,LDT2

HHDT,MHDT
HHDT
HHDT
LDA,LDT1,LDT2

HHDT,MHDT
HHDT
Grading
Onsite truck
HHDT
65 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 42.0 8.80 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 16.4 5.30 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 15.0 8.80 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 5.30 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 8.40 8.80 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 5.30 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT
Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 15.0 8.80 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 5.30 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 0.20 20.0 HHDT
Demolition 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
66 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 2025
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

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

0.00 0.00
150,000
50,000
13,669
Material Imported (Cubic Yards)
Material Exported (Cubic Yards)
Acres Graded (acres)
Material Demolished (Building
Square Footage)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition
Site Preparation
Grading
Paving

0.00 0.00
20,000

0.00 5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies Non -applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.7. Construction Paving

0.00 0.00

0.00 16.5

21.0 0.00
300

0.00 0.00

0.00 5.23
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail
Parking Lot

0.00 5.23

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (Ib/MWh)
0%
100%
CH4
N2O

0.00 2026 0.00
204
204

0.03 0.03
< 0.005
< 0.005
67/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type
Trips/Weekday
Trips/Saturday
Trips/Sunday
Trips/Year
VMT/Weekday
VMT/Saturday
VMT/Sunday
VMT/Year
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse -No Rail
174
Parking Lot 0.00

5.9.2. Mitigated
174

0.00 174

0.00 63,510

0.00 1,062

0.00 387,608

0.00 Land Use Type
Trips/Weekday
Trips/Saturday
Trips/Sunday
Trips/Year
VMT/Weekday
VMT/Saturday
VMT/Sunday
VMT/Year
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse -No Rail
174
Parking Lot 0.00
174

0.00 5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
174

0.00 63,510

0.00 1,062

0.00 387,608

0.00 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 5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

0.00 150,000
50,000
13,669
68 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Season
Snow Days
Summer Days
day/yr
day/yr

0.00 180

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
Season
Unit
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 N20 and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No
Rail
Parking Lot

5.11.2. Mitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr)
1,059,606
199,569
CO2
204
204
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N20 and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No
Rail
Parking Lot
1,059,606
199,569

0.0330

0.0330
204
204

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
CH4

0.0330

0.0330
N20

0.0040

0.0040
N20

0.0040

0.0040
Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
594,312

0.00 Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
594,312

0.00 69/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail
Parking Lot

5.12.2. Mitigated
23,125, 000

0.00 0.00

0.00 Land Use
Indoor Water (gal/year)
Outdoor Water (gal/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail
Parking Lot

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
23,125,000

0.00 0.00

0.00 Land Use
Waste (tonlyear)
Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail
Parking Lot

5.13.2. Mitigated

94.0 0.00
Land Us
Waste (tonlyear)
Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail

94.0 Parking Lot

0.00 5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type W
Equipment Type
Refrigerant
GWP
Quantity (kg)
Operations Leak Rate
Service Leak Rate
Times Serviced
70 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type
Equipment Type !Refrigerant I GWP Quantity (kg) !Operations Leak Rate I Service Leak Rate Times Serviced

5.15. Operational Off -Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type
Fuel Type I Engine Tier 1 Number per Day I Hours Per Day I Horsepower I Load Factor

5.15.2. Mitigated
Equipment Type X Fuel Type A i Engine Tier 1 Number per Day 1 Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type I Fuel Type
Number per Day
Hours per Day Hours per Year
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
71 /79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023

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

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Vegetation Soil Type
Initial Acres
Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
FBiomass Cover Type
Initial Acres
Final Acres

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Biomass Cover Type
Initial Acres
Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

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

5.18.2.2. Mitigated
Tree Type
Number
Electricity Saved (kWh/year)
Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
72/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 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
Extreme Precipitation

5.56 4.35
annual days of extreme heat
annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise
Wildfire

0.00 42.7
meters of inundation depth
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 % 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 (2040-2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth 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 (MIR005). Each grid cell is 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.

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 (MIR005). 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
Temperature and Extreme Heat
Exposure Score
N/A
Sensitivity Score
N/A
Adaptive Capacity Score
N/A
Vulnerability Score
N/A
Extreme Precipitation
Sea Level Rise
N/A
1 N/A
0 N/A
0 N/A
N/A
Wildfire
Flooding
1 N/A
0 N/A
0 N/A
N/A
N/A
Drought 0
Snowpack Reduction N/A
0 N/A
0 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.
73 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 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
Sea Level Rise
Wildfire
Flooding
Drought
Snowpack Reduction
Air Quality Degradation
N/A
1 1
N/A
1 N/A
N/A
N/A
1 1
N/A
1 N/A
N/A
N/A
1 1
N/A
1 N/A
N/A
N/A
2 2
N/A
2 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
Exposure Indicators
AQ-Ozone
AQ-PM
Result for Project Census Tract

11.6 10.6
AQ-DPM

48.3 74/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Drinking Water
Lead Risk Housing
Pesticides
Toxic Releases
Traffic
Effect Indicators
CleanUp Sites
Groundwater
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators
Impaired Water Bodies
Solid Waste
Sensitive Population
Asthma
Cardio-vascular
Low Birth Weights
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators
Education
Housing
Linguistic
Poverty
Unemployment

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

50.8 41.6

98.7 8.01

33.3 38.1

99.7 96.9

97.5 95.0

40.4 25.6

33.0 72.2

35.3 29.5

61.1 56.2
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

44.14217888
75 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Employed 73.4377005
Median HI 53.77903247
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 36.60977801
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 9.213396638
Transportation —
Auto Access 89.83703323
Active commuting 28.93622482
Social —
2 -parent households 40.90850764
Voting 80.1360195
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 55.1777236
Park access 27.26806108
Retail density 33.42743488
Supermarket access 37.05889901
Tree canopy 25.12511228
Housing —
Homeownership 67.43231105
Housing habitability 66.61106121
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 58.46272296 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 58.1675863
Uncrowded housing 54.07416913
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 48.58206082
Arthritis 2.5
76 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Asthma ER Admissions 67.2
High Blood Pressure 5.3
Cancer (excluding skin) 5.1
Asthma 40.2
Coronary Heart Disease 2.5
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 8.5
Diagnosed Diabetes 22.3
Life Expectancy at Birth 59.7
Cognitively Disabled 44.8
Physically Disabled 50.9
Heart Attack ER Admissions 78.5
Mental Health Not Good 51.7
Chronic Kidney Disease 3.6
Obesity 50.5
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 32.6
Stroke 10.1
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 82.5
Current Smoker 55.2
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 43.7
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 19.9
Elderly 31.3
English Speaking 59.3
77/79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Foreign -born
Outdoor Workers
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity
Impervious Surface Cover
Traffic Density
Traffic Access
Other Indices
Hardship
Other Decision Support
2016 Voting

32.2 40.0

83.9 12.5

0.0 47.3

66.1 7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric
Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) Project Located in a Low -Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617)

56.0 53.0
No
No
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.
78 / 79

Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project Detailed Report, 8/14/2023 Construction: Construction Phases

8. User Changes to Default Data
Justification
Construction: Architectural Coatings
Operations: Architectural Coatings
Construction: Dust From Material Movement
Construction: Trips and VMT
Overlapped Building construction, paving, and architectural coating phase for conservative emissions estimates
Based on SBCAPCD Rule 323.1
Based on SBCAPCD 323.1
Based on applicant provided data
Based on aerial Google Earth images, approximate 14,810.4 square feet of asphalt would be removed. Assuming a 4 inch depth, approximately 2.285 haul trips per day during site preparation would occur to remove asphalt material.
79/79

"A" STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT & REZONE
1494 FAIRWAY DRIVE

CITY OF SANTA MARIA, CA
(APN: 111-231-016)

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
OCTOBER 11, 2023
Prepared for:

SANTA MARIA PUBLIC AIRPORT DISTRICT

RRM DESIGN
PREPARED BY:

David Wolff Enviroiimental, LLC
Appendix B

BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS - REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

Dal id 11 oIlF 1 in irouuu•utal, 1.L(' 'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE GP AMENDMENT & REZONE

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT II

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION, LOCATION, AND PURPOSE 2

3.0 METHODS 2

4.0 RESULTS 3

4.1 HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES 3

4.1.1 DISTURBED/RUDERAL NON-NATIVE GRASSLAND 4

4.2 WILDLIFE 4

4.3 WATERS OF THE U.S., WETLANDS, AND WATERS OF THE STATE 4

4.4 SPECIAL -STATUS SPECIES AND NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN 5

4.4.1 SPECIAL -STATUS BOTAMCAL RESODRcs_S 5

4.4.2 SPECIAL -STATUS WILDLIFE 6

5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES 7

5.1 SUFFICIENCY OF BIOLOGICAL DATA 7

5.2 IMPACT ASSESSMENT 8

5.3 RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES 9

6.0 CONCLUSIONS 10

7.0 REFERENCES 10

APPENDIX A - FIGURES
FIGURE 1: REGIONAL LOCATION & CTS POND MAP
FIGURE 2: VICINITY LOCATION & EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP
FIGURE 3: REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS

BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS - REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

David ollf Eniironmcntal, LLC 'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT 1 1
'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
1494 FAIRWAY DRrvE

CITY OF SANTA MARIA, CA
(APN: 111-231-016)

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The "A" Street at Fairway Drive Rezoning project (Project) proposes to change the land use designation of the site located at 1494 Fairway Drive from Airport Service (AS -1) to Light Industrial (LI) and rezone the site from Open Space (OS) to Light Manufacturing (M-1).

