Santee City Council
December 10, 2025

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration
Santee Community Center
DECEMBER 2025
Prepared for:

CITY OF SANTEE
10601 Magnolia Avenue
Santee, California 92071
Contact: Sandi Sawa, AICP, Director of Planning & Building Prepared by:
605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
Contact: Caitlin Munson
Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material.

FMND - 1
Introduction to the Final MND
This Final Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Santee Community Center is comprised of the Draft MND including Appendices A through H, comments received during public review and responses to those comments, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).

Final MND
The comments received during public review did not require changes to the Draft MND. The only edit made to the Draft MND after public review was a correction to the list of appendices on page ii in the Table of Contents to add Appendix I AB 52 Letters. Appendix I was provided for public review; however, it was inadvertently not included in the list of appendices. The Draft MND has been reproduced with the date of December 2025.

Responses to Comments
The City received ten written comment letters during the 30-day public review period, which was between April 28, 2025 and May 28, 2025. The comment letters are listed below:

Number Commenter Date Received
S1 California Department of Transportation May 28, 2025 O1 Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians April 29, 2025
I1 Benjamin Aller May 5, 2025
I2 Elie Arslan May 20, 2025
I3 Kristin Archer May 26, 2025
I4 Megan Powell May 27, 2025
I5 Michele Abbott May 27, 2025
I6 Hammon Dale & Nina Humphries May 28, 2025
I7 Elie Arslan May 28, 2025
I8 Lisa & Robert Albon May 28, 2025
The comments are reproduced and responses are provided to each comment in a side-byside format. Numbered brackets identify each specific comment and the corresponding response.

MMRP
As required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15074(c), an MMRP has been prepared and is included after the responses to comments. The MMRP shows the mitigation measures verbatim from the Draft MND, the entity responsible for implementing the mitigation, the entity responsible for verifying that the mitigation has been completed and the timing for implementation of the mitigation.
14169 i
DECEMBER 2025
Table of Contents

SECTION PAGE
Acronyms and Abbreviations............................................................................................................................................ iv 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Project Overview.....................................................................................................................................1

1.2 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance ................................................................................1

1.3 Public Review Process ...........................................................................................................................1 2 Project Description...............................................................................................................................................4

2.1 Project Location......................................................................................................................................4

2.2 Environmental Setting............................................................................................................................4

2.3 Project Characteristics ...........................................................................................................................5

2.3.1 Proposed Project.......................................................................................................................5

2.3.2 Proposed Operation..................................................................................................................6

2.4 Project Construction and Phasing .........................................................................................................6

2.5 Project Approvals....................................................................................................................................8 3 Initial Study Checklist...........................................................................................................................................9

3.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................................ 14

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ................................................................................................... 17

3.3 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................................. 18

3.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................................... 30

3.5 Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................................. 43

3.6 Energy .................................................................................................................................................. 47

3.7 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................................ 50

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions................................................................................................................ 55

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..................................................................................................... 58

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality............................................................................................................... 62

3.11 Land Use and Planning ....................................................................................................................... 66

3.12 Mineral Resources .............................................................................................................................. 67

3.13 Noise .................................................................................................................................................... 68

3.14 Population and Housing...................................................................................................................... 79

3.15 Public Services .................................................................................................................................... 80

3.16 Recreation............................................................................................................................................ 82

3.17 Transportation ..................................................................................................................................... 83

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources.................................................................................................................... 86

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems.............................................................................................................. 88

3.20 Wildfire ................................................................................................................................................. 90

3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................................................................................... 92

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 ii
DECEMBER 2025
4 References and Preparers................................................................................................................................ 94

4.1 References Cited................................................................................................................................. 94

4.2 List of Preparers .................................................................................................................................. 97

APPENDICES
A Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculations B Biological Resources Memorandum
C Archaeological Resources Inventory Report
D Geotechnical Report
E Hazardous Materials Assessment
F Hydrology Technical Memorandum
G Transportation Analysis
H Noise Supporting Documentation
I AB 52 Letters

FIGURES
Figure 1 Project Location................................................................................................................................... 99 Figure 2 Site Plan.............................................................................................................................................101 Figure 3 Level Plan...........................................................................................................................................103 Figure 4 Elevations...........................................................................................................................................105 Figure 5 Baseline Outdoor Ambient Sound Level Measurements ................................................................107 Figure 6 Daytime Scenario ..............................................................................................................................109 Figure 7 Nighttime Scenario............................................................................................................................111 Figure 8A Outdoor Event Outdoor Event at Amphitheater Venue ...................................................................113 Figure 8B Outdoor Event at Outdoor Patio Venue............................................................................................115 Figure 9 Emergency Generator Test Scenario................................................................................................117 Figure 10 Fireworks Event Scenario .................................................................................................................119 Figure 11A Temporary Construction Noise Barrier Extent Calculations............................................................121 Figure 11B Temporary Construction Noise Barrier Extent Calculations............................................................123 Figure 11C Temporary Construction Noise Barrier Extent Calculations............................................................125 TABLES
Table 2.4-1. Anticipated Construction Scenario ..............................................................................................................7 Table 2.5-1. Agency Approval............................................................................................................................................8 Table 3.3-1. Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions – Without PDFs................... 21 Table 3.3-2. Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions – With PDF-AQ-1................. 22 Table 3.3-3. Estimated Maximum Daily Operation Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions – Unmitigated.......................... 23

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 iii
DECEMBER 2025
Table 3.3-4. American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD) Principal Parameters......................................................................................................................................................... 25 Table 3.3-5. Construction Health Risk Assessment Results – Unmitigated............................................................... 26 Table 3.3-6. Construction Health Risk Assessment Results – Mitigated.................................................................... 27 Table 3.8-1. Sustainable Santee Action Plan Project Checklist................................................................................... 56 Table 3.8-2. Estimated Annual Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................. 57 Table 3.8-3. Summary of Estimated Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................................. 58 Table 3.13-1. Measured Samples of Existing Outdoor Ambient Sound Level ............................................................ 70 Table 3.13-2. Estimated Per-Phase Construction Noise Levels .................................................................................. 72 Table 3.13-3. Estimated Per-Phase Construction Noise Levels With Noise Barrier................................................... 73 Table 3.13-4. Predicted Stationary Source Operation Noise Levels ........................................................................... 75 Table 3.13-5. Predicted Off-Site Traffic Noise Exposure Levels .................................................................................. 76 14169 iv
DECEMBER 2025
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
AB Assembly Bill
BMP best management practice
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CAP Climate Action Plan
CARB California Air Resources Board
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
City City of Santee
CO carbon monoxide
County County of San Diego
dBA A-weighted decibel
DEHQ Department of Environmental Health and Quality
DPM diesel particulate matter
GHG greenhouse gas
HRA health risk assessment
HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
kBtu kilo-British thermal unit
kWh kilowatt-hour
MM Mitigation Measure
MND mitigated negative declaration
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm System Permit
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOx oxides of nitrogen
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
O3 ozone
PDF Project Design Feature
PM10 particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter PM2.5 particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns in diameter Project Santee Community Center Project
PV photovoltaic
RAQS Regional Air Quality Strategy
SANDAG San Diego Association of Governments
SDAB San Diego Air Basin
SDAPCD San Diego Air Pollution Control District
SIP State Implementation Plan
SOx sulfur oxide
SWPPP stormwater pollution prevention plan
TC Town Center
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VOC volatile organic compound

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 v
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
14169 1
DECEMBER 2025
1 Introduction

1.1 Project Overview
The proposed Santee Community Center Project (project) would involve the construction of the Santee Community Center (Community Center) building in the City of Santee (City) (Figure 1). The Community Center building would be two stories tall and include event space, office space, and support spaces and would total 12,500 gross square feet (Figure 2, Site Plan; Figure 3, Level Plan; and Figure 4, Elevations). The Community Center would offer classes and events and would provide event spaces for the community to rent.

1.2 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance
The City is the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) lead agency responsible for the review and approval of the proposed project. Based on the findings of the initial study for the project, the City has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is the appropriate environmental document to prepare in compliance with CEQA (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.). As stated in CEQA Section 21064.5, an MND may be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when an initial study “has identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the public agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment.”
This MND has been prepared for the City and complies with Section 15070(b) of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.). The purpose of the MND and the Initial Study Checklist (see Section 3 of this MND) is to determine any potentially significant impacts associated with the proposed project and to incorporate mitigation measures into the project design as necessary to reduce or eliminate the significant or potentially significant effects of the project.

1.3 Public Review Process
In accordance with CEQA, a good-faith effort has been made during the preparation of this MND to contact affected agencies, organizations, and persons who may have an interest in this project. In reviewing the MND, public agencies and the interested public should focus on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing the project’s possible impacts on the environment. A copy of the Draft MND and related documents are available for review during regular business hours at the City of Santee Planning & Building Department (Building 4) and Clerk’s Office (Building 3) both located at 10601 Magnolia Avenue, Santee, CA 92071. The MND can also be reviewed at the Santee County Library located at 9225 Carlton Hills Boulevard, Santee, CA 92071.

Electronic copies of the MND can be downloaded from the City’s website at:
https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/business/active-projects-map .

Written and electronic comments (file size should be a maximum of 10MB unless a link is requested) addressing the MND will be received by mail or email at the following address for a 30-day review and comment period starting

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 2
DECEMBER 2025
on Monday, April 28, 2025, and ending on Wednesday, May 28, 2025 in accordance with Section 15072(a) of the CEQA Guidelines.

Sandi Sawa, AICP, Director of Planning & Building
Subject: Santee Community Center
Planning & Building Department
City Hall, Building 4
10601 Magnolia Avenue
Santee, California 92071
Telephone: (619) 258-4100, extension 167
Email: [email protected]
Following the close of the public comment period, the City will consider this MND and comments in determining whether to approve the proposed project.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 3
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
14169 4
DECEMBER 2025
2 Project Description

2.1 Project Location
The proposed project site is located in the City of Santee (City), in the southwestern portion of San Diego County (County) (Figure 1, Project Location). Nearby are the Cities of San Diego and El Cajon, as well as unincorporated areas of the County. The proposed project site comprises approximately 5.2 acres and is located in south central Santee.

2.2 Environmental Setting
The proposed project site is located at 10129 Riverwalk Drive and is accessible from California State Routes 52, 67 and 125. Vehicular access is provided via the existing south leg of the Riverwalk Drive/Canopy Park Lane intersection, which is an all-way stop-controlled intersection.

The project site is located in a developed, urban area of the City. The project site is bound by the Cameron Family YMCA and Sportsplex USA to the west; open space and Town Center Community Park East to the south; open space and Park Center Drive to the east; and Riverwalk Drive and residential uses to the north.

Events that currently occur at the nearby Town Center Community Park East site, and are likely to continue, include:
o The City’s Annual 4th of July fireworks celebration
o Summer Concert series
o “Movies in the Park” during summer months
o Soccer, football and lacrosse sports events
The Woodglen Vista Creek (i.e., a tributary to the San Diego River) is the open space to the east and south of the Project. Woodglen Vista Creek contains the only native biological resources within the Project site vicinity.

Historically, Woodglen Vista Creek ran through the middle of the Project site but was redirected around the site during previous grading efforts in 2006. Since the development of the parking lot, coastal sage scrub and southern cottonwood–willow riparian forest has been restored within the Woodglen Vista Creek and designated as protected open space associated with previous projects.

The project site is zoned as Town Center (TC) and has a General Plan land use designation of Town Center (TC) (City of Santee 2020 and 2017a). The proposed project is a permitted use in the TC zone and land use designation. The project site is currently developed as an asphalt parking lot with several landscape features located throughout and a grassy field in the northwest quadrant of the site. The northwest quadrant was previously graded for development of the Town Center Community Park and used for parking on the dirt and aggregate base. This area of the Project site is now a grassy field and is currently used for passive recreational activity.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 5
DECEMBER 2025

2.3 Project Characteristics

2.3.1 Proposed Project
The proposed project would involve the construction of the Community Center building, which would be two stories tall and include event space, office space, and support spaces, and would total 12,500 gross square feet (Figure 2, Site Plan; Figure 3, Level Plan; and Figure 4, Elevations).

The Community Center building would include an eastern and western wing joined by the lobby and entrance area.

There are two entrances planned, the south entrance and the north entrance, both of which lead to the lobby area.

Entry plazas, which would include benches and landscaped areas, would be located outside of both entrances. The lobby would include a reception area, access to both wings of the building, a staircase, and an elevator. The eastern wing would be one story tall and would include event space, storage, a kitchen, utilities, and an outdoor covered dining area (located south of the event space). The service yard and biofiltration basin would be located immediately east of the eastern wing. The first floor of the western wing would include office space, restrooms, storage, and janitors’ closet. The second floor would include event space, an event deck, concession space, restrooms, and storage. Amphitheater seating and bike storage would be located west of the western wing. The facility would be used as a backup emergency operations center for City Hall and would have a backup emergency generator located on the east side of the Community Center building.

The project would include several sustainability features, such as photovoltaic (PV) panels, electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, and low-flow plumbing fixtures. The proposed Community Center building is oriented to allow for ventilation from the prevailing southwest winds. Shade structures are provided in locations that would block light from the summer sun and are not located in areas where winter light is anticipated to be oriented. Portions of the building would include glass panels and sky lights to take advantage of natural light. Exterior lighting would include parking lot and building security lighting. The exterior lighting would be shielded and directed away from adjacent properties.

The project would include several features to prevent runoff into Woodglen Vista Creek. The site grading design would control runoff by directing stormwater through a piped storm drainage system and directing sheet flow over pedestrian pavement into stormwater retention basins located south and east of the Community Center building.

The project site would be modified to include sufficient parking for both the proposed Community Center building and the existing YMCA building. The existing asphalt parking lot would become the new east parking lot, and the existing grassy field would become the new west parking lot. The existing asphalt parking lot includes 270 regular stalls and 9 accessible stalls, while the new east and west asphalt parking lots would include a combined total of 275 regular stalls and 12 accessible stalls. Loading and unloading during events (i.e. deliveries and catering) would occur in the walled and gated utility yard located east of the proposed Community Center building.

The project would expand the existing driveway apron connecting to Riverwalk Drive, which would be the only offsite improvement. The driveway apron would be expanded to accommodate a secondary entrance and exit to the new west parking lot. The project would use existing on-site utility connections.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 6
DECEMBER 2025

2.3.2 Proposed Operation
The Community Center would open in 2026. The project would provide event spaces for the community to rent and would require approximately four new employees. The Community Center would operate year-round, Sunday through Thursday 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and Fridays and Saturdays 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.

The following standing events could be hosted at the Community Center:
▪ Gatherings for private and governmental events including business meetings, trainings, birthday parties, family celebrations, weddings, community events, conferences, town hall meetings, city council meetings, governmental meetings, car shows, festivals, emergency operations, comedy shows, movies, and other events. The majority of these events would occur indoors, with some events occurring outdoors, such as events featuring fireworks during evening hours .Events would range in size from 50 persons to 450 persons, which would use all available Community Center building space. Events using outdoor space, such as car shows in the parking lot, could increase capacity by 250 persons. Overflow parking during events that use either the new east or west parking lots would use the existing south parking lot, located across the footbridge. Anticipated time of operation for events would be Sunday through Thursday 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and Friday and Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.

The Community Center could also host the following classes:
▪ Senior, youth, and general classes such as outdoor recreation, art, dance, martial arts, music, gardening, cooking, flower arranging, language, historical, and cultural classes; training classes such as CPR, fitness, safety, dog training, and babysitter training classes, and additional classes needed for the community. The average class size would be 30–60 persons per class, but a class could be as large as the occupancy load of the Community Center building if a large class was required. Anticipated time of operation for classes would be Monday through Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.

2.4 Project Construction and Phasing
Construction of the project would include concrete removal/demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. Construction is anticipated to begin August 2025 and end in September 2026, for an approximated construction duration of 14 months.1 Construction equipment would be staged either on site or in the adjacent parking lot. Construction phasing is anticipated as follows:
▪ Demolition (20 days)
▪ Site preparation (4 days)
▪ Grading (10 days)
▪ Building construction (220 days)
1 Timing estimates of the proposed project buildout were based on the preliminary project phasing schedule. Because CalEEMod uses real dates (e.g., January 15, 2024) to calculate construction emissions, assumptions were made as to key dates for each phase. While all dates reflected in this MND are estimates, and actual dates may differ depending on funding, weather, and other factors, this analysis represents a conservative assessment of air quality impacts because air quality regulations become more restrictive over time.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 7
DECEMBER 2025
▪ Paving (20 days)
▪ Architectural coating (20 days)
Demolition would involve the removal of existing concrete located throughout the site, primarily for the existing parking lot rather than the grassy field which is located on a dirt base. Additional site clearing and rough grading would occur during the site preparation phase. Grading would require 2,000 cubic yards of import. The depth of disturbance would be approximately 7 feet. The new west parking lot would be constructed prior to the existing parking lot being disturbed for construction of the new east parking lot.

A summary of the anticipated construction equipment, quantity of equipment, hours of operation of the equipment, and worker, vendor, and haul trips per phase is included in Table 2.4-1.

Table 2.4-1. Anticipated Construction Scenario
Construction
Phase
Worker
Round
Trips per
Day
Vendor
Truck
Round
Trips
per Day
Haul
Truck
Trips per
Day Equipment Quantity
Hours
per
Day
Demolition 16 4 14 Rubber-tired dozers 2 8
Concrete/industrial saws 1 8
Tractors/loaders/backhoes 3 8
Site
Preparation
18 6 0 Tractors/loaders/backhoes 4 8
Rubber-tired dozers 3 8
Grading 16 6 26 Rubber-tired dozers 1 8
Tractors/loaders/backhoes 3 8
Excavators 1 8
Graders 1 8
Building
Construction
20 4 0 Cranes 1 7
Forklifts 3 8
Tractors/loaders/backhoes 3 8
Welders 1 8
Generator sets 1 8
Paving 20 2 0 Pavers 1 8
Cement and mortar mixers 2 6
Rollers 2 6
Tractors/loaders/backhoes 1 8
Paving equipment 2 6
Architectural
Coating
6 2 0 Air compressors 1 6
Source: See Appendix A.

Note: Water trucks were not modeled as equipment in the construction models and were instead modeled as vendor trips in the site preparation and grading phases.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 8
DECEMBER 2025

2.5 Project Approvals
Table 2.5-1 provides a summary of public agency approvals and recommendations that are associated with the project. Once the the construction contract for the project is awarded by the City of Santee City Council, all required permits would be pulled by the general contractor concurrently.

Table 2.5-1. Agency Approval
Agency Action
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Section 401 Water Quality Certification National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System Permit
San Diego Air Pollution Control District Permit to construct City of Santee Building Permits
Fire Sprinkler/Alarm Permits
14169 9
DECEMBER 2025
3 Initial Study Checklist

1. Project title:

Santee Community Center

2. Lead agency name and address:

City of Santee
10601 Magnolia Avenue
Santee, California 92071

3. Contact person and phone number:

Sandi Sawa, AICP, Director of Planning & Building
10601 Magnolia Avenue
Santee, California 92071
(619) 258-4100 (ext. 167)

4. Project location:
10129 Riverwalk Drive
Santee, California 92071

5. Project sponsor’s name and address:

City of Santee
10601 Magnolia Avenue
Santee, California 92071

6. General plan designation:

Town Center (TC)

7. Zoning:

Town Center (TC)

8. Description of project. (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary):

See Section 2, Project Description.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 10
DECEMBER 2025

9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project’s surroundings:

The project site is bound by the Cameron Family YMCA and Sportsplex USA to the west; open space and Town Center Community Park to the south; open space and Park Center Drive to the east; Riverwalk Drive and residential uses to the north. Events currently held at the Town Center Community Park include:
o The City’s Annual 4th of July fireworks celebration
o Summer Concert series
o “Movies in the Park” during summer months
o Soccer, football and lacrosse sports events

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement):

See Section 2.5, Project Approvals.

11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
The Project is subject to compliance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52 (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21074), which requires consideration of impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) as part of the CEQA process and requires the lead agency to notify any tribal groups (who have requested notification) of the proposed Project. Pursuant to AB 52, the City of Santee (City) sent Project notification letters to tribal representatives of the Jamul Indian Village, Mesa Grande Band of Mission Indians, and Barona Band of Mission Indians on July 10, 2024 inviting each tribe to engage in tribal consultation, if desired (Appendix I).

None of the tribal representatives responded to the AB-52 notification letter or requested consultation.

Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Agriculture and
Forestry 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
Mineral Resources
Noise Population and
Housing
Public Services

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 11
DECEMBER 2025
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 13
DECEMBER 2025
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.

Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less Than Significant With Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 14
DECEMBER 2025

3.1 Aesthetics

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
I. AESTHETICS – Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
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?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less-than-Significant Impact. A scenic vista is a public viewpoint that provides expansive views of a highly valued landscape. There are no scenic vistas within the proposed project site. The project site is located in a developed urban area of the City. The project site is bound by the Cameron Family YMCA and Sportsplex USA to the west; open space and Town Center Community Park East to the south; open space and Park Center Drive to the east; and Riverwalk Drive and residential uses to the north. According to the City’s General Plan, open space areas serve as scenic vistas within the City (City of Santee 2003). As such, since the project site is located adjacent to the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area, the project site is located within the view corridor of a scenic vista. However, views of the open space from the project site and from public views located north of the project site are currently obstructed by existing vegetation to the east and south. Therefore, the proposed project would not impede views of the open space. The proposed project would involve the partial removal of an existing parking lot to allow for the construction of a twostory Community Center building that includes event space, office space, and support spaces, with an associated parking lot. Therefore, the proposed project would be visually consistent with the surrounding development because there are similar uses to the west of the proposed project area. Upon completion of construction, views of the proposed project site and surrounding area would be similar to existing conditions. The proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact on scenic vistas.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 15
DECEMBER 2025
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. The City’s General Plan identifies existing scenic resources throughout the City, including the San Diego River and other waterway corridors, undeveloped hillsides and ridgelines, the Santee Town Center, Santee Lakes, and Mission Trails Regional Park. There are no designated or eligible state scenic highways within the City. The nearest state scenic highway, California State Route 52, which is designated scenic from post mile 9.5 near Santo Road to post mile 13.0 near Mast Boulevard, is approximately

1.2 miles south of the proposed project site. Intervening urban development obstructs views of the proposed project site from California State Route 52. Therefore, the project would have no impact on state scenic highways. Further, there are no significant trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings on the project site.
c) In non-urbanized areas, would the project 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?
Less-than-Significant Impact. As defined in CEQA Section 21071 (a), an urbanized area means “an incorporated city that meets either of the following criteria: (1) Has a population of at least 100,000 persons; (2) Has a population of less than 100,000 persons if the population of that city and not more than two contiguous incorporated cities combined equals at least 100,000 persons.” According to the U.S.

Census Bureau, the estimated population of Santee as of July 1, 2022, was 59,051 persons. The estimated population of El Cajon as of July 1, 2022, was 104,414persons (U.S, Census Bureau 2022). Because Santee and El Cajon are contiguous cities and their combined population exceeds 100,000 persons, the proposed project site would be considered an urbanized area.

The proposed project site is zoned TC, and Community Centers are a permitted public and semi-public use in the TC zone. Implementation of the project would not conflict with applicable zoning. The project would comply with the City’s lighting and landscaping requirements and all applicable zoning requirements, including heights and setbacks. The exterior material of the proposed Community Center building includes glass, steel, stone veneer, cement plaster, and fiber cement, which references civic architecture and compliments the existing YMCA building. The Community Enhancement Element of the General Plan promotes the Town Center as a “focal point and activity center for the entire City.” This Element also encourages respect for the San Diego River and its tributaries. The proposed Community Center would not impact the adjacent Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space. As noted in Section 2 of this MND, the project would include specific features to protect the open space, such as defined limits of disturbance to minimize impacts and prevent additional public access to potentially sensitive biological areas, and the addition of a new trash enclosure on the east boundary of the east parking lot to reduce the potential for littering near the open space. The Community Center would include indoor and outdoor events that could educate the public about the revegetation efforts in the Woodglen Vista Creek corridor. Because the proposed Community Center would be located adjacent to similar land uses, primarily, the existing Cameron Family YMCA, public views of the site would be consistent with existing conditions. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with other regulations governing scenic quality. Impacts would be less than significant.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 16
DECEMBER 2025
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Existing light sources on the proposed project site include those typical of a parking lot, including lighting from night lighting standards and headlights from vehicles. The proposed project would introduce nighttime lighting that would be typical of a Community Center, and similar to the night lighting from the existing Cameron Family YMCA building to the west. Project construction would be limited to the City’s allowable construction hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and is not anticipated to require lighting. In the event that construction lighting is required, it would be properly shielded to avoid spillover effects.

Project operations would generate lighting from two primary sources: lighting from Community Center building interiors that would pass through windows and lighting from exterior sources (e.g., street lighting, parking lot lighting, vehicle lights, building illumination, security lighting, and landscape lighting). The Community Center would be open until 11 p.m. in some cases, and thus project lighting would operate until closing hours. Light spillover, trespass, and potential glare from project lighting are regulated by Section

13.30.030(B) of the Santee Municipal Code. The code requires that all lights and illuminated signs shall be shielded or directed to not cause glare on adjacent properties or motorists. Therefore, exterior lighting would be shielded and directed away from adjacent properties to avoid light spillover, trespass, and glare.

Light associated with additional vehicle trips generated by the project would be similar in character to what is currently generated by vehicles traveling along the existing roadway network after dark. Although the project could operate until 11pm in some cases, vehicles exiting the property would not create a significant concentrated source of light.

Buildings with large facades constructed of reflective surfaces (e.g., brightly colored building façades, metal surfaces, and reflective glass) could increase existing levels of daytime glare. Regarding exterior glare sources for this project, glass would be one of the materials used for the Community Center building’s exterior. The surface area of glass would be relatively small for the majority of the proposed building because most of the glass would be used for windows. However, the main building entrance would feature tall glass panels to provide natural light and a view of the landscaped area south of the building. A parking lot would be located between the proposed building and Riverwalk Drive. Additionally, the proposed building would be set back, so any resulting glare would be significantly reduced from public view.

The project would result in less-than-significant impacts related to light, glare, and nighttime views.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 17
DECEMBER 2025

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY 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. 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 California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
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?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
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))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
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?
a) Would the project 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? No Impact. According to the California Important Farmland Finder database, the proposed project site is located on land classified as “Urban and Built-Up Land” (DOC 2022a). The project would not be located on land classified as Farmland pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program and would therefore not convert any Farmland to non-agricultural use. No impact would occur.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 18
DECEMBER 2025
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The proposed project site is zoned Town Center (TC) and does not contain agricultural land (City of Santee 2020). There are no existing lands under a Williamson Act contract within the City (DOC 2022b). No impact would occur.
c) Would the project 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))? No Impact. The proposed project site and surrounding areas are not zoned for and do not contain any forest land or timberland as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526 or Government Code Section 51104(g). Therefore, the project would not conflict with or cause the rezoning or conversion of forest land or timberland. No impact would occur.
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. The proposed project site does not contain any forest or timberland as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526 or Government Code Section 51104(g). Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur. e) Would the project 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?
No Impact. There are no agricultural or forest land uses within the proposed project site or surrounding areas. Therefore, the project would not result in the conversion of farmland or forest land to a nonagriculture use. No impact would occur.

3.3 Air Quality

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
III. 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:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
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?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 19
DECEMBER 2025

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less-than-Significant Impact. The San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) is responsible for developing and implementing the clean air plans for attainment and maintenance of the ambient air quality standards in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB)—specifically, the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS).2 San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is responsible for developing forecasts and data that are used by SDAPCD in preparing the SIP and RAQS. In November 2020, SDAPCD adopted the Air Quality Management Plan for attaining the federal 8-hour 75 parts per billion and 70 parts per billion ozone (O3) standards, which is the air basin’s input to the SIP and is required to demonstrate how SDACPD proposes to attain the federal O3 standards. The plan anticipates attainment of the 2008 and 2015 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) standards by 2026 and 2032, respectively. The 2020 Air Quality Management Plan includes planning requirements for attaining the O3 NAAQS, including on-road motor vehicle emissions budgets for transportation conformity, a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) offset demonstration, Reasonably Available Control Measures, Reasonable Further Progress, an Attainment Demonstration, and contingency measures in the event of a failure to meet a milestone or to attain by the predicted attainment date (SDAPCD 2020).

The 2022 RAQS was finalized in 2023 and addresses California planning requirements to meet California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). The 2022 RAQS contains strategies to continue directly reducing emissions of O3 precursors in the County and assist in reducing particulate matter and GHGs as a co-benefit.

Consistent with the SDAPCD’s recent reorganization pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 423 (Gloria, 2019), the 2022 RAQS also proposes to expand the SDAPCD’s involvement as a regional agency within SDAPCD’s regulatory authority, by including commitments to support research and innovation opportunities, developing new partnerships with public and private entities, convening more opportunities for engagement and education with interested parties, and integrating environmental justice and equity into all SDAPCD’s actions.

The SIP and RAQS rely on information from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and SANDAG, including mobile and area source emissions as well as information regarding projected growth in the County as a whole and the in cities in the County, to project future emissions and determine the strategies necessary for the reduction of emissions through regulatory controls. CARB mobile source emission projections and SANDAG growth projections are based on population, vehicle trends, and land use plans developed by the County and the cities in the County as part of the development of their General Plans. 2 For this discussion, the relevant federal air quality plan is the 2020 Plan for Attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone in San Diego County (SDAPCD 2020). The 2022 Regional Air Quality Strategy is the applicable plan for purposes of state air quality planning. Both plans reflect growth projections in the basin.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 20
DECEMBER 2025
While SDAPCD and the City do not provide guidance regarding the analysis of impacts associated with air quality plan conformance, the County’s Guidelines for Determining Significance and Report and Format and Content Requirements – Air Quality does discuss conformance with the RAQS (County of San Diego 2007).

The guidance indicates that if the project, in conjunction with other projects, contributes to growth projections that would not exceed SANDAG’s growth projections for the City, the project would not be in conflict with the RAQS (County of San Diego 2007). If a project includes development that is greater than that anticipated in the local plan and SANDAG’s growth projections, the project might conflict with the SIP and RAQS and may contribute to a potentially significant cumulative impact on air quality.

The project site is designated as Town Center (TC) in the City’s General Plan and is zoned Town Center (TC).

This designation is intended to provide the City with a mixed-use activity center that is oriented toward and enhances the San Diego River. This designation requires development in accordance with the Town Center Specific Plan, including community commercial, civic, park/open space, and residential uses. The TC designation specifically permits a Community Center. The intent of the Specific Plan is to provide the City with detailed land uses and appropriate development regulations that are consistent with the General Plan.

The proposed project would be consistent with the land use designation and zoning and would not require a General Plan amendment or rezone.

The project is consistent with the underlying land use and zoning for the project site. Therefore, the project source emissions are not anticipated to result in air quality impacts that were not previously envisioned in the growth projections and RAQS, and implementation of the project would not result in development beyond that anticipated in local plans or increases beyond those contemplated by SANDAG. Because the proposed land uses and associated vehicle trips are anticipated in local air quality plans, the project would be consistent at a regional level with the underlying growth forecasts in the RAQS. Accordingly, the project would not conflict with and would not obstruct implementation of applicable local and regional air quality plans; impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Less-than-Significant Impact. Past, present, and future development projects may contribute to the SDAB adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis. By its nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact.

The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development, and SDAPCD develops and implements plans for future attainment of ambient air quality standards. Based on these considerations, project-level thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants are used in the determination of whether a project’s individual emissions would have a cumulatively considerable contribution to air quality. If a project’s emissions would exceed the applied significance thresholds, it would have a cumulatively considerable contribution. Conversely, projects that do not exceed the project-specific thresholds are generally not considered to be cumulatively significant.

Construction and operation of the project would result in emissions of criteria air pollutants, which may result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in emissions of criteria air pollutants for which the SDAB is designated as nonattainment under the NAAQS or the CAAQS. The SDAB has been designated as a federal nonattainment area for O3 and a state nonattainment area for O3, particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter (PM10), and particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5). The following discussion quantitatively evaluates potential short-term construction and long-term operational impacts that would result from implementation of the project.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 21
DECEMBER 2025
Construction Emissions
Proposed construction activities would result in the temporary addition of pollutants to the local airshed caused by on-site sources (i.e., off-road construction equipment, soil disturbance, and volatile organic compound [VOC] off-gassing from architectural coatings and asphalt pavement application) and off-site sources (i.e., on-road haul trucks, delivery trucks, and worker vehicle trips). Construction emissions can vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific type of operation, and for dust, the prevailing weather conditions. Therefore, such emissions levels can only be estimated, with a corresponding uncertainty in precise ambient air quality impacts.

Criteria air pollutant emissions associated with construction activity were quantified using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) (CAPCOA 2022). Construction emissions were calculated for the estimated worst-case day over the construction period associated with each phase and reported as the maximum daily emissions estimated during each year of construction (2025–2026). Construction schedule assumptions, including phase type, duration, and sequencing, were based on information provided by the applicant or CalEEMod defaults and are intended to represent a reasonable scenario based on the best information available. Oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions would primarily result from the use of construction equipment and motor vehicles.

Fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) emissions would primarily result from grading and site preparation activities.