Adjacent land uses include commercial businesses to the north, industrial buildings and the FedEx Ground shipping facility to the east, undeveloped land and the Santa Maria Public Airport District (Airport) runways/operating area (AOA) to the south, and agricultural fields to the west. No wetlands or other waters of the U.S./State or riparian habitat occurs on the project site.

A field survey conducted on the Project site established existing conditions of the proposed project site as disturbed/developed ruderal habitat. This biological resources assessment concludes the site does not support suitable habitat for any special -status plant or wildlife species or the potential to occur, or any significant biological resources within the project site.

Based on the findings described in this biological resources assessment which establish the existing developed/ruderal conditions of the project site, implementation of the proposed Project land use change and rezone would not result in any substantial adverse effects on botanical, general wildlife, or waters of the U.S./State/wetland habitat resources. Therefore, direct and indirect project impacts on biological resources would be considered less than significant and no mitigation measures are recommended. The future site development following the rezone may have potentially significant impacts on nesting birds and the California red -legged frog, and mitigation measures are recommended to avoid impacts on these biological resources.

BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS — REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

David olf Ennironmcntal, LLC 'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT 1 2

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION, LOCATION, AND PURPOSE
The proposed Project is a City of Santa Maria (City) General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of the 6.95 -acre Santa Maria Public Airport District parcel (APN: 111-231-016) from Open Space to Light Manufacturing (M-1). The specific request is to change the land use designation of the site located at 1494 Fairway Drive from Airport Service (AS -1) to Light Industrial (LI) and rezone the site from Open Space (OS) to Light Manufacturing (M-1). The proposed land use and zoning will be consistent with those of surrounding properties that have either the Light Industrial (LI) or General Industrial (GI) Land Use Classification with the Light Industrial (M-1) or Commercial Manufacturing (CM) Zone designation with the Planned Development (PD) Overlay.

There is not a specific development proposal that accompanies the rezoning request. For generalized buildout estimates included in other technical reports, a maximum floor area of 75,000 to 100,000 square feet of buildings was assumed. Generalized estimates for grading included 15,000 to 20,000 cubic yards of fill material that would be imported onsite to elevate the site above the adjacent flood elevation.

A portion of the site (approximately 0.42 Acres) is developed as a City water well pump facility and concrete pad yard. The site is otherwise vacant ruderal (disturbed) herbaceous vegetation with a few small non-native pine trees located along its southern boundary, and scattered coyote brush shrubs and fan palms. The site is bounded on the north, west and south perimeters by existing Santa Barbara County (County) flood control channels that flow into the east to west trending "Green Canyon" drainage. Open Space zoned Airport property is beyond to the west under annual crop agricultural use. The project site is abutted by 'A' Street, urban industrial development (FedEx Ground facility) to the east and north. Figure 1 in Appendix A provides a regional aerial photograph map that illustrates the current land use context of the project site.

David Wolff Environmental (DWE) conducted the review of available background data including City environmental review of nearby projects, and a biological and botanical field survey on the project site on August 28, 2023. The purpose of the field survey and this biological resources assessment is to document the existing conditions of the project site, determine the presence/absence of suitable habitat for rare plant or wildlife species, and to evaluate the potential for any direct or indirect significant impacts on biological or wetland resources, or adverse effects on any rare, threatened, or endangered plant or wildlife species (special -status species).

3.0 METHODS
Prior to field surveys, DWE Principal Ecologist David Wolff conducted a review of available background information including aerial photography of the project area over time (Google Earth), and the five -mile radius query results of the California Natural Diversity Data Base

BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS - REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

David ollf Environmental, LLC 'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT 1 3
(CNDDB). The five -mile search radius was used as a greater radius would have extended out of the area to the coastal and inland habitats and geographic areas not relevant to the project site. The CNDDB provided a list and mapped locations of special -status plant and wildlife species, and natural communities of special concern, that have been recorded in the region of the project site. The CNDDB records help to focus the field survey efforts and evaluation of potential project effects on specific species or habitats. It is noted that the CNDDB does not necessarily include all potential special -status species potentially occurring onsite or in the region, but rather only those that have been recorded by the CNDDB. This study also included the review of designated critical habitat and California tiger salamander breeding pond data from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).

DWE Principal Ecologist David Wolff conducted the field reconnaissance survey of the project site to document existing conditions of the onsite biological resources on August 28, 2023. Surveys were conducted by walking the entirety of the proposed project area recording plant and wildlife species observed and general site characteristics and adjacent land uses.

The purpose of the field survey was to document existing conditions in terms of habitat for plant and wildlife species, habitat suitability for presence/absence of special -status plant and wildlife species, the potential to support wetland and/or riparian habitats, and/or waters of the U.S./State. The study area habitat types were described by the aggregation of plants and wildlife based on the composition and structure of the dominant vegetation observed at the time the field reconnaissance was conducted.

DWE Principal Ecologist David Wolff reviewed the available background information and available aerial photography, conducted the field surveys, and is the author and principal in charge of report preparation. The survey data collected on plant and wildlife species, existing conditions, and conclusions presented in this biological resources assessment are based on the methods and field reconnaissance conducted over the project site as described above.

4.0 REsvLTs

4.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES Plant communities are generally described by the assemblages of plant species that occur together in the same area forming habitat types. Community alliance and alliance codes used in this report follow A manual of California vegetation, 2nd edition (Sawyer et al. 2009) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Community List. Plant names used in this report follow The Jepson Manual, Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition Thoroughly Revised and Expanded (Baldwin et al. 2012) and as updated in the Jepson e -Flora website. The CDFW A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California Wildlife Habitat Relationship System Classification System (WHR; Mayer and Laudenslayer, 1988) is the basis for classification of developed/ruderal habitat classification.

BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS — REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

David o11FEnvironmental, LLC 'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT 1 4
The proposed project site supports one plant community a ruderal non-native annual grassland cover over the entire property except for an approximately 0.42 -acre developed concrete pad and building for a City well site. The site was previously a golf course of managed turfgrass with a water feature that has been abandoned, dried up, and returned to the ruderal uplands. Figure 2 in Appendix A provides a vicinity location and exiting conditions map showing the project location in the disturbed/developed proposed project site and surrounding land uses. Figure 3 includes a set of onsite representative photographs.

4.1.1 DISTURBED/RUDERAL NON-NATIVE GRASSLAND
The disturbed/ruderal annual grassland habitat from mowing/discing covers the project site outside the developed City well site can be considered the Avena (barbata, fatua) Semi - Natural Herbaceous Stands (CDFW: 44.150.02). It appears dominated by a thick thatch of mowed/disced non-native annual grasses with few native and non-native herbaceous broadleaf plant species. Common native plant species observed in the disturbed/ruderal annual grassland habitat includes American bird's foot trefoil (Acmispon americanus), grassland tarweed (Deinandra increscens ssp. increscens), telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), and saltgrass (Distichlis spicata). Non-native plants observed dominating the site include short -podded mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), buckhorn plantain (Plantago coronopus), iceplant (Carpobrotus edulis), annual bursage (Ambrosia acanthicarpa), and Italian thistle (Carduuspycnocephalus). A line of several non-native pine trees (Pinus sp.) occur on the south edge of the site with scattered coyote brush (Baccharispilularis) and fan palms ( Washingtonia sp.) are on the site.

4.2 WILDLIFE
The project site developed/ruderal non-native grassland habitat that is disced/mowed annually provides minimal quality wildlife habitat likely only for locally common wildlife species that have become adapted to the urban edge. The developed/ruderal habitat on the project site does not support a significant amount of wildlife habitat, and does not represent any movement corridor for wildlife as it is abutted to 'A' Street and the urban land uses to the north and east. The site was previously a golf course of managed turfgrass that has returned to the ruderal uplands disced/mowed that reduces habitat value for wildlife. Only evidence of gophers and ground squirrels were observed on the project site.

4.3 WATERS OF THE U.S., WETLANDS, AND WATERS OF THE STATE No wetlands or other waters of the U.S./State or riparian habitat occurs on the ruderal non- native annual grassland project site. As noted above, the site is bounded on the north, west and south perimeters by existing County flood control channels that flow into the east to west trending "Green Canyon" drainage that supports a willow riparian habitat. The flood control channels to the west and north are trapezoidal channels with maintained ruderal BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS — REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

David o11FEnvironmental, LLC 'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT 1 5
non-native annual grassland habitat on the banks. The County flood control ditches and associated riparian habitat could be considered waters of the U.S./State under the jurisdiction of federal and state statutes. However, no delineation or jurisdictional determination has been made as part of this analysis for these offsite drainage features. Further, no offsite project elements are proposed in the County flood control ditches.

4.4 SPECIAL -STATUS SPECIES AND NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN Special -status species are those plants and animals listed, proposed for listing, or candidates for listing as threatened or endangered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under the federal Endangered Species Act (FESA); those considered "species of concern" by the USFWS; those listed or proposed for listing as rare, threatened, or endangered by the CDFW under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA); animals designated as "Species of Special Concern" by the CDFW; and plants occurring as a rank 1B, 2, and 4 of the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Natural Communities of Special Concern are habitat types considered rare and worthy of tracking in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) by the CNPS and CDFW because of their limited distribution or historic loss over time.

The search and review of the CNDDB revealed 19 special -status species composed of six special -status plants, 12 special -status wildlife species, and one natural community of special concern with recorded occurrences in the region of the proposed project site. The following briefly describes or summarizes the special -status species issues and presence/absence determination for occurrence on the project site.

44.1 Special -Status Botanical Resources
The search and review of the CNDDB identified six special -status plant species with recorded occurrences within an approximately five -mile radius of the project site. None have been recorded on the project site. The La Graciosa thistle (Cirsium scariosum var. loncholepis), a state threatened, federally endangered, and California Rare Plant Rank 1B.1 species, is a wetland species. No wetlands occur along the project site.

Five upland special -status plant species (none formally listed) known from the region were identified in the CNDDB search that includes the black -flowered figwort (Scrophularia atrata; CNPS Rank 1B.2), Blochman's leafy daisy (Erigeron blochmaniae; CNPS Rank 1B.2), dune larkspur (Delphinium parryi ssp. blochmaniae; CNPS Rank 1B.2), Kellogg's horkelia (Horkelia cuneata var. sericea; CNPS Rank 1B.2), and San Luis Obispo monardella (Monardella undulata ssp. crispa; CNPS Rank 1B.2). The prior golf course use and regular discing/mowing weed control make the project site unsuitable for these species and they are not expected to occur.

BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS — REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

David ollf Environmental, LLC 'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT 1 6
The CNDDB identified one natural community of special concern, Southern Vernal Pool, within a five -mile radius of the project site. No vernal pools occur on the project site.

Based on the findings from database review and the DWE field survey, no designated critical habitat occurs over the project site, and no impacts to special -status botanical resources or natural communities of special concern would result from the proposed project.

4.4.2 Special -Status Wildlife
The search and review of the CNDDB identified 12 special -status wildlife species with recorded observations within a five -mile radius of the project site. Only the California red - legged frog (CRLF; Rana draytonii ), a federally threatened species and California Species of Special Concern (SSC), has recorded observations within the County flood control ditches near the project site. In the past, two of the former golf course ponds supported CRLF on the site that is now the FedEx facility. One of the former golf course ponds at the intersection of 'A' Street and Fairway Drive has been retained with site development as mitigation for CRLF habitat (See Figure 2). Current CRLF use in this pond is undetermined.

This species may be present within the offsite drainages when water is present, and potentially in the retained mitigation golf course pond. The project site lacks suitable upland refuge habitat with vegetation cover limited to herbaceous grassland habitat. No moist refuge such as riparian habitat or downed woody debris occurs on the project site suggesting only the limited probability of overland movements during or immediately after rainstorms.

The project site existing conditions and proximity to USFWS identified known and potential breeding pond data were assessed for the potential of the site to support breeding or upland dispersal for the California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense; CTS), a federally listed endangered and state threatened species. The CTS is a lowland species that breeds in temporary pools with sufficient duration for metamorphosis (greater than 90 -days) and seeks upland refuge (before/after aquatic breeding and metamorphosis, etc.) in small mammal burrows during most of its lifecycle. They can be found primarily in grasslands and low foothill and oak woodland habitats within a USFWS predicted maximum upland habitat dispersal of 1.3 miles from a breeding pond. CTS breed in long-lasting rain pools (e.g., seasonal ponds, vernal pools, rarely in slow -moving streams), and occasionally in permanent ponds lacking fish or other large predators. During the nonbreeding season and most of their lifecycle, adults and juveniles (up to five years for breeding maturity) occur in upland habitats and occupy ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi) or pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) burrows. They migrate nocturnally to aquatic sites to breed during

BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS - REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

David o11FEmironmcntal, LLC 'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT 1 7
relatively warm winter or spring rains. Juveniles emigrate at night from the drying pools to upland refuge sites, such as rodent burrows and cracks in the soil.

No known CTS breeding pools have been documented within the USFWS maximum predicted 1.3 -mile CTS upland dispersal distance from the project site. However, two potential breeding pools, SAMA-1 1 and SAMA-12 have been identified by the USFWS approximately 1.2 miles and 0.72 mile respectively to the southwest of the project site (See Figure 1). The intervening active agricultural fields are an impediment to CTS movement with the agricultural irrigation ditches, flood control ditches, and "Green Canyon" drainage representing positive barriers to CTS movement to the project site. As such, the project site does not represent suitable upland dispersal/refuge habitat, and no breeding habitat for the CTS occurs on the project site. Therefore, there would be no impact to this species from future development following the rezoning of the project site.

The offsite willow riparian habitat along "Green Canyon" and the County flood control ditches when flowing could provide suitable habitat to support the western pond turtle (Emys marmorata) that is a highly aquatic species. Upland movement into the mowed/disced project area and developed urban land uses is unlikely. The western spadefoot (Spea hammondil) is a toad that requires temporary pools for breeding and uplands for dry season refuge. No suitable breeding pools are within the project area or surrounding areas so this species would not be expected to occur. Similarly, no suitable seasonally ponded habitat occurs for the vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchl).

The previous golf course use, lack of shrub cover, and discing/mowing weed control renders the site as unsuitable for the northern legless lizard (Anniella pulchra), Blainville's (coast) horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillll), American badger ( Taxidea taxus), and burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), all designated as species of special concern. No evidence of badger dens were observed during the DWE field survey. The Lompoc grasshopper (Trlmerotropls occulens) requires gravelly/rocky undisturbed habitat, and the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) requires stands of trees neither of which occur on the project site. The peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) is a coastal species not expected to use the small urbanized inland site for foraging as no nesting habitat occurs onsite or nearby in the agricultural and urban landscape.

5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES

5.1 SUFFICIENCY OF BIOLOGICAL DATA
The DWE field survey and review of available background information are sufficient to:

1.) adequately establish existing conditions of the project site and context in the landscape and land use mosaic; 2.) determine the occurrence or lack of suitable habitat for special - status plant or wildlife species; 3.) determine no waters of the U.S./State occur onsite; and 4.) adequately determine the potential significance of proposed development of the site and project impacts on biological resources.

BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS — REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

David ollf Environmental, LLC 'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT 1 8

5.2 IMPACT' ASSESSMENT
Botanical Resources — Taking into account the 0.42 -acre City well facility and yard, the proposed project would allow for the development of 6.43 acres of disturbed/ruderal habitat supporting a low -diversity non-native annual grassland habitat for future undetermined light industrial uses. No native habitat or natural communities of special concern occur on the project site so none would be impacted. No special -status plant species are expected to occur in the disturbed/ruderal habitat. Therefore, the rezoning and future light industrial development of the 6.95 -acre ruderal/disturbed/developed site of mostly non-native grasses and forbs would be considered a less than significant impact on botanical resources General Wildlife Resources — There are no wildlife movement corridors across the site that is surrounded by agricultural lands and abutted to urban development. The network of nearby County flood control ditches may provide wildlife dispersal and migration corridors for a variety of local wildlife species adapted to the agricultural/urban setting (i.e., racoons, opossum, skunk). However, as noted above, no ditches are on the project site and no project activities are proposed within the highly maintained ditches. This site does not contain any features which would provide a native wildlife nursery site that would attract animals or other migratory species. Therefore, impacts on general wildlife resources would be less than significant.

Nesting Birds — Potential but very low quality nesting habitat for ground nesting birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC Sections 3503/3503.5) occurs in the ruderal grassland habitat on the project site.

Project construction may result in direct impacts to nesting bird species, should active nests be present at the time of vegetation clearance. In addition, potentially suitable nesting habitat for a wide range of birds exists within 500 feet of the site. No direct impacts to nesting birds or their habitat outside of the site are expected. Potential impacts to nesting birds could occur only if individuals were to be present during construction and be exposed to potential disruption of nesting activities from construction activities. This would be considered a potentially significant impact on nesting birds California Red -Legged Frog — While there is a potential for CRLF to occur in the County flood control ditches when water is present and retained golf course pond on the FedEx site, the project site does not support any aquatic habitat and only marginal upland dispersal habitat with little refuge opportunities. No loss of CRLF habitat would result from project development of the site. No designated critical habitat occurs over the project site, so none would be affected. Potential impacts to this species would occur if individuals were present during construction and were exposed to vehicle and heavy equipment traffic. This would be considered a potentially significant impact.

BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS - REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

David IV olf Ei ironmcntal, LLC 'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT 1 9

5.3 RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES
Given existing conditions within the existing disturbed/developed project site as documented by the field reconnaissance survey, implementation of the proposed Project land use change and rezone will result in less than significant impacts on botanical and general wildlife resources, as well as waters of the U.S./State/wetland habitat resources. Therefore, no mitigation measures are recommended. The future site development following the rezone may have potentially significant impacts on nesting birds and the California red -legged frog.

The following mitigation measures are recommended to avoid impacts on these biological resources.