The project would be required to comply with SDAPCD Rule 55, Fugitive Dust Control. This rule requires that the project take steps to restrict visible emissions of fugitive dust beyond the property line. Compliance with Rule 55 would limit fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) generated during grading and construction activities. To account for dust control measures in the calculations, it was assumed that the project would ensure that active sites be watered at least two times daily. To ensure compliance with the Rule 55, these specific measures have been incorporated into the project as a Project Design Feature (PDF) and will be made a condition of approval and tracked with the project’s mitigation monitoring and reporting program. The application of architectural coatings, such as exterior application/interior paint and other finishes, would produce VOC emissions. The contractor would be required to comply with the requirements of SDAPCD’s Rule 67.7, Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt, which would limit VOC emissions from asphalt off-gassing.

Table 3.3-1 presents the estimated maximum daily construction emissions generated during construction of the project without PDF-AQ-1, and Table 3.3-2 shows the maximum daily construction emissions during construction with PDF-AQ-1. Details of the emission calculations are provided in Appendix A, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculations.

Table 3.3-1. Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions – Without PDFs
Year
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Pounds Per Day
Summer
2025 3.39 31.90 31.10 0.05 21.22 11.41
2026 4.43 16.36 23.17 0.04 0.93 0.66
Winter
2025 1.17 10.62 13.51 0.02 0.54 0.43

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 22
DECEMBER 2025
Table 3.3-1. Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions – Without PDFs
Year
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Pounds Per Day
2026 1.11 10.02 13.41 0.02 0.49 0.38
Maximum Daily Emissions 4.43 31.90 31.10 0.05 21.22 11.41 Threshold 75 250 550 250 100 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Source: Appendix A.

Notes: PDF = Project Design Feature; VOC = volatile organic compound; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxide; PM10 = particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter equal to or less than 10 microns; PM2.5 = particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter equal to or less than 2.5 microns.

Thresholds are established by the SDAPCD.

Table 3.3-2. Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions – With PDF-AQ-1
Year
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Pounds Per Day
Summer
2025 3.39 31.90 31.10 0.05 9.22 5.24
2026 4.43 16.36 23.17 0.04 0.93 0.66
Winter
2025 1.17 10.62 13.51 0.02 0.54 0.43
2026 1.11 10.02 13.41 0.02 0.49 0.38
Maximum Daily Emissions 4.43 31.90 31.10 0.05 9.22 5.24 Threshold 75 250 550 250 100 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Source: Appendix A.

Notes: PDF = Project Design Feature; VOC = volatile organic compound; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxide; PM10 = particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter equal to or less than 10 microns; PM2.5 = particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter equal to or less than 2.5 microns.

Thresholds are established by the SDAPCD.

As shown in Table 3.3-1 and Table 3.3-2, maximum daily construction emissions would not exceed the SDAPCD significance thresholds for VOCs, NOx, CO, sulfur oxide (SOx), PM10, or PM2.5 during construction; short-term construction air quality impacts would be less than significant.

Operational Emissions
Operation of the project would generate VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions from mobile sources, including vehicular traffic generated by employees and visitors; energy sources from natural gas usage; and area sources, including the use of landscaping equipment, consumer products, and architectural coatings. Pollutant emissions associated with long-term operations were quantified using CalEEMod, using a combination of project-specific information and CalEEMod default values.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 23
DECEMBER 2025
Table 3.3-3 presents the maximum area, energy, mobile source, and stationary source emissions associated with project operation (year 2026).

Table 3.3-3. Estimated Maximum Daily Operation Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions – Unmitigated
Emissions Source
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Pounds per Day
Summer
Mobile 5.75 3.93 40.76 0.10 8.52 2.21
Area 0.39 <0.01 0.54 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Energy 0.01 0.11 0.09 <0.01 0.01 0.01
Stationary 0.52 1.44 1.32 0.00 0.08 0.08
Total Daily Summer Emissions 6.66 5.49 42.71 0.10 8.61 2.30 Winter
Mobile 5.62 4.32 38.59 0.09 8.52 2.21
Area 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.01 0.11 0.09 0.00 0.01 0.01
Stationary 0.52 1.44 1.32 0.00 0.08 0.08
Total Daily Winter Emissions 6.44 5.87 39.99 0.10 8.60 2.30 Maximum Daily Emissions 6.66 5.87 42.71 0.10 8.60 2.30
Threshold 75 250 550 250 100 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Source: Appendix A.

Notes: VOC = volatile organic compound; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxide; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; <0.01 = reported value is less than 0.01.

As shown in Table 3.3-3, maximum daily operational emissions from the project would not exceed the SDAPCD significance thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, or PM2.5; long-term air quality impacts would be less than significant.

Conclusion
The SDAB has been designated as a federal nonattainment area for O3 and a state nonattainment area for O3, PM10, and PM2.5. The nonattainment status is the result of cumulative emissions from various sources of air pollutants and their precursors within the SDAB, including motor vehicles, off-road equipment, and commercial and industrial facilities. Construction and operation of the project would generate VOC and NOx emissions (which are precursors to O3) and emissions of PM10 and PM2.5. However, as indicated in Table 3.3-1, Table 3.3-2, and Table 3.3-3, project-generated construction and operational emissions would not exceed the emission-based significance thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, or PM2.5.

Cumulative localized impacts would potentially occur if a construction project were to occur concurrently with another off-site project. Construction schedules for potential future projects near the project area are currently unknown; therefore, potential construction impacts associated with two or more simultaneous projects would be considered speculative. However, future projects would be subject to CEQA and would require air quality analysis and, where necessary, mitigation if the project would exceed applied thresholds. Criteria air pollutant

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 24
DECEMBER 2025
emissions associated with construction activity of future projects would be reduced through implementation of control measures required by SDAPCD. For example, cumulative PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would be reduced because all future projects would be subject to SDAPCD Rule 55 (Fugitive Dust), which sets forth general and specific requirements for all construction sites in the SDAB. In addition, cumulative VOC emissions would be subject to SDAPCD Rule 67.0.1 (Architectural Coatings).

Based on the project-generated construction and operational emissions of CO, SOx, VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in emissions of nonattainment pollutants. Therefore, the project’s cumulative air quality impact would be less than significant. c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Air quality varies as a direct function of the quantity of pollutants emitted into the atmosphere, the size and topography of the air basin, and the prevailing meteorological conditions. Air quality problems arise when the rate of pollutant emissions exceeds the rate of dispersion. Reduced visibility, eye irritation, and adverse health impacts on those persons termed “sensitive receptors” are the most serious hazards of existing air quality conditions in the area. Some land uses are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others, depending on the population groups and the activities involved. People most likely to be affected by air pollution, as identified by CARB, include children, older adults, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. According to the SDAPCD, sensitive receptors are those who are especially susceptible to adverse health effects from exposure to toxic air contaminants, such as children, the elderly, and the ill. Sensitive receptors include residences, schools (grades Kindergarten through 12), libraries, day care centers, nursing homes, retirement homes, health clinics, and hospitals within 2 kilometers of the facility (SDAPCD 2022a).

The nearest sensitive receptors are the residences located approximately 80 feet north of the project site’s northern boundary.

Carbon Monoxide Hotspot
Mobile-source impacts occur on two scales of motion. Regionally, project-related travel would add to regional trip generation and increase the VMT within the local airshed and the SDAB. Locally, projectgenerated traffic would be added to the roadway system near the project site. If such traffic occurs during periods of poor atmospheric ventilation, is composed of many vehicles “cold-started” and operating at pollution-inefficient speeds, and is operating on roadways already crowded with non-project traffic, there is a potential for the formation of microscale CO hotspots in the area immediately around points of congested traffic. Because of continued improvement in vehicular emissions at a rate faster than the rate of vehicle growth and/or congestion, the potential for CO hotspots in the SDAB is steadily decreasing.

CO transport is extremely limited, and CO disperses rapidly with distance from the source. Under certain extreme meteorological conditions, however, CO concentrations near a congested roadway or intersection may reach unhealthy levels, affecting sensitive receptors such as residents, school children, hospital patients, and the elderly. Typically, high CO concentrations are associated with urban roadways or intersections operating at an unacceptable level of service. Projects contributing to adverse traffic impacts may result in the formation of CO hotspots.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 25
DECEMBER 2025
To verify that the project would not cause or contribute to a violation of the CO standards, a screening evaluation of the potential for CO hotspots was conducted using the County screening threshold of 3,000 peak trips (County of San Diego 2007). Based on the Transportation Impact Analysis prepared for the project (Appendix G), there would be approximately 96 trips during the AM peak hour and 125 trips during the PM peak hour, which would be minimal in comparison to the screening threshold of 3,000 peak trips.

Therefore, the project would not result in a CO hotspot and would result in a less-than-significant impact.

Toxic Air Contaminants
Construction Health Risk
A health risk assessment (HRA) was performed to evaluate potential health risk associated with construction of the project from toxic air contaminants in the form of diesel particulate matter (DPM). The following discussion summarizes the dispersion modeling and HRA methodology; supporting construction HRA documentation, including detailed assumptions, is presented in Appendix A.

For risk assessment purposes, PM10 in diesel exhaust is considered DPM, originating mainly from off-road equipment operating at a defined location for a given length of time at a given distance from sensitive receptors. Less-intensive, more-dispersed emissions result from on-road vehicle exhaust (e.g., heavy-duty diesel trucks). For the construction HRA, the CalEEMod scenario for the project was adjusted to reduce diesel truck one-way trip distances to 1,320 feet (0.25 miles) (SJVAPCD 2018) to estimate emissions from truck pass-by at proximate receptors. The air dispersion modeling methodology was based on SDAPCD’s accepted modeling practices (SDAPCD 2022a). Air dispersion modeling was performed using the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency’s American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD) Version 22112 modeling system (computer software) with the Lakes Environmental Software implementation/user interface, AERMOD View Version 12.0.0. The HRA followed the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment 2015 guidelines (OEHHA 2015) and SDAPCD guidance to calculate the health risk impacts at all proximate receptors, as further discussed below. The dispersion modeling included the use of standard regulatory default options. AERMOD parameters were selected consistent with the SDAPCD and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidance and identified as representative of the project site and project activities. Principal parameters of this modeling are presented in Table 3.3-4.

Table 3.3-4. American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD) Principal Parameters
Parameter Details
Meteorological Data The SDAPCD was consulted to obtain the most representative meteorological data set for the project site. The SDAPCD provided meteorological data for the Lexington Elementary School meteorological station, which was located at 533 B First Street in El Cajon, approximately 4.7 miles southeast of the project site. The latest 3-year data set from the Lexington Elementary School station was for the 2019–2021 years.

Urban versus Rural
Option
Urban dispersion option was selected because of the land use types within a 3- kilometer radius of the project site, in accordance with Section 4.4.1 of the OEHHA Guidance Manual (SDAPCD 2022a).

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 26
DECEMBER 2025
Table 3.3-4. American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD) Principal Parameters
Parameter Details
Terrain
Characteristics
Digital elevation model files were imported into AERMOD so that complex terrain features were evaluated, as appropriate for the site. This accounts for complex terrain within 2 kilometers of the site. The NED dataset with resolution of 1 arc-second was used. The AERMAP terrain preprocessor, which can process U.S. Geological Survey digital elevation model data and data from the NED, was also used to generate the terrain elevations for the receptor locations. The AERMAP program generates an output file that contains the receptor pathway data for AERMOD.

Source Release
Characterizations
Air dispersion modeling of DPM emissions was conducted assuming the off-road equipment would operate in accordance with the modeling scenario estimated in CalEEMod (Appendix A). The construction equipment and on-site truck travel DPM emissions were modeled as a line of adjacent volume sources across the project site to represent project construction with a release height of 5 meters, plume height of 10 meters, and plume width of 10 meters (SCAQMD 2008).

Receptors Discrete receptors were placed at the nearest residential receptor locations in all directions from the project site, and Cartesian grids of less than 50-meter spacing were placed within 0.25 miles of the project site. In addition, discrete receptors were placed at school sites and day care facilities within a 2-kilometer area surrounding the project site.

Source: See Appendix A.

Notes: SDAPCD = San Diego Air Pollution Control District; AERMOD = American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model; OEHHA = Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment; NED = National Elevation Dataset; AERMAP = terrain preprocessor for AERMOD; DPM = diesel particulate matter.

The health risk calculations were performed using the Hotspots Analysis and Reporting Program Version 2 (HARP2) Air Dispersion and Risk Tool (ADMRT, Version 22118). AERMOD was run with all sources emitting unit emissions (1 gram per second) to obtain the necessary input values for HARP2. The line of volume sources was partitioned evenly based on the emission rate of 1 gram per second. The ground-level concentration plot files were then used to estimate the long-term cancer health risk to an individual, and the non-cancer chronic health indices. There is no reference exposure level for acute health impacts from DPM, and thus, acute risk was not evaluated.

Results of the construction HRA are presented in Table 3.3-5.

Table 3.3-5. Construction Health Risk Assessment Results – Unmitigated Impact Parameter Units
Project
Impact
CEQA
Threshold
Level of
Significance
Maximum Individual Cancer Risk –
Residential
Per Million 38.63 10 Potentially
Significant
Chronic Hazard Index – Residential Index Value 0.04 1.0 Less than Significant Source: Appendix A.

Note: CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act.

As shown in Table 3.3-5, the DPM emissions from construction of the project would result in a maximum individual cancer risk of 38.63 in 1 million and a chronic hazard index of 0.04. The chronic hazard index

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 27
DECEMBER 2025
would be below the 1.0 significance threshold; however, the project would exceed the cancer risk threshold of 10 in 1 million and would be potentially significant without mitigation.

Mitigation Measure (MM) AQ-1 would require that all diesel-fueled off-road construction equipment greater than 75 horsepower be zero-emission or equipped with CARB Tier 4 Final-compliant engines (as set forth in Section 2423 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations and Part 89 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations). An exemption from these requirements may be granted, at the City’s discretion, if the contractor documents that the required tier is not reasonably available and that corresponding reductions in DPM are achieved from other construction equipment so that emissions remain below the applicable cancer risk threshold. Table 3.3-6 summarizes the results of the HRA for project construction after mitigation.

Table 3.3-6. Construction Health Risk Assessment Results – Mitigated Impact Parameter Units
Impact
Level
CEQA
Threshold
Level of
Significance
Maximum Individual Cancer Risk –
Residential
Per Million 8.20 10 Less than
Significant
Chronic Hazard Index – Residential Index Value 0.01 1.0 Less than Significant
Source: Appendix A
Notes: CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act
As shown in Table 3.3-6, mitigated project construction activities would result in a maximum individual cancer risk of 8.20 in 1 million at the maximally exposed residence, which is less than the significance threshold of 10 in 1 million. Mitigated project construction would result in a chronic hazard index of 0.01, which is below the 1.0 significance threshold. The project construction health risk impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Operational Health Risk
CARB identified sources of air pollution that are of primary concern when siting new sensitive receptors.

Those sources include freeways, high-traffic roadways, distribution centers, large stationary sources, etc. (CARB 2005). The project involves the development of a Community Center and is not considered a sensitive receptor, nor would it be considered a source of substantial long-term air pollution, as evidenced by Table 3.3-3. Operation of the project would include a 200-kilowatt (kW) Tier 3 emergency back-up generator3 that would be subject to permitting from SDAPCD. A screening analysis was prepared for the project using the Santa Barbara Air Pollution Control District Diesel-Fired Internal Combustion Engines (DICE) Screening Tool, which relies on meteorology data from the Santa Barbara and Santa Maria Airports.

The results of the screening analysis showed a worst-case potential health risk of 2.3 in 1 million. While the meteorological conditions would be different for the proposed project, it should be noted that the wind rose for the project shows the predominant wind direction to be away from the nearest sensitive receptors and toward non-sensitive commercial uses (see Appendix A). A prioritization screening was also prepared for the project using the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) prioritization calculator. 3 The emergency generator is currently specified as a Kohler Tier 3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-certified model 200REOZJF, which is powered by a John Deere engine model number 606HFG85A, which has a horsepower (hp) rating of 315 hp. 200 kilowatts equates to 268 hp. The analysis assumed the 315 hp to provide a conservative estimate.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 28
DECEMBER 2025
The SJVAPCD prioritization calculator is a spreadsheet model that uses emissions and pollutant potency, which provides a conservative estimate of risks. The results of the prioritization showed a risk of 3.01 in 1 million for receptors at a distance of 100 meters (see Appendix A).

As previously noted, the project’s emergency generator would be subject to permitting from the SDAPCD, which would involve application submittal and agency review of emissions and potential DPM impacts to sensitive receptors in the form of an HRA to determine risks for the maximally exposed individual resident, the maximally exposed individual worker, the maximally exposed short-term receptor (if different than the maximally exposed individual resident or worker), and nearby sensitive receptors. Pursuant to SDAPCD Rule 1200, permitting of the project would be contingent on achieving a cancer risk of less than 10 in 1 million.

Permit conditions may require the use of Toxic-Best Available Control Technology in the form of additional emission controls or higher-tiered engines, if applicable. Pursuant to permitting, the project would not exceed a risk of 10 in 1 million, and the operational health risk impact would be less than significant.

Health Effects of Criteria Air Pollutants
As determined in Section 3.3(b) of this MND, project construction and operation would not exceed significance thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, or PM2.5. VOCs and NOx are precursors to O3, for which the SDAB is designated as nonattainment with respect to the NAAQS and CAAQS. The health effects associated with O3 are generally associated with reduced lung function. The contribution of VOCs and NOx to regional ambient O3 concentrations is the result of complex photochemistry. The increases in O3 concentrations in the SDAB due to O3 precursor emissions tend to be found downwind from the source location, allowing time for the photochemical reactions to occur. However, the potential for exacerbating excessive O3 concentrations would also depend on the time of year that the VOC emissions would occur because exceedances of the O3 CAAQS/NAAQS tend to occur between April and October, when solar radiation is highest. The holistic effect of a single project’s emissions of O3 precursors is speculative due to the lack of reliable and meaningful quantitative methods to assess this impact. The project would not exceed the significance thresholds for VOC or NOx; therefore, implementation of the project would contribute minimally to regional O3 concentrations and the associated health effects.

In addition to O3, NOx emissions contribute to potential exceedances of the NAAQS and CAAQS for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) (because NO2 is a constituent of NOx). Health effects that result from NO2 and NOx include respiratory irritation, which could be experienced by nearby receptors during the periods of heaviest use of off-road construction equipment. However, project construction would be relatively short term, and off-road construction equipment would be operating at various portions of the site and would not be concentrated in one portion of the site at any one time. In addition, as shown in Appendix A, CARB air quality monitoring shows existing NO2 concentrations in the area are well below the NAAQS and CAAQS standards. Because project generated NOx emissions would not exceed the significance threshold, the project would not result in potential health effects associated with NO2 and NOx.

CO tends to be a localized impact associated with congested intersections. The associated potential for CO hotspots was discussed previously and was determined to be a less-than-significant impact. Furthermore, the SDAPCD Annual Air Quality Monitoring Network Report for 2022 shows that CO concentrations have decreased in the San Diego region over the last 20 years and are well below the NAAQS and CAAQS standards (SDAPCD 2022b). Thus, the project’s CO emissions would not contribute to significant health effects associated with this pollutant.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 29
DECEMBER 2025
Construction and operation of the project would also not exceed thresholds for PM10 or PM2.5 and would not contribute to exceedances of the NAAQS and CAAQS for particulate matter or obstruct the SDAB from coming into attainment for these pollutants. Additionally, the project would implement dust control strategies and be required to comply with SDAPCD Rule 55, Fugitive Dust Control, which limits the amount of fugitive dust generated during construction. Due to the minimal contribution of particulate matter during construction and operation, the project is not anticipated to result in health effects associated with PM10 or PM2.5.

Conclusion
The project would not result in any potentially significant contribution to local or regional concentrations of nonattainment pollutants and would not result in a significant contribution to the adverse health impacts associated with those pollutants. Impacts would be less than significant with implementation of MM-AQ-1.

Furthermore, there are numerous scientific and technological complexities associated with correlating criteria air pollutant emissions from an individual project to specific health effects or potential additional nonattainment days, and there are currently no modeling tools that could provide reliable and meaningful additional information regarding health effects from criteria air pollutants generated by individual projects. The proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and impacts are determined to be less than significant with implementation of MM-AQ-1. d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Construction and operation of the project would result in various emissions.

Criteria air pollutants, fugitive dust, and toxic air contaminants are addressed under Sections 3.3(b) and

3.3(c) above, and as such, this impact analysis is focused on the potential for an odor impact to occur. The occurrence and severity of potential odor impacts depends on numerous factors. The nature, frequency, and intensity of the source; the wind speeds and direction; and the sensitivity of receiving location each contribute to the intensity of the impact. Although offensive odors seldom cause physical harm, they can be annoying, cause distress among the public, and generate citizen complaints.

Odors would be generated from vehicles and/or equipment exhaust emissions during construction of the project. Odors produced during construction would be attributable to concentrations of unburned hydrocarbons from the tailpipes of construction equipment, architectural coatings, and asphalt pavement application. Such odors would disperse rapidly from the project site and generally occur at magnitudes that would not affect substantial numbers of people. Therefore, impacts associated with odors during construction would be considered less than significant.

Land uses and industrial operations associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The project does not propose and would not engage in any of these activities or other potential activities that would generate operational odors. As discussed in Section 2.3.2, the proposed Community Center would be used for private and government events and gatherings and classes for the general public and would not create any new sources of substantial odors during operation. Therefore, impacts related to odors are determined to be less than significant.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 30
DECEMBER 2025
Project Design Features
PDF-AQ-1 Fugitive Dust Control. Standard construction practices would be employed to reduce fugitive dust emissions and include watering of the active sites and exposed surfaces up to two times per day, depending on weather conditions; watering unpaved roads; and limiting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads. Construction of the project would be subject to SDAPCD Rule 55 – Fugitive Dust Control. Compliance with Rule 55 would limit fugitive dust that may be generated during grading and construction activities.

Mitigation Measures
MM-AQ-1 Tier 4 Final Construction Equipment. Prior to the commencement of construction activities for the project, the applicant shall require its construction contractor to demonstrate that all 75-horsepower or greater diesel-powered equipment is powered with California Air Resources Board-certified Tier 4 Final engines.

An exemption from these requirements may be granted by the City of Santee (City) if the applicant documents that equipment with the required tier is not reasonably available and that equivalent reductions in PM10 exhaust emissions are achieved from other combinations of construction equipment. Before an exemption may be considered by the City, the applicant shall be required to demonstrate that three construction fleet owners/operators in the San Diego region were contacted and that those owners/operators confirmed Tier 4 equipment could not be located within the San Diego region. The City shall review the exemption request and provide a determination within 10 business days from receipt of the request.

3.4 Biological Resources

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
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
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
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 Wildlife or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 31
DECEMBER 2025

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state
or federally protected wetlands (including,
but not 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?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance?
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?
a) Would the project 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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Direct Impacts
No special-status plant or wildlife species were observed within the Project site during surveys, and due to lack of habitat, none are expected to occur (Appendix B). Therefore, no direct impacts would occur to special-status plant or wildlife species with Project implementation.

Direct impacts to nesting birds, protected under Section 3503 of the California Fish and Game Code, could occur within areas of the Project site containing ornamental trees as part of the current development’s landscaping. Project implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM) BIO-1 (Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey) would reduce potential direct impacts to nesting birds to a less-than-significant level through performance of a nesting bird survey if construction occurs during the nesting season. Additionally, all trees removed as part of Project implementation, that could potentially provide nesting habitat for birds, would be replaced as directed by MM-BIO-4 (Tree Replacement, Encroachment, and Preservation). Therefore, no significant direct impacts are anticipated with Project implementation to nesting birds or their habitat.

Glass windows and tall glass panels would be used for the Community Center building’s exterior, which could potentially result in an increase in bird strikes. Project design feature PDF-1 would require incorporation of glazing treatments along the north and south sides of the building to ensure that large

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 32
DECEMBER 2025
areas of glass are visible to birds. Therefore, no significant direct impacts to birds from building strikes are anticipated with implementation of PDF-1.

The Project site does not occur within federally designated critical habitat for plant or wildlife species.

Therefore, no direct impacts would occur to critical habitat with Project implementation.

Indirect Impacts
Project implementation has the potential to result in indirect impacts to special-status wildlife species, specifically least Bell’s vireo, yellow-breasted chat, yellow warbler, two-striped garter snake, Townsend’s big-eared bat, and western yellow bat, as well as special-status plant species occurring within the Project site’s buffer area that overlaps Woodglen Vista Creek.

Construction-Related (Short-term): Potential short-term or temporary indirect impacts to least Bell’s vireo, yellow-breasted chat, yellow warbler, two-striped garter snake, Townsend’s big-eared bat, western yellow bat, and special-status plant species resulting from construction activities include the release of chemical pollutants; adverse effects from noise, vibration, and increased human presence; and nighttime lighting.

These potential construction-related indirect impacts would be potentially significant absent mitigation.

Project implementation of MM-BIO-1 (Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey) would reduce potential indirect impacts from construction noise to a less-than-significant level through performance of a nesting bird survey if construction occurs during the nesting season. If nesting least Bell’s vireo, yellow-breasted chat, and/or yellow warbler are identified, an adequate buffer will be implemented to ensure that effects from noise, vibration, and human presence are minimized. In addition, implementation of MM-BIO-2 (Construction-Related Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources) will minimize indirect impacts to least Bell’s vireo, yellow-breasted chat, yellow warbler, two-striped garter snake, Townsend’s big-eared bat, western yellow bat, and special-status plant species through biological monitoring, requiring a Worker Environmental Awareness Training that will cover the special-status resources and mitigation requirements for the Project, delineating Project boundaries, requiring that all vehicles and equipment be serviced in designated staging areas, and ensuring that construction will not be conducted at night. Project construction would be limited to the City’s allowable construction hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and is not anticipated to require lighting. In the event that construction lighting is required, it would be properly shielded to avoid spillover effects (MM-BIO2).

Implementation of MM-BIO-1 (Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey) and MM-BIO-2 (Construction-Related Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources) would minimize the effect of construction-related indirect impacts to special-status plant and wildlife species to less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Long-Term: Potential long-term, indirect impacts that could result from Project implementation to suitable foraging and nesting habitat for least Bell’s vireo, yellow-breasted chat, yellow warbler, two-striped garter snake, Townsend’s big-eared bat, western yellow bat, and special-status plants include chemical releases, such as oils and grease from vehicles that could degrade habitat; increased invasive plant species that may degrade habitat; and trampling of vegetation and soil compaction by humans, which could affect soil moisture, water penetration, surface flows, and erosion. These potential long-term indirect impacts would be potentially significant absent mitigation.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 33
DECEMBER 2025
The Project site is currently developed as a parking lot with landscaped features (i.e. planted trees) located throughout and a grassy field used for passive recreational activities. The proposed Project will also include landscaping (i.e. planted trees) surrounding the parking lot and Community Center, which shall be included in the Project’s Landscape Plan. Therefore, the Project’s proposed landscaping and subsequent irrigation needs would be similar to the site’s existing conditions. However, the proposed Project will convert the existing grassy recreation field into an additional parking lot resulting in an increase in the amount of impervious surfaces, which would likely reduce the amount of irrigation when compared with existing conditions and increase the amount of stormwater runoff. Increased moisture associated with irrigation and runoff can attract invasive species such as Argentine ants (Linepithema humile), which can displace native ants that are potential pollinators and seed dispersers for special-status plant species, displace native insects that are the main prey base for many special-status wildlife species, and possibly help promote other non-native invertebrates such as earwigs and sowbugs. However, because the Project’s landscaping irrigation would be similar to or reduced as compared to the existing conditions and the proposed project would include a series of catch basins, roof drainages and biofiltration basins to manage stormwater runoff, an increase in the potential indirect impacts to special-status species from Argentine ants is not anticipated.

Because the Project site is located within the City’s Town Center zone, there are existing ambient noise levels resulting from surrounding recreation activities (e.g., traffic, baseball fields, outdoor events). Projectrelated operational noise levels would be associated with increased traffic, HVAC systems, emergency generator, and indoor and outdoor events. Most of the proposed operational events would occur indoors and, according to Table 3.13-4 of this document, are predicted to be less than 60 A-weighted decibels (dBA) (Leq) along the edge of the Project site adjacent to Woodglen Vista Creek, which is typically used by the Wildlife Agencies (i.e. USFWS and CDFW) as the noise threshold for wildlife species. Occasionally there will be certain outdoor events (e.g. 4th of July fireworks show) that could result in noise levels exceeding the 60 dBA (leq)) threshold for a brief portion of the 24-hour day. However, special-status wildlife species are already being subjected to these types of occasional ambient noise levels from surrounding activities (e.g. the City’s 4th of July fireworks show, Summer Concerts, and outdoor movie events occurring immediately south of the Project site at the Town Center Community Park East site would also result in a similar noise level within Woodglen Vista Creek). Therefore, long-term operational noise impacts are less than significant.

The Project site and surrounding area contain existing sources of artificial nighttime light that are typical of an existing parking lot (e.g., streetlights, exterior building lights) and recreation fields (e.g., baseball field).

Implementation of MM-BIO-3 (Long-Term Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources) would minimize the effect of long-term indirect impacts from proposed lighting as it would be designed consistent with the requirements of Section 13.30.030(B) of the Santee Municipal Code, which states that lighting shall be shielded, or recessed, and directed downward and away from adjoining properties. Therefore, long-term lighting impacts are less than significant.

Implementation of MM-BIO-3 (Long-Term Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources) would minimize the effect of long-term indirect impacts to special-status plant and wildlife species by requiring measures to ensure runoff is not altered from existing conditions and toxicants are not discharged, preparation of landscaping plans that will emphasize native species and not include species from the California Invasive Plant Council’s Invasive Plant Inventory, and incorporation of barriers to prevent unauthorized public access to open space areas associated with

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 34
DECEMBER 2025
Woodglen Vista Creek. Therefore, long-term indirect impacts to special-status species would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
b) Would the project 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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The following analysis considers direct and indirect impacts associated with the project:

Direct Impacts
A total of 5.20 acres of urban/developed land cover would be permanently impacted with Project implementation (Appendix B). Communities listed by CDFW as high priority for inventory (i.e., State Rank 1, 2, or 3) are considered sensitive and typically require mitigation (CDFW 2023). There are no sensitive vegetation communities with CDFW state rankings of 1, 2, or 3 within the Project site and therefore no impacts would occur to sensitive vegetation communities with Project implementation.

Indirect Impacts
Project implementation has the potential to result in indirect impacts to sensitive vegetation communities occurring adjacent to the Project site.

Construction-Related (Short-term): Sensitive vegetation communities may be indirectly impacted during construction of the proposed Project. Potential short-term or temporary indirect impacts to sensitive vegetation communities resulting from construction activities include inadvertent spillover impacts, including unintentional clearing, trampling, or grading outside of the Project footprint; generation of fugitive dust; changes in hydrology resulting from construction, including sedimentation and erosion; the release of chemical pollutants; and the adverse effect of invasive plant species. These potential construction-related, indirect impacts to sensitive vegetation communities would be potentially significant absent mitigation.

Implementation of MM-BIO-2 (Construction-Related Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources) would minimize the effect of constructionrelated indirect impacts to sensitive vegetation communities to less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Long-Term: Potential long-term, indirect impacts that could result from development near sensitive vegetation communities include chemical releases, such as oils and grease from vehicles that could degrade habitat; increased invasive plant species that may degrade habitat; and trampling of vegetation and soil compaction by humans, which could affect soil moisture, water penetration, surface flows, and erosion. These potential long-term indirect impacts to sensitive vegetation communities would be potentially significant absent mitigation.

Implementation of MM-BIO-3 (Long-Term Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources) would minimize long-term indirect impacts by requiring measures to ensure runoff is not altered from existing conditions and toxicants are not discharged, preparation of landscaping plans that will emphasize native species and not include species from the

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 35
DECEMBER 2025
California Invasive Plant Council’s Invasive Plant Inventory, and incorporation of barriers to prevent unauthorized public access to open space areas associated with Woodglen Vista Creek. Therefore, longterm indirect impacts to sensitive vegetation communities would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The following analysis considers direct and indirect impacts associated with the project:

Direct Impacts
No jurisdictional aquatic resources, including state or federally protected wetlands, occur within the Project site (Appendix B). Therefore, no direct impacts to state or federally protected wetlands are anticipated with Project implementation, and no permits under Sections 401 or 404 of the CWA or under Sections 1600– 1616 of the California Fish and Game Code are required.

Indirect Impacts
Project implementation has the potential to result in indirect impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources occurring adjacent to the Project site associated with Woodglen Vista Creek.

Construction-Related (Short-term): Jurisdictional aquatic resources of the United States/state may be indirectly impacted during construction. Potential short-term or temporary indirect impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources resulting from construction activities include the generation of fugitive dust; changes in hydrology resulting from construction, including sedimentation and erosion; the release of chemical pollutants; and unintentional clearing, trampling, or grading outside of the proposed construction zone.

Construction-related indirect impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources would be potentially significant absent mitigation.

Implementation of MM-BIO-2 (Construction-Related Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources) would minimize construction-related indirect impacts through biological monitoring, requiring a Worker Environmental Awareness Training that will cover the special-status resources and mitigation requirements for the Project, delineating Project boundaries, implementing standard dust control measures, developing a stormwater pollution prevention plan, and requiring all vehicles and equipment to be serviced in designated staging areas. Therefore, construction-related indirect impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Long-Term: Potential long-term indirect impacts that could result from development near jurisdictional aquatic resources of the United States/state include pollutants that could degrade water quality and habitat; increased invasive plant species that may degrade habitat; and trampling of vegetation and soil compaction by humans, which could affect soil moisture, water penetration, surface flows, and erosion.

Long-term indirect impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources would be potentially significant absent mitigation.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 36
DECEMBER 2025
Implementation of MM-BIO-3 (Long-Term Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources) would minimize long-term indirect impacts by requiring measures to ensure runoff is not altered from existing conditions and toxicants are not discharged, restoration of temporary impacts, preparation of landscaping plans that will emphasize native species and not include species from the California Invasive Plant Council’s Invasive Plant Inventory, and incorporation of barriers to prevent unauthorized public access to areas with state and federally protected waterways.

Therefore, long-term indirect impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
d) Would the project 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?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The following analysis considers direct and indirect impacts associated with the project:

Direct Impacts
The Project site is currently developed as a parking lot and is not mapped as a core area or habitat linkage under the MSCP (City of San Diego 1998). Therefore, the Project site does not function as a wildlife corridor or habitat linkage. Therefore, no direct impacts are anticipated to wildlife corridors and/or habitat linkages with Project implementation.

Indirect Impacts
Project implementation has the potential to result in indirect impacts to Woodglen Vista Creek, which occurs adjacent to the Project site and may function as a local wildlife corridor with connectivity to the San Diego River. However, Woodglen Vista Creek is surrounded by urban portions of the City so it is only a marginally valuable, local wildlife corridor (e.g. used by local populations of common species such as coyote, raccoon, striped skunk, and Virginia opossum).

Construction-Related (Short-term): The Woodglen Vista Creek wildlife corridor may be indirectly impacted during construction of the proposed Project. Potential short-term or temporary indirect impacts to biological resources within the Woodglen Vista Creek wildlife corridor resulting from construction activities include inadvertent spillover impacts, including unintentional clearing, trampling, or grading outside of the Project footprint; generation of fugitive dust; changes in hydrology resulting from construction, including sedimentation and erosion; the release of chemical pollutants; and the adverse effects of invasive plant species. These potential construction-related, indirect impacts to the Woodglen Vista Creek wildlife corridor would be potentially significant absent mitigation.

Implementation of MM-BIO-2 (Construction-Related Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources) would minimize the effect of constructionrelated indirect impacts to the Woodglen Vista Creek wildlife corridor to less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Project construction would be limited to the City’s allowable construction hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and is not anticipated to require lighting. In the event that construction lighting is required, it would be properly shielded to avoid spillover effects (MM-BIO-2).

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 37
DECEMBER 2025
Long-Term: Potential long-term, indirect impacts that could result from development near the Woodglen Vista Creek wildlife corridor include chemical releases such as oils and grease from vehicles that could degrade habitat; increased invasive plant species that may degrade habitat; nighttime lighting; and trampling of vegetation and soil compaction by humans, which could affect soil moisture, water penetration, surface flows, and erosion. These potential long-term indirect impacts to the Woodglen Vista Creek wildlife corridor would be potentially significant absent mitigation.

Implementation of MM-BIO-3 (Long-Term Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources) would minimize the effect of long-term indirect impacts to the Woodglen Vista Creek wildlife corridor by requiring measures to ensure runoff is not altered from existing conditions and toxicants are not discharged, preparation of landscaping plans that will emphasize native species and not include species from the California Invasive Plant Council’s Invasive Plant Inventory, and incorporation of barriers to prevent unauthorized public access to open space areas associated with Woodglen Vista Creek. Therefore, long-term indirect impacts to wildlife corridors would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Because the Project site is located within the City’s Town Center zone, there are existing ambient noise levels resulting from surrounding recreation activities (e.g., traffic, baseball fields, outdoor events). Projectrelated operational noise levels would be associated with increased traffic, HVAC systems, emergency generator, and indoor and outdoor events. Most of the proposed operational events would occur indoors and, according to Table 3.13-4 of this document, are predicted to be less than 60 dBA (leq) along the edge of the Project site adjacent to Woodglen Vista Creek, which is typically used by the Wildlife Agencies (i.e.

USFWS and CDFW) as the noise threshold for wildlife species. Occasionally there will be certain outdoor events (e.g. 4th of July fireworks show) that could result in noise levels exceeding the 60 dBA (leq)) threshold for a brief portion of the 24-hour day. However, special-status wildlife species are already being subjected to these types of occasional ambient noise levels from surrounding activities (e.g. the City’s 4th of July fireworks show, Summer Concerts, and outdoor movie events occurring immediately south of the Project site at the Town Center Community Park East site would also result in a similar noise level within Woodglen Vista Creek). Therefore, long-term operational noise impacts are less than significant.

The Project site contains sources of artificial nighttime light that are typical of an existing parking lot (e.g., streetlights, exterior building lights). Implementation of MM-BIO-3 (Long-Term Indirect Impacts to SpecialStatus Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources) would minimize the effect of long-term indirect impacts from the Project’s lighting as it would be designed consistent with the requirements of Section 13.30.030(B) of the Santee Municipal Code, which states that lighting shall be shielded, or recessed, and directed downward and away from adjoining properties. Therefore, long-term lighting impacts are less than significant.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The City’s Urban Forestry Ordinance contains tree-related policies, regulations, and generally accepted standards for planting, trimming, and removing trees on public property and public rights-of-way (Santee Municipal Code, Section 8.06 [City of Santee 2020]). The ordinance gives the City control of all trees, shrubs, and other plantings in any street, park, public right-of-

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 38
DECEMBER 2025
way, landscape maintenance district or easement, or other City-owned property. City staff review of development plans for the City-owned and maintained property would ensure that the proposed landscaping and maintenance requirements conform to the Urban Forestry Ordinance. The proposed site plan would require removal of existing City-owned trees. As such, tree replacement would occur at a 1:1 mitigation ratio with 15-gallon trees, as directed by MM-BIO-4 (Tree Replacement, Encroachment, and Preservation). Additionally, measures to minimize damage to the encroachment and preserved trees, as well as recommendations for long-term maintenance and care for trees that will be retained on site, would be included in the Project’s Landscape Plan. Therefore, the proposed Project would comply with the Urban Forestry Ordinance, and impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

In the Conservation Element of the City of Santee General Plan, biological resources are discussed, and specific objectives and policies are presented (City of Santee 2003). The proposed Project does not conflict with any objectives or policies as presented in the Conservation Element of the General Plan. Therefore, impacts to local policies and ordinances would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The Project site is within the boundaries of the MSCP Plan (City of San Diego 1998). The Draft Santee MSCP Subarea Plan would serve as a habitat conservation plan under the MSCP Plan (City of San Diego 1998) pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of FESA, and as a Natural Community Conservation Plan pursuant to the California Natural Community Conservation Planning Act of 1991. The Draft Santee MSCP Subarea Plan, once finalized, will contribute to the regional MSCP for preservation, mitigation for impacts, and conservation of sensitive biological resources within San Diego County. The Draft Santee MSCP Subarea Plan is also intended to provide cumulative mitigation for impacts to covered species within the City’s jurisdiction, as long as projects are consistent with and covered by provisions of the Santee MSCP Subarea Plan, and to ensure sufficient biological resources are conserved to assist in the conservation and recovery of covered species under the MSCP.

Although the Draft Santee MSCP Subarea Plan has not yet been approved or permitted, it is used as the guidance document for projects occurring within the City. All Project impacts would occur outside of the Draft Santee MSCP Subarea Plan Preserve area. Additionally, MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-3 are proposed to prevent any direct or indirect impacts to special-status species, sensitive vegetation communities, and/or jurisdictional aquatic resources. Furthermore, Project implementation would not conflict with the provisions of the MSCP Plan or Draft Santee MSCP Subarea Plan, nor would it prevent the Draft Santee MSCP Subarea Plan from being approved or compromise continued implementation of the MSCP in San Diego County.

Therefore, impacts to habitat conservation plans would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Project Design Feature
PDF-BIO-1 Bird Safe Buildings. All new building development shall provide bird-safe building design features in order to reduce the potential for bird strikes. Project design features include incorporating glazing treatments on the building façade to ensure that large areas of glass are visible to birds.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 39
DECEMBER 2025
Mitigation Measures
MM-BIO-1 Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey. Construction within all potential nesting resource areas within the Project site (i.e., ornamental trees) and areas of the Project site within 500 feet of the Woodglen Vista Creek should be avoided during the migratory bird nesting season (typically January 1 through September 30). If construction activities (i.e., grading, tree removal, external construction involving heavy equipment generating noise in excess of 60 A-weighted decibels [dBA] (leq)) must occur during the bird nesting season, an avian nesting survey of all potential nesting resource areas (e.g., ornamental trees) within the Project site and areas of the Woodglen Vista Creek within 500 feet of all impact areas must be conducted to determine the presence/absence of special-status species, protected migratory birds, and active nests. If least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens), and/or yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia) are identified during the surveys, then noise attenuation measures shall be required to ensure that noise levels from construction do not exceed a 60 dBA hourly average per hour at the edge of the riparian habitat or to the ambient noise level if it exceeds 60 dBA prior to construction.

Construction noise monitoring shall be required to verify that noise levels at the edge of occupied habitat are maintained below 60 dBA hourly average unless an analysis completed by a qualified acoustician shows that noise generated by construction activities would not exceed 60 dBA hourly average at the edge of occupied habitat.

The avian nesting survey shall be performed by a qualified wildlife biologist within 14 days prior to the start of construction and one more survey pass within 24 hours of initiation of construction activities in accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513. If construction activities are on hold for more than 30 days, then pre-construction surveys would need to be reinitiated. If an active bird nest is found, the nest shall be flagged and mapped on the construction plans, along with an appropriate buffer established around the nest, which will be determined by the biologist based on the species’ sensitivity to disturbance (typically 300 feet for passerines and 500 feet for raptors and special-status species), existing nearby conditions (e.g., natural habitat versus roads or existing noisy activities), existing buffering features (e.g., topography, tall and dense trees, buildings), legal status of species (i.e., listed versus non-listed), general sensitivities of the species (e.g., disturbance tolerant or urban versus non disturbance tolerant), and other variables. The nest area shall be avoided until the nest is vacated and the juveniles have fledged. The nest area shall be demarcated in the field with flagging and stakes or construction fencing. On-site construction monitoring shall also be conducted when an active nest buffer is in place. No Project activities shall encroach into established buffers without the consent of a monitoring biologist. The buffer shall remain in place until it is determined that the nestlings have fledged and the nest is no longer active.

MM-BIO-2 Construction-Related Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources. Prior to the issuance of a notice to proceed to the Contractor and prior to the commencement of any construction, construction plans shall include the following to address potential indirect

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 40
DECEMBER 2025
impacts to special-status species occurring within all suitable habitat associated with the Woodglen Vista Creek (i.e., within 500 feet of the Project site):
• Biological Monitoring. A qualified Project biologist approved by the City of Santee shall monitor ground-disturbing and vegetation-clearing activities for the duration of the Project construction to ensure that practicable measures are being employed to avoid incidental disturbance of habitat, species of concern, and other sensitive biological resources outside the Project footprint. Once ground-disturbing and vegetationclearing activities are complete, the Project biologist shall conduct weekly checks to inspect construction fencing and ensure that all applicable requirements from the mitigation measures are being upheld until construction is completed. • Worker Environmental Awareness Training. Prior to grading, a pre-construction meeting shall be required that includes a training session for Project personnel by a qualified biologist. The training shall include (1) a description of the species of concern and its habitats; (2) the general provisions of the applicable regulations pertaining to biological resources, including the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act; (3) the need to adhere to the provisions of the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and other applicable regulations; (4) the penalties associated with violating the provisions of the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, and other applicable regulations; (5) the general measures that are being implemented to conserve the species of concern as they relate to the Project; and (6) the access routes to and Project site boundaries within which the Project activities must be accomplished.

Additionally, the training shall include the measures and mitigation requirements for the applicable resources. Copies of the mitigation measures and any required permits from the resource agencies shall be made available to construction personnel. • Delineation of Property Boundaries. Before beginning activities that would cause impacts, the contractor shall, in consultation with the biological monitor, clearly delineate the boundaries with fencing, stakes, or flags, consistent with the grading plan, within which the impacts will take place. All impacts outside the fenced, staked, or flagged areas shall be avoided, and all fencing, stakes, and flags shall be maintained until the completion of impacts in that area. In addition, any avoided environmental resources shall be clearly delineated. Prior to implementing construction activities, the biological monitor shall verify that the flagging clearly delineates the construction limits and any sensitive environmental resources to be avoided.
• Standard Dust Control Measures. Standard dust control measures as per the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District shall be implemented to reduce impacts on nearby plants and wildlife. Measures include controlling speed to 15 miles per hour or less on unpaved roads, replacing ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible, frequently watering active work sites, installing shaker plates, and suspending excavation and grading operations during periods of high winds. • Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Prior to the issuance of a notice to proceed to the Contractor and prior to the commencement of any construction, the Contractor shall submit a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) to the City of Santee that specifies best management practices to prevent all construction pollutants from

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 41
DECEMBER 2025
contacting stormwater, with the intent of keeping sedimentation or any other pollutants from moving off site and into receiving waters. The requirements of the SWPPP shall be incorporated into design specifications and construction contracts.

Best management practice categories employed on site shall include erosion control, sediment control, and non-stormwater good housekeeping. Best management practices recommended for the construction phase shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
- Limiting grading to the minimum area necessary for construction, operation, and decommissioning of the Project
- Limiting vegetation disturbance/removal to the maximum extent practicable - Implementing fiber rolls and sandbags around drainage areas and the site perimeter
- Stockpiling and disposing of demolition debris, concrete, and soil properly - Installing a stabilized construction entrance/exit and stabilizing disturbed areas - Installing proper protections for fueling and maintaining equipment and vehicles - Managing waste, aggressively controlling litter, and implementing sediment controls
- Stabilizing soil in disturbed areas through revegetation The following water quality measures shall be included in the SWPPP:
• Erodible fill material shall not be deposited into water courses. Brush, loose soils, or other similar debris material shall not be stockpiled within the stream channel or on its banks.
• The Project shall be designed to avoid the placement of equipment and personnel within the stream channel or on sand and gravel bars, banks, and adjacent upland habitats used by target species of concern, as feasible. Project activities that cannot be conducted without placing equipment or personnel in sensitive habitats shall be timed to avoid the breeding season of riparian species. • Water pollution and erosion control plans shall be developed and implemented in accordance with the Regional Water Quality Control Board. • Minimize Spills of Hazardous Materials. All vehicles and equipment shall be maintained in proper condition to minimize the potential for fugitive emissions of motor oil, antifreeze, hydraulic fluid, grease, or other hazardous materials.

Hazardous spills shall be immediately cleaned up and the contaminated soil shall be properly handled and disposed of at a licensed facility. Servicing of construction equipment shall take place only at a designated staging area. The staging area will be located on the south side of the Project site, away from Woodglen Vista Creek, and no stockpiles will be allowed adjacent to Woodglen Vista Creek. • Wildlife Hazards. The following measures shall be implemented to ensure that wildlife do not become trapped, entangled, injured, or poisoned by construction activities:

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 42
DECEMBER 2025
o Structures in which wildlife may become trapped (e.g., open pipes, pits, trenches) shall be tightly covered at the end of each work day. If covering the structure is not possible, an escape ramp shall be provided to allow any wildlife that falls in to safely escape.
o Debris piles, construction materials, equipment, and other items that may be used as wildlife refuge shall be inspected for wildlife at the start of each work day and prior to disturbance. If wildlife is discovered, it shall either be moved out of harm’s way by a qualified biologist or allowed to move off of the Project site on its own.
o Nets and mesh shall be made of loose weave material that is not fused at the intersections of the weave because nets with welded weaves present an entanglement risk.
o Toxic materials and garbage shall be removed from the work site and safely stored or disposed of at the end of each work day. • Invasive Weeds. To reduce the spread of invasive plant species, landscape plants shall not be on the most recent version of the California Invasive Plant Council’s Invasive Plant Inventory (https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/inventory/). • Night Work. All construction activities shall be conducted during the daytime, and lights shall not be kept on overnight in the construction area, as practicable. If night lighting is required during construction activities, all exterior lighting along undeveloped land shall be fully shielded and directed downward in a manner that will prevent light spillage or glare into the adjacent open space.

MM-BIO-3 Long-Term Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources. Prior to the issuance of a notice to proceed to the Contractor and prior to the commencement of any construction, construction plans shall include the following to address potential indirect impacts to special-status species occurring within all suitable habitat associated with Woodglen Vista Creek (i.e., within 500 feet of the Project site):
• Runoff. Future development within 500 feet of suitable habitat for special-status species shall incorporate measures, including measures required through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, to ensure that the quantity and quality of runoff discharged is not altered in an adverse way when compared with existing conditions. In particular, measures shall be put in place to avoid discharge of untreated surface runoff from developed and paved areas into open space or suitable habitat for special-status species. Stormwater systems shall be designed to prevent the release of toxins, chemicals, petroleum products, exotic plant materials, or other elements that might degrade or harm biological resources or ecosystem processes. This can be accomplished using a variety of methods, including natural detention basins, grass swales, or mechanical trapping devices. Regular maintenance shall occur to ensure effective operation of runoff control systems.
• Lighting. Project lighting would be designed consistent with the requirements of Section 13.30.030(B) of the Santee Municipal Code. Night lighting shall be directed away from open space and/or suitable habitat for special-status species to protect

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 43
DECEMBER 2025
species from direct night lighting. Shielding shall be incorporated in Project designs to ensure that ambient lighting is not increased.
• Invasive Species. Landscape Plans shall incorporate native species that occur in the region. Invasive, non-native plant species listed on the most recent California Invasive Plant Council’s Invasive Plant Inventory (https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/inventory/) with a rating of moderate or high shall not be included in landscaping. • Barriers. The proposed Project shall incorporate barriers, where appropriate, to minimize unauthorized public access, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass, or dumping in open space and/or suitable habitat for special-status wildlife (e.g., Woodglen Vista Creek). Such barriers may include native landscaping, rocks/boulders, fencing, walls, signage, and/or other appropriate mechanisms.

MM-BIO-4 Tree Replacement, Encroachment, and Preservation. Prior to the issuance of a notice to proceed to the Contractor and prior to the commencement of any construction, construction plans and the Project’s Landscape Plan shall include the following to address tree removal, encroachment into protected zone, and retained trees:
• Replacement. The proposed site plan would require removal of City of Santee–owned trees. Tree replacement shall occur at a 1:1 mitigation ratio with 15-gallon trees and be included in the Project’s Landscape Plan, which shall also include recommendations for long-term maintenance and care for regulated trees that will be retained on site.
• Encroachment into Protected Zone and Retained Trees. Additionally, tree protection measures shall be provided in the Project’s Landscape Plan and designed to mitigate impacts from construction encroachment into the protected zone of any preserved and/or encroached upon City of Santee–owned trees. These tree protection measures shall be consistent with best management practices for tree protection on construction sites and would help minimize impacts to any preserved and/or encroached City of Santee–owned trees. These measures shall be implemented prior to, during, and following construction. This includes measures such as exclusion fencing and worker training to avoid direct impacts to trees, and measures such as irrigation and monthly inspections by a Certified Arborist to promote the long-term health of retained trees.

3.5 Cultural Resources

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 44
DECEMBER 2025

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
No Impact. The term “historical resources” applies to any such resource that is at least 50 years old and is listed or determined eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. The project site is currently developed as a parking lot with several landscape features located throughout and a grassy field used for passive recreational activity. As detailed in the Archaeological Resources Inventory Report (Appendix C), between 2005 and 2009, the project area4 was graded and developed into the parking lot for the YMCA. Additionally, the surrounding area was also disturbed by mass grading activities for development of the Town Center Community Park. Further, no historic structural resources have historically been located or are currently located on the project site (see Appendix C, Archaeological Resources Inventory Report). No significant prehistoric or historic cultural resources have been previously recorded within or immediately adjacent to the project area. Therefore, the project would not affect a known historical resource, resulting in no impact.
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. As detailed in the Archaeological Resources Inventory Report (Appendix C), Dudek performed a California Historical Resources Information Systems records search of the project area and a 1-mile radius at the South Coastal Information Center on October 10, 2022. The records search results revealed that 71 previous archaeological resources studies have been conducted within 1-mile of the project area. Of the 71 previous studies, 4 studies intersect the project area. Overall, the entire project area has been previously studied and resulted in negative results in the project area. This includes the 2007 monitoring reports (SD-11189 and SD-11190) for the Town Center Community Park Mass Grading, which includes all of the project area. No archaeological resources were found during this monitoring. The South Coastal Information Center records search and the site visit did not identify any archaeological resources within the project area; however, 14 archaeological resources were identified within the 1-mile radius. The review of aerial photographs also reveals the project area has been disturbed by mass grading activities. The previous development of the project area for the Town Center Community Park was monitored for cultural resources and yielded negative results. Additionally, Dudek performed a pedestrian survey of the proposed project area on November 7, 2022, that confirmed the project area has been completely developed and did not identify any archaeological resources. 4 The project area in Appendix C includes an earlier version of the project boundary, which was only 1.1 acres of the current 5.2 acres project site. However, the Archaeological Resources Inventory Report included a 1-mile radius records search and discusses the conditions of the surrounding area, therefore covering the current project boundary.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 45
DECEMBER 2025
Although the project site is currently developed, there is still the potential for buried and/or surface prehistoric and historic resources to be encountered. Therefore, the project will also adhere to MM-CUL-2, which states that a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be present during ground disturbing activities. Further, the project will adhere to MM-CUL-1, which states that in the event that archaeological resources (sites, features, or artifacts) are exposed during construction activities for the project, all work within the vicinity of the find must stop until a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards can evaluate the significance of the find. Construction activities may continue in other areas but should be redirected a safe distance from the find. If the new discovery is evaluated and found to be significant under CEQA and avoidance is not feasible, additional work such as data recovery may be warranted. A data recovery plan shall be developed by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the City and Native American representatives, if applicable. Ground disturbance can continue only after the resource has been properly mitigated and with approval by the City.

With the inclusion of MM-CUL-1 and MM-CUL-2, potential project impacts to any previously undiscovered archaeological resources would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. While there are no formal cemeteries or recorded burials in the vicinity of the project area, prehistoric burials are possible. In the unlikely event that unknown human burials are encountered during project grading and construction, they would be handled in accordance with procedures of Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, California Government Code Section 27491, and Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. These regulations detail specific procedures to follow in the event of a discovery of human remains. Compliance with these regulations would reduce impacts to a level of less than significant. Implementation of MM-CUL-2 would further reduce impacts to a level of less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
MM-CUL-1 Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological Resources. If potential archaeological resources are uncovered during grading, the Applicant shall be required to halt all construction work occurring within 100 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards can evaluate the material to determine whether it is a “unique cultural resource” as defined in Section 21083.2 (g) of the CEQA Statutes. If the new discovery is evaluated and found to be significant under CEQA and avoidance is not feasible, additional work such as data recovery may be warranted. A data recovery plan shall be developed by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the City and Native American representatives, if applicable. round disturbance can continue only after the resources has been properly mitigated and with approval by the City.

MM-CUL-2 Archaeological Monitoring. The qualified archaeologist, or an archaeological monitor (working under the direct supervision of the qualified archaeologist), shall observe all initial ground-disturbing activities, including but not limited to brush clearance, vegetation removal, grubbing, grading, and excavation. The qualified archaeologist, in coordination with the applicant and the City, may reduce or discontinue monitoring if it is determined by the qualified archaeologist that the possibility of encountering buried archaeological deposits is low based on observations of soil stratigraphy or other factors. Archaeological

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 46
DECEMBER 2025
monitoring shall be conducted by an archaeologist familiar with the types of archaeological resources that could be encountered within the project site. The archaeological monitor shall be empowered to halt or redirect ground-disturbing activities away from the vicinity of a discovery until the qualified archaeologist has evaluated the discovery and determined appropriate treatment (as prescribed below). The archaeological monitor shall keep daily logs detailing the types of activities and soils observed, and any discoveries. After monitoring has been completed, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare a monitoring report that details the results of monitoring. The report shall be submitted to the City and any Native American groups who request a copy. A copy of the final report shall be filed at the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC).

A Native American Monitor of Kumeyaay descent shall be present for any pre-construction meeting and for all ground disturbing activities associated with the project. Should any cultural or tribal cultural resources be discovered, no further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the City Planner, or designee, with concurrence from the Native American Monitor, are satisfied that treatment of the resource has occurred. In the event that a unique archaeological resource or tribal cultural resource is discovered, and in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b)(1), (2), and (4), the resource shall be moved and buried in an open space area of the Project site, such as slope areas, which will not be subject to further grading activity, erosion, flooding, or any other ground disturbance that has the potential to expose the resource. The on-site area to which the resource is moved shall be protected in perpetuity as permanent open space. No identification of the resource shall be made on-site; however, the Applicant shall plot the new location of the resource on a map showing latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates and provide that map to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for inclusion in the Sacred Lands File (SLF). Disposition of the resources shall be at the discretion of the City of Santee, but in accordance with the foregoing.

In the event of the unanticipated discovery of archaeological materials, all work shall immediately cease in the area (within 100 feet) of the discovery until it can be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the Native American monitor.

Construction shall not resume until the qualified archaeologist has conferred with the applicant and the City on the significance of the resource.

If it is determined that the discovered archaeological resource constitutes a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource under CEQA, avoidance and preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigation. Preservation in place may be accomplished by, but is not limited to, avoidance, incorporating the resource into open space, capping, or deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement. In the event that preservation in place is demonstrated to be infeasible and data recovery through excavation is the only feasible mitigation available, a Cultural Resources Treatment Plan shall be prepared and implemented by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the applicant and the City that provides for the adequate recovery of the scientifically consequential information contained in the archaeological resource. The qualified archaeologist and the City shall consult with appropriate Native American representatives in determining treatment for

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 47
DECEMBER 2025
prehistoric or Native American resources to ensure cultural values ascribed to the resources, beyond those which are scientifically important, are considered.

If human remains are encountered, all work shall halt in the vicinity (within 100 feet) of the discovery and the San Diego County Coroner will be contacted in accordance with PRC Section 5097.98 and Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. The applicant and the City will also be notified. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are Native American, the NAHC will be notified in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, subdivision (c), and PRC Section 5097.98 (as amended by AB 2641). The NAHC will designate a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the remains per PRC Section 5097.98.

The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of being granted access and shall provide recommendations for the treatment of the remains. Until the landowner has conferred with the MLD, the applicant will ensure that the immediate vicinity where the discovery occurred is not disturbed by further activity, is adequately protected according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices.

3.6 Energy

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VI. Energy – Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less-than-Significant Impact. The project would result in an increase in energy consumption during construction and operation, which are addressed separately below.

Construction Emissions
Electricity Usage
Temporary electric power for as-necessary lighting and electronic equipment, such as computers inside temporary construction trailers, would be provided by San Diego Gas and Electric. The electricity used for such activities would be temporary, would be substantially less than that required for project operation, and would therefore have a negligible contribution to the project’s overall energy consumption.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 48
DECEMBER 2025
Natural Gas Usage
Natural gas is not expected to be required during project construction. Fuels used for construction would primarily consist of diesel and gasoline, which are discussed under the following subsection Petroleum Usage.

Any minor amounts of natural gas that may be consumed because of project construction would be temporary and negligible, and would not have an adverse effect; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Petroleum Usage
Petroleum would be consumed throughout construction of the project. Fuel consumed by construction equipment would be the primary energy resource expended over the course of construction, and VMT associated with the transportation of construction materials and construction worker commutes would also result in petroleum consumption. Heavy-duty construction equipment associated with construction activities and haul trucks involved in relocating dirt around the project site are assumed to use diesel fuel.

Construction workers would travel to and from the project site throughout the duration of construction (approximately 14 months). It is assumed that construction workers would travel to and from the project site in gasoline-powered vehicles.

Heavy-duty construction equipment of several types would be used during project construction. CalEEMod was used to estimate construction equipment usage; results are included in Appendix A. The estimated diesel fuel usage from construction equipment, haul trucks, and vendor trucks is estimated at 32,886 gallons of diesel fuel. The total fuel usage associated with worker vehicles is estimated at 1,531 gallons of gasoline. Project construction would represent a “single-event” petroleum demand and would not require ongoing or permanent commitment of petroleum resources for this purpose. The Project would not be unusual as compared to overall local and regional demand for energy resources and would not involve characteristics that require equipment that would be less energy efficient than that found at comparable construction sites in the region or state. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.

Operational Emissions
Electricity Usage
The operational phase would require electricity for multiple purposes, including Community Center building heating and cooling, lighting, and electronics, and EV charging stations. CalEEMod was used to estimate project emissions from electricity uses (see Appendix A). Default electricity generation rates in CalEEMod were used based on the proposed land use and climate zone. Note that the project would include installing solar PV systems sized to meet the Sustainable Santee Action Plan Project Consistency Checklist item of 2 kW per 2,000 square feet.

Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations serves to enhance and regulate California building standards.

The most recent amendments to Title 24, Part 6, referred to as the 2022 standards, became effective on January 1, 2023. According to CalEEMod estimates, the proposed project would consume 266,720 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year during operation. The project would include solar PV systems pursuant to the Sustainable Santee Action Plan that generate at least 2 kW per square foot of building area for a total of 18.75 kW of solar PV based on 12,500 sq. ft./ (2,000 sq. ft./3 kW) (City of Santee 2019). The project would generate a minimum of 32,228 kWh of electricity per year (NREL 2023). For context, in 2022,

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 49
DECEMBER 2025
California used approximately 288 billion kWh of electricity (CEC 2024a). In 2022, total electricity demand in the County was approximately 20.2 billion kWh (CEC 2024a).

The project would involve the operation of a Community Center reflecting contemporary energy efficient/ energy conserving designs and operational programs. Uses proposed by the project are not inherently energy intensive, and the project electricity demands in total would be comparable to other projects of similar scale and configuration. Additionally, the project would be required to comply with the applicable Title 24 standards, which would further ensure that the project energy demands would not be inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary, and impacts would be less than significant.

Natural Gas Usage
The operation would require natural gas for various purposes, including water heating and natural gas appliances. Natural gas consumption associated with operation is based on the CalEEMod outputs presented in Appendix A; CalEEMod default values for natural gas usage were assumed for the project. This analysis provides a conservative estimate of natural gas usage.

As previously explained, Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations serves to enhance and regulate California’s building standards, and 2022 standards are the current standards. According to CalEEMod estimates, the proposed project would consume 400,287 kilo-British thermal units (kBtus) per year. For context, in 2022, California consumed approximately 1,171 trillion kBtus of natural gas (CEC 2024b). In 2021, residential and non-residential uses in the County consumed about 52 trillion kBtu of natural gas (CEC 2024b). As supported by the preceding discussions, project natural gas consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary, and impacts would be less than significant.

Petroleum Usage
During operations, most of the project’s fuel consumption would involve the use of motor vehicles traveling to and from the project site by employees and visitors.

Petroleum fuel consumption associated with motor vehicles traveling to and from the project site is a function of the VMT due to project operation. As shown in Appendix A, the annual VMT attributable to the proposed project were estimated based on project-specific trip generation information and CalEEMod default values for the proposed land use. Like the construction worker and truck trips, fuel consumption from those utilizing the Community Center and employees is estimated by converting the total carbon dioxide emissions from operation of the project to gallons using the conversion factors for carbon dioxide to gallons of gasoline or diesel. Based on the annual fleet mix provided in CalEEMod, approximately 81% of the fleet are assumed to run on gasoline, while the remaining 19% are assumed to run on diesel. In the first year of assumed operations (2026), the proposed project would consume approximately 144,784 gallons of gasoline and 30,601 gallons of diesel from vehicle travel.

Trip generation and VMT generated by the project are consistent with other community uses of similar scale and configuration. That is, the project does not propose uses or operations that would inherently result in excessive and wasteful vehicle trips and VMT or associated excess and wasteful vehicle energy consumption.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 50
DECEMBER 2025
Enhanced fuel economies realized pursuant to federal and state regulatory actions and the related transition of vehicles to alternative energy sources (e.g., electricity, natural gas, biofuels, hydrogen cells) would decrease future gasoline fuel demands per VMT. The project would implement sidewalks, facilitating and encouraging pedestrian access. As supported by the preceding discussions, project transportation energy consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary, and impacts would be less than significant.

Renewable Energy Potential
Regarding solar power, the project would install solar PV systems, consistent with the CAP requirements, on the 12,500-square-foot building area. Based on the CAP requirements, the system would be sized to generate 32,228 kWh per year. While battery storage for the project has not been proposed at this time, the project does not preclude installation of battery storage in the future, if determined to be a feasible and compatible land use of the site.

The project would use renewable energy on site as determined to be feasible and would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, including electricity, natural gas, or petroleum during project construction or operation. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less-than-Significant Impact. The project would be subject to and would comply with, at a minimum, the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (24 CCR, Part 6). Part 6 of Title 24 establishes energy efficiency standards for residential and nonresidential buildings constructed in California to reduce energy demand and consumption. The proposed project would also be subject to Part 11 of Title 24, also known as the CALGreen building standards. Furthermore, the project would be consistent with the City’s CAP Consistency Checklist measures, such as through its implementation of PV panels, which would further reduce operational energy use. The proposed project would be built and operated in accordance with all existing applicable regulations at the time of construction. For the reasons stated, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact associated with the potential to conflict with energy standards and regulations.