BIO-1: Nesting Birds Impact Avoidance and Minimization
The following actions are recommended to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds:
• A nesting bird survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than two weeks prior to the onset of construction activities. The nesting bird survey should be conducted within any and all suitable habitat that occurs within the project site, within 300 feet of its immediate vicinity for raptors, and 100 feet for all other bird species (as is feasible). If no active nests are found, no further mitigation would be required.
• If active bird nests are found, then an appropriately sized avoidance buffer should be established by the biologist and all construction work within the buffer should be delayed until after the nesting season has ended or until the biologist has determined that the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site for survival. • Limits of construction to avoid the nest shall be established in the field with flagging and stakes or construction fencing. Construction personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of the area.

BIO-2 California Red -legged Frog Impact Avoidance
The following actions are recommended to avoid potential impacts to CRLF:
• A pre -construction survey of the proposed project site for CLRF shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 48 hours prior to the start of project construction to confirm this species is not present in the work area.
• A qualified biological monitor familiar with CRLF will monitor all initial site disturbance (clearing, grubbing, rough grading).
• In the event the pre -construction survey or the onsite monitor identifies the presence of individuals of CRLF prior to or during construction, then all work shall stop until the CRLF leave the site of their own accord. If CRLF do not move off site on their own, the project proponent shall comply with all relevant requirements of take authorization under the federal Endangered Species Act prior to resuming project activities.

BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS — REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

David olfi Environmental, LLC 'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT 1 10

6.0 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings described above establishing the existing conditions of biological resources within the project site and implementation of the recommended mitigation measures to avoid impacts on nesting birds and the CRLF, the proposed project would not result in any substantial adverse effects on biological, botanical, or wetland habitat resources.

Therefore, direct, and indirect project impacts on biological resources would be considered to be less than significant.

7.0 REFERENCES

1. Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, Editors. 2012. The Jepson Manual, Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition Thoroughly Revised and Expanded UC Press.

2. California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2023. Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California.

3. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2023. Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) of recorded occurrences of special -status species. Accessed June 2019.

4. CALFLORA. 2023. Online database of native plants of California. 2018.

5. Holland, R.F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. California Department of Fish and Wildlife Nongame-Heritage Program.

6. Holland, V.L., and D.J. Keil. 1990. California Vegetation. Biological Sciences Department, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California.

7. Jameson, E.W. & Hans J. Peeters . 2004. Mammals of California, Revised Edition.

University of California Press.

8. Jepson Flora Project. 2023. Jepson eFlora contains taxonomic treatments for native and naturalized plants occurring in wildlands or otherwise outside of cultivation.

9. Jennings, M.R. and M.P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California. California Department of Fish and Wildlife Contract # 8023.

Inland Fisheries Division, Rancho Cordova, California.

10. Mayer, W. and W. Laudenslayer, Editors. 1988. A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

11. Peterson, R.T. 1990. A Field Guide to Western Birds, Houghton Mifflin Company.

12. Stebbins, R.C., and McGinnis, S.M. 2012. Field Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles of California: Revised Edition (California Natural History Guides) University of California Press, 2012

13. Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler -Wolf, and J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society Press, Sacramento.

BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS - REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

Uanid %%olffEn%ironmental, 141.0
'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE GP AMENDMENT & REZONE A

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX A

FIGURES
FIGURE 1: REGIONAL LOCATION & CTS POND MAP
FIGURE 2: VICINITY LOCATION & EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP
FIGURE 3: REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS

BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS - REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

l)a� id V olIT ironmentul, LLC
'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
"Green Canyon"
Drainage
Project Site
Santa Maria Airport
FIGURE 1 — REGIONAL LOCATION & CTS POND MAP
GOOGLE EARTH MAY 2023
NORTH
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS — REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

l)am id 11 olll' 1:uV ironmental, LLC
'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Ruderal/Disturbed
Non -Native Annual
Grassland Habiat
County Flood
Control
Ditches
"Green Canyon"
Drainage
AMC ♦oy
County Flood
Control Basin
Project Site
(Approximate)
APN:111-231-016
City Well
FedEx Ground Facility and
CRLF Mitigation Pond
County Flood
Control Channel
FIGURE 2 — VICINITY LOCATION AND EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP GOOGLE EARTH MAY 2023
NORTH 4
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS — REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

DAVID WOLFF ENVIRONMENTAL
'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING — BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT Photo
Photo
ruderal
,' 11,8""" r

1. h, tJ ,'-s ,i D
1 d Y Kk c, t 5 lr{ ly
' a i f a,
- e
'c n LeYy i "'i'� "t y5`§1.� x;X I
Y t `.;t :r '-- S 7iG., r r
`l ] h �1.Lri � K ..,Yy l+r %�" :'.
' FZ •
iA e, } 1 'l t}
z34 T `�,_ �\ �b
�` {/ .�,i y ,y r�:'' y » .,,,
„•,t3'cr' '•F i f . ry;' '` -
re ,.. , r it , ttP :.e . .C. j ^v
'y��' � ..7 Ck r'�f''' 'C -"� '� ` yy t'r ,, )•
,- f"' '!.: / •
, Y sK -:. Ad s AA
r V 4 �,.�y .%fi F•. •,,4 s p 1: * .,rQ' '',. e1 w
x
i+...- •, rj 1/ c e ,,//J . .4' r:
•lt'�.•w,x.J +M .u]L r..r ''.•.`.1R...mfi �',6 • ••,

•If
> •
f it •
-..1.� y� i�• A �, �+A �'f
�+� Y.. ra%'Fly:
,•
H yd
:.: a ;, k 1�a,
t 9 's > %f` `•� �, d' lJ
1 1>e -,j� 7 y _. '.h � i
'+ e rc 'k
s\! '' .. A9'Lj7 '
1: View north at non-native ruderal/disturbed grassland of project site and fenced City well site (arrow). 8/28/2023
2: View south along 'A' Street east border of the site at non-nnative annual grassland habitat and fenced City well (arrow). 8/28/2023 Photo
fenced
qq��yyvv ,f
��'�.•: �, ly c' > � wa i ,t6
,sc �tA$ S

1. ,JF • i q 4 v f -t r�, )
T - 4Oa '^i ?'.`'.� -�` �h t��c'. 7S5 i X' `
,. rt.- is •�? i i a yM yx: ri i' 3"-r 3 #
SP� ` t7 �liiy sil� .7' t Y4�� 'bpsn �! "� a.Y
�' �"L `mfr 2�" ,� 5....
3 .a y. . - _ f r
4k'3- K l !- `j .j�M. '
y°^-� . i1 Y r
'A!My R Z l� ry�� .: i1 \ � i'rt'.i1� H -
S t s, _, r i::E
�� •" = f ,.., ij"'•�,, W •+ -' g 4� •. •l �:
•
•
'z -.:i :lb E {� "� 1i'• '4 J-'.; .� S."- `�x R, tiJ ;
�S �,•,t ,:. 'rs y,)„ .,., a ny,
d 9 �� b4-' •,% 'f 'r ,��@�`. a r 0" ' J. '4,r�7'�: S
v 1 - ,} q„ t ` Y • s, '�S94Y. r •'l. k . r7 -fit -;�
''',./".' 3�' •, f N yT .; f4' O -' l*r
b •"Jl�,Ar � f x ` .^y _. Y i +. � +� ✓ ', ss i
._, , E. Z
'�% 'f+' z,•':,�C�` (ry �,2'� F3'r.7�!{�• if` ..�: % �, , •�'`S.: t. �:r ---"._. R... _ ?' ,�'...

Photo
&
L >`
.. ; ..
1 ..454':4- ys," "t�'. - - ✓Y
;;0. :. atfr ,f yc ,,, .a-ai
�
St 11 i '' : 4h Y l .t t
r't f �. w�• - It:: 3.�
iw� n4 .`
�;y� S v:M ��0�
,--_'!if �_ •1 ��fK••{ f]F X '} � Y l s -. i N
mix. 9� ? k��
�''r'"! Y aL"�T .f'v
1• 1 L fl y `'.` �!4
NRYr� u � f-� ^arcs

3: View southeast at mowed non-native annual grassland habitat, City well site, & offsite FedEx Ground facility (arrrow). 8/28/2023 4: View S. at mustard dominated grassland, pines on south border, offsite willow riparian of "Green Canyon" to the south. 8/28/2023 FIGURE 3 — REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS — REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

DAVID WOLFF ENVIRONMENTAL
'A' STREET AT FAIRWAY DRIVE REZONING — BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT Photo
native
~
r 4
`"' ,-r� � a , le -P'r
�. "'^ jilt .am rc, � r
�`ro-.`� Yd L N :..' a6 `'�a+r.. .+5 ' �+a ..•'-
�. fiy r zq,� G.�
� >tt r b r >1
�.' - s .' r :Z'•e '6,',
�.

F -. x ? 2' 9i^
�fic • tn,S .k
•:``` � .'�> i� \.
�wr y `. .ivy� ♦ Y
t�`�
.i �.. JC'l� �5y "ir i
: "� \ ,,y �,
.lf ... Fc¢�,,^
r'S � 1 "f �1 ` `f T.