3.7 Geology and Soils

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 51
DECEMBER 2025

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
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.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
of topsoil?
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?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or
indirect risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
a) Would the project 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. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project site, like all of southern California, is located within a seismically active region that contains major active faults. The project would likely be exposed to seismic ground shaking should a seismic event occur in the region. The intensity of ground shaking at any specific

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 52
DECEMBER 2025
location within the region depends on the characteristics of the earthquakes, the distance from the earthquake epicenter, and the local geologic and soil conditions. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zoning Act (Alquist-Priolo Act) requires the delineation of fault zones along active faults in California. The purpose of the Alquist-Priolo Act is to regulate development on or near active fault traces to reduce hazards associated with fault rupture. The proposed project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The closest known active fault is the Mission Gorge Fault located approximately 6.5 miles away from the project site (Appendix D, Geotechnical Report). The proposed project would include the construction of a Community Center, which would be designed in accordance with all applicable provisions established in the current California Building Code, which sets forth specific engineering requirements to ensure structural integrity during a seismic event. Compliance with these requirements would reduce the potential risk to both people and structures with respect to strong seismic activity. Impacts would be less than significant. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. Liquefaction occurs when partially saturated soil loses its effective stress and enters a liquid state, which can result in the soil’s inability to support structures above.

Liquefaction can be induced by ground-shaking events and is dependent on soil saturation conditions. The project site is mapped within a liquefaction zone identified by the City on the Geotechnical/Seismic Hazard Map in the General Plan (City of Santee 2003). The Geotechnical Investigation Report (see Appendix D) prepared for the proposed project determined the project site is considered to have a moderate to high liquefaction potential because potentially liquefiable soils are present at the site between a depth of 14.5 and 28 feet below ground surface that could result in approximately 4 inches of liquefaction-induced settlement and a seismic differential settlement on the order of 2 inches. The Geotechnical Investigation Report recommends measures including post-tension slabs, mat foundations, and ground improvement to mitigate the potential effects of the total and differential settlements. Implementation of MM-GEO-1, which would require compliance with all applicable recommendations of the Geotechnical Investigation Report and the latest adopted version of the California Building Code, would reduce impacts associated with seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, to a less-than-significant level. Additionally, MM-GEO-1 would be consistent with the provisions of Municipal Code 15.58.120, which requires compliance with the recommendations of the geotechnical investigation. iv) Landslides?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The project site is mapped as marginally susceptible to landslide based on the City of Santee General Plan Geotechnical/Seismic Hazard Map (Appendix D). The project site has an elevation of approximately 345 feet above mean sea level. The southern and eastern limits of the property have slopes approximately 7 feet high that descend into the San Diego River.

Implementation of MM-GEO-1 would reduce impacts associated with landslides and/or rockfall to a level less than significant
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less-than-Significant Impact. Prior to construction, the project applicant shall prepare a site-specific stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) consistent with the State Water Resources Control Board Construction General Permit as a condition of approval. The SWPPP shall describe best management practices (BMPs) to be used during construction to prevent discharge of sediment and other pollutants in stormwater runoff from the project site. Typical construction BMPs include silt fencing, fiber rolls, and

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 53
DECEMBER 2025
sweeping. Specific BMPs would be determined by the project contractor and engineer based on site-specific conditions. As part of the project, the contractor will monitor the construction BMPs, including conducting routine inspections of disturbed areas to ensure that the BMPs remain intact and effective. Adherence to these BMPs would ensure that the construction would not result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil, and impacts would be less than significant.

The proposed project would also include post-construction, permanent BMPs, such as a series of catch basins, roof drainages and biofiltration basins located throughout the site and would use the existing earthen swale along the site’s eastern and southern perimeter to manage stormwater runoff (Appendix F).

These post-construction BMPs would meet the City’s requirements and would be consistent with the County’s 2020 BMP Design Manual. The City would be responsible for monitoring the effectiveness of the permanent BMPs in accordance with the Stormwater Management Plan. Implementation of the postconstruction BMPs and adherence to these requirements would be adequate to reduce potential impacts related to erosion or loss of topsoil during operation. Thus, impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project 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?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. As discussed in response to Threshold 3.7 (a) iii) and iv), implementation of MM-GEO-1 would reduce impacts associated with potential geologic hazards related to landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse to a level less than significant. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. Moderately expansive soils are present on the project site (Appendix D). To limit the potential effects on project-related infrastructure, MM-GEO-1 would be implemented. MM-GEO-1 would require the project to employ all applicable recommendations in the Geotechnical Investigation Report and provisions and standard engineering protocols established in the current California Building Code, including remedial grading to remove expansive materials, or alternatively, designing the foundation to resist these expansion pressures. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. Implementation of the project would not require a septic tank or alternative wastewater disposal system. The project would be served by existing public sewers within the Padre Dam Municipal Water District’s sewer system. Thus, no impact would result. f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains of organisms from prehistoric environments found in geologic strata. These resources are valued for the information they yield about the earth’s history and its past ecological settings. The potential for fossil

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 54
DECEMBER 2025
occurrence depends on the rock type exposed at the surface in a given area. In general, the project site is underlain at depth by early Cretaceous age undivided tonalite and granodiorite (Map Symbol – Kgr, referred to as Granitic Rock in this report) covered by Holocene young alluvial deposits (Map Symbol – Qya) (Appendix D). While it is possible that paleontological resources could be discovered during construction activities, it is unlikely due to the previous disturbance and development that have occurred in the project area. Consequently, it is unlikely that paleontological resources would be located beneath the project site.

However, with the inclusion of MM-GEO-2, potential project impacts to any previously undiscovered paleontological resources would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature, and impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

Mitigation Measures
MM-GEO-1 Geotechnical/Geological Engineering Recommendations. Prior to any grounddisturbing construction activities, the project applicant shall incorporate the recommendations of the geotechnical/geological engineering studies prepared by Group Delta Consultants Inc. (March 18, 2022) into project plans related to the proposed project.

The project’s building plans shall demonstrate that they incorporate all applicable recommendations of the design-level geotechnical study and comply with all applicable requirements of the latest adopted version of the California Building Code. A licensed professional engineer shall prepare the plans, including those that pertain to soil engineering, structural foundations, pipeline excavation, and installation. All on-site soil engineering activities shall be conducted under the supervision of a licensed geotechnical engineer or certified engineering geologist.

MM-GEO-2 Inadvertent Discovery. Prior to ground-disturbing activities, the qualified paleontologist shall conduct a WEAT (worker environmental awareness training) for the construction crew members informing them of the potential to inadvertently encounter paleontological resources and the proper procedures to be enacted in the event of an inadvertent discovery. A qualified project paleontologist is a person with a doctorate or master’s degree in paleontology or related field and who has knowledge of the County of San Diego paleontology and documented experience in professional paleontological procedures and techniques. The applicant shall ensure that construction personnel attend the training and sign an attendance acknowledgement form. The applicant shall retain documentation demonstrating attendance. The qualified paleontologist shall observe all initial ground disturbing activities including grading and excavation. The qualified paleontologist, in coordination with the applicant and the City, may reduce or discontinue monitoring if it is determined by the qualified paleontologist that the possibility of encountering buried paleontological resources is low based on observations of soil stratigraphy or other factors.

In the unlikely event that paleontological resources (i.e., fossils) are exposed during construction activities, all construction work occurring within 50 feet of the find shall immediately stop and the lead agency representative contacted. The qualified vertebrate paleontologist meeting the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards, shall be assigned to review the unanticipated find to determine the significance. If the discovery proves potentially significant under CEQA as determined by the qualified vertebrate paleontologist, and the area cannot be feasibly avoided, additional work, such as preparation of a

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 55
DECEMBER 2025
Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program and paleontological monitoring shall be warranted.

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
The Sustainable Santee Action Plan Project Consistency Checklist is intended to be a tool for development projects to demonstrate consistency with the City’s Sustainable Santee Plan (City of Santee 2019), which is a GHG emissions reduction plan in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5. Therefore, the Checklist is used to determine significance in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5, and the Checklist was used to evaluate the project’s significance with respect to GHG emissions. Construction and operational GHG emissions are quantified herein for informational purposes only.
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b) Would the project generate conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The Sustainable Santee Action Plan Project Consistency Checklist is used to determine significance in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5; therefore, the Checklist was used to evaluate the project’s significance with respect to GHG emissions. The City’s General Plan designates the project site for Town Center (TC) and is zoned Town Center (TC) pursuant to the City’s Municipal Code. The proposed project would be consistent with Chapter 13.18 of the City’s Municipal Code, which states that this designation is intended to provide the City with a mixed-use activity center that is oriented toward and enhances the San Diego River (City of Santee 2019). The City processed an update to its Town Center Specific Plan, and the proposed project would also be consistent with the Town Center Specific Plan Update’s intent to incorporate community-serving, civic/institutional, and public uses within City-owned properties to become focal points in Santee for residents and visitors to enjoy. Table 3.8-1 includes the applicable Checklist items and the related project consistency analysis. Please see the Sustainable Santee Action Plan Project Checklist in Appendix A for complete details.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 56
DECEMBER 2025
Table 3.8-1. Sustainable Santee Action Plan Project Checklist Checklist Item Project Consistency
Measure 4.1. New commercial units meet or exceed
California Green Building Standards Tier 2 Voluntary
Measures such as obtain green building ratings including:

LEED, Build it Green, or Energy Star Certified buildings certification in scoring development and explain the
measures implemented.

Consistent. The project will meet or exceed
CALGreen Tier 2 Standards in effect at the time
of the building permit application.

Documentation shall be provided to the City
demonstrating that the project meets this
requirement prior to the issuance of the building
permit.

Measure 5.1 Project utilizes tree planting for shade and energy efficiency such as tree planting in parking lots and streetscapes.

Consistent. Landscaping will be installed in the
parking area, around portions of the building,
and around site frontages, including trees,
shrubs, and cover. The project would include the
planting of 33 new trees.

Measure 5.2. Project uses light-reflecting surfaces such as enhanced cool roofs on commercial buildings.

Consistent. Roof structures shall be designed to
include “cool roofs” materials with a minimum
reflectance and thermal emittance values equal
to or greater than the current CALGreen Table
A5.106.11.3, Tier 1.

Measure 6.1 Proposed project streets include sidewalks, crosswalks, and other infrastructure that promotes nonmotorized transportation options.

Consistent. The project would include street,
sidewalk, and landscape improvements to
encourage pedestrian travel to the site.

Measure 6.2. Proposed project installs bike paths to
improve bike transit.

Consistent. While the project would not include a
new dedicated bicycle path onsite, there is an
existing dedicated bicycle path on Riverwalk
Drive adjacent to the project site that could be
used to travel to the site. Further, the project
would include a new bicycle parking area with
space for 16 bicycles.

Measure 7.1 Install electric vehicle chargers in all new residential and commercial developments.

Consistent. The project includes 35 new EVCSs
in the new east parking lot and 25 new EVCSs in
the new west lot for a total of 60 EVCSs (EVcapable stall with EVSE).

Measure 8.1 Implement traffic flow improvement program. Consistent. No traffic improvements were required.

Measure 9.1. Reduce waste at landfills. Consistent. The project will include storage areas for recyclables, green waste, and food waste.

Further, construction of the project would include
a salvage and recycling rate of at least 80
percent for nonhazardous waste, or would
comply with local construction and demolition
waste management ordinances in place at the
time of construction.

Measure 10.1 c. On commercial buildings, install at least 2 kW [of solar PV] per square foot of building area (e.g., 2,000 sq. ft. = 3 kW) unless the installation is infeasible due to poor solar resources.

Consistent. The project will include 18.75 kW of
solar PV based on 12,500 sq. ft./ (2,000 sq.
ft./3 kW)
Source: Sustainable Santee Action Plan Consistency Checklist in Appendix A.

Note: LEED = Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design; CALGreen = California Green Building Standards Code; EVCS = electric vehicle charging station; EVSE = electric vehicle supply equipment; kW = kilowatts; PV = photovoltaic; sq. ft. = square feet.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 57
DECEMBER 2025
As shown in Table 3.8-1, the project is consistent with the Checklist adopted by the City to ensure that the emission targets identified in the Sustainable Santee Action Plan are achieved. The Sustainable Santee Action Plan determined that a project consistent with the Checklist would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. Therefore, the project would not generate GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment; impacts would be less than significant.

Construction Emissions
Construction of the project would result in GHG emissions, which are primarily associated with the use of off-road construction equipment, haul trucks, on-road vendor trucks, and worker vehicles.

Construction of the project is anticipated to commence in August 2025 and would last approximately 14 months, ending in September 2026. On-site sources of GHG emissions include off-road equipment and off-site sources including vendor trucks and worker vehicles. Table 3.8-2 presents construction emissions for the project in 2025 through 2026 from on-site and off-site emission sources.

Table 3.8-2. Estimated Annual Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions Year
CO2 CH4 N2O R CO2e
Metric Tons per Year
2025 160.98 <0.01 <0.01 0.03 162.62
2026 188.39 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 189.44
Total 349.37 0.01 0.01 0.05 352.07
Amortized Emissions (30 years) 11.74
Source: CalEEMod Version 2022. See Appendix A for complete results.

Notes: CO2 = carbon dioxide; CH4 = methane; N2O = nitrous oxide; R = refrigerants; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent; <0.01 = reported value is less than 0.01.

As shown in Table 3.8-2, the estimated total GHG emissions from construction of the project would be 352.07 MT CO2e. When amortized over 30 years5, the estimated annual GHG emissions from construction of the project would be approximately 11.74 MT CO2e per year. As with project-generated construction criteria air pollutant emissions, GHG emissions generated during construction of the project would be short term in nature, lasting only for the duration of the construction period, and would not represent a long-term source of GHG emissions.

Operational Emissions
Operation of the project would generate GHG emissions through vehicle trips by residents, employees, customers, and visitors to and from the project site; landscape maintenance equipment operation; energy use (natural gas and generation of electricity consumed by the project); solid waste disposal; and 5 The operation of the project is anticipated to be for 30 years or longer. Construction emissions are amortized for 30 years to combine construction emissions and operational emissions, thus accounting for the whole of the project’s emissions. This analysis conservatively amortizes the construction emissions for 30 years, thus providing a higher emissions estimate than if the project were to operate for a longer duration.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 58
DECEMBER 2025
generation of electricity associated with water supply, treatment, and distribution, and wastewater treatment. The estimated operational project-generated GHG emissions are shown in Table 3.8-3.

Table 3.8-3. Summary of Estimated Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions Emissions Source
CO2 CH4 N2O R CO2e
Metric Tons per Year
Mobile 1577.80 0.08 0.07 2.37 1601.90
Area 0.18 <0.01 <0.01 N/A 0.18
Energy 92.50 0.01 <0.01 N/A 92.80
Water and Wastewater 6.01 0.08 <0.01 N/A 8.61
Solid Waste 6.36 0.64 0.00 N/A 22.24
Refrigeration N/A N/A N/A 0.01 0.01
Stationary 6.24 <0.01 <0.01 0.00 6.26
Subtotal 1,732.01
Amortized Construction Emissions (30 years) 11.74
Total Project Emissions 1,743.75
Source: See Appendix A for complete results.

Notes: CO2 = carbon dioxide; CH4 = methane; N2O = nitrous oxide; R = refrigerants; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent; <0.01 = reported value is less than 0.01; N/A = not applicable.

As shown in Table 3.8-3, estimated annual project-generated GHG emissions would be approximately 1,732.01 MT CO2e per year as a result of project operation; with amortized construction emissions of approximately 11.74 MT CO2e per year, total project emissions would be approximately 1,743.75 MT CO2e per year.

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS – Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
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?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 59
DECEMBER 2025

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
d) Be located on a site that 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?
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?
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly
or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires?
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Construction and operations associated with the project would involve the transport, storage, use, and/or disposal of limited quantities of hazardous materials, such as fuels, solvents, degreasers, and paints. These materials are not considered extremely hazardous and are used routinely throughout urban environments for construction projects. Further, these materials would be transported and handled in accordance with all federal, state, and local laws regulating the management and use of hazardous materials, including the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration, California Department of Transportation, and the California Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Division. All hazardous materials are required to be utilized and transported in accordance with their labeling pursuant to federal and state law. With adherence to state and local regulations, impacts associated with routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant.
b) Would the project 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?
Less-than-Significant Impact. As discussed in response to Threshold 3.9 a), construction and operations would involve the use of limited quantities of commonly used hazardous materials, such as fuels, solvents, degreasers, and paints. These materials are not considered acutely hazardous and are used routinely

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 60
DECEMBER 2025
throughout urban environments for both construction and operation of projects. Further, these materials would be transported and handled in accordance with all federal, state, and local laws regulating the management and use of hazardous materials.

A review of regulatory databases was conducted as part of the Hazardous Materials Assessment for the Santee Community Center (Appendix E, Hazardous Materials Assessment). The project site was not listed on the Cortese List databases. Other online databases that provide environmental information on release and cleanup cases in California were also reviewed, including the California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substance Control EnviroStor, Regional Water Quality Control Board GeoTracker, and the San Diego County Department of Environmental Health and Quality (DEHQ) online database. The project site was identified in the San Diego DEHQ database (DEHQ 2024). Various permit records were identified for the adjoining property, the Cameron Family YMCA, dating from December 2002 to January 2022. The permits and records were in relation to facility remodeling, pool installation, and resurfacing and modifications of the facility’s pools. No records were identified that would indicate a potential impact of hazardous waste or materials to the project site. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project site is located within 0.25 miles of Rio Seco School, located approximately 0.23 miles to the west. While the project would be within 0.25 miles of an existing school and could involve the use of small quantities of potentially hazardous materials such as fuels, solvents, degreasers, and paints during construction and small amounts of commercially available janitorial and landscaping supplies during operation, such materials would not be used in quantities sufficient to cause a potential hazard to nearby schools. Therefore, impacts related to emitting hazardous emissions or handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 miles of existing or proposed schools would be less than significant.
d) Would the project be located on a site that 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?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Government Code Section 65962.5 refers to the Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List, commonly known as the Cortese List, maintained by the Department of Toxic Substance Control. A review of regulatory databases was conducted as part of the Hazardous Materials Assessment for the Santee Community Center (Appendix E, Hazardous Materials Assessment). The project site was not listed on the Cortese List databases. Other online databases that provide environmental information on release and cleanup cases in California were also reviewed, including the California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substance Control EnviroStor, Regional Water Quality Control Board GeoTracker, and the San Diego County Department of Environmental Health and Quality (DEHQ) online database. The project site was identified in the San Diego DEHQ database (DEHQ 2024). Various permit records were identified for the adjoining property, the Cameron Family YMCA, dating from December 2002 to January 2022. The permits and records were in relation to facility remodeling, pool installation, and resurfacing and modifications of the facility’s pools. No records were identified that would indicate a potential impact of hazardous waste or materials to the project site. Therefore, there are no

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 61
DECEMBER 2025
cases adjacent to the project site that could have potentially impacted the project site, and impacts would be less than significant.
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? Less-than-Significant Impact. Gillespie Field is located approximately 1.5 miles south of the proposed project site. According to the Gillespie Field Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, with respect to safety hazards, the proposed project site is not located within a safety zone and, with respect to noise, the proposed project site lies outside the 60-decibel Community Noise Equivalent Level noise exposure contour (ALUC 2010). Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. Impacts would be less than significant. f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The project site is located in an existing developed area with access to major roadways that would allow for emergency evacuation. The project would comply with all design recommendations and requirements for construction and operations, including large events, as provided by the Santee Fire Department to ensure that emergency access meets City standards. Therefore, the project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with emergency response, and impacts would be less than significant.
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Wildland fires present a significant threat in the City, particularly in the summer months when temperatures are high and precipitation is limited. Areas in the City that are particularly susceptible to fires are designated as Very High Hazard or High Hazard areas and are delineated on the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones for Local Responsibility Areas as recommended by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. The project site is not located within land mapped as a Fire Hazard Severity Zone (CAL FIRE 2024). The closest Very High Hazard area is located 1.4 miles northeast of the project site. The project site is located in a generally flat area where urban development currently exists, and it is not susceptible to the threat of wildfire. While there is vegetation to the south and east, this area does not represent a significant source of wildfire risk, and the proposed project itself is not located within a fire hazard area. As such, in the unlikely event of a wildfire in the areas proximate to the proposed project site, all occupants at the proposed project site would evacuate the area as directed by local fire officials. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 62
DECEMBER 2025

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground
water quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the project
may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
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;
ii) substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding onor offsite;
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
iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would involve earthwork activities and soil disturbance over the course of construction that could expose soils to the effects of wind and water erosion, and sedimentation and other pollutants associated with construction activity could be released from accidental spills or unauthorized releases. Standard construction management practices, as required

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 63
DECEMBER 2025
through the City and the statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit, would minimize construction-related impacts on water quality. The Construction General Permit would require implementation of a SWPPP to address potential construction-related impacts on water quality. The SWPPP must specify the location, type, and maintenance requirements for BMPs necessary to prevent stormwater runoff from carrying construction-related pollutants into the City’s municipal storm drain system and into the adjacent Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space.

Redevelopment of the project site would involve changes to existing drainage patterns and would result in an increase in impervious surfaces from 45.7% to 77% (Appendix F). However, the project would not alter the course of a stream or river with the addition of impervious surfaces. Nonetheless, as a result, the proposed changes to the site use could become a source of pollution from incidental spills of vehicle oils and other pollutants that can be conveyed by storm and landscape irrigation flows. However, all proposed improvements would be required to adhere to existing drainage control requirements including the Municipal Separate Storm System (MS4) NPDES Permit and the City’s drainage control requirements (Municipal Code Chapter 9.06). Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant would be required to submit drainage control plans to the City for review and approval. As part of these requirements, the plans would identify post-construction BMPs that are consistent with Low Impact Development requirements and meet all applicable MS4 Permit and City requirements. The proposed project would include a series of catch basins, roof drainages and biofiltration basins located throughout the site and would use the existing earthen swale along the site’s eastern and southern perimeter to manage stormwater runoff (Appendix F). There would be five biofiltration basins located south and east of the proposed building and three biofiltration basins located in the new west parking lot. These post-construction BMPs would meet the City’s requirements and would be consistent with the County’s 2020 BMP Design Manual. Adherence to these drainage control requirements would be adequate to protect the water quality of stormwater discharged off site. Therefore, compliance with these existing regulatory requirements for drainage control design measures would reduce potential impacts related to water quality standards and waste discharge requirements to a less-than-significant level. b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? Less-than-Significant Impact. There are no groundwater extraction wells currently on the project site, and no extraction wells are proposed as part of the project. The underlying groundwater basin, the San Diego River Valley Groundwater Basin, is considered by the Department of Water Resources to be a low-priority basin and not subject to the requirements of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (Appendix F).

The proposed project may require dewatering activities during construction due to groundwater levels reported at 14.5 feet below ground surface during the geotechnical investigation (Appendix D). However, even if considered necessary for completion of construction for foundations or utility corridors, the dewatering would be temporary and would likely involve only relatively small quantities of groundwater.

The proposed project would be served by the Padre Dam Municipal Water District, which sources the majority of its water from the San Diego County Water Authority. The San Diego County Water Authority obtains its water from imported surface waters (California State Water Project water and Colorado River water) and desalinated water from the Carlsbad Desalination Plant. Groundwater is only used to supplement the recycled water system (Carollo Engineers 2021). In addition, according to the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan for the Padre Dam Municipal Water District, Padre Dam Municipal Water District

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 64
DECEMBER 2025
can meet projected water demands out to 2045 under normal, single dry year, and multiple 5-year scenarios (Carollo Engineers 2021).

Therefore, while the project would increase the water demand at the site, the proposed project would not contribute to depletion of groundwater or interfere with recharge of a managed groundwater supply source.

Impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project 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? Less-than-Significant Impact. The statewide NPDES Construction General Permit would require implementation of a SWPPP to address potential construction-related impacts on water quality. As such, prior to construction, a site-specific SWPPP consistent with the State Water Resources Control Board Construction General Permit would be prepared as a condition of approval. The SWPPP shall describe BMPs to be used during construction to prevent discharge of sediment and other pollutants in stormwater runoff from the project site. Typical construction BMPs include silt fencing, fiber rolls, and sweeping. Specific BMPs would be determined by the project contractor and engineer based on site-specific conditions. As part of the project, the contractor would monitor the construction BMPs, including conducting routine inspections of disturbed areas to ensure that the BMPs remain intact and effective. Adherence to these BMPs would ensure that project construction would not result in substantial soil erosion.

The proposed project would also include post-construction, permanent BMPs, such as a series of catch basins, roof drainages and biofiltration basins located throughout the site and would use the existing earthen swale along the site’s eastern and southern perimeter to manage stormwater runoff (Appendix F).

Specifically, there would be three biofiltration basins in the northwestern parking lot, and there would be five biofiltration basins along the southern and eastern site boundaries, adjacent to the Woodglen Vista Creek open space area. These post-construction BMPs would meet the City’s requirements and would be consistent with the County’s 2020 BMP Design Manual. The City would be responsible for monitoring the effectiveness of the permanent BMPs in accordance with the Stormwater Management Plan.

Implementation of the post-construction BMPs and adherence to these requirements would be adequate to reduce potential impacts related to erosion or siltation during operation. Thus, impacts would be less than significant.
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The 100-year, 6-hour peak flow rate is approximately 22.4 cfs under existing conditions and 26.2 cfs under proposed project conditions (Appendix F). The impact of this increase in peak flow would be minimized by the stormwater design of the proposed project. Stormwater runoff on the project site currently occurs as sheet flow in the existing parking lot toward the southern end of the parking lot, where it is conveyed via existing earthen swales, and occurs as runoff in the grassy field toward existing grate inlets, where it is conveyed via storm drainpipes. However, the proposed project would control runoff by directing stormwater through a piped storm drainage system and directing sheet flow over pedestrian pavement into stormwater retention basins located south and east of the Community Center

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 65
DECEMBER 2025
building. Drainage from parking lot areas would be routed around the Community Center building via a concrete gutter that directs the flows to the existing earthen swale and continue to match existing flow conditions. Catch basins would be located in the outdoor event areas of the proposed project to collect surface flows away from the building entryways. Drainage of the proposed project conveys water to the biofiltration basins and discharges into Woodglen Vista Creek.

Implementation of the eight biofiltration basins would provide both water quality and flow attenuation consistent with City requirements. Therefore, with adherence to the MS4 Permit and local City drainage control requirements (Municipal Code Chapter 9.06), the proposed changes to drainage patterns would not result in on- or off-site flooding or other adverse effects related to stormwater quantity or quality postproject. Furthermore, the project site is not located in a flood hazard zone (FEMA 2024). Therefore, the project would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site, and impacts would be less than significant. 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? Less-than-Significant Impact. As described in Threshold 3.10.c.ii, the proposed project would include eight biofiltration basins to provide both water quality and flow attenuation consistent with the City requirements. As such, with adherence to the MS4 Permit and local City drainage control requirements (Municipal Code Chapter 9.06), the proposed changes to drainage patterns would not result in on- or offsite flooding or other adverse effects related to stormwater quantity or quality post-project. Therefore, project runoff would not exceed the capacity of stormwater drainage systems and would not provide substantial sources of polluted runoff, and impacts would be less than significant. iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The project site is not located in a flood hazard zone (FEMA 2024) and is therefore not at threat for impeding or redirecting flood flows. Therefore, the project would not impede or redirect flood flows, and impacts would be less than significant. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact. The proposed project site is not located near any coastal areas that are subject to tsunamis.

Additionally, the project site is located approximately 17 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean, and therefore is not subject to risk associated with tsunamis. Risk of a tsunami affecting the proposed project site is therefore low. A seiche is a standing wave in a completely or partially enclosed body of water that can be caused by high winds, seismic activity, or changes in atmospheric pressure. The proposed project site is not located adjacent to any standing bodies of water; therefore, seiche risk is low. Finally, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency flood maps, the proposed project site is not located within a flood hazard area (FEMA 2024). Therefore, the proposed project would not risk release of pollutants due to project inundation from flooding. The project would have no impact because the project location is not within a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 66
DECEMBER 2025
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would prepare a SWPPP to address potential construction-related impacts on water quality. The proposed Project would include eight biofiltration basins to provide both water quality and flow attenuation consistent with the City requirements. The proposed project would comply with the San Diego River water quality improvement plan. The proposed project does not propose to extract groundwater and thus does not have the potential to decrease local groundwater supplies. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.11 Land Use and Planning

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING – Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established
community?
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?
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? No Impact. The proposed project would include the construction of a Community Center, which is consistent with the zoning and land use designation in the General Plan. The proposed project would not develop new roads or infrastructure. Development of the site is planned and would not induce substantial growth. No impact would occur.
b) Would the project 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? No Impact. The proposed project site currently consists of a parking lot with several landscape features located throughout. The project site is zoned as Town Center (TC) and has a General Plan land use designation of Town Center (TC) (City of Santee 2020 and 2017a), which permits the construction of a Community Center subject to the appropriate review and permits.

As discussed in Section 3.9, Hazards and Hazardous Material, according to the Gillespie Field Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, the proposed project site is not located within a safety zone and lies outside the 60- decibel Community Noise Equivalent Level noise exposure contour (ALUC 2010). Therefore, the project would not conflict with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 67
DECEMBER 2025
Project implementation would not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation. No impact would occur.

3.12 Mineral Resources

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. The Conservation Element of the General Plan documents that known mineral resources within the City include sand, gravel, and crushed rock, which are collectively referred to as aggregate (City of Santee 2003). These resources have been identified within the floodplain of the San Diego River. As identified in the California Department of Conservation Mineral Lands Classification Map (DOC 1996), the project site is classified as MRZ-2, which is defined as areas that contain known mineral deposits that could qualify as mineral resources. The project site is surrounded by commercial, residential, and roadway uses that would preclude the type of extraction operations typically associated with aggregate minerals (i.e., large-scale pits or quarries). Therefore, extraction of mineral resources is not a viable use of the site. No impact would occur.
b) Would the project 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? No Impact. As discussed in response to Threshold 3.12 a), extraction of mineral resources is not a viable use of the site. No impact would occur.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 68
DECEMBER 2025

3.13 Noise

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIII. NOISE – Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
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?
Thresholds of Significance
Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.) will be used to determine the significance of potential noise and vibration impacts.

In light of the Appendix G significance criteria, this analysis uses the following standards to evaluate potential noise and vibration impacts.
▪ Construction noise – The distance between the closest residential uses (to the north, along Riverwalk Drive) and the West Lot is approximately 80 feet, or approximately 250 feet between the closest residential uses and the Community Center. Edgemoor Hospital, located northeast of the project site, is approximately 515 feet from the Community Center, or approximately 760 feet from the West Lot; thus, the nearest and “worst-case” source-to-receiver distances are studied (i.e., the distance from the closest residential uses to the north, approximately 80 feet and 250 feet from the construction of the West Lot and Community Center, respectively). Most construction equipment and vehicles on a project site do not operate continuously. Therefore, consistent with the FTA guidance, this analysis will use 80 dBA Leq over an 8-hour period as the construction noise impact criterion during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) (FTA 2018). Additionally, with respect to construction activities near the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area to the south, the closest source-to-receiver distance would be approximately 25 feet to the proposed Community Center. Thus, project construction activities would be considered significant if construction noise levels at the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area exceed a limit of

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 69
DECEMBER 2025
60 dBA 1-hour Leq, per the Significance Guideline 4.1.H of the County of San Diego’s Guidelines for Determining Significance for Biological Resources (County of San Diego 2010). ▪ Off-site project-attributed transportation noise – A noise impact due to transportation noise would be considered significant if predicted noise levels with the proposed project will exceed the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) thresholds noted below (FICON 1992).:
o Outdoor ambient sound level without the project is less than 60 dBA Ldn, then a projectattributed increase of 5 dBA or more would be considered significant; o Outdoor ambient sound level without the project is between 60 and 65 dBA Ldn, projectattributed increase of 3 dBA or more would be considered significant; and o Outdoor ambient sound level without the project is greater than 65 dBA Ldn, then projectattributed increase of 1.5 dBA or more would be considered significant. ▪ Off-site project-attributed stationary noise – The Noise Element of the City’s General Plan (City of Santee 2003) includes a Noise / Land Use Compatibility Guide which sets forth the compatible/acceptable levels for various land use categories. The Noise / Land Use Compatibility Guide sets a limitation of 65 dBA Ldn for the following noise-sensitive land uses representative of those within the project area: 1) residential – low-density single-family, duplex, mobile homes; 2) residential – multi-family ; 3) transient lodging – motels, hotels; 4) schools, libraries, churches, hospitals, nursing homes; and 5) sports arena, outdoor spectator sports. The nearest noisesensitive land uses are residential single- and multi-family, located offsite to the north of the project along Riverwalk Drive, as close as 80 feet from the West Lot. A noise impact would be considered significant if noise from typical operation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), other electro-mechanical systems (including emergency generator testing), vehicle movement in the proposed parking lots, indoor events at the Community Center, and outdoor events (i.e., fireworks) associated with the proposed project exceeded 65 dBA Ldn at the closest residential land uses to the project site.
▪ Construction vibration – Guidance from Caltrans indicates that a vibration velocity level of 0.2 ips PPV received at a structure would be considered annoying by occupants within the receiving structure (Caltrans 2013). As for the receiving structure itself, aforementioned Caltrans guidance recommends that a vibration level of 0.3 ips PPV would represent the threshold for building damage risk.
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is currently developed as an asphalt parking lot with several landscape features located throughout and a grassy field in the northwest quadrant. The northwest quadrant was previously graded for development of the Town Center Community Park and used for parking on the dirt and aggregate base. This area of the Project site is now a grassy field and is currently used for passive recreational activity, and as indicated in Table 3.13-1, the site does not currently generate substantial noise. Noise-sensitive receptors near the project include single-

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 70
DECEMBER 2025
family residences to the north along Riverwalk Drive and to the east along Cottonwood Avenue, Edgemoor Hospital to the northeast, and the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area immediately south and east.