E
{ • a�° t .V .„ ,vt•+,.\�
>t
\
:a fu SY i r •3 r�^,+ ' Sy r
� ! r •,; , aS •.-. �t '� } :1yt,'.!1
1y \?u f �t yi 1
Yx Ri• `r• q s.,..,4,',.,. y tn�
fi-3� r `S'i- ` .y. �

7.,� r �` J y J�e¢y°9i-0 '
! •
� {,A� td � '•r� ��•
5i , .. 3 > k
C , r/,t . j;
�" r ,A ,� U •O /f
6 ° %� A ° AA
�. ! -.^,� '� , •l ! r iV4,,ry6
\ / �
: ��lh-fib , J 1
•, mi'''l(, !`. �. hY
{ I c` y4 W
s $yyyf k 37 � , t* { S .fir s �
\ .�.
t ,. 7"
�(,ti r
91L+• \a� �\ i 't•! y Y �t --1 % �c ';!
s •.tl { x k�G r w A �f'.. Y t R•f ' ,a .;
1, . .%{ rta ta,E, `a : ,: Vv.. 2, S: .z'.:
8: View south at County flood control ditch (arrow) offsite to west of the project site. 8/28/2023
7: View southeast at City well site developed area. 8/28/2023 FIGURE 3 — REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
BIOLOGICAL & WETLAND RESOURCES ASSESSMENTS — REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST

1 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project
1494 Fairway Drive
Santa Maria, California
prepared for
RRM Design Group
3765 South Higuera Street, Suite 102
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc.

Report Date — August 22, 2023
Date of First Research —June 9, 2023
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.

Environmental Scientists I Planners I Engineers
rinconconsultants.com
Appendix C

Rincon Consultants, Inc.
319 East Carillo Street
Santa Barbara, California 93101
805 644 4455
[email protected]
www.rinconconsultants.com
August 22, 2023
Project No.: 23-14608
Pamela A. Ricci, AICP
RRM Design Group
3765 South Higuera Street, Suite 102
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Via email: [email protected]
Subject: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project, Santa Maria, California
Dear Ms. Ricci:

This report presents the findings of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) completed by Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) for the Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project located in Santa Maria, California. The Phase I ESA was performed in accordance with our proposal dated May 25, 2023 and contract dated June 6, 2023.

The accompanying report presents our findings and provides an opinion regarding the presence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. Our work program for this project, as referenced in our contract, is intended to meet the guidelines outlined in the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Process (ASTM Standard E1527-21). Our scope of services, pursuant to ASTM practice, did not include any inquiries with respect to asbestos -containing building materials unrelated to releases into the environment; biological agents; cultural and historic resources; ecological resources; endangered species; health and safety; indoor air quality unrelated to releases of hazardous substances or petroleum products into the environment; industrial hygiene; lead -based paint unrelated to releases into the environment; lead in drinking water; mold or microbial growth conditions; polychlorinated biphenyl -containing building materials (e.g., interior fluorescent light ballasts, paint, and caulk); naturally -occurring radon; regulatory compliance; substances not defined as hazardous substances (including some substances sometimes generally referred to as emerging contaminants) unless or until such substances are classified as a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act hazardous substance; and wetlands.

Thank you for selecting Rincon for this project. If you have any questions, or if we can be of any future assistance, please contact us.

Sincerely,
Rincon Consultants, Inc.

AlvAL1207 Vag
Lauren Vigliotti Savanna Vrevich
Environmental Scientist Environmental Scientist
a/PC
Ryan Thacher, PhD, PE
Director of Site Assessment and Remediation
Environmental S cien tis t s
Planners Engineers

Executive Summary
Table of Contents
1 Executive Summary 1
2 Introduction 3

2.1 Subject Property Description 3

2.1.1 Descriptions of Roads and Other Improvements on the Subject Property 3

2.1.2 General Vicinity Characteristics 7

2.2 Purpose and Definitions 9

2.2.1 Notable Finding 9

2.3 Scope of Services 9

2.4 Significant Assumptions, Limitations, Deviations, Exceptions, Special Terms, and Conditions 10

2.5 ASTM Deviations 11

2.6 User Reliance 11
3 User -Provided Information and Responsibilities 12

3.1 Review Land Title Records and Judicial Records for Environmental Liens and Activity and Use Limitations 12

3.2 User Questionnaire 12

3.3 User -Provided Document Review 13
4 Physical Setting Resources and Government Records 14

4.1 Physical Setting Resources 14

4.1.1 Topography 14

4.1.2 Geology and Hydrogeology 14

4.2 Government Record Sources and Agency Records Review 15

4.2.1 Orphan Listings 15

4.2.2 Subject Property 16

4.2.3 Adjacent Properties 16

4.2.4 Nearby Release Sites within 1/3 Mile 17

4.3 Review of State of California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) Records 21

4.4 Review of National Pipeline Mapping System Records 21

4.5 Review of California Statewide PFAS Investigation 21 5 Historical Records 22

5.1 Methodology 22

5.2 Summary of Subject Property and Adjacent Historical Uses 22

5.3 Gaps in Historical Sources 23
6 Interviews 24
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment i

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment

6.1 Interview Summaries 24

6.1.1 Interview with Owner 24

6.1.2 Interview with Site Manager 24

6.1.3 Interviews with Occupants 25

6.1.4 Interviews with Local Government Officials 25

6.1.5 Interviews with Others 25
7 Site Reconnaissance 26

7.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions 26

7.2 General Subject Property Information 26

7.2.1 Current Use of Subject Property and Adjacent Properties 26

7.2.2 Past Use of Subject Property and Adjacent Properties 26

7.2.3 Current or Past Uses in the Surrounding Areas 26

7.2.4 Geologic, Hydrogeologic, Hydrologic, and Topographic Conditions 26

7.2.5 General Description of Subject Property 27

7.3 Interior and/or Exterior Observations 27
8 Potential Vapor Migration 32
9 Evaluation 33

9.1 Significant Data Gaps 33

9.2 Findings, Opinions, Conclusions, and Recommendations 33 10 References 35
11 Signatures of Environmental Professionals 37
12 Qualifications of Environmental Consultants 38
Tables
Table 1 Subject Property Characteristics 3
Table 2 Current Uses of Adjacent Properties 7
Table 3 Summary of Santa Maria Airport Release Sites 19 Table 4 Historical Use of the Subject Property and Adjoining Properties 22 Table 5 Interior and/or Exterior Observations 27
Table 6 Findings, Opinions, Conclusions, and Recommendations 34 Figures
Figure 1 Vicinity 5
Figure 2 Subject Property 6
Figure 3 Adjacent Land Use 8
ii

Executive Summary
Photographs
Photographs 1-4 29
Photographs 5-8 30
Photographs 9-12 31
Appendices
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Interview Documentation
Regulatory Records Search
Regulatory Documentation
Historical Research Documentation
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment iii

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
This page intentionally left blank.
iv

Executive Summary
1 Executive Summary
This report presents the findings of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project located at 1494 Fairway Drive in Santa Maria, California (subject property). The Phase I ESA was performed for RRM Design Group by Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon). RRM Design Group has requested this assessment and will use the information for the purpose of rezoning. The subject property is currently a vacant 6.95 -acre parcel that includes a City of Santa Maria drinking water well. It is our understanding that the proposed future use of the property includes rezoning for industrial uses, with no current redevelopment plans.

The research completed as part of this Phase I ESA is listed below:

Task Completed Date Reviewed Concern Identified?
User -Provided —Title Report
User -Provided — Lien Search Report
Historical Research — Aerial Photographs
Historical — Topographic Maps
Historical — Fire Insurance Maps
Historical — City Directories
Physical Setting
Agency Database Report
Agency File Reviews
Interviews — User Questionnaire
Interviews — Owner Questionnaire
Interviews — Other Yes
Site Reconnaissance Yes
Vapor Migration Research Yes
Yes
Requested
Yes
Yes
Yes, none available
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
06/20/2023
Not Applicable (N/A)
06/20/2023
06/20/2023
N/A
06/20/2023
06/09/2023
06/09/2023
06/13/2023
06/20/2023
06/20/2023
06/29/2023
06/29/2023
06/13/2023
No
N/A
Yes
No
N/A
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
Based on the findings of this Phase I ESA, it is our opinion that that no recognized environmental conditions (RECs), historical recognized environmental conditions (HRECs), or controlled recognized environmental conditions (CRECs) were identified for the subject property. However, there are environmental concerns in connection with the subject property as follows.

Notable Findings

1. The subject property is located within the Santa Maria Airport Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Investigation site, but is outside of a one -mile radius of identified PFAS sources and impacts.

2. An abandoned/remnant well structure is located in the southeastern portion of the subject property.

3. Historical use of the subject property as part of a military base and a golf course may be associated with unidentified subsurface debris and/or structures.

4. The former Santa Maria oil field is located between 0.5 and 1.5 miles north and east of the subject property.

Because we have no evidence indicating that the subject property has been impacted by hazardous materials or petroleum products, no additional assessment is recommended. However, based on the Notable Findings above, Rincon recommends preparation of a soil management plan prior to Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 1

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
activities that will disturb soil at the subject property. We also recommend proper abandonment of the well structure observed in the southeastern portion of the subject property. 2 Introduction
2 Introduction
This report presents the findings of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) conducted for the Santa Maria Airport Rezoning Project located at 1494 Fairway Drive in Santa Maria, California (subject property; Figure 1). The Phase I ESA was performed by Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) for RRM Design Group in general conformance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E1527-21, our proposal dated May 25, 2023, and our contract dated June 6, 2023. This report presents our findings and provides our opinion as to the presence of recognized environmental conditions (RECs) on the subject property.