Represented by locations ST1, ST2, ST3, and ST4 in Table 3.13-1, the existing outdoor ambient sound environment of the proposed project site and nearby noise-sensitive receptors was sampled during a field survey conducted on February 10, 2025. Collected sample sound pressure level measurements at these locations, along with documented investigator observations regarding perceived or witnessed acoustical contributors to this baseline or pre-project noise environment, also appear in Table 3.13-1. These locations are intended to be representative of the existing single-family homes to the north and east of the project, as well as the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area. Measurement locations are shown in Figure 5, Baseline Outdoor Ambient Sound Level Measurements, and photographs, tagged survey positions, and instrument details can be found in Appendix H.

Table 3.13-1. Measured Samples of Existing Outdoor Ambient Sound Level Survey
Position Description/Address Time
Leq
(dBA)
Lmax
(dBA)
Lmin
(dBA) Notes (Perceived Sound Sources)
ST1
North of proposed
project West Lot on
the north side of
Riverwalk Drive
2:30 p.m.–
2:45 p.m. 55.1 66.8 47.5 Traffic, birds, distant aircraft, distant conversations/yelling ST2
North/northeast of
proposed project
site on the north
side of Riverwalk
Drive
2:50 p.m.–
3:05 p.m.

50.7 62.1 43.5 Traffic, birds, distant aircraft,
distant conversations/yelling
ST3
East of proposed
project site along
Cottonwood Avenue
3:32 p.m.–
3:47 p.m.

42.6 44.8 41.1
Traffic, birds, distant aircraft,
distant conversations/yelling,
distant dog barking
ST4
South of the
proposed
Community Center,
adjacent to the
Woodglen Vista
Creek protected
open space area
3:11 p.m. –
3:26 p.m.

48.9 53.0 46.0
Aircraft, birds, distant
conversations/yelling, distant
dog barking, distant traffic,
rustling leaves
Source: Appendix H
Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); dBA = A-weighted decibels; Lmax = maximum sound level during the measurement interval; Lmin = minimum sound level during the measurement interval.

The measured outdoor energy-equivalent sound level (Leq) values appearing in Table 3.13-1 range from

42.6 dBA at ST3 to 55.1 dBA at ST1. Measured values are higher at ST1 and ST2 due to the proximity of the measurement locations to moderately trafficked roadways (i.e., Riverwalk Drive). At ST3, measured sound levels were lower as traffic was less frequent along Cottonwood Avenue, a local roadway accessing residential uses. At ST4, measured sound levels adjacent to the Woodglen Vista Creek open space area are consistent with existing recreational and parking lot activity at Town Center Park East to the southwest and the Cameron Family YMCA.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 71
DECEMBER 2025
Construction
Construction of the project would result in the temporary generation of noise at the project site, involving the use of heavy equipment and machinery, such as dozers, excavators, loaders, cranes, temporary generators, rollers, and other equipment. Construction would generate levels of noise that can vary from hour to hour and day to day depending on the equipment in use, the operations being performed, and the distance between the source and receptor. Typically, construction equipment operates in alternating cycles of full power and low power, producing average noise levels less than the maximum noise level. The average sound level of construction activity also depends on the amount of time that the equipment operates and the intensity of construction activities during that time.

Aggregate noise emission from proposed project construction activities, broken down by sequential phase, was predicted at two evaluation distances to the nearest existing noise-sensitive receptors: 1) from the nearest position of the construction site boundary and 2) from the geographic center of the construction site, which serves as the time-averaged location or geographic acoustical centroid of active construction equipment for the phase under study. The intent of the former distance is to help evaluate anticipated construction noise from equipment or vehicle activity expected to be at the boundary for some period of time, which would be most appropriate for phases such as site preparation, grading, and paving. The latter distance is used in a manner similar to the general assessment technique as described in the FTA guidance for construction noise assessment, when the location of individual equipment for a given construction phase is uncertain over some extent of (or the entirety of) the construction site area. In this studied scenario, because of the equipment location uncertainty, the loudest piece of equipment for a construction phase is assumed to operate at the nearest position of the construction site boundary to the nearest noisesensitive receptor, and the rest of the equipment is assumed to operate from the acoustical centroid position.

Table 3.13-2 presents the estimated construction noise level (8-hour Leq) for each anticipated phase of project construction activity at two receptors: a single-family home to the north of the project site, and the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area immediately south of Community Center building.

Construction activities could occur at a nearest distance of approximately 80 feet from the project site boundary to the single-family residential noise-sensitive receptor to the north, or a nearest distance of approximately 25 feet from the project site boundary to the Woodglen Vista Creek to the south. The acoustical centroid distance at both noise-sensitive receptors was modeled to be approximately 250 feet.

Details of these predictions in Appendix H show the expected acoustical contribution from each type of operating construction equipment at various distances for each phase and noise-sensitive receptor.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 72
DECEMBER 2025
Table 3.13-2. Estimated Per-Phase Construction Noise Levels Project
Construction
Activity
Phase
Predicted
8-hour Leq
(dBA) at
Nearest
Distance to
SingleFamily
Residence
Measured
Outdoor
Ambient Sound
Level at
Corresponding
Location (dBA
Leq)
Exceed FTABased
Construction
Noise
Threshold of
80 dBA 8-
hour Leq?
(Yes/No)
Predicted
8-hour Leq
(dBA) at
Nearest
Distance
to
Woodglen
Vista
Creek
Exceed
Sensitive
Habitat
Construction
Noise
Threshold of
60 dBA 1-
hour Leq?
(Yes/No)
Measured
Outdoor
Ambient Sound
Level at
Corresponding
Location (dBA
Leq)
Demolition 73.7 55.1 @ ST1 No 74.0 Yes 48.9 @ ST4
Site
Preparation 73.4 55.1 @ ST1 No 73.7 Yes 48.9 @ ST4
Grading 76.0 55.1 @ ST1 No 76.0 Yes 48.9 @ ST4
Building
Construction 68.3 55.1 @ ST1 No 72.2 Yes 48.9 @ ST4
Paving 68.3 55.1 @ ST1 No 69.6 Yes 48.9 @ ST4
Architectural
Coating 67.4 55.1 @ ST1 No 69.6 Yes 48.9 @ ST4
Note: Leq = energy-equivalent sound level; dBA = A-weighted decibel The predicted aggregate noise levels for the studied construction activity phases occurring closest to the single-family residential noise-sensitive receptor to the north could be up to 20.9 dBA higher than the sampled baseline outdoor ambient sound levels appearing in Table 3.13-1 at ST1, and would represent an audible change to the environment; however, these predicted levels would be temporary, and are less than the 80 dBA 8-hour Leq FTA-based standard. Thus, the noise produced from the construction of the proposed project at the nearest single-family residential noise-sensitive receptor to the north would result in a lessthan-significant impact.

However, at the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area immediately south of the project site, the predicted aggregate noise levels for the studied construction activity phases would exceed the 60 dBA 1- hour Leq construction noise limit for sensitive habitat by up to 16 dBA, and could be up to 27.1 dBA higher than the sampled baseline outdoor ambient sound levels appearing in Table 3.13-1 at ST4.

Thus, MM-NOI-1 would require the Applicant, or its designee, to implement certain noise reduction measures as site conditions warrant. Proper implementation of MM-NOI-1 would reduce noise levels by up to 16 dB if a 12-foot-tall temporary construction noise barrier is implemented during each construction phase on the southern and eastern project boundaries, which would correspondingly reduce the highest predicted estimated non-mitigated construction noise level from 76.0 to 60.0 dBA Leq during the grading phase, which would be within the applicable 60 dBA threshold.

Table 3.13-3 shows the predicted aggregate noise levels for construction activities when a 12-foot-tall temporary construction noise barrier described in MM-NOI-1 is implemented during the six (6) studied construction phases, strategically placed along the southern and eastern boundaries of the project site.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 73
DECEMBER 2025
Table 3.13-3. Estimated Per-Phase Construction Noise Levels With Noise Barrier Project Construction
Activity Phase
Predicted 8-hour Leq (dBA) at Nearest
Distance to Woodglen Vista Creek
Exceed Sensitive Habitat Construction Noise
Threshold of 60 dBA 1-hour Leq? (Yes/No)
Demolition 58.9 No
Site Preparation 58.5 No
Grading 60.0 No
Building Construction 57.2 No
Paving 54.7 No
Architectural Coating 55.0 No
Note: Leq = energy-equivalent sound level; dBA = A-weighted decibel As shown in Table 3.13-3, with the implementation of a 12-foot-tall temporary construction noise barrier placed along the southern and eastern boundaries of the project site (MM-NOI-1), the predicted aggregate noise levels at the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area for the studied construction activity phases would equal or be below the 60 dBA 1-hour Leq construction noise limit for sensitive habitat. While construction noise levels could be up to 11.1 dBA higher than the sampled baseline outdoor ambient sound levels appearing in Table 3.13-1 at ST4, these predicted levels would be temporary. Thus, with the implementation of a 12-foot-tall temporary construction noise barrier, the noise produced from the construction of the proposed project at the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area would result in a less-than-significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Operation
Stationary Operation
The existing project site and surrounding uses (i.e., YMCA building, parking lot, Sportsplex USA, and Town Center Park East) feature operational noise from onsite HVAC, public gatherings, private events, sports events, etc. The following list describes existing noise-producing events that occur:
▪ The existing YMCA has special events in the parking lot, outdoor pools and other related noise generators.
▪ The City’s annual 4th of July fireworks celebration south of the site at the Town Center Community Park East.
▪ The City holds the Summer Concert series at the amphitheater in Town Center Community Park East site every Thursday from Memorial Day through Labor Day. ▪ “Movies in the Park” events are held at the amphitheater during summer months at Town Center Community East Site.
▪ Soccer, football and lacrosse sports events are held at the Town Center East Site. ▪ Sportsplex USA west of the site holds softball tournaments and indoor soccer tournaments.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 74
DECEMBER 2025
Upon completion of construction, the proposed project would feature operational noise from onsite HVAC systems associated with the Community Center, along with increased vehicle presence onsite associated with the parking lot expansion. Also associated with the Community Center would be gatherings for private and governmental events including business meetings, trainings, birthday parties, family celebrations, weddings, community events, conferences, town hall meetings, city council meetings, governmental meetings, car shows, festivals, emergency operations, comedy shows, movies, and other events. The majority of these events would occur indoors, with some events occurring outdoors, such as events featuring fireworks during evening hours. Additionally, an emergency generator would be located outside along the eastern wall of the Community Center building, which would undergo scheduled testing producing additional operational noise.

On this basis, five (5) operational scenarios, each representing one full hour of onsite activities of the proposed project were modeled, as outlined below:
▪ A daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) scenario featuring normal operating conditions, including onsite HVAC systems associated with the Community Center and increased vehicle presence onsite associated with the parking lot expansion;
▪ A nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) scenario featuring only onsite HVAC system operations; ▪ A scenario featuring an outdoor event at the Community Center patio and amphitheater, also including onsite HVAC systems associated with the Community Center and increased vehicle presence onsite associated with the parking lot expansion; ▪ A scenario featuring onsite emergency generator testing, also including onsite HVAC systems associated with the Community Center and increased vehicle presence onsite associated with the parking lot expansion; and
▪ A scenario of an outdoor event featuring a fireworks display.

Table 3.13-4 presents the predicted stationary source operation noise levels for four (4) modeled scenarios at six (6) noise-sensitive receptors: R1 – R5 represent single-family residences to the north and east of the project site, and R6 represents a nearest-receptor position to the project site within the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area. The studied noise-sensitive receptors encompass the nearest and “worst-case” source-to-receiver distances; additional noise-sensitive receptors in the area would be further from the project and thus experience lower predicted noise levels than those discussed below.

At the nearest noise-sensitive land uses, the City’s operational noise threshold is set forth as a 65 dBA DayNight Noise Level (Ldn), which calculates a 24-hour dBA Ldn noise level by applying a +0 dBA penalty to 1- hour dBA Leq noise levels during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and a +10 dBA Leq penalty to 1- hour dBA Leq noise levels during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.).

Thus, the “Normal Operating Conditions Scenario” represents a combined calculation of the daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) scenarios, and the “Outdoor Event Scenario” considers an event occurring for a few hours during a daytime period and considers predicted operational noise levels from both the daytime and nighttime scenarios when an outdoor event is not taking place. Both the “Emergency Generator Test Scenario” and “Fireworks Event Scenario” assume the mentioned activities,

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 75
DECEMBER 2025
respectively, occur during a 1-hour period, where for other 23 hours in a day, the site is operating under “Normal Conditions” during both daytime and nighttime hours.

Table 3.13-4. Predicted Stationary Source Operation Noise Levels Receptor
ID
Receptor
Description
Normal Operating
Conditions
Scenario – DayNight Noise Level
(dBA Ldn)
Outdoor Event
Scenario –
Day-Night
Noise Level
(dBA Ldn)
Emergency
Generator Test
Scenario – DayNight Noise Level
(dBA Ldn)
Fireworks Event
Scenario – DayNight Noise
Level (dBA Ldn)
R1
Residence –
Northwest of
Project Site

35.5 37.6 35.5 62.4
R2 Residence – North
of Project Site 36.8 39.8 36.8 63
R3 Residence – North
of Project Site 36.5 39.4 36.6 63.2
R4
Residence –
North/Northeast of
Project Site

35.9 38.3 35.9 62.8
R5
Residence – East of
Project Site 20.8 31.6 21.5 57.1
R6
Woodglen Vista
Creek – Nearest
Position

37.3 59.5 38.1 62.8
Note: Ldn = day-night noise level; dBA = A-weighted decibel Source: Appendix H; Figures 6 – 10. Figures 6 – 10 display calculated dBA 1-hour Leq noise levels.

The predicted project stationary operational noise levels in dBA Ldn as shown in Table 3.13-4 were calculated using the resulting dBA 1-hour Leq levels generated from the operational noise models. Figures 6 through 10 illustrate the predicted aggregate sound pressure level (SPL) propagation solely from a 1-hour period of the operation of the proposed project’s stationary sound sources associated with the scenarios described above. The color-coded annular bands of dBA 1-hour Leq levels are calculated across a field parallel and five (5) feet above local grade, and the proposed Community Center building and existing Cameron Family YMCA building were rendered in the 3-D model space (see Appendix H).

Figures 6 and 7 represent predicted aggregate SPL propagation from project operations during a daytime hour and a nighttime hour, respectively; the resulting dBA Ldn noise levels for the “Normal Operating Conditions Scenario” were calculated using predicted dBA 1-hour Leq levels from project operations during a daytime hour and a nighttime hour. Similarly, Figure 8 displays the resulting dBA 1-hour Leq noise contours for an “Outdoor Event Scenario,” where Table 3.13-4 presents the calculated dBA Ldn levels when an outdoor event takes place for 3-hours during the daytime—the other 21 hours of the 24-hour period included 12 “daytime hour” and 9 “nighttime hour” predicted dBA 1-hour Leq levels. Figures 9 and 10 display an “Emergency Generator Test Scenario” and “Fireworks Event Scenario,” respectively, where both unique operational occurrences take place for approximately 20 minutes within a 1-hour period, and assumes the project operates under normal conditions for the remaining 23 hours.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 76
DECEMBER 2025
The results presented in Table 3.13-4 suggest that project operation noise, under each modeled operation scenario, is anticipated to be less than 65 dBA Ldn at the nearest existing noise-sensitive receptors and thereby comply with the operational noise threshold (65 dBA Ldn) established in Section 5.04.090 of the City’s Noise Ordinance. Therefore, impacts from onsite operational noise would be less than significant.

Off-Site Traffic Noise Exposure
The proposed project would generate additional traffic trips along existing roads in the area, particularly Riverwalk Drive, from which the staff and visitors of the proposed project would take access. Based upon traffic counts conducted at local intersections for the Transportation Analysis prepared for the proposed project (see Figures 7-2, 7-3, and 8-1 to 8-3 in the Transportation Analysis), Riverwalk Drive from Cuyamaca Street to Verde Vista Lane currently has PM peak-hour volumes of approximately 595 vehicles, 344 vehicles from Verde Vista Lane to Canopy Park Lane, and 314 vehicles from Canopy Park Lane to Park Center Drive.

On Riverwalk Drive, the project is calculated to generate an additional 109 trips from Cuyamaca Street to Verde Vista Lane, 117 trips from Verde Vista Lane to Canopy Park Lane, and 94 trips from Canopy Park Lane to Park Center Drive. PM peak-hour volumes of cumulative projects near the proposed project would generate an additional 30 trips from Cuyamaca Street to Verde Vista Lane, 62 trips from Verde Vista Lane to Canopy Park Lane, and 62 trips from Canopy Park Lane to Park Center Drive.

Consistent with Caltrans guidance (Caltrans 2013), this analysis assumes 80% of the ADT occurs during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.), 5% during the evening (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.), and 15% during the nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.). The modeled traffic speed was assumed to be the anticipated speed limit for the studied roads, which is 25 miles per hour (mph) on Riverwalk Drive. The vehicle-mix percentages used in the noise model were 97% auto, 2% medium trucks and 1% heavy trucks.

The change in roadway noise levels at the nearest residential noise-sensitive receptors was predicted for four conditions: existing, existing plus project, cumulative conditions, and cumulative plus project. Traffic noise levels were calculated for roadway segments bounded by intersections within the project area and are listed as follows:
• Riverwalk Drive – From Cuyamaca Street to Verde Vista Lane; • Riverwalk Drive – From Verde Vista Lane to Canopy Park Lane; and • Riverwalk Drive – From Canopy Park Lane to Park Center Drive.

Table 3.13-5 presents the predicted off-site traffic noise exposure levels for the four conditions. Details of these predictions can be found in Appendix H.

Table 3.13-5. Predicted Off-Site Traffic Noise Exposure Levels Street
Name From To
Existing
(dBA
Ldn)
Existing
+ Project
(dBA Ldn)
Noise
Level
Increase
(dBA Ldn)
Cumulative
(dBA Ldn)
Cumulative
+ Project
(dBA Ldn)
Noise
Level
Increase
(dBA Ldn)
Riverwalk
Drive
Cuyamaca
Street
Verde
Vista
Lane

61.4 62.1 0.7 61.6 62.3 0.7

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 77
DECEMBER 2025
Table 3.13-5. Predicted Off-Site Traffic Noise Exposure Levels Street
Name From To
Existing
(dBA
Ldn)
Existing
+ Project
(dBA Ldn)
Noise
Level
Increase
(dBA Ldn)
Cumulative
(dBA Ldn)
Cumulative
+ Project
(dBA Ldn)
Noise
Level
Increase
(dBA Ldn)
Riverwalk
Drive
Verde
Vista Lane
Canopy
Park
Lane

59.0 60.3 1.3 59.8 60.9 1.1
Riverwalk
Drive
Canopy
Park Lane
Park
Center
Drive

58.6 59.8 1.1 59.6 60.5 0.9
Note: Ldn = day-night noise level; dBA = A-weighted decibel Based upon the FICON thresholds presented in the Regulatory Setting above, an increase of less than 5 dBA when the ambient sound level is less than 60 dBA Ldn/CNEL, less than 3 dBA when the ambient sound level is between 60 and 65 dBA Ldn/CNEL, or less than 1.5 dBA when the ambient sound level is greater than 65 dBA Ldn/CNEL would not be significant. Utilizing the traffic noise modeling worksheets found in Appendix H, Table 3.13-5 shows that where ambient sound levels are below 60 dBA Ldn, the highest predicted change in traffic noise level would be 1.3 dBA Ldn on Riverwalk Drive from Verde Vista Lane to Canopy Park Lane, which is less than the FICON 5 dBA threshold when the ambient sound level is less than 60 dBA Ldn/CNEL, and would be considered imperceptible to the average person. Similarly, where ambient sound levels are between 60 and 65 dBA Ldn on Riverwalk Drive from Cuyamaca Street to Verde Vista Lane, the highest predicted change in traffic noise level would be 0.7 dBA Ldn, which is less than the FICON 3 dBA threshold under such conditions. Therefore, potential impacts at existing off-site noise-sensitive land uses along roadway segments identified in Table 3.13-5 and with respect to project-generated changes to future traffic noise would be less than significant.
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less-than-Significant Impact. Vibration is oscillatory movement of mass (typically a solid) over time.

Depending on their distances to a sensitive receptor, operation of large bulldozers, graders, loaded dump trucks, or other heavy construction equipment and vehicles on a construction site have the potential to cause high vibration amplitudes.

The City’s Municipal Code does not have a vibration threshold against which project construction-related ground-borne vibration impacts to the community can be assessed. For purposes of this impact assessment, a vibration velocity level of 0.2 inches per second (ips) peak particle velocity (PPV) is used as the standard for evaluating human annoyance (to perceived ground-borne vibration within an occupied structure) and the potential risk for residential building damage due to “continuous” or frequently occurring ground-borne vibration events (Caltrans 2020).

Ground-borne vibration attenuates rapidly, even over short distances. The attenuation of ground-borne vibration as it propagates from source to receptor through intervening soils and rock can be estimated with expressions found in FTA and the California Department of Transportation guidance.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 78
DECEMBER 2025
For a roller operating as close as 80 feet to the nearest receiving residential land use to the north during the paving construction phase as shown in Table 3.13-2, the estimated vibration velocity would be 0.037 ips per the equation as follows (FTA 2018):

PPVrcvr = PPVref × (25/D)1.5 = 0.037 ips PPV = 0.21 × (25/80)

1.5 In the above equation, PPVrcvr is the predicted vibration velocity at the receiver position (i.e., residence), PPVref is the reference value at 25 feet from the vibration source (in this case, the roller is used because the roller’s 0.21 ips PPV at 25 feet is the worst case vibration level), and D is the actual horizontal distance to the receiver from the source.

Thus, the predicted worst-case ground-borne vibration velocity PPV values associated with project construction (i.e., 0.037 ips PPV) are below the 0.2 ips PPV threshold for building occupant annoyance and

0.3 ips PPV for building damage risk. Impacts during construction would be less than significant. 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? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project site is located approximately 1.4 miles to the north of Gillespie Field. The proposed project site lies outside the 60 dB CNEL noise exposure contour as shown in the Gillespie Field Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Thus, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
MM-NOI-1 Temporary Construction Noise Reduction. The Applicant, or its designee, shall implement one or more of the following measures, as necessary, in order to achieve onsite noise control and sound abatement that, in the aggregate, would result in a minimum construction noise reduction of approximately 16 decibels (dB) at the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area immediately south and east of the project:
• Install noise abatement on the site boundary fencing (or within, as practical and appropriate) in the form of sound blankets or comparable temporary solid barriers of at least 12 feet tall to occlude construction noise emission between the site (or specific equipment operation as the situation may define) and the noise-sensitive receptor(s) of concern (i.e., the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area). o By way of example, suspended sound blankets, field-erected plywood sheeting, or comparable temporary solid (or flexible but sufficiently massive) barriers (of minimum sound transmission class [STC] rating of 25, which per California Department of Transportation guidance indicates would permit up to 16 dB of expected barrier insertion loss) would occlude construction noise emission between the site (or specific equipment operation as the situation may define) and the noise-sensitive receptor(s) of concern.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 79
DECEMBER 2025
o Temporary barriers shall adhere to a minimum height standard of 12 feet to serve as an effective deterrent against noise pollution and shielding for adjoining off-site receptors.
o To determine the extent/length of these temporary noise barrier(s) required for each phase of construction, see Figure 11. Appendix H includes a worksheet illustrating the predicted noise exposure levels at a nearest receptor (i.e., Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area) as close as 15 feet to the exterior of the temporary barrier, with the listed onsite noise-producing construction equipment as close as 10 feet to the interior of the barrier. Equipment operating further away would have quieter acoustic contribution due to the increased distance, and equipment operating closer to the barrier would improve the barrier’s insertion loss performance (due to greater path length difference) and thus yield lower noise exposure levels at the offsite receptor. Similarly, should the offsite receptor be more distant from the temporary barrier than 25 feet, the added overall distance to the onsite operating equipment will—due to principles of geometric divergence—attenuate the sound path and yield less noise exposure at the receptor. Such a wall should be located on the project boundary (focusing on the southern and eastern boundary), as shown in Figure 11, to reduce construction noise exposure.
• Administrative controls (e.g., reduce operating time of equipment and/or prohibit usage of equipment type[s] within certain distances to a nearest receiving occupied off-site property).
• Engineering controls (change equipment operating parameters [e.g., speed, capacity], or install features or elements that otherwise reduce equipment noise emission [e.g., upgrade engine exhaust mufflers]).

3.14 Population and Housing

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 80
DECEMBER 2025

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing, necessitating
the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
a) Would the project 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)?
No Impact. The proposed project would include the construction of a Community Center, which is consistent with the zoning and land use designation in the General Plan. The project would require approximately four new employees. As such, given the scale of the employment associated with the project, the proposed project would not induce substantial direct population growth in the City. Additionally, the project does not propose any residential uses that would induce direct population growth in the City.

Furthermore, the proposed project would not develop new roads or infrastructure. As such, development of the site is planned and would not induce substantial growth. No impact would occur. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The proposed project site is developed with a parking lot with landscape features located throughout. Project development would not result in the displacement of existing people or housing. No impact would occur.

3.15 Public Services

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES – Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 81
DECEMBER 2025
a) Would the project 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:

Fire protection?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would include the construction of a Community Center. Project development would not result in a substantial unplanned population growth within the City.

The proposed project site is located within an area that is adequately served by the Santee Fire Department.

The closest fire station is located at 8950 Cottonwood Avenue, which is 0.7 mile southeast of the project site and approximately a 6-minute drive from the project site. The first due response time for a structure fire is 7 minutes and 33 seconds and the first due response time for rescue and emergency medical services call is 7 minutes and 27 seconds (City of Santee 2024). The project would not result in the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, and impacts would be less than significant.

Police protection?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would include the construction of a Community Center. Project development would not result in a substantial unplanned population growth within the City.

The proposed project site is located within an area that is adequately served by the Santee Sheriff’s Station.

The Santee Sheriff’s Station is located at 8811 Cuyamaca Street, which is 1.0 mile southwest of the project site and approximately a 6 minute drive from the project site. In 2022, the average Sheriff response time was between 9.2 minutes and 9.59 minutes (City of Santee 2024). As such, it is anticipated that the Santee Sheriff’s Station would have the resources to adequately serve the proposed project. Project implementation would not result in the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, and impacts would be less than significant.

Schools?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project site would be located within the Santee School District and Grossmont Union High School District. The proposed project would include the construction of a Community Center and would not result in substantial unplanned population growth within the City. As such, project implementation would not result in the need for new or physically altered school facilities, and impacts would be less than significant.

Parks?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project site is located -within the boundary of Town Center Community Park. The proposed project would include the construction of a Community Center and would not result in a substantial unplanned population growth within the City. As such, project implementation would not result in the need for new or physically altered parks or recreational facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 82
DECEMBER 2025
Other public facilities?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would include the construction of a Community Center and would not result in substantial unplanned population growth. Project implementation would not result in the need for new or physically altered library facilities, and impacts would be less than significant.

3.16 Recreation

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVI. RECREATION
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?
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?
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? Less-than-Significant Impact. The project site is bound by recreational facilities including the Cameron Family YMCA and Sportsplex USA to the west and the Town Center Community Park to the south.

As discussed in Section 3.14, Population and Housing, the proposed project would not result in population growth within the City. The proposed project would provide event spaces for the community to rent. The Community Center would also host indoor and outdoor classes, including outdoor recreation classes with an anticipated average class size of 30 to 60 persons per class, which could increase the use of neighborhood or regional parks. However, the project would not adversely affect existing City park facilities or create the need for new park facilities, because the project would provide recreational resources to the public. The project would not result in a substantial physical deterioration of existing parks. As a result, impacts would be less than significant.
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? Less-than-Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would include the construction of recreational facilities. As such, the proposed project has the potential to have an adverse physical effect on the environment. The proposed project’s environmental impacts have been evaluated throughout this document

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 83
DECEMBER 2025
and any potentially significant impacts would be mitigated. Therefore, impacts related to the construction of recreational facilities as a result of the proposed project would be less than significant

3.17 Transportation

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVII. TRANSPORTATION – Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would involve the construction of the Community Center building, which is two stories tall and includes event space, office space, and support spaces, and would total 12,500 gross square feet.

Automobile and truck traffic volumes associated with project-related construction activities would vary throughout the construction phases, as different activities occur. However, project-related construction traffic would be temporary and cease upon project completion. Therefore, construction trip generation associated with the project would have a less-than-significant impact.

The City uses the regionally adopted San Diego Traffic Engineers’ Council/ITE guidelines for the purposes of traffic impact analysis. The project trip generation was calculated using trip rates based on the ITE 11th Edition of the Trip Generation Manual and SANDAG (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (2002). The trip rates for the recreational Community Center land use (land use code 495) from the ITE Trip Generation Manual were used. According to the Transportation Analysis prepared for the proposed project (Appendix G), the project is calculated to generate 1,441 average daily traffic, with 96 trips during the AM peak hour (63 inbound and 33 outbound) and 125 trips during the PM peak hour (59 inbound and 66 outbound). As discussed in Appendix G, the function and aspects of the proposed Community Center would fall under the category of “community parks,” which is considered a local park per the City’s Recreation Element. According to the City’s screening criteria No. 5, Locally Serving Public Facilities, public facilities that serve the surrounding community or public facilities that are passive

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 84
DECEMBER 2025
use may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary, and the project would be considered to have a less-than-significant CEQA transportation impact and would be screened out of further analysis.

The City provides Class II bike lanes on Mast Boulevard, Cuyamaca Street, and Magnolia Avenue, and Class III bike routes on Riverwalk Drive. Per the City of Santee Mobility Element, Class III bike routes are planned along Park Center Drive between Mast Boulevard and Riverwalk Drive (City of Santee 2017b). Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the roadways within the study area with the exception of Park Center Drive south of Riverwalk Drive. In addition, a sidewalk connection is provided between the project site and the Santee Transit Center and nearby bus stops. Per the City of Santee Mobility Element, there are no plans to add or alter sidewalks within the project vicinity. Transit service is provided to the area via Metropolitan Transit Services. The nearest bus stop is located just 230 feet south of the Riverwalk Drive/Cuyamaca Street intersection, which is a walking distance of 0.5 miles from the project site. The Santee Transit Center, which serves the Green Line Trolley, is located in the Santee Trolley Square shopping mall, which is a walking distance of 1.2 miles from the project site (City of Santee 2017b). A description of the nearest transit service is shown below:
▪ Bus Route 832 provides bus service to the area via Cuyamaca Street, Mission Gorge Road, and Magnolia Avenue. During weekdays, headways are 1 hour for the duration of the day. During weekends, headways are 1 hour for the duration of the day. ▪ The Green Line Trolley runs between the Santee Transit Center and the 12th and Imperial Avenue Transit Center in Downtown San Diego. There are 27 stops along this route, with 15-minute headways on the weekdays and 30-minute headways on the weekends. During weekends, headways are 15–30 minutes during the peak periods.

The project does not propose any improvements that would impact the existing transit facilities including bike routes, sidewalks, or transit services. The project would have a less than significant VMT impact.

Therefore, the project would not conflict with a program plan, ordinance, or policy addressing transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, and impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less-than-Significant Impact. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 codifies the change from level of service to VMT as a metric for transportation impact analysis. Pursuant to Senate Bill 743, VMT analysis is the primary method for determining CEQA impacts. The State of California Office of Planning and Research has developed screening thresholds to quickly identify when a project should be expected to cause a lessthan-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. Thus, lead agencies may screen out VMT impacts using project size, whether a project site is in a low-VMT area, and whether a project is in a High Quality Transit Area.

Based on the City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines, April 2022, the requirements to prepare a detailed transportation VMT analysis apply to all discretionary land development projects that are not exempt from CEQA, except those that meet at least one of the transportation screening criteria described below. A project that meets at least one of the screening criteria below would be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact due to some aspect of the project. If evidence suggests that the project might have a significant impact despite meeting the below screening criteria, City staff reserves the discretion to request VMT analysis.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 85
DECEMBER 2025

1. Projects Located in a Transit-Accessible Area: Projects located within a half-mile radius of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.

2. Small Projects: Projects generating 500 or fewer net new daily vehicle trips may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Trips are based on the number of vehicle trips calculated using SANDAG’s (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region or ITE trip generation rates with any alternative modes/location-based adjustments applied.

3. Projects in a VMT Efficient Area: A VMT-efficient area is any area within the City with an average VMT/capita or VMT/employee below the thresholds as compared to the baseline City/Regional VMT for the TAZ that the project is located within.

4. Locally Serving Retail Projects: Local serving retail generally improves the convenience of shopping close to home and has the effect of reducing vehicle travel. Local serving retail projects less than 50,000 square feet that are expected to draw approximately 75% of customers from the local area (roughly 3-miles) are presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Retail projects that are between 50,000 square feet and 125,000 square feet with similar customer attraction (approximately 75% from local area) may also be presumed locally-serving; however, the city may require the applicant to provide a market analysis as evidence that the project is locally serving. Retail projects that are more than 125,000 square feet are required to conduct a VMT analysis unless the applicant provides market surveys to demonstrate that at least 75% of customers are attracted from the local population.

5. Locally Serving Public Facilities: Public facilities that serve the surrounding community or public facilities that are passive use may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.

6. Redevelopment Projects with Lower Total VMT: A redevelopment project may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary if the proposed project’s total project VMT is less than the existing land use’s total VMT and the CEQA action includes closing the existing land use.

7. Infill Affordable Housing: Based on the ITE 11th Edition of the Trip Generation Manual, the affordable housing trip generation rate is approximately 30% lower than the multi-family (low-rise) rate. Adding affordable housing to infill locations generally improves jobs-housing balance, in turn, shortening commutes and reducing VMT. This suggests that it is possible to presume a blended affordable and market-rate residential project as having less than significant VMT impact.

The City uses the regionally adopted San Diego Traffic Engineers’ Council/ITE guidelines for the purposes of traffic impact analysis. The project trip generation was calculated using the trip rates based on the ITE 11th Edition of the Trip Generation Manual and SANDAG (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (2002). The trip rates for recreational Community Center land use (land use code 495) from the ITE Trip Generation Manual were used. According to the Transportation Analysis

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 86
DECEMBER 2025
prepared for the proposed project (Appendix G), the project is calculated to generate 1,441 average daily traffic, with 96 trips during the AM peak hour (63 inbound and 33 outbound) and 125 trips during the PM peak hour (59 inbound and 66 outbound). As discussed above, the function and aspects of the proposed Community Center would fall under the category of “community parks,” which is considered a local park per the City’s Recreation Element. According to the City’s screening criteria No. 5, Locally Serving Public Facilities, public facilities that serve the surrounding community or public facilities that are passive use may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary, and the project would be considered to have a less-than-significant CEQA transportation impact and would be screened out of further analysis. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant VMT impact. c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? No Impact. Vehicular access to the project site will be provided via an existing full-access driveway, which is also the south leg of the Riverwalk Drive/Canopy Park Lane intersection. The project site is currently fronting a two-lane undivided roadway. Onsite circulation would not include dangerous intersections or hazardous geometric curves. The project does not include the use of any incompatible vehicles or equipment on the site, such as farm equipment. No project component would increase hazards to the public due to incompatible use, as the uses proposed by the project would be fully compatible with surrounding land uses. Therefore, no impact would occur. d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less-than-Significant Impact. The project site is located in an existing developed area with access to major roadways that would allow for emergency evacuation. The project would comply with all design recommendations and requirements for construction and operations as provided by the Santee Fire Department to ensure that emergency access meets City standards. Therefore, the project would not impact surrounding roadways in a manner resulting in impediments to emergency access, and impacts would be less than significant.

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a
local register of historical resources as
defined in Public Resources Code Section
5020.1(k), or

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 87
DECEMBER 2025

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
b) A resource determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to
a California Native American tribe.

Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? No Impact. As discussed in Section 3.5, Cultural Resources, no historical resources listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources have been identified within the proposed project site. Therefore, project implementation would not result in the substantial adverse change historical resources that are either listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources. No impact would occur. b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. As mentioned, the Project is subject to compliance with AB 52 (California PRC Section 21074), which requires consideration of impacts to TCRs as part of the CEQA process and requires the lead agency to notify any tribal groups (who have requested notification) of the proposed Project. Pursuant to AB 52, the City sent Project notification letters to tribal representatives of the Jamul Indian Village, Mesa Grande Band of Mission Indians, and Barona Band of Mission Indians on July 10, 2024, inviting each tribe to engage in tribal consultation, if desired (Appendix I). None of the tribal representatives responded to the AB 52 notification letter or requested consultation.

However, as discussed in Section 3.5, Cultural Resources, although the surface of the project site has been disturbed and is currently an asphalt parking lot with several landscape features located throughout and a grassy field in the northwest quadrant of the site, there is still the potential for buried and/or surface resources to be encountered. Therefore, the project will adhere to MM-CUL-2, which states that a qualified

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 88
DECEMBER 2025
archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be present during ground disturbing activities. Further, the project will adhere to MM-CUL-1, which states that in the event that archaeological resources (sites, features, or artifacts) are exposed during construction activities for the project, all work within the vicinity of the find must stop until a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards can evaluate the significance of the find. Construction activities may continue in other areas but should be redirected a safe distance from the find. If the new discovery is evaluated and found to be significant under CEQA and avoidance is not feasible, additional work such as data recovery may be warranted. A data recovery plan shall be developed by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the City and Native American representatives, if applicable. Ground disturbance can continue only after the resource has been properly mitigated and with approval by the City. With the inclusion of MM-CUL1 and MM-CUL-2, potential project impacts to any previously undiscovered tribal cultural resources would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
waste water treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the waste
water 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?
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?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 89
DECEMBER 2025
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, waste water treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would include the construction of a Community Center. The proposed project would require connections to water, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities. The proposed project site is located adjacent to existing development served by existing facilities. Project implementation would result in a minimal increase in demand of these services and would not require the construction of new or expansion of existing water, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less-than-Significant Impact. According to the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan for the Padre Dam Municipal Water District, the Padre Dam Municipal Water District can meet projected water demands out to 2045 under normal, single dry year, and multiple 5-year scenarios (Carollo Engineers 2021). The project would be consistent with the existing land use and zoning designations. Consequently, the project would not require water service beyond what has been anticipated by regional growth projections. Therefore, the project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years, and impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project result in a determination by the waste water treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The project would not require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities that would cause significant environmental effects. Existing water and sewer facilities are available adjacent to the site. Improvements would be limited to extension of pipelines onto the project site, and all impacts associated with proposed improvements have been considered within this environmental document. No new water or wastewater facilities are required to serve the project, and impacts would be less than significant. d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less-than-Significant Impact. Solid waste generated by the project that cannot be recycled would be sent to area landfills. Based on the Five-Year Review Report of the County Integrated Waste Management Plan for the County of San Diego (County of San Diego 2022), remaining capacity at area landfills would be adequate to handle the project’s solid waste disposal needs. Most of the solid waste collected in the City is disposed of at the Sycamore Sanitary Landfill, which has remaining capacity through the year 2042.

Other landfills that handle waste from the Cities of San Diego and Santee include the Miramar Landfill and the Otay Landfill, which have capacity remaining. The project would also generate construction waste during the construction phase of the project. City Municipal Code Section 13.38.060 requires that a minimum of 65% of construction and demolition debris by weight be diverted from landfills by using recycling, reuse, and diversion programs. A construction and demolition debris management plan that demonstrates how the project would comply with diversion requirements is required pursuant to the Municipal Code prior to

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 90
DECEMBER 2025
issuance of a building or demolition permit. As a result, the project would be served by landfill(s) with sufficient permitted capacity, and impacts would be less than significant. e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The project would comply with the City’s construction and demolition recycling ordinance (Santee Municipal Code Section 13.38.060) and Solid Waste Ordinance No. 3239-A, which follow state regulations for solid waste and recycling and require a minimum of 65% of the project’s construction and demolition be diverted from the landfills. As a result, impacts would be less than significant.

3.20 Wildfire

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XX. WILDFIRE – If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?
a) Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The project site is located in an existing developed area with access to major roadways that would allow for emergency evacuation. Therefore, the project would not impair

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 91
DECEMBER 2025
implementation of or physically interfere with emergency response, and impacts would be less than significant.
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, would the project exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Wildland fires present a significant threat in the City, particularly in the summer months when temperatures are high and precipitation is limited. Areas in the City that are particularly susceptible to fires are designated as Very High Hazard or High Hazard areas and are delineated on the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones for Local Responsibility Areas as recommended by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. As shown on the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Hazard Severity Zones Map, the project site is not located within land mapped as a Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The closest Very High Hazard area is located 1.4 miles northeast of the project site.

The project site is located in a generally flat area where urban development currently exists, and it is not susceptible to the threat of wildfire. While there is vegetation to the south and east, this area does not represent a significant source of wildfire risk, and the proposed project itself is not located within a fire hazard area. As such, in the unlikely event of a wildfire in the areas proximate to the proposed project site, all occupants at the proposed project site would evacuate the area as directed by local fire officials. As such, the proposed project would not exacerbate wildfire risks due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project 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? Less-than-Significant Impact. As described in Threshold 3.19.a), the project would not require or result in the construction of roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, or power lines. Additionally, the project would not require construction or maintenance of any other infrastructure facilities. Therefore, the project would not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk, and impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project 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? Less-than-Significant Impact. The project site is not located in a 100-year floodplain or a flood hazard zone (FEMA 2024). With adherence to the MS4 Permit and local City drainage control requirements (Municipal Code Chapter 9.06), the proposed changes to drainage patterns would not result in on- or offsite flooding or other adverse effects related to stormwater quantity or quality. Furthermore, the project site is located in a generally flat area and surrounded by existing development on all sides. Therefore, the project would not 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, and impacts would be less than significant.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 92
DECEMBER 2025

3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining 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?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable”
means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining 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?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The proposed project would not cause any fish or wildlife species to drop below self-sustaining levels. As discussed under Section 5.4 Biological Resources, the proposed project would not result in direct impacts to special-status plant or wildlife species with Project implementation. There is potential for construction-related and long-term indirect impacts. However, potential indirect impacts would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-3.

Additionally, as discussed in Section 3.5, Cultural Resources, and Section 3.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, there is potential for unanticipated discovery of Cultural or Tribal Cultural Resources. Impacts to archaeological and tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with the incorporation of MM-CUL-1

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 93
DECEMBER 2025
and MM-CUL-2. Therefore, impacts to biological and cultural resources would be less than significant with mitigation.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would result in significant impacts unless mitigated for the following environmental issues: air quality, cultural resources, tribal cultural resources, geology and soils, noise, and biological resources. The impacts associated with these resource areas are localized and thus would not result in cumulative impacts. A mitigation program has been prepared for each of these environmental issue areas to reduce impacts to less than significant. Other development projects within the City would also be subject to these requirements and separate review under CEQA, as applicable. All other potential impacts from the project were determined either to have no impact or to be less than significant following compliance with the established regulatory framework, without the need for mitigation.

Cumulatively, the proposed project would not result in any significant impacts that would substantially combine with impacts of other current or probable future impacts. Therefore, the proposed project, in conjunction with other future projects, would not result in any cumulatively considerable impacts, and no mitigation is required.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less-than-Significant Impact. As discussed throughout this document, no hazardous conditions on the project site or in the surrounding area were identified that could adversely affect human beings. It is not anticipated that demolition or construction activities would create conditions that would significantly directly or indirectly impact human beings. Development of the project site would comply with all state and City regulations that would ensure the Community Center building is safe and designed to protect future occupants. The project would not result in any substantial adverse effects on human beings directly or indirectly.
14169 94
DECEMBER 2025
4 References and Preparers

4.1 References Cited
ALUC (San Diego County Airport Land Use Commission). 2010. “Gillespie Field Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.” As amended December 20, 2010. Accessed April 1, 2024. http://sntbberry.cityofsanteeca.gov/ sites/FanitaRanch/Public/Remainder%20of%20the%20Record/(2)%20Reference%20Documents%20fro m%20EIR%20&%20Technical%20Reports/Tab%20302%20-%202010-12-20%20SDCRAA% 202010_Gillespie%20Field%20Airport%20Land%20Use%20Compatibility%20Plan.pdf.

CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2024. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsibility Area. September 29, 2023. Accessed April 1, 2024. https://calfire-forestry.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id= 988d431a42b242b29d89597ab693d008.

Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September.

Caltrans. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Division of Environmental Analysis, Environmental Engineering, Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Sacramento, California. April.

CAPCOA (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association). 2022. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) User’s Guide, Version 2022.1. Prepared by ICF, in collaboration with Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, Fehr & Peers, STI, and Ramboll. April 2022. Accessed March 31, 2024. https://caleemod.com/documents/user-guide/CalEEMod_User_Guide_v2022.1.pdf.

CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April 2005. Accessed December 2022. Accessed March 31, 2024. https://www.aqmd.gov/ docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/california-air-resources-board-air-quality-and-land-use-handbook-acommunity-health-perspective.pdf.

Carollo Engineers. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan for the Padre Dam Municipal Water District. Final Report. June 2021. Accessed January 2024. https://www.padredam.org/DocumentCenter/View/ 5620/2020-Urban-Water-Management-Plan.

CDFW. 2023. “California Natural Communities List.” Sacramento, California: CDFW, Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program. June 1, 2023. Accessed July 2023. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/ FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=153398&inline.

CEC (California Energy Commission) 2024a. “Electricity Consumption By County 2022.” Accessed February 2024. http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx.

CEC. 2024b. “Natural Gas Consumption By County 2022.” Accessed February 2024. https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 95
DECEMBER 2025
City of San Diego. 1998. Final MSCP Plan. Prepared by MSCP Policy Committee and MSCP Working Group.

San Diego, California: MSCP Policy Committee and MSCP Working Group. August 1998. http://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/pds/mscp/docs/SCMSCP/FinalMSCPProgramPlan.pdf.

City of Santee. 2003. General Plan. Accessed February 2024. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/ government/planning-and-building/land-use-code/general-plan.

City of Santee. 2017a. “General Plan Land Use Map.” Accessed April 2, 2024. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/8547/636362228959170000.

City of Santee. 2017b. “Mobility Element.” In City of Santee General Plan. Adopted October 25, 2017. Prepared by Chen Ryan. San Diego, California: Chen Ryan. Accessed April 2, 2024. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/11054/636446327420070000.

City of Santee. 2019. Sustainable Santee Plan: The City’s Roadmap to Greenhouse Gas Reductions. Final – December 2019. Prepared by LSA. Irvine, California: LSA. Accessed February 2024. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/18422/637185004712370000.

City of Santee. 2020. Santee Municipal Code. https://library.qcode.us/lib/santee_ca/pub/municipal_code/ item/title_8-chapter_8_06.

City of Santee. 2020. “Zoning District Map.” Revised January 8, 2020.

City of Santee. 2023. Santee Municipal Code.
https://library.qcode.us/lib/santee_ca/pub/municipal_code/item/title_5-chapter_5_04.

City of Santee. 2024. “Draft Safety and Environmental Justice Element.” In City of Santee General Plan. October 2024. Accessed February 12, 2025. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/departments/city-clerk/documentcentral/planning-building/active-projects/safety-environmental-justice-element/santee-safety-ej-elementoct2024-draft.pdf.

County of San Diego. 2007. Guidelines for Determining Significance and Report and Format and Content Requirements – Air Quality. Land Use and Environment Group. Department of Planning and Land Use.

Department of Public Works. March 19, 2007. Accessed March 31, 2024. https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/pds/ProjectPlanning/docs/AQ-Guidelines.pdf.

County of San Diego. 2022. Five-Year Review Report of the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan.

County of San Diego Department of Public Works. Accessed April 2, 2024. https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/dpw/SOLID_WASTE_PLANNING_and_RECYCLING/ Files/2022%20Five-Year%20Review.pdf.

DOC (California Department of Conservation). 1996. “Update of Mineral Land Classification: Aggregate Materials in the Western San Diego County Production-Consumption Region.” Sacramento, California: Department of Conservation, Division of Minerals and Geology. Accessed April 2, 2024. https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/pds/ceqa/Soitec-Documents/Final-EIR-Files/ references/rtcref/ch3.2.2/2014-12-19_CaliforniaDepartmentofConservation1997.pdf.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 96
DECEMBER 2025
DOC 2022a. California Important Farmland Finder. Accessed April 2, 2024. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/ DLRP/CIFF/.

DOC. 2022b. California Williamson Act Enrollment Finder. California Important Farmland Finder. Accessed April 2, 2024. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/WilliamsonAct/.

FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2024. “FEMA Flood Map Service Center: Search by Address” [interactive map application]. Accessed January 17, 2024. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search? AddressQuery=10123%20Riverwalk%20Drive%2C%20Santee%20CA.

FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. FTA Report No. 0123.

September.

FICON. 1992. Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues. Federal Interagency Committee on Noise. August 1992.

Harris, C.M., ed. 1991. Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control. 3rd ed. New York, New York:

McGraw-Hill Inc.

NREL (National Renewal Energy Laboratory). 2023. “Solar Resource Data.” PVWatts Calculator. https://pvwatts.nrel.gov/pvwatts.php.

OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program. Risk Assessment Guidelines. Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. February 2015.

Accessed February 2024. http://oehha.ca.gov/air/hot_spots/2015/2015GuidanceManual.pdf.

RWQCB (Regional Water Quality Control Board). 2024. “2020–2022 California Integrated Report of Impaired Water Bodies.” Accessed January 17, 2024. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/ water_quality_assessment/2020_2022_integrated_report.html.

SDAPCD. 2020. 2020 Plan for Attaining National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone in San Diego County.

October 2020. Accessed March 31, 2024. https://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdapcd/documents/ grants/planning/Att%20A%20(Attainment%20Plan)_ws.pdf.

SDAPCD. 2022a. “Supplemental Guidelines for Submission of Air Toxics ‘Hot Spots’ Program Health Risk Assessments (HRAs).” July 2022. https://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdapcd/documents/ permits/air-toxics/Hot-Spots-Guidelines.pdf.

SDAPCD. 2022b. Annual Air Quality Monitoring Network Report 2022. Prepared by D. Medina, A. Canter, M. Lu, and D. Sodeman. San Diego, California: Monitoring and Technical Services Division. Accessed March 31, 2024. https://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdapcd/documents/monitoring/ 2022-Network-Report.pdf.

SJVAPCD (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2018. “APR – 2030. Project Air Quality Analysis Applicability Determination under CEQA.” June 12, 2018. Accessed April 3, 2024. https://ww2.valleyair.org/media/bo3hz35n/apr-2030.pdf.

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 97
DECEMBER 2025
SWRCB (State Water Resources Control Board). 2024. “Restoration of a Reach of the San Diego River within the Unincorporated Community of Lakeside, San Diego County, California.” Accessed January 17, 2024. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/nps/docs/success/r9_lakeside.pdf.

U.S. Census Bureau. 202. QuickFacts: Population Estimates, July 1, 2022. Accessed April 2, 2024. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/

4.2 List of Preparers
Dudek
Caitlin Munson – Project Manager
Alexandra Howard – Environmental Planner
Elysa Briens – Environmental Planner
Nick Segovia – Acoustician
Elena Nuño – Air Quality Specialist
Danielle Mullen – Biologist
Matthew DeCarlo – Archaeologist
Jessica Colston – Archaeologist
Eric Schniewind – Senior Geologist, Hydrologist, and Hazardous Materials Specialist Audrey Herschberger, PE – Environmental Engineer
City of Santee
Sandi Sawa, Director of Planning and Building
Carl Schmitz, Director of Engineering/City Engineer
Marni Borg, Principal Environmental Planner
Steven Miller, Principal Civil Engineer

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 98
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Cuy
a
m
a
c
a
St
Magnolia Park Dr
Palm Glen Dr
Bilteer Ct
P
ark
Center Dr
Leave sly Trl
Riverwalk Dr
River Bluff Dr
C
ottonw
o
od A
ve
River P
ark Dr
Claudia Ave
Park Center Dr
Riverwalk Dr
Town Center
Community Park
- East
Town Center
Community Park
- West
YMCA & Santee
Aquatics Center
Rio Seco
Elementary
Sportsplex
USA Santee
N
Magnolia A
ve
Project Boundary
0 200 400
Feet
Date: 2/14/2024 User: rstrobridge Path: Z:\Projects\j1416903\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\Santee Community Center MND.aprx Map: Project Location Layout: Figure 1 Project Location Temecula
Murrieta
Chula Vista
Encinitas
San Diego
Carlsbad
Oceanside
Lemon Grove
El Cajon
Poway
San Marcos
Escondido
Vista
Imperial Beach
Del Mar
Coronado
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
S a n D i e g o
C o u n t y
M e x i c o
ÄÆ52
ÄÆ94
274 ÄÆ
ÄÆ74 195 ÄÆ
ÄÆ56
ÄÆ86
ÄÆ78
ÄÆ67
ÄÆ76 ÄÆ79
§¨¦805
§¨¦15
§¨¦8
Project Site
El Cajon Quadrangle - Township 15S Range 1W Section 22
SOURCE: Maxar 2022
Project Location
Santee Community Center Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration FIGURE 1

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 100
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
FIGURE 2
Site Plan
Santee Community Center Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration SOURCE: HMC Architects, 2022
Date: 9/13/2022 - Last saved by: kbarrow - Path: Z:\Projects\j1416903\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\Figure1_Project_Location.aprx

RIVERWALK DRIVE

PARK CENTER DRIVE
R/W
R/W
C/L
R/W
R/W
C/L

WOODGLEN VISTA CREEK

CITY OF SANTEE DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR:

SCALE
HORIZ: AS SHOW
VERT: AS SHOW

REVISIONS ACPTD BENCH MARK
RCE NO. EXPIRES

CONSTRUCTION RECORD REFERENCES DATE BY

CONTRACTOR

INSPECTOR

DATE COMPLETED

DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY CHECKED BY
DATE

REVIEWED

PLANS PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF

BY PROJECT ENGINEER XXXXX
CITY W.O. NO
SKC
CIP 2018-3

GPY SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER EH
X/XX/20XX
SARAH CURRAN X/XX/20XX CIVIL SITE PLAN - FOR REFERENCE ONLY

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 102
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
FIGURE 3
Level Plan
Santee Community Center Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration SOURCE: HMC Architects, 2022
Date: 9/13/2022 - Last saved by: kbarrow - Path: Z:\Projects\j1416903\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\Figure1_Project_Location.aprx

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 104
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
FIGURE 4
Elevations
Santee Community Center Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration SOURCE: HMC Architects, 2022
Date: 9/13/2022 - Last saved by: kbarrow - Path: Z:\Projects\j1416903\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\MND\Figure1_Project_Location.aprx

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 106
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
0 144288432576720864
100811521296144015841728187220162160230424482592273628803024316833123456360037443888403241764320446446084752489650405184532854725616576059046048619263366480662467686912705672007344748876327776792080648208835284968640878489289072921693609504964897929936 1008010224103681051210656108001094411088112321137611520116641180811952120961224012384125281267212816129601310413248133921353613680138241396814112142561440014544146881483214976151201526415408155521569615840159841612816272164161656016704168481699217136172801742417568177121785618000181441828818432185761872018864190081915219296194401958419728198722001620160203042044820592207362088021024211682131221456216002174421888220322217622320224642260822752228962304023184233282347223616237602390424048241922433624480246242476824912250562520025344254882563225776259202606426208263522649626640267842692827072272162736027504 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
SOURCES: Google 2025; Santee Recreation Center 2025; Dudek 2025 Santee Recreation Center Project (Santee, CA)
FIGURE 5
0 121.5 243 Feet Baseline Outdoor Ambient Sound Level Measurements Project Boundary
Cameron
Family
YMCA

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 108
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
0 144288432576720864
100811521296144015841728187220162160230424482592273628803024316833123456360037443888403241764320446446084752489650405184532854725616576059046048619263366480662467686912705672007344748876327776792080648208835284968640878489289072921693609504964897929936 1008010224103681051210656108001094411088112321137611520116641180811952120961224012384125281267212816129601310413248133921353613680138241396814112142561440014544146881483214976151201526415408155521569615840159841612816272164161656016704168481699217136172801742417568177121785618000181441828818432185761872018864190081915219296194401958419728198722001620160203042044820592207362088021024211682131221456216002174421888220322217622320224642260822752228962304023184233282347223616237602390424048241922433624480246242476824912250562520025344254882563225776259202606426208263522649626640267842692827072272162736027504 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
SOURCES: Google 2025; Santee Recreation Center 2025; Dudek 2025 Santee Recreation Center Project (Santee, CA)
FIGURE 6
0 121.5 243 Feet Predicted Stationary Source Operation Noise from Proposed Project - Daytime Scenario (1-Hour dBA Leq) A-weighted
Sound Level
Project Boundary
Calculation Boundary
30 dBA
Cameron
Family
YMCA
Proposed
Community
Center
R1 R2 R3 R4
R5
Riparian
Habitat
(east)
Rooftop
Mech. Equip.
(HVAC)
Idling
vehicles in
parking lot

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 110
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
0 144288432576720864
100811521296144015841728187220162160230424482592273628803024316833123456360037443888403241764320446446084752489650405184532854725616576059046048619263366480662467686912705672007344748876327776792080648208835284968640878489289072921693609504964897929936 1008010224103681051210656108001094411088112321137611520116641180811952120961224012384125281267212816129601310413248133921353613680138241396814112142561440014544146881483214976151201526415408155521569615840159841612816272164161656016704168481699217136172801742417568177121785618000181441828818432185761872018864190081915219296194401958419728198722001620160203042044820592207362088021024211682131221456216002174421888220322217622320224642260822752228962304023184233282347223616237602390424048241922433624480246242476824912250562520025344254882563225776259202606426208263522649626640267842692827072272162736027504 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
SOURCES: Google 2025; Santee Recreation Center 2025; Dudek 2025 Santee Recreation Center Project (Santee, CA)
FIGURE 7
0 121.5 243 Feet Predicted Stationary Source Operation Noise from Proposed Project - Nighttime Scenario (1-Hour dBA Leq) A-weighted
Sound Level
Project Boundary
Calculation Boundary
30 dBA
Cameron
Family
YMCA
Proposed
Community
Center
Riparian
Habitat
(southeast)
Rooftop
Mech. Equip.
(HVAC)
R1 R2 R3 R4
R5

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 112
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
0 144288432576720864
100811521296144015841728187220162160230424482592273628803024316833123456360037443888403241764320446446084752489650405184532854725616576059046048619263366480662467686912705672007344748876327776792080648208835284968640878489289072921693609504964897929936 1008010224103681051210656108001094411088112321137611520116641180811952120961224012384125281267212816129601310413248133921353613680138241396814112142561440014544146881483214976151201526415408155521569615840159841612816272164161656016704168481699217136172801742417568177121785618000181441828818432185761872018864190081915219296194401958419728198722001620160203042044820592207362088021024211682131221456216002174421888220322217622320224642260822752228962304023184233282347223616237602390424048241922433624480246242476824912250562520025344254882563225776259202606426208263522649626640267842692827072272162736027504 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
SOURCES: Google 2024; Dudek 2025
Santee Recreation Center Project (Dudek No. 14169)
FIGURE 8A
0 98.5 197 Feet Aggregate Project Operations Noise Prediction Results - Outdoor Event at Amphitheater Venue 35 dBA
Aggregate A-weighted
Sound Pressure Level
(SPL)

30.0 dB
50 dBA
45 dBA
Calculation Boundary (not physical feature)
R1 R2 R3 R4
R5
Riparian
Habitat
(east)
Riparian
Habitat
(southeast)
Riparian
Habitat
(at bridge)
Rooftop
Mech. Equip.
(HVAC)
Idling
vehicles in
parking lot
Outdoor Event
at
Ampitheater
Project Boundary

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 114
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
0 144288432576720864
100811521296144015841728187220162160230424482592273628803024316833123456360037443888403241764320446446084752489650405184532854725616576059046048619263366480662467686912705672007344748876327776792080648208835284968640878489289072921693609504964897929936 1008010224103681051210656108001094411088112321137611520116641180811952120961224012384125281267212816129601310413248133921353613680138241396814112142561440014544146881483214976151201526415408155521569615840159841612816272164161656016704168481699217136172801742417568177121785618000181441828818432185761872018864190081915219296194401958419728198722001620160203042044820592207362088021024211682131221456216002174421888220322217622320224642260822752228962304023184233282347223616237602390424048241922433624480246242476824912250562520025344254882563225776259202606426208263522649626640267842692827072272162736027504 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
SOURCES: Google 2024; Dudek 2025
Santee Recreation Center Project (Dudek No. 14169)
FIGURE 8B
0 98.5 197 Feet Aggregate Project Operations Noise Prediction Results - Outdoor Event at Outdoor Patio Venue Aggregate A-weighted
Sound Pressure Level
(SPL)

30.0 dB
Calculation Boundary
(not physical feature)
R1 R2 R3 R4
R5
Riparian
Habitat
(east)
Riparian
Habitat
(southeast)
Riparian
Habitat
(at bridge)
Project Boundary
Rooftop
Mech. Equip.
(HVAC)
Idling
vehicles in
parking lot
Outdoor Event
at Outdoor
Patio

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 116
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
0 144288432576720864
100811521296144015841728187220162160230424482592273628803024316833123456360037443888403241764320446446084752489650405184532854725616576059046048619263366480662467686912705672007344748876327776792080648208835284968640878489289072921693609504964897929936 1008010224103681051210656108001094411088112321137611520116641180811952120961224012384125281267212816129601310413248133921353613680138241396814112142561440014544146881483214976151201526415408155521569615840159841612816272164161656016704168481699217136172801742417568177121785618000181441828818432185761872018864190081915219296194401958419728198722001620160203042044820592207362088021024211682131221456216002174421888220322217622320224642260822752228962304023184233282347223616237602390424048241922433624480246242476824912250562520025344254882563225776259202606426208263522649626640267842692827072272162736027504 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
SOURCES: Google 2025; Santee Recreation Center 2025; Dudek 2025 Santee Recreation Center Project (Santee, CA)
FIGURE 9
0 121.5 243 Feet Predicted Stationary Source Operation Noise from Proposed Project - Emergency Generator Test Scenario (1-Hour dBA Leq) A-weighted
Sound Level
Project Boundary
Calculation Boundary
Cameron
Family
YMCA
Proposed
Community
Center
Rooftop
Mech. Equip.
(HVAC)
Idling
vehicles in
parking lot
Emergeny
Generator
R1 R2 R3 R4
R5
Riparian
Habitat
(east)

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 118
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
0 144288432576720864
100811521296144015841728187220162160230424482592273628803024316833123456360037443888403241764320446446084752489650405184532854725616576059046048619263366480662467686912705672007344748876327776792080648208835284968640878489289072921693609504964897929936 1008010224103681051210656108001094411088112321137611520116641180811952120961224012384125281267212816129601310413248133921353613680138241396814112142561440014544146881483214976151201526415408155521569615840159841612816272164161656016704168481699217136172801742417568177121785618000181441828818432185761872018864190081915219296194401958419728198722001620160203042044820592207362088021024211682131221456216002174421888220322217622320224642260822752228962304023184233282347223616237602390424048241922433624480246242476824912250562520025344254882563225776259202606426208263522649626640267842692827072272162736027504 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
SOURCES: Google 2025; Santee Recreation Center 2025; Dudek 2025 Santee Recreation Center Project (Santee, CA)
FIGURE 10
0 121.5 243 Feet Predicted Stationary Source Operation Noise from Proposed Project - Fireworks Event Scenario (1-Hour dBA Leq) A-weighted
Sound Level
Project Boundary
Calculation Boundary
Cameron
Family
YMCA
Proposed
Community
Center
Rooftop
Mech. Equip.
(HVAC)
Idling
vehicles in
parking lot
Fireworks Area
Source
R1 R2 R3 R4
R5
Riparian
Habitat
(east)

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 120
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2D 2D
Receptor Location
(located across from noise source)
Linear barrier extent = W+4D
Noise Source
(or Area of Activity)
Source width
(W)
Distance (D) from barrier to edge of noise source width, or radiating equipment cabinet/enclosure surface
Source: Santee Community Center 2025; Dudek 2025
Figure 11A
Temporary Construction Noise Barrier Extent Calculations

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 122
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Receptor Location
(located across from noise source)
Noise Source
(or Area of Activity)
Source width
(W)
D


barrier width < W+4D
Source: Santee Community Center 2025; Dudek 2025
Figure 11B
Temporary Construction Noise Barrier Extent Calculations

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 124
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Source: Santee Community Center 2025; Dudek 2025
Figure 11C
Temporary Construction Noise Barrier Extent Calculations

SANTEE COMMUNITY CENTER / INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 14169 126
DECEMBER 2025

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 1 of 54
Comment Letter S1: California Department of Transportation, May 28, 2025 S1-1: This comment is an introduction to the comment letter describing the California Department of
Transportation’s (Caltrans’) goals and does not raise a significant environmental issue regarding the
adequacy or accuracy of the information provided in
the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (Draft MND)
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

S1-1
S1
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 2 of 54
S1-2: This comment explains Caltrans’ commitment to
meeting multi-modal mobility needs and encourages
early coordination between the City and Caltrans for
locations that may affect both agencies. This
comment does not raise a significant environmental
issue regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the
information provided in the Draft MND for the
proposed Community Center. Therefore, no further
response is required.

S1-3: This comment explains Caltrans’ commitment to
“smart growth”-type land use planning and the
application of smart growth policies and encourages
coordination between the City and Caltrans for
locations where both agencies have joint jurisdiction.

This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

S1-1
cont.

S1-2
S1-3
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 3 of 54
S1-4: This comment explains Caltrans’ authority to issue a special use permit to operate or move a vehicle or
combination of vehicles or special mobile equipment
of a size or weight of vehicle or load exceeding the
maximum limitations specified in the California
Vehicle Code. This comment does not raise a
significant environmental issue regarding the
adequacy or accuracy of the information provided in
the Draft MND for the proposed Community Center.

Therefore, no further response is required.

S1-5: This comment explains Caltrans’ role as a Responsible Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and requirements for work within Caltrans’
right-of-way. The proposed Community Center does
not include or impact Caltrans right-of-way. This
comment does not raise a significant environmental
issue regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the
information provided in the Draft MND for the
proposed Community Center. Therefore, no further
response is required.