2.1 Subject Property Description
The subject property is located on the west side of A Street, opposite the intersection with Fairway Drive in Santa Maria, California (Figure 2). Additional information regarding the subject property is listed below:

Table 1 Subject Property Characteristics
Property Characteristic Description
Subject Property Address(es)
1494 Fairway Drive, Santa Maria, California
Historical Subject Property Address(es) None
Assessor's Parcel Number(s)/Acreage 111-231-016/6.95 acres No. of Buildings/Year of Construction 1 pump house and 1 shed within 0.42 -acre yard Subterranean Features Water well
Current Subject Property Use Vacant land and a City water well pump facility and yard (0.42 acre) Current Owner of Subject Property Santa Maria Airport
Current Tenant(s) of Subject Property City of Santa Maria

2.1.1 Descriptions of Roads and Other Improvements on the Subject Property
The following were observed on the subject property during the site reconnaissance:
■ Concrete pad with an unidentified meter in the eastern portion of the subject property. ■ City of Santa Maria groundwater well inside a housing on a concrete slab, pump house structure on a concrete slab within a locked gate and barbed wire/chain-link fenced area. The pump house contained two 100 -gallon chlorine storage tanks. ■ Pad -mounted transformer within the fenced area.
■ Two flush -mounted utility boxes in the eastern portion of the subject property. ■ An abandoned well structure was observed in the vegetated area in the southeastern portion, and lengths of PVC pipe were observed on the ground nearby.

The remainder of the subject property consists of vegetated land with a dirt access road. Access to the subject property is available through a gate and a driveway on Fairway Drive. The following utility providers service the subject property:

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 3

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Electrical Service
Natural Gas Service
Water Service
Sewer Service
Solid Waste Service
Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E)
None
City of Santa Maria (water well on subject property)
None
None
4 Introduction
Figure 1 Vicinity
Oil Wells
'k
at
. �l l jt t a n W, T arte+ U I' 1 -•
n : 3 y _ t
s •i1, ., .tC toy -
• _a
J w
Subject k fm � :
�_: b_q�:.:p.rs.: __ti.' Property o.

F i OIJNDARY
of I r .1 .; -,
a
0 1,000 2,000 Feet
I I
Imagery provided by Notional Geographic Society, Esri and its licensors ft 2023. The topographic representation depicted in this map may not portray all of the features currently found in the vicinity today and/or features depicted in this map may have changed since the original topographic map was assembled. /^l Project Location
A
RIA.
© Bakersfield
Lockwood
San
Miguel
Templeton
San Luis
Obispo
Oceano
A Santa
Maria
IO
Lompoc
Pacific o,
Los Padres
National
forest
Santa Barbara
Oxnard
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
5 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Figure 2 Subject Property
I �)
Subject Property
A Abandoned/remnant well structure
C Concrete pad with unidentified meter
p Pump house with chlorine storage tanks
T Pad Mounted Transformer
W City of Santa Maria well
0 75 150 N
Feet I A
mogery provided by Microsoft Bing and its licensors ® 2023. 6 Introduction

2.1.2 General Vicinity Characteristics
The subject property is located in an area that primarily consists of commercial and industrial land uses. The current adjacent land uses are described in Table 2 and depicted on Figure 3.

Table 2 Current Uses of Adjacent Properties
Area Use
Northern Properties
Commercial businesses including a printing facility and a cafe Eastern Properties
Fairway Drive followed by industrial buildings and a shipping facility Southern Properties
Western Properties
Undeveloped land with airport property farther south
Agricultural fields (row crops)
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 7

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Figure 3 Adjacent Land Use
1494 Fairway
Drive
Santa Maria Airport
Subject Property
175 350
Feet
Imagery provided by Microsoft Bing and its licensors ® 2023. 8 Introduction

2.2 Purpose and Definitions
RRM Design Group has requested this assessment and will use the information for the purpose of rezoning the subject property. The purpose of this Phase I ESA was to determine if there are RECs on the subject property, taking into account commonly and reasonably ascertainable information, and to qualify for Landowner Liability Protections under the Brownfields Amendments to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).

A Recognized Environmental Condition (REC) is defined pursuant to ASTM E1527-21 as, "(1) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release to the environment;
(2) the likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release or likely release to the environment; or
(3) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment." As stated in ASTM E1527-21, "likely is that which is neither certain nor proved, but can be expected or believed by a reasonable observer based on the logic and/or experience of the environmental professional, and/or available evidence, as stated in the report to support the opinions given therein." A Controlled REC is defined pursuant to ASTM E1527-21 as, "recognized environmental condition affecting the subject property that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or authorities with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to implementation of required controls (for example, activity and use limitations or other property use limitations)." A Historical REC is defined pursuant to ASTM E1527-21 as, "a previous release of hazardous substances or petroleum products affecting the subject property that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or authorities and meeting unrestricted use criteria established by the applicable regulatory authority or authorities without subjecting the subject property to any controls (for example, activity and use limitations or other property use limitations). A historical recognized environmental condition is not a recognized environmental condition."
A de minimis condition is defined pursuant to ASTM E1527-21 as, "a condition related to a release that generally does not present a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. A condition determined to be a de minimis condition is not a recognized environmental condition nor a controlled recognized environmental condition."
A Property Use Limitation (PUL) is defined pursuant to ASTM E1527-21 as, "a limitation or restriction on current or future use of a property in connection with a response to a release, in accordance with the applicable regulatory authority or authorities that allows hazardous substances or petroleum products to remain in place at concentrations exceeding unrestricted use criteria."
A Significant Data Gap is defined pursuant to ASTM E1527-21 as, "a data gap that affects the ability of the environmental professional to identify a recognized environmental condition."

2.2.1 Notable Finding
Although not defined by ASTM E1527-21, Rincon utilizes the term Notable Finding for potential environmental concerns present at or possibly present at a property that do not specifically fit one of the above ASTM-defined situations, yet may impact current or future use of the subject property.

2.3 Scope of Services
The scope of services conducted during this study is outlined below:

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 9

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
■ Performed a reconnaissance of the subject property to identify obvious indicators of the existence of hazardous materials.
■ Observed adjacent or nearby properties from public thoroughfares in an attempt to see if such properties are likely to use, store, generate, or dispose of hazardous materials. ■ Obtained and reviewed an environmental records database search to obtain information about the potential for hazardous materials to exist at the subject property or at properties located in the vicinity of the subject property.
■ Reviewed files for the subject property and immediately adjacent properties as identified in the database report, as applicable.
■ Reviewed the current United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic map to obtain information about the subject property and regional topography and uses of the subject property and surrounding sites.
■ Reviewed additional pertinent record sources (e.g., California Geologic Energy Management Division [CalGEM] records, online databases of hazardous substance release sites), as necessary, to identify the presence of RECs at the subject property. ■ Reviewed the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Statewide Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Investigation online Public Map Viewer regarding current PFAS orders issued to facilities located in the vicinity of the subject property. ■ Reviewed reasonably ascertainable historical resources (e.g., aerial photographs, topographic maps, fire insurance maps, city directories) to assess the historical land use of the subject property and adjacent properties.
■ Provided a user interview questionnaire to a representative of RRM Design Group, the user of the Phase I ESA.
■ Provided a property owner interview questionnaire to the property owner or a designated subject property representative identified to Rincon by RRM Design Group. ■ Conducted interviews with other property representatives (e.g., key site manager, occupants), as applicable.
■ Reviewed available RRM Design Group -provided information (e.g., previous environmental reports, title documentation).
■ Requested Title Search Information Reports and environmental lien search information from the user of the report.

2.4 Significant Assumptions, Limitations, Deviations,
Exceptions, Special Terms, and Conditions
This work is intended to adhere to good commercial, customary, and generally accepted environmental investigation practices for similar investigations conducted at this time and in this geographic area. No guarantee or warranties, expressed or implied, are provided. The findings and opinions conveyed in this report are based on findings derived from a site reconnaissance, review of an environmental database report, specified regulatory records and historical sources, and comments made by interviewees. This report is not intended as a comprehensive site characterization and should not be construed as such. Standard data sources relied upon during the completion of Phase I ESAs may vary with regard to accuracy and completeness. Although Rincon believes the data sources are reasonably reliable, Rincon cannot and does not guarantee the 10 Introduction
authenticity or reliability of the data sources it has used. Additionally, pursuant to our contract, the data sources reviewed included only those that are practically reviewable without the need for extraordinary research.

Rincon has not found evidence that hazardous materials or petroleum products exist at the subject property at levels likely to warrant mitigation. Rincon does not under any circumstances warrant or guarantee that not finding evidence of hazardous materials or petroleum products means that hazardous materials or petroleum products do not exist on the subject property. Additional research, including surface or subsurface sampling and analysis, can reduce RRM Design Group's risks, but no techniques commonly employed can eliminate these risks altogether.

In addition, pursuant to ASTM E1527-21 practice, our scope of services did not include any inquiries with respect to asbestos -containing building materials unrelated to releases into the environment; biological agents; cultural and historic resources; ecological resources; endangered species; health and safety; indoor air quality unrelated to releases of hazardous substances or petroleum products into the environment; industrial hygiene; lead -based paint unrelated to releases into the environment; lead in drinking water; mold or microbial growth conditions; polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) -containing building materials (e.g., interior fluorescent light ballasts, paint, and caulk); naturally -occurring radon; regulatory compliance; substances not defined as hazardous substances (including some substances sometimes generally referred to as emerging contaminants) unless or until such substances are classified as a CERCLA hazardous substance; and wetlands.

2.5 ASTM Deviations
Deviations from ASTM E1527-21 practice were not encountered during the completion of this Phase I ESA. An environmental lien search was not completed as part of this assessment; however, one was requested from the user.

2.6 User Reliance
RRM Design Group has requested this assessment and will use the information for the purpose of rezoning the subject property. This Phase I ESA was prepared for use solely and exclusively by RRM Design Group, the City of Santa Maria, the Santa Maria Airport District, the project consultant team, environmental review consultants, and the future property owner/developer. No other use or disclosure is intended or authorized by Rincon. Also, this report is issued with the understanding that it is to be used only in its entirety. It is intended for use only by RRM Design Group, the City of Santa Maria, the Santa Maria Airport District, the project consultant team, environmental review consultants, and the future property owner/developer, and no other person or entity may rely upon the report without the express written consent of Rincon.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 1 1

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
3 User -Provided Information and
Responsibilities

3.1 Review Land Title Records and Judicial Records for
Environmental Liens and Activity and Use
Limitations
Rincon requested title search information reports from the user of the report. Pursuant to ASTM E1527-21,
"the title search information reports shall identify environmental covenants, environmental easements, land use covenant and agreements, declaration of environmental land use restrictions, environmental land use controls, environmental use controls, environmental liens, or any other recorded instrument that restricts, affects, or encumbers the title to the subject property due to restrictions or encumbrances associated with the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products. Title search information reports shall review land title records for documents recorded between 1980 and the present. If judicial records are not reviewed, the title search information report shall include a statement providing that the law or custom in the jurisdiction at issue does not require a search for judicial records in order to identify environmental liens."
As stated in ASTM E1527-21 it is the "user's responsibility to search for environmental liens and activity and land use limitations (AULs)." This is in "addition to the environmental professional's search of institutional control and engineering control registries described in" ASTM E1527-21 Section 8.2.

A copy of the title search information records provided by the user is included in Appendix A and described in Section 3.3.

3.2 User Questionnaire
As described in ASTM E1527-21 Section 6, a User Questionnaire as provided by ASTM E1527-21 Appendix X3 was provided to RRM Design Group. The purpose of the User Questionnaire is for the user of the Phase I ESA to provide actual knowledge pertaining to the subject property to help identify RECs. Pamela A. Ricci, Principal Planner with RRM Design Group, completed the User Questionnaire on June 19, 2023. A copy of the completed questionnaire is included as Appendix A.

Based on our review of the completed questionnaire, the user indicated the following:
• The Phase I ESA is required/being performed as requested by the City of Santa Maria as part of the pre -application review process for a rezoning of the subject property from Open Space to Light Manufacturing (M-1).
• The Airport District will be rezoning the property to market the subject property for light industrial development.
12 User -Provided Information and Responsibilities
Based on our review of the completed questionnaire, the user did not review the following sources of information and is unaware of information regarding the following:
• Recorded land title records (or judicial records, where appropriate) that identify any environmental liens filed or recorded against the subject property • Recorded land title records (or judicial records, where appropriate) that identify any AULs, such as engineering controls, land use restrictions or institutional controls that are in place at the property and/or have been filed or recorded against the subject property under federal, tribal, state, or local law
• Title Report that identifies information pertaining to environmental cleanup liens or AULs for the subject property
Based on our review of the completed questionnaire, the user is unaware of information regarding the following:
• Specialized knowledge or experience related to the subject property or nearby properties • Reduction in value for the subject property relative to any known environmental issues • Commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the subject property that would help the environmental professional to identify conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases
• Obvious indicators that point to the presence or likely presence of releases at the subject property
• Pending, threatened, or past litigation relevant to hazardous substances or petroleum products, in, on, or from the subject property
• Pending, threatened, or past administrative proceedings relevant to hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or from the subject property • Notice from any government entity regarding any possible violation of environmental laws or possible liability relating to hazardous substances or petroleum products Based on our review of the completed questionnaire, the user identified information pertaining to the subject property that may help identify RECs in connection with the subject property. This information is summarized below:
• The past use of the subject property was as part of a golf course.

3.3 User -Provided Document Review
The following document regarding the subject property was provided by RRM Design Group:
• Fidelity National Title Company, Preliminary Report, State Highway 135 & Skyway Drive, Santa Maria, California, dated April 20, 2023.

The title report indicates that the subject property includes an easement in the eastern -central portion for "discharge and drainage of potable water associated with the start-up of City well 10-S", recorded on 04/22/1997. An easement for a water line enters the eastern -central portion of the subject property, dated from 12/20/1979.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 13

Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment
4 Physical Setting Resources and
Government Records

4.1 Physical Setting Resources

4.1.1 Topography
The current USGS topographic map (Santa Maria Quadrangle 2018) indicates that the subject property is situated at an elevation of approximately 213 feet above mean sea level with topography sloping gently to the southwest. The adjacent topography slopes gently to the west. A copy of the current USGS topographic map is included in Appendix D (EDR 2023e, page 6).

4.1.2 Geology and Hydrogeology
Based on information provided by RRM Design Group and the property owner, there are no site - specific geotechnical or geologic reports available for the subject property.

According to the Geologic Map of California (Jennings et al 2010), the subject property is underlain by Quaternary deposits consisting of extensive marine and nonmarine sand deposits.

During the preparation of this Phase 1 ESA, we reviewed the California SWRCB's online GeoTracker database to determine groundwater flow direction in the vicinity of the subject property. File reviews conducted for surrounding release sites indicate that regional groundwater is typically encountered at depths greater than 140 feet below ground surface and shallow/perched groundwater occurs at depths between approximately 4 and 13 feet bgs. Based on information from one source, groundwater in the vicinity of the subject property generally flows to the northwest.

The information obtained regarding groundwater in the vicinity of the subject property is listed below:

Source Address, Distance, and Groundwater Depth (feet Groundwater Direction from Subject Property below ground surface) Flow Direction Source Unocal, 1500 W. Betteravia Rd.,
Santa Maria — 0.4 mile north
>80 feet
MacDonnell No. 3 Sump, 2337 140 feet
Thompson Way, Santa Maria —

0.5 mile northeast
Santa Maria Airport, 3217 4 to 10 feet
Terminal Dr., Santa Maria — 1.25 (shallow/perched)
miles southeast
No data
GeoTracker (Harding ESE Inc.
2002)
Northwest GeoTracker (Santa Barbara
County Fire Department 2001)
No data GeoTracker (SCS Engineers 2021)
A City of Santa Maria Water Department drinking water well is located in the eastern portion of the subject property, and is identified as Well 10S, State Well #CA4210011_010_010. The well is reported to have a total depth of 507 feet bgs and a screened interval of 291 feet bgs to 507 feet bgs (GeoTracker 2023). Additional information regarding water quality data for this well is provided in Section 4.6.
14 Physical Setting Resources and Government Records

4.2 Government Record Sources and Agency Records
Review
Rincon outsourced with a regulatory database search contractor, Environmental Data Resources (EDR), to obtain records of sites that generate, store, treat, or dispose of hazardous materials and sites for which a hazardous material release incident has occurred. The regulatory database search was conducted for the subject property and included data from surrounding sites within specified radii of the subject property. A copy of the database report, which specifies the ASTM E1527-21 search distance for each public list, is included as Appendix B. As shown on the June 8, 2023 database report, federal, state, and county lists were reviewed as part of the research effort. Please refer to Appendix B for a complete listing of sites reported by EDR and a description of the databases reviewed.

The Map Findings Summary, included in the database report, provides a summary of the databases searched, the number of reported facilities within the search radii, and whether the facility is located onsite or adjacent to the subject property.

As a follow-up to the database search, Rincon reviewed regulatory information for the subject property and nearby listings that were interpreted to have the potential to impact the subject property, based on one or more of the factors listed below:
■ Reported distance of the facility from the subject property; • The nature of the database on which the facility is listed, and/or whether the facility was listed on a database reporting unauthorized releases of hazardous materials, petroleum products, or hazardous wastes;
■ Reported case type (e.g., soil only, failed underground storage tank [UST] test only); • Reported substance released (e.g., chlorinated solvents, gasoline, metals); • Reported regulatory agency status (e.g., case closed, "no further action"); and, • Location of the facility with respect to the reported groundwater flow direction (discussed in Section 4.1 of this report).

Facilities/properties that were interpreted by Rincon to be of potential environmental concern to the subject property, based on one or more of the factors listed above, are summarized below. In accordance with ASTM E1527-21, contamination migration pathways in soil, groundwater, and soil vapor were considered in our analysis of offsite properties of potential environmental concern.

The following sections include a summary of our review of the database report and the regulatory information obtained from online sources (e.g., SWRCB GeoTracker database, Department of Toxic Substances Control [DTSC] EnviroStor database, local fire department) and/or files requested from the applicable regulatory agency.