S1-4
S1-5
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 4 of 54
S1-5
cont.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 5 of 54
Comment Letter O1: Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians, April 29, 2025 O1-1: This comment states that the proposed Community
Center site has cultural significance or ties to the
Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians (Viejas) and requests
that a Kumeyaay cultural monitor be on site for grounddisturbing activities. Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-2 states: “A Native American Monitor of Kumeyaay
descent shall be present for any pre-construction
meeting and for all ground disturbing activities
associated with the project.” The mitigation measure
further describes the procedures to be followed in the
event of an inadvertent discovery of an archaeological
resource, tribal or cultural resource, historical
resource, or human remains. The City will assure
compliance with this mitigation measure and will
inform Viejas of any inadvertent discovery of cultural
artifacts, cremation sites or human remains, as
requested. This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the accuracy or
adequacy of the information provided in the Draft
Mitigated Negative Declaration (Draft MND) for the
proposed Community Center. Therefore, no further
response is required.

O1-1
O1
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 6 of 54
Comment Letter I1: Benjamin and Emelita “Emily” Aller, May 5, 2025 Note that the email from Benjamin Aller was received
on May 5, 2025. Staff responded in writing to the
questions raised in the email on Monday, May 5, 2025.

Below are the responses previously provided:

I1-1: This comment raises questions pertaining to the
proposed amphitheater, including the orientation and
acoustic design. The “Amphitheatre” is a 3-tier seat
wall (4 levels) integrated into the bank between the
proposed Community Center and Cameron Family
YMCA that will accommodate approximately 25-35
persons. The intent was not for concerts or large
gatherings but where persons could congregate for
leisure or to attend presentations/training outside.

Improvement #6 shown on the “First Level Plan” in
Figure 3 of the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
(Draft MND) shows the location of the seat wall. The
seat wall is also shown in Figure 4 of the Draft MND on the left side of the “South Perspective Elevation”.

Noise was evaluated in the Draft MND, and noise
calculations are included in Appendix H to the Draft
MND. All of these resources can be found at the link
below:
draft-mitigated-negative-declaration.pdf
I1-1
I1-2
I1-3 I1-4
I1
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 7 of 54
This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

I1-2: This comment asks about the hours of operations for the proposed Community Center’s amphitheater. The
hours of operations would be the same as the
operations for the Community Center, which are
Sunday through Thursday from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
and Fridays and Saturdays from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00
p.m. (see Section 2.3.2, Proposed Operation, of the
Draft MND). This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

I1-3: This comment asks about the elevation of the
proposed Community Center site. The pad elevation
of the proposed Community Center building will be
350’. The current elevation of the site is between 348’ and 350’. This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 8 of 54
I1-4: This comment asks about the start of construction of the proposed Community Center. Construction is
tentatively scheduled to begin January 2026. This
comment does not raise a significant environmental
issue regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the
information provided in the Draft MND for the
proposed Community Center. Therefore, no further
response is required.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 9 of 54
Comment Letter I2: Elie George Arslan, May 20, 2025
I2-1: This comment acknowledges that the Notice of Intent was received and expresses the opinion of the author
regarding the proposed Community Center. This
comment does not raise a significant environmental
issue regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the
information provided in the Draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration (Draft MND) for the proposed Community
Center. Therefore, no further response is required.

I2-2: This comment states that traffic and noise pollution in the project vicinity is currently bad, and traffic and
parking (across the street) will get worse with the
proposed Community Center. Transportation is
addressed in Section 3.17, Transportation, and
Appendix G, Transportation Analysis, of the Draft MND.

The analysis concluded that the function and aspects
of the proposed Community Center would fall under
the category of “community parks,” which is
considered a local park per the City’s Recreation
Element. According to the City’s screening criteria,
public facilities that serve the surrounding community
or public facilities that are passive use may be
presumed to have a less-than-significant impact,
absent substantial evidence to the contrary, and the
project would be considered to have a less-thansignificant CEQA transportation impact and would be screened out of further analysis. Therefore, the
I2-1
I2-2
I2-3
I2-4
I2-5
I2-6
I2-7
I2
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 10 of 54
proposed Community Center would have a less than
significant VMT impact and would not be inconsistent
with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.3 (b).

Furthermore, as of July 1, 2020, auto delay, level of
service (LOS) and other similar measures of vehicular
roadway capacity and traffic congestion were
eliminated as the basis for determining significant
transportation impacts under CEQA. As such,
congestion is no longer an impact under CEQA. For
events that impact roadways or large-scale events,
traffic control plans and temporary use permits will be required.

Noise is addressed in Section 3.13, Noise, and
Appendix H, Noise Supporting Documentation, of the
Draft MND. The analysis addressed short-term
construction noise, off-site project-attributed
transportation noise and off-site project-attributed
noise from operations. The analysis concluded:
• Construction Noise: While there would be an
audible change in the noise environment during
construction of the proposed Community Center,
the noise levels would be temporary and the
predicted levels would be less than the 80 dBA 8-
hour Leq Federal Transit Administration (FTA)-
based standard (see Table 3.13-2 in the MND).

Noise produced from the construction of the
proposed Community Center at the nearest single-
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 11 of 54
family residential noise-sensitive receptor to the
north (approximately 80 feet from the project
boundary) would result in a less than-significant
impact. Construction noise at the Woodglen Vista
Creek protected open space immediately south of
the project site was also evaluated. The analysis
concluded that the construction noise levels for
the construction activity phases would exceed the
60 dBA 1-hour Leq construction noise limit for
sensitive habitat, and therefore mitigation was
required. Section 5.04 of the Municipal Code (MC),
Noise Abatement and Control, limits the hours
and days of construction and prohibits
construction on Sundays or City recognized
holidays. Construction violations can be reported
to the City’s Planning, Building and Engineering
Department (619-258-4100) or a Service Request
can be entered on the City’s website
(https://www.cityof santeeca.gov).
• Transportation Noise: The change in roadway
noise levels at the nearest residential noise-
sensitive receptors was predicted for four
conditions: existing, existing plus project,
cumulative conditions, and cumulative plus
project. Traffic noise levels were calculated for
roadway segments bounded by intersections
within the project area including Riverwalk Drive
from Cuyamaca Street to Verde Vista Lane,
Riverwalk Drive from Verde Vista Lane to Canopy
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 12 of 54
Park Lane and Riverwalk Drive from Canopy Park
Lane to Park Center Drive. Where ambient sound
levels are below 60 dBA Ldn, the highest predicted
change in traffic noise level would be 1.3 dBA Ldn
on Riverwalk Drive from Verde Vista Lane to
Canopy Park Lane, which is less than the Federal
Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) 5 dBA
threshold and would be considered imperceptible
to the average person [“Federal Agency Review of
Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues”, Federal
Interagency Committee on Noise, August 1992].

On Riverwalk Drive from Cuyamaca Street to Verde
Vista Lane, the highest predicted change in traffic
noise level would be 0.7 dBA Ldn, which is less
than the FICON 3 dBA threshold. Potential impacts
from project-generated changes to future traffic
noise at existing off-site noise-sensitive land uses
along Riverwalk Drive between Cuyamaca Street
and Park Center Drive would be less than
significant.
• Operational Noise: Noise impacts from several
operational scenarios, each representing one full
hour of on-site activities at the proposed
Community Center were studied at six sensitive
receptor sites (See Table 3.13-4 and Figures 6
through 10 of the Draft MND). Of these sensitive
receptor sites, five represent residences to the
north and east of the site. The results presented in
Table 3.13-4 indicate that project operation noise,
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 13 of 54
under each modeled operation scenario, is
anticipated to be less than 65 dBA Ldn at the
nearest existing noise-sensitive receptors and
thereby comply with the operational noise
threshold (65 dBA Ldn) established in Section

5.04.090 of the City’s Noise Ordinance. Therefore,
impacts from onsite operational noise would be
less than significant.

With regard to parking, the proposed Community
Center would reconfigure the existing parking lot into
the new “east” parking lot, and the existing field north of the Cameron Family YMCA building would become
the new “west” parking lot. Section 2.3.1, Proposed
Project, of the Draft MND indicates that there would be a combined total of 275 regular stalls and 12
accessible stalls between the two parking lots.

Currently, the Cameron Family YMCA parking lot is
underutilized, and is only at capacity with large events.

With the 62 parking spaces added along Park Center
Drive through a restriping program approved at City
Council on April 9, 2025, there would be a net gain of
81 parking spaces. In addition, there are other
underutilized parking areas within the Town Center,
including the 206-space overflow parking lot south of
the community center, which is directly connected to
the Community Center via a pedestrian bridge.

Therefore, there will be adequate parking to
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 14 of 54
accommodate the proposed Community Center along
with the Cameron Family YMCA.

This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

I2-3: This comment raises a concern about pollution during construction and noise. Section 3.3, Air Quality, and
Tables 3.3-1 and 3.3-2 of the Draft MND address
construction emissions. The analysis concludes that
maximum daily construction emissions would not
exceed the San Diego Air Pollution Control District
(SDAPCD) significance thresholds for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon
monoxide (CO), sulfur oxide (SOx), particulate matter
with an aerodynamic diameter equal to or less than 10
microns (PM10), or less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5)
during construction; short-term construction air
quality impacts would be less than significant. See
response to comment I2-2 and Section 3.13, Noise,
and Appendix H, Noise Supporting Documentation, of
the Draft MND with respect to construction noise. This
comment does not raise a significant environmental
issue regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the
information provided in the Draft MND for the
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 15 of 54
proposed Community Center. Therefore, no further
response is required.

I2-4: This comment raises a concern about traffic
congestion and parking. These topics are addressed
in response to comment I2-2. This comment does not
raise a significant environmental issue regarding the
adequacy or accuracy of the information provided in
the Draft MND for the proposed Community Center.

Therefore, no further response is required.

I2-5: This comment raises concern about the private views from the commenter’s house. Aesthetics is
addressed in Section 3.1, Aesthetics, of the Draft
MND. The California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) significance thresholds address visual quality
or character of public views in non-urbanized areas
and urbanized areas. Since this site is in an urbanized area, the significance threshold focuses on whether or
not the project would “conflict with applicable zoning
or other regulations governing scenic quality” (see
threshold (c) in Section 3.1 of the Draft MND). As
addressed under this threshold, the proposed
Community Center site is zoned Town Center (TC),
and Community Centers are a permitted use in this
zone. Implementation of the project would not conflict
with applicable zoning. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant. This comment does not raise a
significant environmental issue regarding the
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 16 of 54
adequacy or accuracy of the information provided in
the Draft MND for the proposed Community Center.

Therefore, no further response is required.

I2-6: This comment suggests that this project be built in another location, and if this is not possible, then there should be measures to control traffic, control noise
from construction, control noise from future events as
well as have no environmental impacts. Traffic, noise
from construction and noise from future on-site events
are addressed in response to comment I2-2. As noted
in response to comment I2-2, for events that impact
roadways or large-scale events, traffic control plans
and temporary use permits will be required.

With respect to an alternative location, the City of
Santee owns the site, and the proposed Community
Center is consistent with the site’s TC zoning and land use designation. Furthermore, the original location for the proposed Community Center was the grass field
located north of the Cameron Family YMCA. However,
the location for the proposed Community Center was
moved south, adjacent to the east side of the Cameron
Family YMCA, to be further away from the adjacent
residential developments.

The Draft MND identified environmental impacts
related to air quality, biological resources, cultural
resources, geology, paleontological resources and
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 17 of 54
noise. These environmental impacts will be reduced
to below significance with implementation of the
proposed mitigation measures (i.e., MM-AQ-1, MMBIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3 and BIO-4, MM-CUL-1 and CUL-2, MM-GEO-1 and GEO-2, and MM-NOI-1). This
comment does not raise a significant environmental
issue regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the
information provided in the Draft MND for the
proposed Community Center. Therefore, no further
response is required.

I2-7: This comment is a conclusion and offers to answer any questions. This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 18 of 54
Comment Letter I3: Kristin Archer, May 27, 2025
I3-1: This comment expresses the opinion of the author
regarding the proposed Community Center. This
comment does not raise a significant environmental
issue regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the
information provided in the Draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration (Draft MND) for the proposed Community
Center. Therefore, no further response is required.

I3-2: This comment expresses concern over the loss of
parking and conversion of the grass lot north of the
Cameron Family YMCA, thereby eliminating an area
used for the Cameron Family YMCA’s summer camp
program. The proposed Community Center would
reconfigure the existing parking lot into the new “east” parking lot, and the existing field north of the Cameron Family YMCA building would become the new “west”
parking lot. Section 2.3.1, Proposed Project, of the
Draft MND indicates that there would be a combined
total of 275 regular stalls and 12 accessible stalls
between the two parking lots. Currently, the Cameron
Family YMCA parking lot is underutilized, and is only at capacity with large events. With the 62 parking spaces
added along Park Center Drive through a restriping
program approved at City Council on April 9, 2025,
there would be a net gain of 81 parking spaces. In
addition, there are other underutilized parking areas
within the Town Center, including the 206-space
I3-1
I3-2
I3-3
I3
I3-5
I3-4
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 19 of 54
overflow parking lot south of the community center,
which is directly connected to the Community Center
via a pedestrian bridge. Therefore, there will be
adequate parking to accommodate the proposed
Community Center along with the Cameron Family
YMCA.

As stated in Section 2.2, Environmental Setting, of the Draft MND, the northwest quadrant of the site (i.e., the grassy field) was previously graded for development of
the Town Center Community Park and was a
temporary gravel parking lot for the Cameron Family
YMCA when it was constructed in 2003. As part of the
Town Center Community Park Phase 2 project
completed in 2010, the gravel parking lot was
converted into a grassy field when the current
permanent parking lot was constructed. The grassy
field was originally planned to be the location for the proposed Community Center. However, the location
for the proposed Community Center was moved
south, adjacent to the east side of the Cameron Family
YMCA, to be further away from adjacent residential
developments. The grassy field is owned by the City of
Santee and zoned Town Center (TC). The proposed use
including parking is allowed by the zone and land use
designation of the site.

Santee’s Community Services Department is working
with the Cameron Family YMCA to identify alternative
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 20 of 54
locations for the summer camps. As discussed in
Section 2.3.2 of the MND, the proposed Community
Center will offer event space that will benefit the
community including senior, youth, and general
classes such as outdoor recreation, art, dance, martial arts, music, gardening, cooking, flower arranging,
language, historical, and cultural classes; training
classes such as CPR, fitness, safety, dog training, and babysitter training classes, and other classes needed
for the community.

This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

I3-3: This comment states that the large parking lot provides safe, well-lit parking which is used for overnight
resident parking. The reconfigured new “east” parking
lot and the new “west” parking lot will be landscaped
and lit at night. This comment does not raise a
significant environmental issue regarding the
adequacy or accuracy of the information provided in
the Draft MND for the proposed Community Center.

Therefore, no further response is required.

I3-4: This comment states that street parking on Riverwalk Drive near the Edgemoor hospital is a gathering
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 21 of 54
location for hospital patients and the
transient/homeless that exchange and partake in drug
use in this area, and vehicles in this area have been
vandalized. The proposed project will provide lighting
improvements such as upgraded LED parking lot
lighting. In addition, CCTV security cameras and
programmed events through the daytime and evening
hours will all help with security. This comment does
not raise a significant environmental issue regarding
the adequacy or accuracy of the information provided
in the Draft MND for the proposed Community Center.

Therefore, no further response is required.

I3-5: This comment represents a conclusion to the letter, requests consideration of the comments and requests
the proposed Community Center be located
elsewhere. In accordance with Section 15074(b) of the
CEQA Guidelines, the Santee City Council shall
consider the Draft MND together with any comments
received during public review during its decisionmaking process for the proposed Community Center.

With respect to an alternative location, the City of
Santee owns the site, and the proposed Community
Center is consistent with the site’s TC zoning and land use designation. This comment does not raise a
significant environmental issue regarding the
adequacy or accuracy of the information provided in
the Draft MND for the proposed Community Center.

Therefore, no further response is required.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 22 of 54
Comment Letter I4: Megan Powell, May 27, 2025
I4-1: This comment addresses concern over traffic from
existing events. Sections 2.2, Environmental Setting,
and 3.13, Noise, of the Draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration (Draft MND) acknowledge that there are
existing events that currently occur in the project
vicinity, and are likely to continue, including:
• The City’s Annual 4th of July fireworks celebration
in the Town Center Community Park East site
• Summer Concert series in the Town Center
Community Park East site
• “Movies in the Park” during summer months in the
Town Center Community Park East site
• Soccer, football and lacrosse sports events in the
Town Center Community Park East site
• Existing Cameron Family YMCA special events
• Sportsplex USA’s softball tournaments and indoor
soccer tournaments
This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

I4-1
I4-2
I4-3
I4-4
I4-5
I4-6
I4
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 23 of 54
I4-2: This comment addresses parking and the loss of the grass field north of the Cameron Family YMCA. With
regard to parking, the proposed Community Center
would reconfigure the existing parking lot into the new “east” parking lot, and the existing field north of the Cameron Family YMCA building would become the
new “west” parking lot. Section 2.3.1, Proposed
Project, of the Draft MNDindicates that there would be
a combined total of 275 regular stalls and 12
accessible stalls between the two parking lots.

Currently, the Cameron Family YMCA parking lot is
underutilized, and is only at capacity with large events.

With the 62 parking spaces added along Park Center
Drive through a restriping program approved at City
Council on April 9, 2025, there would be a net gain of
81 parking spaces. In addition, there are other
underutilized parking areas within the Town Center,
including the 206-space overflow parking lot south of
the community center, which is directly connected to
the Community Center via a pedestrian bridge.

Therefore, as stated in Section 2.3.1 of the Draft MND, there will be sufficient parking to accommodate the
proposed Community Center along with the Cameron
Family YMCA.

With respect to the grass area that will be converted to parking, as stated in Section 2.2, Environmental
Setting, of the Draft MND, the northwest quadrant of
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 24 of 54
the project site (i.e., the grassy field) was previously graded for development of the Town Center
Community Park and was a temporary gravel parking
lot for the Cameron Family YMCA when it was
constructed in 2003. As part of the Town Center
Community Park Phase 2 project completed in 2010,
the gravel parking lot was converted into a grassy field when the current permanent parking lot was
constructed. The grassy field was originally planned to be the location for the proposed Community Center.

However, the location for the proposed Community
Center was moved south, adjacent to the east side of
the Cameron Family YMCA, to be further away from
adjacent residential developments.

The grassy field is owned by the City of Santee and
zoned Town Center (TC). The proposed use including
parking is allowed by the zone and land use
designation of the site. Santee’s Community Services
Department is working with the Cameron Family YMCA
to identify alternative locations for the summer
camps. As discussed in Section 2.3.2 of the MND, the
proposed Community Center will offer event space
that will benefit the community including senior,
youth, and general classes such as outdoor
recreation, art, dance, martial arts, music, gardening, cooking, flower arranging, language, historical, and
cultural classes; training classes such as CPR, fitness, Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 25 of 54
safety, dog training, and babysitter training classes,
and other classes needed for the community.

This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

I4-3: This comment states that there are no bus lines close to the proposed Community Center site. Section 3.17,
Transportation, of the Draft MND addresses public
transportation. As stated under threshold (a), transit
service is provided to the area via Metropolitan Transit Services. The nearest bus stop is located just 230 feet south of the Riverwalk Drive/Cuyamaca Street
intersection, which is a walking distance of 0.5 mile
from the project site. The Santee Transit Center, which serves the Green Line (now Copper Line) Trolley, is
located in the Santee Trolley Square shopping mall,
which is a walking distance of 1.2 miles from the
project site. A description of the nearest transit service is shown below:
• The Green Line (now Copper Line) Trolley runs
between the Santee Transit Center and El Cajon
then connects to the 12th and Imperial Avenue
Transit Center in Downtown San Diego. There are
27 stops along this route, with 15-minute
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 26 of 54
headways on the weekdays and 30-minute
headways on the weekends. During weekends,
headways are 15–30 minutes during the peak
periods.

In addition to public transit, the City provides Class II bike lanes on Mast Boulevard, Cuyamaca Street, and
Magnolia Avenue, and Class III bike routes on
Riverwalk Drive. Per the City’s Mobility Element, Class III bike routes are planned along Park Center Drive
between Mast Boulevard and Riverwalk Drive.

Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the roadways
within the study area with the exception of Park Center Drive south of Riverwalk Drive. In addition, a sidewalk connection is provided between the project site and
the Santee Transit Center and nearby bus stops.

This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

I4-4: This comment addresses existing congestion in
parking lots and along the street from events at the
Sportsplex, Cameron Family YMCA and behind the
YMCA. See responses to I4-1 and I4-2. This comment
does not raise a significant environmental issue
regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the information
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 27 of 54
provided in the Draft MND for the proposed
Community Center. Therefore, no further response is
required.

I4-5: This comment asks about the emergency evacuation
plan for event attendees and residents along Riverwalk
Drive with existing events and a large event at the
proposed Community Center. As addressed in
threshold (f) of Section 3.9, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, of the Draft MND, the project site is located in an existing developed area with access to major
roadways that would allow for emergency evacuation.

Riverwalk Drive and Park Center Drive are built to City standards that accommodate emergency access.

Riverwalk Drive leads to Cuyamaca Street to the west
and Park Center Drive to the east of the project site.

Both Cuyamaca Street and Park Center Drive connect
to Mast Boulevard and eventually to Magnolia Avenue
which are anticipated evacuation routes. Further, the
proposed Community Center would comply with all
design recommendations and requirements for
construction and operations, including large events,
as provided by the Santee Fire Department to ensure
that emergency access meets City standards.

Therefore, the proposed Community Center would not
impair implementation of or physically interfere with
emergency response, and impacts would be less than
significant. This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 28 of 54
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

I4-6: This comment does not support the Community
Center in the proposed location. With respect to an
alternative location, the City of Santee owns the site, and the proposed Community Center is consistent
with the site’s TC zoning and land use designation. This comment does not raise a significant environmental
issue regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the
information provided in the Draft MND for the
proposed Community Center. Therefore, no further
response is required.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 29 of 54
Comment Letter I5: Michele Abbott, May 27, 2025
I5-1: This comment presents opposition to the proposed
Community Center based on traffic, noise and the loss
of the grass area north of the Cameron Family YMCA.

Transportation is addressed in Section 3.17,
Transportation, and Appendix G, Transportation
Analysis, of the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
(Draft MND). As of July 1, 2020, auto delay, level of
service (LOS) and other similar measures of vehicular
roadway capacity and traffic congestion were
eliminated as the basis for determining significant
transportation impacts under CEQA. The
intersection analyses in the MND use LOS for
informational purposes. Table 6-1 of Appendix G
shows that all the study area intersections are
calculated to operate at Level of Service (LOS) D or
better during both the AM and PM peak hours. The four
intersections along Riverwalk Drive currently operate
at LOS C or better. According to Table 9-1 of Appendix
G, under the Existing + Cumulative Projects (projects
in the study area that could be constructed and
occupied between January 2024 and projected
opening year of the project (Fall of 2026)) + Project
Conditions, all study area intersections are calculated to operate at LOS D or better during the morning and
afternoon peak hours. LOS D is considered an
acceptable level of intersection operation per the City of Santee’s Mobility Element. Further, the existing
I5-1
I5
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 30 of 54
intersection at Riverwalk Drive and Park Center Drive
is stop-controlled and has appropriate signage and
roadway striping. Based on the above intersection
analyses conclusions, the roads adjacent to the
project site will operate at acceptable levels of service.

Noise is addressed in Section 3.13, Noise, and
Appendix H of the Draft MND. The analysis addressed
short-term construction noise, off-site projectattributed transportation noise and off-site projectattributed noise from operations. The analysis concluded:
• Construction Noise: While there would be an
audible change in the noise environment during
construction of the proposed Community Center,
the noise levels would be temporary and the
predicted levels would be less than the 80 dBA 8-
hour Leq Federal Transit Administration (FTA)-
based standard (see Table 3.13-2 in the MND).

Noise produced from the construction of the
proposed Community Center at the nearest singlefamily residential noise-sensitive receptor to the north (approximately 80 feet from the project
boundary) would result in a less than-significant
impact. Construction noise at the Woodglen Vista
Creek protected open space immediately south of
the project site was also evaluated. The analysis
concluded that the construction noise levels for
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 31 of 54
the construction activity phases would exceed the
60 dBA 1-hour Leq construction noise limit for
sensitive habitat, and therefore mitigation was
required. Section 5.04 of the Municipal Code (MC),
Noise Abatement and Control, limits the hours
and days of construction and prohibits
construction on Sundays or City recognized
holidays. Construction violations can be reported
to the City’s Planning, Building and Engineering
Department (619-258-4100) or a Service Request
can be entered on the City’s website
(https://www.cityof santeeca.gov).
• Transportation Noise: The change in roadway noise
levels at the nearest residential noise-sensitive
receptors was predicted for four conditions:
existing, existing plus project, cumulative
conditions, and cumulative plus project. Traffic
noise levels were calculated for roadway segments
bounded by intersections within the project area
including Riverwalk Drive from Cuyamaca Street to
Verde Vista Lane, Riverwalk Drive from Verde Vista
Lane to Canopy Park Lane and Riverwalk Drive
from Canopy Park Lane to Park Center Drive.

Where ambient sound levels are below 60 dBA Ldn,
the highest predicted change in traffic noise level
would be 1.3 dBA Ldn on Riverwalk Drive from
Verde Vista Lane to Canopy Park Lane, which is
less than the Federal Interagency Committee on
Noise (FICON) 5 dBA threshold and would be
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 32 of 54
considered imperceptible to the average person
[“Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise
Analysis Issues”, Federal Interagency Committee
on Noise, August 1992]. On Riverwalk Drive from
Cuyamaca Street to Verde Vista Lane, the highest
predicted change in traffic noise level would be 0.7
dBA Ldn, which is less than the FICON 3 dBA
threshold. Potential impacts at existing off-site
noise-sensitive land uses along Riverwalk Drive
between Cuyamaca Street and Park Center Drive
and with respect to project-generated changes to
future traffic noise would be less than significant.
• Operational Noise: Noise impacts from several
operational scenarios, each representing one full
hour of on-site activities at the proposed
Community Center were studied at six sensitive
receptor sites (See Table 3.13-4 and Figures 6
through 10 of the Draft MND). Of these sensitive
receptor sites five represent residences to the
north and east of the site. The results presented in
Table 3.13-4 suggest that project operation noise,
under each modeled operation scenario, is
anticipated to be less than 65 dBA Ldn at the
nearest existing noise-sensitive receptors and
thereby comply with the operational noise
threshold (65 dBA Ldn) established in Section

5.04.090 of the City’s Noise Ordinance. Therefore,
impacts from on-site operational noise would be
less than significant.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 33 of 54
With respect to the grassy areas north of the Cameron
Family YMCA, as stated in Section 2.2, Environmental
Setting, of the Draft MND, the northwest quadrant of
the site (i.e., the grassy field) was previously graded for development of the Town Center Community Park and
was a temporary gravel parking lot for the Cameron
Family YMCA when it was constructed in 2003. As part
of the Town Center Community Park Phase 2 project
completed in 2010, the gravel parking lot was
converted into a grassy field when the current
permanent parking lot was constructed. The grassy
field was originally planned to be the location for the proposed Community Center.However, the location
for the proposed Community Center was moved
south, adjacent to the east side of the Cameron Family
YMCA, to be further away from adjacent residential
developments.

The grassy field is owned by the City of Santee and
zoned Town Center (TC). The proposed use including
parking is allowed by the zone and land use
designation of the site. Santee’s Community Services
Department is working with the Cameron Family YMCA
to identify alternative locations for the summer
camps. As discussed in Section 2.3.2 of the MND, the
proposed Community Center will offer event space
that will benefit the community including senior,
youth, and general classes such as outdoor
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 34 of 54
recreation, art, dance, martial arts, music, gardening, cooking, flower arranging, language, historical, and
cultural classes; training classes such as CPR, fitness, safety, dog training, and babysitter training classes,
and other classes needed for the community.

This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 35 of 54
Comment Letter I6: Hammon Dale and Nina Humphries, May 28, 2025 I6-1: This comment presents opposition to the proposed
Community Center project based on traffic, loss of
community utility of parking spaces, pollution, and
property values. The comment is introductory and
specific comments are addressed in the subsequent
responses. This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft
Mitigated Negative Declaration (Draft MND) for the
proposed Community Center. Therefore, no further
response is required.

I6-2: This comment addresses traffic congestion along
Riverwalk Drive and Park Center Drive particularly
during Community Center events, with emphasis on
the critical safety implications from traffic delays near Rio Seco Elementary School and Edgemoor Hospital.

Intersection analyses indicate the efficiency of the
road system. As cited in the comment, traffic was
addressed in Appendix G, Transportation Analysis, and
Section 3.17, Transportation, of the Draft MND.

Intersection analyses indicate the efficiency of the
road system. Table 6-1 of Appendix G shows that all
the study area intersections are calculated to operate
at Level of Service (LOS) D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours. The four intersections along
Riverwalk Drive currently operate at LOS C or better.

I6-1
I6-2
I6-3
I6-4
I6-5
I6
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 36 of 54
According to Table 9-1 of Appendix G, under the
Existing + Cumulative Projects (projects in the study
area that could be constructed and occupied between
January 2024 and projected opening year of the project
(Fall of 2026)) + Project Conditions, all study area
intersections are calculated to operate at LOS D or
better during the morning and afternoon peak hours.

LOS D is considered an acceptable level of
intersection operation per the City of Santee General
Plan. Based on the above intersection analyses
conclusions, the roads adjacent to the project site will operate at acceptable levels of service. As noted in
response to comment I2-2, for events that impact
roadways or large-scale events, traffic control plans
and temporary use permits will be required. This
comment does not raise a significant environmental
issue regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the
information provided in the Draft MND for the
proposed Community Center. Therefore, no further
response is required.

I6-3: This comment states that the loss of the grassy field would impact passive recreational activity and
childcare programs and would contribute to a less
aesthetically pleasing environment. As stated in
Section 2.2, Environmental Setting, of the Draft MND,
the northwest quadrant of the site (i.e., the grassy field) was previously graded for development of the Town
Center Community Park and was a temporary gravel
I6-6
I6-7
I6-8
I6-5
cont.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 37 of 54
parking lot for the Cameron Family YMCA when it was
constructed in 2003. As part of the Town Center
Community Park Phase 2 project completed in 2010,
the gravel parking lot was converted into a grassy field when the current permanent parking lot was
constructed. The grassy field was originally planned to be the location for the proposed Community Center.

However, the location for the proposed Community
Center was moved south, adjacent to the east side of
the Cameron Family YMCA, to be further away from
adjacent residential developments.

The grassy field is owned by the City of Santee and
zoned Town Center (TC). The proposed Community
Center, including parking, is allowed by the zone and
land use designation of the site. Santee’s Community
Services Department is working with the Cameron
Family YMCA to identify alternative locations for the
summer camps. As discussed in Section 2.3.2 of the
MND, the proposed Community Center will offer event
space that will benefit the community including senior, youth, and general classes such as outdoor
recreation, art, dance, martial arts, music, gardening, cooking, flower arranging, language, historical, and
cultural classes; training classes such as CPR, fitness, safety, dog training, and babysitter training classes,
and other classes needed for the community.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 38 of 54
Aesthetics is addressed in Section 3.1, Aesthetics, of
the Draft MND. The California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) significance thresholds address visual
quality or character of public views in non-urbanized
areas and urbanized areas. Since this site is in an
urbanized area, the significance threshold focuses on
whether or not the project would “conflict with
applicable zoning or other regulations governing
scenic quality” (see threshold (c) in Section 3.1). As
addressed under this threshold, the proposed
Community Center site is zoned TC, and Community
Centers are a permitted use in this zone.

Implementation of the project would not conflict with
applicable zoning. Therefore, impacts would be less
than significant. This comment does not raise a
significant environmental issue regarding the
adequacy or accuracy of the information provided in
the Draft MND for the proposed Community Center.

Therefore, no further response is required.

I6-4: This comment raises concern over health and quality of life due to potential impacts from noise, light, air pollution and traffic. The comment notes that the
Draft MND acknowledges new sources of light and air
pollution from construction and operation.

Noise is addressed in Section 3.13, Noise, and
Appendix H, Noise Supporting Documentation, of the
Draft MND. The analysis addressed short-term
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 39 of 54
construction noise, off-site project-attributed
transportation noise and off-site project-attributed
noise from operations. The analysis concluded: • Construction Noise: While there would be an audible change in the noise environment during
construction of the proposed Community Center,
the noise levels would be temporary and the
predicted levels would be less than the 80 dBA 8-
hour Leq Federal Transit Administration (FTA)-
based standard (see Table 3.13-2 in the MND).

Noise produced from the construction of the
proposed Community Center at the nearest single-
family residential noise-sensitive receptor to the
north (approximately 80 feet from the project
boundary) would result in a less than-significant
impact. Construction noise at the Woodglen Vista
Creek protected open space immediately south of
the project site was also evaluated. The analysis
concluded that the construction noise levels for
the construction activity phases would exceed the
60 dBA 1-hour Leq construction noise limit for
sensitive habitat, and therefore mitigation was
required. Section 5.04 of the Municipal Code (MC),
Noise Abatement and Control, limits the hours
and days of construction and prohibits
construction on Sundays or City recognized
holidays. Construction violations can be reported
to the City’s Planning, Building and Engineering
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 40 of 54
Department (619-258-4100) or a Service Request
can be entered on the City’s website
(https://www.cityof santeeca.gov).
• Transportation Noise: The change in roadway noise
levels at the nearest residential noise-sensitive
receptors was predicted for four conditions:
existing, existing plus project, cumulative
conditions, and cumulative plus project. Traffic
noise levels were calculated for roadway segments
bounded by intersections within the project area
including Riverwalk Drive from Cuyamaca Street to
Verde Vista Lane, Riverwalk Drive from Verde Vista
Lane to Canopy Park Lane and Riverwalk Drive
from Canopy Park Lane to Park Center Drive.