4.2.1 Orphan Listings
The EDR database report identified six orphan or unmapped site listings, which were unable to be plotted due to insufficient address information. Based on Rincon's review of the limited address information or site descriptions for the orphan listings, none of the listings are expected to impact the subject property.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 15

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment

4.2.2 Subject Property

4.2.2.1 Well 10S
Database Summary
Agency Records
Agency Lead
Listing/Case Status
Soil Impacts/COCs
Soil Vapor Impacts/COCs
Groundwater Impacts/COCs
Groundwater Depth/Flow Direction
Potential Impacts to Soil, Soil Vapor,
and/or Groundwater at Subject Property
The drinking water well at the subject property was listed in the PFAS database. This listing indicates that the well at the subject property is sampled periodically as part of the SWRCB PFAS investigation requirements. More details regarding PFAS are provided in Section 4.5.

Agency records were reviewed online at GeoTracker and the SWRCB website, as summarized below.

Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Open
No
No
Yes/PFAS
Unknown
Yes

4.2.3 Adjacent Properties

4.2.3.1 Northern Adjacent Property - 2445 A Street (VTC Enterprises) Database Summary
Agency Records
Agency Lead
Listing/Case Status
Soil Impacts/COCs
Soil Vapor Impacts/COCs
Groundwater Impacts/COCs
Groundwater Depth/Flow Direction
Site Distance from Subject Property
Potential Impacts to Soil, Soil Vapor,
and/or Groundwater at Subject Property
The northern adjacent site was listed in three non -release databases:

RCRA NonGen/NLR, FINDS, and ECHO. These listings indicate that hazardous materials are handled and stored onsite; however, no releases have been reported.

Agency records were not reviewed because no releases have been reported at this facility.

Not Applicable (N/A)
N/A
No
No
No
Unknown
Adjacent to the north (approximately 140 feet away)
No

4.2.3.2 Eastern Adjacent Property - 1424 Fairway Drive (Ellis Logistics) Database Summary
Agency Records
Agency Lead
The eastern adjacent site was listed in three non -release databases: RCRA NonGen/NLR, FINDS, and ECHO. These listings indicate that hazardous materials are handled and stored onsite; however, no releases have been reported.

Agency records were not reviewed because no releases have been reported at this facility.

N/A
16 Physical Setting Resources and Government Records
Listing/Case Status
Soil Impacts/C0Cs
Soil Vapor Impacts/C0Cs
Groundwater Impacts/C0Cs
Groundwater Depth/Flow Direction
Site Distance from Subject Property
Potential Impacts to Soil, Soil Vapor,
and/or Groundwater at Subject Property
N/A
N/A
No
No
Unknown
Immediately adjacent to the east
No

4.2.4 Nearby Release Sites within 1 /3 Mile
The Santa Maria Airport property, which includes the subject property, was associated with nine release listings in the databases searched. No other release sites were listed within 1/3 mile of the subject property. Agency records for releases associated with the Santa Maria Airport site were reviewed online at GeoTracker and EnviroStor, and are summarized in Table 3 below.

There are numerous release sites associated with the Santa Maria oil field located approximately 0.5 to 1.5 miles north and east of the subject property. Due to their distance, these release sites are unlikely to pose a risk to the subject property.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 17

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
This page intentionally left blank.
18 Physical Setting Resources and Government Records
Table 3 Summary of Santa Maria Airport Release Sites
Listed
Site Name/ Regulatory
Address Databases
Agency
Lead
Case Status
Soil Impacts/
COCs
Soil Vapor Groundwater
Impacts/ Impacts/
COCs COCs
Groundwater Depth/
Flow Direction
Site Distance and
Direction from
Subject Property
Release Distance
and Direction
from Subject
Property
Potential Impacts to
Soil, Soil Vapor, and/or
Groundwater at the
Subject Property
Notes
Santa Maria
Pub/Capt G
Allan Hancock
Fld, 3217
Terminal
Drive
Western Air
Lines
Van AFB -
Santa Maria
Airport/Heavy
Bomber
Base/Hancock
Airfield
Santa Maria
Army Airfield,
3217 Skyway
Drive
Cleanup
Program —
PFAS
Investigation
RWQCB
Open — site
assessment as
of 06/25/2020
FUDs, DTSC Inactive —
EnviroStor Needs
Evaluation as
of 07/01/2005
EnviroStor DTSC Inactive —
Needs
Evaluation as
of 07/01/2005
FUDS,
EnviroStor,
LUST
Avis Rent -A- LUST
Car, 3249
Terminal
Drive
Santa Maria LUST
Airport, 3217
Terminal
Drive
Starline LUST
Aircraft
Services, 3427
Skyway Drive
Skyway LUST
Aviation Fuel,
3233 Skyway
Drive
Santa Maria LUST
Airport
District, 3217
Skyway Drive
RWQCB Open, Inactive
as of
05/20/2010
Santa Open, Inactive
Barbara as of
County, 07/01/2013
RWQCB
Yes, PFAS
No
Yes, PFAS
Unknown Unknown Unknown
Unknown Unknown Unknown
Yes, Unknown Unknown
Petroleum
hydrocarbons
Yes, No No
Petroleum
hydrocarbons
Santa Closed as of Yes, Gasoline Unknown No
Barbara 09/28/1995
County,
RWQCB
Santa Closed as of Yes, Jet fuel Unknown No
Barbara 09/19/1993
County
Santa Closed as of Yes, Jet -A fuel Unknown No
Barbara 09/28/1990
County,
RWQCB
Santa Closed as of
Barbara 07/10/1990
County,
RWQCB
Yes, Unknown No
Petroleum
hydrocarbons
Perched groundwater

3.5 to 10 feet bgs,
unknown flow direction;
regional groundwater
160 to 200 feet bgs
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Approximately

0.75 mile
southeast
Approximately

0.9 mile
southeast
Approximately

0.7 mile
southeast
Approximately

1.25 miles
southeast
Approximately

1.25 miles
southeast
Approximately 1
mile southeast
Approximately 1
mile southeast
Approximately

0.75 mile
southeast
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Approximately

1.25 miles
southeast
Approximately

1.25 miles
southeast
Approximately 1
mile southeast
Approximately 1
mile southeast
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
The SWRCB issued investigation order WQ 2019-0005-DWQ to the Santa Maria Airport requiring completion of an initial PFAS investigation at the Airport. Soil, groundwater, and surface water samples were collected in March 2020. The results of the investigation did not identify PFAS in the supply or agricultural wells at the airport (including Well 10S on the subject property). PFAS was reported in soil and groundwater samples collected from the main portions of the airport. The subject property is located outside of a 1 -mile radius of identified PFAS source areas at the Santa Maria Airport site (Appendix C) (SCS Engineering 2021), and are not likely to be found in soil at the subject property.

No additional information/site documents regarding this site available on GeoTracker or EnviroStor
No additional information/site documents regarding this site available on GeoTracker or EnviroStor
The Department of Defense (DoD) has not prepared a Joint Execution Plan for this facility, no funding is available for regulatory oversight. Maps depicting locations of USTs at the site identify them at least 1 mile southeast of the subject property.

UST removed from the site in 2005. Groundwater not encountered in excavation. No additional information available.

Releases from six USTs and/or associated pipelines reported during UST removal/closure activities by the Army Corps of Engineers in 1990 and 1991.

Release of jet fuel to soil from fuel lines. Impacts delineated onsite, and case closure was granted.

Release of jet -A fuel discovered during a UST removal. Soil was excavated, bioremediated and replaced, under approval from Santa Barbara County.

According to GeoTracker, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers addressed the removal and sampling associated with 64 UST and pipeline distribution sites located in the Santa Maria Public Airport District (GeoTracker 2023d).

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
19 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
This page intentionally left blank.
20 Physical Setting Resources and Government Records

4.3 Review of State of California Geologic Energy
Management Division (CaIGEM) Records
A review of the CaIGEM Online Mapping System indicates that no oil wells are located on the subject property or adjacent properties, or within 0.25 mile of the subject property (CaIGEM 2023).

4.4 Review of National Pipeline Mapping System
Records
A review of the National Pipeline Mapping System (NPMS) online Public Map Viewer indicates that no natural gas transmission pipelines or hazardous liquid pipelines are located on the subject property or adjacent properties. Additionally, no pipeline -related accidents or incidents are mapped within 0.25 mile of the subject property (United States Department of Transportation 2023).

4.5 Review of California Statewide PFAS Investigation
Beginning in 2019, the SWRCB sent assessment requirements to property owners of sites that may be potential sources of PFAS. These sites currently include select airports, chrome plating facilities, DoD) sites, landfills, publicly owned treatment works facilities, and bulk fuel storage terminals and refineries. According to the SWRCB, "PFAS are a large group of human -made substances that do not occur naturally in the environment and are resistant to heat, water, and oil" (SWRCB 2023b). There are 57 known classes of PFAS comprising hundreds of individual PFAS compounds that were, or still are commercially produced. Only two PFAS compounds have undergone sufficient toxicological testing to have been assigned United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Health Advisory Levels: perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). Other PFAS compounds are transformed into PFOA and PFOS in the environment (USEPA 2023).

Santa Maria City CouncilNovember 19, 2024

Santa Maria City Council
November 19, 2024