Where ambient sound levels are below 60 dBA Ldn,
the highest predicted change in traffic noise level
would be 1.3 dBA Ldn on Riverwalk Drive from
Verde Vista Lane to Canopy Park Lane, which is
less than the Federal Interagency Committee on
Noise (FICON) 5 dBA threshold and would be
considered imperceptible to the average person
[“Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise
Analysis Issues”, Federal Interagency Committee
on Noise, August 1992]. On Riverwalk Drive from
Cuyamaca Street to Verde Vista Lane, the highest
predicted change in traffic noise level would be 0.7
dBA Ldn, which is less than the FICON 3 dBA
threshold. Potential impacts from project-
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 41 of 54
generated changes to future traffic noise at existing
off-site noise-sensitive land uses along Riverwalk
Drive between Cuyamaca Street and Park Center
Drive would be less than significant.
• Operational Noise: Noise impacts from several
operational scenarios, each representing one full
hour of on-site activities at the proposed
Community Center were studied at six sensitive
receptor sites (See Table 3.13-4 and Figures 6
through 10 of the Draft MND). Of these sensitive
receptor sites five represent residences to the
north and east of the site. The results presented in
Table 3.13-4 suggest that project operation noise,
under each modeled operation scenario, including
emergency generator testing and operating
heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC)
systems, is anticipated to be less than 65 dBA Ldn
at the nearest existing noise-sensitive receptors
and thereby comply with the operational noise
threshold (65 dBA Ldn) established in Section

5.04.090 of the City’s Noise Ordinance. Therefore,
impacts from on-site operational noise would be
less than significant.

Threshold (d) of Section 3.1, Aesthetics, of the Draft
MND addresses lighting. The analysis acknowledges
that the proposed Community Center would introduce
nighttime lighting that would be typical of a
Community Center and similar to the night lighting
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 42 of 54
from the existing Cameron Family YMCA building to
the west. The analysis addresses lighting from
construction, operations and traffic and proposed
building materials. Project construction would be
limited to the City’s allowable construction hours of
7;00a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and is not expected to require
lighting. In the event that construction lighting is
required, it would be properly shielded to avoid
spillover effects. Project operations would generate
lighting from two primary sources: lighting from
Community Center building interiors that would pass
through windows and lighting from exterior sources
(e.g., street lighting, parking lot lighting, vehicle lights, building illumination, security lighting and landscape
lighting). Light spillover, trespass, and potential glare from project lighting are regulated by Section

13.30.030 (B) of the Santee Municipal Code. The code
requires that all lights and illuminated signs be
shielded or directed to not cause glare on adjacent
properties or motorists. Exterior lighting would be
shielded and directed to not cause glare on adjacent
properties or motorists. With regard to lighting
associated with traffic, light associated with additional vehicle trips generated by the project would be similar in character to what is currently generated by vehicles travelling along the existing roadway network after
dark. Although the project could operate until 11pm in
some cases, vehicles exiting the property would not
create a significant concentrated source of light.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 43 of 54
Regarding exterior glare sources (e.g., brightly colored building facades, metal surfaces, and reflective glass), glass would be used for the building’s exterior. Glass
windows would have a relatively small surface area.

However, the main building entrance would feature tall
glass panels to provide natural light. Any resulting
glare from these windows would be significantly
reduced from public view because the building would
be set back from Riverwalk Drive and a parking lot
would be located between the proposed building and
the road. The analysis concluded that the project
would result in less-than-significant impacts related to light, glare, and nighttime views.

With respect to pollution, Section 3.3, Air Quality, and Tables 3.3-1 and 3.3-2 of the Draft MND address
construction emissions. The analysis concludes that
maximum daily construction emissions would not
exceed the SDAPCD significance thresholds for VOCs,
NOx, CO, sulfur oxide (SOx), PM10, or PM2.5 during
construction; short-term construction air quality
impacts would be less than significant. Table 3.3-3
and 3.3.4 address maximum area, energy, mobile
source, and stationary source emissions associated
with project operation (year 2026). Maximum daily
operational emissions from the project would not
exceed the SDAPCD significance thresholds for VOC,
NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, or PM2.5; long-term air quality
impacts would be less than significant.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 44 of 54
With respect to traffic, please see response to
comment I6-2. This comment does not raise a
significant environmental issue regarding the
adequacy or accuracy of the information provided in
the Draft MND for the proposed Community Center.

Therefore, no further response is required.

I6-5: This comment summarizes the comments raised in I6- 2 through I6-4 and degradation of property values. See
responses to comments I6-2 through I6-4. Property
values are not an environmental issue and therefore
are not required to be addressed in a CEQA document.

This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

I6-6: This comment questions whether the proposed
Community Center is the most prudent use of public
funds. The proposed Community Center is funded
primarily by Public Facility and Park In Lieu Developer Impact Fees, and the City already owns the site.

Funding is not an environmental issue and therefore is
not required to be addressed in a CEQA document.

This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 45 of 54
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

I6-7: This comment summarizes the previous comments
and recommends reconsideration of the scale, design
and location of the proposed Community Center.

Please see responses to comments I6-2 through I6-6.

With respect to an alternative location, the City of
Santee owns the site, and the proposed Community
Center is consistent with the site’s TC zoning and land use designation. This comment does not raise a
significant environmental issue regarding the
adequacy or accuracy of the information provided in
the Draft MND for the proposed Community Center.

Therefore, no further response is required.

I6-8: This comment thanks the City for consideration of the concerns raised in the comment letter. This comment
does not raise a significant environmental issue
regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the information
provided in the Draft MND for the proposed
Community Center. Therefore, no further response is
required.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 46 of 54
Comment Letter I7: Elie George Arslan (2), May 28, 2025 I7-1: This resends comment letter I2 and asks what the City will do with concerns raised by residents. Please see
responses to comments I2-1 through I2-7. In addition,
in accordance with Section 15074(b) of the CEQA
Guidelines, the Santee City Council shall consider the
Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (Draft MND)
together with any comments received during public
review during its decision-making process for the
proposed Community Center. This comment does not
raise a significant environmental issue regarding the
adequacy or accuracy of the information provided in
the Draft MND for the proposed Community Center.

Therefore, no further response is required.

I7
I7-1
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 47 of 54
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 48 of 54
Comment Letter I8: Lisa and Robert Albon, May 28, 2025
I8-1: This comment is introductory and specific comments are addressed in the subsequent responses. This
comment does not raise a significant environmental
issue regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the
information provided in the Draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration (Draft MND) for the proposed Community
Center. Therefore, no further response is required.

I8-2: This comment describes the lack of parking in the existing Riverwalk community. This comment does not
raise a significant environmental issue regarding the
adequacy or accuracy of the information provided in
the Draft MND for the proposed Community Center.

Therefore, no further response is required.

I8-3: This comment explains that Riverwalk Drive and Park Center Drive are two-lane roads and questions the
ability to evacuate from the community, Cameron
Family YMCA, Sportsplex, Edgemoor Hospital and
proposed Community Center and additional housing.

As addressed under threshold (f) of Section 3.9,
Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the Draft MND,
the project site is located in an existing developed area with access to major roadways that would allow for
emergency evacuation. Riverwalk Drive and Park
Center Drive are built to City standards that can
I8
I8-1
I8-2
I8-4
I8-5
I8-3
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 49 of 54
accommodate emergency access. Riverwalk Drive
leads to Cuyamaca Street to the west and Park Center
Drive to the east of the project site. Both Cuyamaca
Street and Park Center Drive connect to Mast
Boulevard and eventually to Magnolia Avenue, which
are anticipated evacuation routes. Further, the
proposed Community Center would comply with all
design recommendations and requirements for
construction and operations, including large events,
as provided by the Santee Fire Department to ensure
that emergency access meets City standards.

Therefore, the project would not impair
implementation of or physically interfere with
emergency response, and impacts would be less than
significant. This comment does not raise a significant
environmental issue regarding the adequacy or
accuracy of the information provided in the Draft MND
for the proposed Community Center. Therefore, no
further response is required.

I8-4: This comment questions the ability to evacuate in an emergency. See response to comment I8-3. This
comment does not raise a significant environmental
issue regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the
information provided in the Draft MND for the
proposed Community Center. Therefore, no further
response is required.

I8-6
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 50 of 54
I8-5: This comment addresses noise, particularly at night, and hours of operation as compared to the Cameron
Family YMCA. Noise is addressed in Section 3.13,
Noise, and Appendix H, Noise Supporting
Documentation, of the Draft MND. The analysis
addressed short-term construction noise, off-site
project-attributed transportation noise and off-site
project-attributed noise from operations. The analysis
concluded:
• Construction Noise: While there would be an
audible change in the noise environment during
construction of the proposed Community Center,
the noise levels would be temporary and the
predicted levels would be less than the 80 dBA 8-
hour Leq Federal Transit Administration (FTA)-
based standard (see Table 3.13-2 in the MND).

Noise produced from the construction of the
proposed Community Center at the nearest singlefamily residential noise-sensitive receptor to the north (approximately 80 feet from the project
boundary) would result in a less than-significant
impact. Construction noise at the Woodglen Vista
Creek protected open space immediately south of
the project site was also evaluated. The analysis
concluded that the construction noise levels for
the construction activity phases would exceed the
60 dBA 1-hour Leq construction noise limit for
sensitive habitat, and therefore mitigation was
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 51 of 54
required. Section 5.04 of the Municipal Code (MC),
Noise Abatement and Control, limits the hours
and days of construction and prohibits
construction on Sundays or City recognized
holidays. Construction violations can be reported
to the City’s Planning, Building and Engineering
Department (619-258-4100) or a Service Request
can be entered on the City’s website
(https://www.cityof santeeca.gov).
• Transportation Noise: The change in roadway
noise levels at the nearest residential noise-
sensitive receptors was predicted for four
conditions: existing, existing plus project,
cumulative conditions, and cumulative plus
project. Traffic noise levels were calculated for
roadway segments bounded by intersections
within the project area including Riverwalk Drive
from Cuyamaca Street to Verde Vista Lane,
Riverwalk Drive from Verde Vista Lane to Canopy
Park Lane and Riverwalk Drive from Canopy Park
Lane to Park Center Drive. Where ambient sound
levels are below 60 dBA Ldn, the highest predicted
change in traffic noise level would be 1.3 dBA Ldn
on Riverwalk Drive from Verde Vista Lane to
Canopy Park Lane, which is less than the Federal
Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) 5 dBA
threshold and would be considered imperceptible
to the average person [“Federal Agency Review of
Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues”, Federal
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 52 of 54
Interagency Committee on Noise, August 1992].

On Riverwalk Drive from Cuyamaca Street to Verde
Vista Lane, the highest predicted change in traffic
noise level would be 0.7 dBA Ldn, which is less
than the FICON 3 dBA threshold. Potential impacts
from project-generated changes to future traffic
noise at existing off-site noise-sensitive land uses
along Riverwalk Drive between Cuyamaca Street
and Park Center Drive would be less than
significant.
• Operational Noise: Noise impacts from several
operational scenarios, each representing one full
hour of on-site activities at the proposed
Community Center were studied at six sensitive
receptor sites (See Table 3.13-4 and Figures 6
through 10 of the Draft MND). Of these sensitive
receptor sites five represent residences to the
north and east of the site. The results presented in
Table 3.13-4 suggest that project operation noise,
under each modeled operation scenario, is
anticipated to be less than 65 dBA Ldn at the
nearest existing noise-sensitive receptors and
thereby comply with the operational noise
threshold (65 dBA Ldn) established in Section

5.04.090 of the City’s Noise Ordinance. Therefore,
impacts from on-site operational noise would be
less than significant.

Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 53 of 54
With respect to hours of operation, as stated in
Section 2.3.2, Proposed Operation, of the Draft MND,
the Community Center would operate year-round,
Sunday through Thursday 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and
Fridays and Saturdays 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. The
evening hours of operation extend past the Cameron
Family YMCA’s hours due to the types of events and
activities that are proposed at the Community Center.

See Section 2.3.2 in the Draft MND for anticipated
events to be held at the Community Center. This
comment does not raise a significant environmental
issue regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the
information provided in the Draft MND for the
proposed Community Center. Therefore, no further
response is required.

I8-6: This comment suggests the proposed Community
Center should be located at an alternative location
and suggests the Karl Strauss site, which is located at the northeast corner of Cuyamaca Street and Town
Center Parkway (Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 381-
050-64-00). The City of Santee owns the proposed
project site. The City does not own the Karl Strauss
site. Furthermore, Community Center has always
been planned for the proposed site. It was originally
planned for the grassy field located north of the
Cameron Family YMCA. However, the location for the
proposed Community Center was moved south,
adjacent to the east side of the Cameron Family
Community Center Final MND Responses to Comments
December 2025 Page 54 of 54
YMCA, to be further away from adjacent residential
developments. This comment does not raise a
significant environmental issue regarding the
adequacy or accuracy of the information provided in
the Draft MND for the proposed Community Center.

Therefore, no further response is required.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Introduction
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) supplements the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Community Center project by providing the mechanism for ensuring implementation of all mitigation measures identified in the MND.

Purpose of the MMRP
As the lead agency, the City of Santee (City) is responsible for implementing the MMRP, which has been prepared in conformance with Section 21081.6 of the California Public Resources Code, as identified below:
(a) When making findings required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 21081 or when adopting a mitigated negative declaration pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) of Section 21080, the following requirements shall apply:
(1) The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of a responsible agency or a public agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the lead or responsible agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program.
(2) The lead agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based.

The preparation of an MMRP is also required by Section 15074(d) of the CEQA Guidelines. The MMRP consists of mitigation measures that avoid, reduce, or fully mitigate potential environmental impacts.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Table
Project-specific mitigation measures have been categorized in Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Table 1 identifies the environmental impact, specific mitigation measures, responsible party, monitoring agency, and timing of mitigation. Table 1 will serve as the basis for scheduling the implementation of and compliance with all mitigation measures.

The categories identified in Table 1 are described below:

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-2
• Mitigation Measure. This column provides the verbatim text of the adopted mitigation measure from the Final MND.
• Responsible Party. This column identifies the party responsible for implementing the action.
• Approving Agency. This column identifies the entity responsible for overseeing and verifying satisfactory completion of the action.
• Time Frame of Mitigation. This column identifies the project stage in which the mitigation shall be implemented.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-3
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation Section 3.3, Air Quality
MM-AQ-1: Tier 4 Final Construction Equipment. Prior to the commencement of construction activities for the project, the applicant shall require its construction contractor to demonstrate that all 75-horsepower or greater diesel-powered equipment is powered with California Air Resources Board-certified Tier 4 Final engines.

An exemption from these requirements may be granted by the City of Santee (City) if the applicant documents that equipment with the required tier is not reasonably available and that equivalent reductions in PM10 exhaust emissions are achieved from other combinations of construction equipment. Before an exemption may be considered by the City, the applicant shall be required to demonstrate that three construction fleet owners/operators in the San Diego region were contacted and that those owners/operators confirmed Tier 4 equipment could not be located within the San Diego region. The City shall review the exemption request and provide a determination within 10 business days from receipt of the request.

Applicant (City of
Santee); Construction
Contractor
City of Santee
Engineering and
Planning & Building
Departments
Prior to commencement of
construction activities.

During all construction
phases.

Section 3.4, Biological Resources
MM-BIO-1: Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey. Construction within all potential nesting resource areas within the Project site (i.e., ornamental trees) and areas of the Project site within 500 feet of the Woodglen Vista Creek should be avoided during the migratory bird nesting season (typically January 1 through September 30). If construction activities (i.e., grading, tree removal, external construction involving heavy equipment generating noise in excess of 60 A-weighted decibels [dBA] (leq)) must occur during the bird nesting season, an avian nesting survey of all potential nesting resource areas (e.g., ornamental trees) within the Project site and areas of the Woodglen Vista Creek within 500 feet of all impact areas must be conducted to determine the presence/absence of special-status species, protected migratory birds, and active nests.

If least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens), and/or yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia) are identified during the surveys, then noise attenuation measures shall be required to ensure that noise levels from construction do not exceed a 60 dBA hourly average per hour at the edge of the Construction
Contractor; Approved
Qualified Biologist;
Qualified Acoustician
City of Santee
Engineering and
Planning & Building
Departments and
Approved Qualified
Biologist
Within 14 days prior to
grading/construction.

Within 24 hours of initiation
of grading/construction.

During ground-disturbing
activities for the duration of
the project construction.

Surveys reinitiated if
construction is on hold for
more than 30 days.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-4
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation riparian habitat or to the ambient noise level if it exceeds 60 dBA prior to construction. Construction noise monitoring shall be required to verify that noise levels at the edge of occupied habitat are maintained below 60 dBA hourly average unless an analysis completed by a qualified acoustician shows that noise generated by construction activities would not exceed 60 dBA hourly average at the edge of occupied habitat.

The avian nesting survey shall be performed by a qualified wildlife biologist within 14 days prior to the start of construction and one more survey pass within 24 hours of initiation of construction activities in accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513.

If construction activities are on hold for more than 30 days, then pre-construction surveys would need to be reinitiated. If an active bird nest is found, the nest shall be flagged and mapped on the construction plans, along with an appropriate buffer established around the nest, which will be determined by the biologist based on the species’ sensitivity to disturbance (typically 300 feet for passerines and 500 feet for raptors and special-status species), existing nearby conditions (e.g., natural habitat versus roads or existing noisy activities), existing buffering features (e.g., topography, tall and dense trees, buildings), legal status of species (i.e., listed versus non-listed), general sensitivities of the species (e.g., disturbance tolerant or urban versus non disturbance tolerant), and other variables. The nest area shall be avoided until the nest is vacated and the juveniles have fledged. The nest area shall be demarcated in the field with flagging and stakes or construction fencing. On-site construction monitoring shall also be conducted when an active nest buffer is in place. No Project activities shall encroach into established buffers without the consent of a monitoring biologist. The buffer shall remain in place until it is determined that the nestlings have fledged and the nest is no longer active.

MM-BIO-2: Construction-Related Indirect Impacts to SpecialStatus Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources. Prior to the issuance of a notice to proceed to the Contractor and prior to the commencement of any construction, construction plans shall include the following to Construction
Contractor; Approved
Qualified Biologist and
Monitor
City of Santee
Engineering and
Planning & Building
Departments; Approved
Qualified Biologist
Prior to issuance of a notice
to proceed to the Contractor.

Prior to commencement of
any grading/construction.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-5
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation address potential indirect impacts to special-status species occurring within all suitable habitat associated with the Woodglen Vista Creek (i.e., within 500 feet of the Project site):
• Biological Monitoring. A qualified Project biologist
approved by the City of Santee shall monitor grounddisturbing and vegetation-clearing activities for the duration of the Project construction to ensure that practicable
measures are being employed to avoid incidental
disturbance of habitat, species of concern, and other
sensitive biological resources outside the Project footprint.

Once ground-disturbing and vegetation-clearing activities are complete, the Project biologist shall conduct weekly checks to inspect construction fencing and ensure that all applicable requirements from the mitigation measures are being upheld until construction is completed.
• Worker Environmental Awareness Training. Prior to
grading, a pre-construction meeting shall be required that includes a training session for Project personnel by a
qualified biologist. The training shall include (1) a
description of the species of concern and its habitats; (2) the general provisions of the applicable regulations
pertaining to biological resources, including the
Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act; (3) the need to adhere to the provisions of the Endangered
Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and other applicable
regulations; (4) the penalties associated with violating the provisions of the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water
Act, and other applicable regulations; (5) the general
measures that are being implemented to conserve the
species of concern as they relate to the Project; and (6) the access routes to and Project site boundaries within which the Project activities must be accomplished. Additionally, the training shall include the measures and mitigation
requirements for the applicable resources. Copies of the mitigation measures and any required permits from the
resource agencies shall be made available to construction personnel.

After completion of grounddisturbing and vegetation
clearing, weekly checks to
inspect construction fencing.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-6
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation • Delineation of Property Boundaries. Before beginning
activities that would cause impacts, the contractor shall, in consultation with the biological monitor, clearly delineate the boundaries with fencing, stakes, or flags, consistent with the grading plan, within which the impacts will take place. All impacts outside the fenced, staked, or flagged areas shall be avoided, and all fencing, stakes, and flags shall be maintained until the completion of impacts in that area. In addition, any avoided environmental resources
shall be clearly delineated. Prior to implementing
construction activities, the biological monitor shall verify that the flagging clearly delineates the construction limits and any sensitive environmental resources to be avoided.
• Standard Dust Control Measures. Standard dust control measures as per the San Diego County Air Pollution
Control District shall be implemented to reduce impacts on nearby plants and wildlife. Measures include controlling speed to 15 miles per hour or less on unpaved roads,
replacing ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible, frequently watering active work sites, installing shaker plates, and suspending excavation and grading
operations during periods of high winds.
• Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Prior to the
issuance of a notice to proceed to the Contractor and prior to the commencement of any construction, the Contractor shall submit a stormwater pollution prevention plan
(SWPPP) to the City of Santee that specifies best
management practices to prevent all construction pollutants from contacting stormwater, with the intent of keeping
sedimentation or any other pollutants from moving off site and into receiving waters. The requirements of the SWPPP shall be incorporated into design specifications and
construction contracts. Best management practice
categories employed on site shall include erosion control, sediment control, and non-stormwater good housekeeping.

Best management practices recommended for the
construction phase shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-7
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation - Limiting grading to the minimum area necessary for
construction, operation, and decommissioning of the
Project
- Limiting vegetation disturbance/removal to the maximum extent practicable
- Implementing fiber rolls and sandbags around drainage areas and the site perimeter
- Stockpiling and disposing of demolition debris, concrete, and soil properly
- Installing a stabilized construction entrance/exit and stabilizing disturbed areas
- Installing proper protections for fueling and maintaining equipment and vehicles
- Managing waste, aggressively controlling litter, and
implementing sediment controls
- Stabilizing soil in disturbed areas through revegetation The following water quality measures shall be included in the SWPPP:
• Erodible fill material shall not be deposited into water courses. Brush, loose soils, or other similar debris material shall not be stockpiled within the stream channel or on its banks.
• The Project shall be designed to avoid the placement of equipment and personnel within the stream channel or on sand and gravel bars, banks, and adjacent upland habitats used by target species of concern, as feasible. Project activities that cannot be conducted without placing
equipment or personnel in sensitive habitats shall be timed to avoid the breeding season of riparian species.
• Water pollution and erosion control plans shall be
developed and implemented in accordance with the
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
• Minimize Spills of Hazardous Materials. All vehicles and equipment shall be maintained in proper condition to
minimize the potential for fugitive emissions of motor oil, antifreeze, hydraulic fluid, grease, or other hazardous materials. Hazardous spills shall be immediately cleaned up and the contaminated soil shall be properly handled and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-8
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation disposed of at a licensed facility. Servicing of construction equipment shall take place only at a designated staging area. The staging area will be located on the south side of the Project site, away from Woodglen Vista Creek, and no stockpiles will be allowed adjacent to Woodglen Vista
Creek.
• Wildlife Hazards. The following measures shall be
implemented to ensure that wildlife do not become trapped, entangled, injured, or poisoned by construction activities:
o Structures in which wildlife may become trapped
(e.g., open pipes, pits, trenches) shall be tightly
covered at the end of each work day. If covering
the structure is not possible, an escape ramp shall
be provided to allow any wildlife that falls in to
safely escape.
o Debris piles, construction materials, equipment,
and other items that may be used as wildlife refuge
shall be inspected for wildlife at the start of each
work day and prior to disturbance. If wildlife is
discovered, it shall either be moved out of harm’s
way by a qualified biologist or allowed to move off
of the Project site on its own.
o Nets and mesh shall be made of loose weave
material that is not fused at the intersections of the
weave because nets with welded weaves present
an entanglement risk.
o Toxic materials and garbage shall be removed from
the work site and safely stored or disposed of at the
end of each work day.
• Invasive Weeds. To reduce the spread of invasive plant species, landscape plants shall not be on the most recent version of the California Invasive Plant Council’s Invasive Plant Inventory (https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/inventory/). • Night Work. All construction activities shall be conducted during the daytime, and lights shall not be kept on overnight in the construction area, as practicable. If night lighting is required during construction activities, all exterior lighting along undeveloped land shall be fully shielded and directed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-9
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation downward in a manner that will prevent light spillage or glare into the adjacent open space.

MM-BIO-3: Long-Term Indirect Impacts to Special-Status
Species, Sensitive Vegetation Communities, and Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources. Prior to the issuance of a notice to proceed to the Contractor and prior to the commencement of any construction, construction plans shall include the following to address potential indirect impacts to special-status species occurring within all suitable habitat associated with Woodglen Vista Creek (i.e., within 500 feet of the Project site):
• Runoff. Future development within 500 feet of suitable habitat for special-status species shall incorporate measures,
including measures required through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, to ensure that the quantity and quality of runoff discharged is not altered in an adverse way when compared with existing conditions. In particular,
measures shall be put in place to avoid discharge of untreated surface runoff from developed and paved areas into open space or suitable habitat for special-status species.

Stormwater systems shall be designed to prevent the release of toxins, chemicals, petroleum products, exotic plant
materials, or other elements that might degrade or harm biological resources or ecosystem processes. This can be accomplished using a variety of methods, including natural detention basins, grass swales, or mechanical trapping
devices. Regular maintenance shall occur to ensure effective operation of runoff control systems.
• Lighting. Project lighting would be designed consistent with the requirements of Section 13.30.030(B) of the Santee
Municipal Code. Night lighting shall be directed away from open space and/or suitable habitat for special-status species to protect species from direct night lighting. Shielding shall be incorporated in Project designs to ensure that ambient lighting is not increased.
• Invasive Species. Landscape Plans shall incorporate native species that occur in the region. Invasive, non-native plant species listed on the most recent California Invasive Plant Construction Contractor City of Santee
Engineering and
Planning & Building
Departments; Approved
Qualified Biologist
Prior to issuance of a notice
to proceed to the Contractor.

Prior to grading/construction.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-10
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation Council’s Invasive Plant Inventory (https://www.calipc.org/plants/inventory/) with a rating of moderate or high shall not be included in landscaping.
• Barriers. The proposed Project shall incorporate barriers, where appropriate, to minimize unauthorized public access, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass, or dumping in open space and/or suitable habitat for special-status wildlife (e.g., Woodglen Vista Creek). Such barriers may include native landscaping, rocks/boulders, fencing, walls, signage, and/or other appropriate mechanisms.

MM-BIO-4: Tree Replacement, Encroachment, and
Preservation. Prior to the issuance of a notice to proceed to the Contractor and prior to the commencement of any construction, construction plans and the Project’s Landscape Plan shall include the following to address tree removal, encroachment into protected zone, and retained trees:
• Replacement. The proposed site plan would require
removal of City of Santee–owned trees. Tree replacement shall occur at a 1:1 mitigation ratio with 15-gallon trees and be included in the Project’s Landscape Plan, which shall also include recommendations for long-term maintenance
and care for regulated trees that will be retained on site. • Encroachment into Protected Zone and Retained Trees.

Additionally, tree protection measures shall be provided in the Project’s Landscape Plan and designed to mitigate
impacts from construction encroachment into the protected zone of any preserved and/or encroached upon City of
Santee–owned trees. These tree protection measures shall be consistent with best management practices for tree
protection on construction sites and would help minimize impacts to any preserved and/or encroached City of
Santee–owned trees. These measures shall be
implemented prior to, during, and following construction.

This includes measures such as exclusion fencing and
worker training to avoid direct impacts to trees, and
measures such as irrigation and monthly inspections by a Certified Arborist to promote the long-term health of
retained trees.

Construction
Contractor; Landscape
Architect
City of Santee
Engineering and
Planning & Building
Departments; Approved
Qualified Biologist
Prior to issuance of a notice
to proceed to the Contractor.

Prior to grading/construction.

Tree protection prior to,
during and following
construction.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-11
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation Section 3.5, Cultural Resources
MM-CUL-1: Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological
Resources. If potential archaeological resources are uncovered during grading, the Applicant shall be required to halt all construction work occurring within 100 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards can evaluate the material to determine whether it is a “unique cultural resource” as defined in Section 21083.2 (g) of the CEQA Statutes. If the new discovery is evaluated and found to be significant under CEQA and avoidance is not feasible, additional work such as data recovery may be warranted. A data recovery plan shall be developed by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the City and Native American representatives, if applicable. Ground disturbance can continue only after the resources has been properly mitigated and with approval by the City.

Applicant (City of
Santee); Qualified
Archaeologist who
meets or exceeds the
Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional
Qualifications
Standards for
archaeology; City
Engineering and
Planning & Building
Departments; Native
American Monitor of
Kumeyaay descent
City of Santee
Engineering and
Planning & Building
Departments
During grading and for the
duration of the proposed
project or until the Qualified
Archaeologist determines
monitoring is no longer
necessary.

MM-CUL-2: Archaeological Monitoring. The qualified
archaeologist, or an archaeological monitor (working under the direct supervision of the qualified archaeologist), shall observe all initial ground-disturbing activities, including but not limited to brush clearance, vegetation removal, grubbing, grading, and excavation.

The qualified archaeologist, in coordination with the applicant and the City, may reduce or discontinue monitoring if it is determined by the qualified archaeologist that the possibility of encountering buried archaeological deposits is low based on observations of soil stratigraphy or other factors. Archaeological monitoring shall be conducted by an archaeologist familiar with the types of archaeological resources that could be encountered within the project site. The archaeological monitor shall be empowered to halt or redirect ground-disturbing activities away from the vicinity of a discovery until the qualified archaeologist has evaluated the discovery and determined appropriate treatment (as prescribed below). The archaeological monitor shall keep daily logs detailing the types of activities and soils observed, and any discoveries. After monitoring has been completed, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare a monitoring report that details the results of monitoring.

The report shall be submitted to the City and any Native American groups who request a copy. A copy of the final report shall be filed at the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC).

Applicant (City of
Santee); Qualified
Archaeologist or
Archaeological Monitor
working under the direct
supervision of the
qualified archaeologist
familiar with types of
archaeological
resources that could be
encountered within the
project site;
Native American
Monitor of Kumeyaay
descent
City of Santee
Engineering and
Planning & Building
Departments
During all initial grounddisturbing activities and for the duration of the proposed
project or until the Qualified
Archaeologist determines
monitoring is no longer
necessary.

Post monitoring.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-12
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation A Native American Monitor of Kumeyaay descent shall be present for any pre-construction meeting and for all ground disturbing activities associated with the project. Should any cultural or tribal cultural resources be discovered, no further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the City Planner, or designee, with concurrence from the Native American Monitor, are satisfied that treatment of the resource has occurred. In the event that a unique archaeological resource or tribal cultural resource is discovered, and in accordance with Public Resources Code Section
21083.2(b)(1), (2), and (4), the resource shall be moved and buried in an open space area of the Project site, such as slope areas, which will not be subject to further grading activity, erosion, flooding, or any other ground disturbance that has the potential to expose the resource. The on-site area to which the resource is moved shall be protected in perpetuity as permanent open space. No identification of the resource shall be made on-site; however, the Applicant shall plot the new location of the resource on a map showing latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates and provide that map to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for inclusion in the Sacred Lands File (SLF). Disposition of the resources shall be at the discretion of the City of Santee, but in accordance with the foregoing.

In the event of the unanticipated discovery of archaeological materials, all work shall immediately cease in the area (within 100 feet) of the discovery until it can be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the Native American monitor.

Construction shall not resume until the qualified archaeologist has conferred with the applicant and the City on the significance of the resource.

If it is determined that the discovered archaeological resource constitutes a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource under CEQA, avoidance and preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigation. Preservation in place may be accomplished by, but is not limited to, avoidance, incorporating the resource into open space, capping, or deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement. In the event that preservation in place is demonstrated to be infeasible and data recovery through Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-13
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation excavation is the only feasible mitigation available, a Cultural Resources Treatment Plan shall be prepared and implemented by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the applicant and the City that provides for the adequate recovery of the scientifically consequential information contained in the archaeological resource.

The qualified archaeologist and the City shall consult with appropriate Native American representatives in determining treatment for prehistoric or Native American resources to ensure cultural values ascribed to the resources, beyond those which are scientifically important, are considered.

If human remains are encountered, all work shall halt in the vicinity (within 100 feet) of the discovery and the San Diego County Coroner will be contacted in accordance with PRC Section 5097.98 and Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. The applicant and the City will also be notified. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are Native American, the NAHC will be notified in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5,
subdivision (c), and PRC Section 5097.98 (as amended by AB 2641). The NAHC will designate a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the remains per PRC Section 5097.98. The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of being granted access and shall provide recommendations for the treatment of the remains. Until the landowner has conferred with the MLD, the applicant will ensure that the immediate vicinity where the discovery occurred is not disturbed by further activity, is adequately protected according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices.

Section 3.7, Geology and Soils
MM-GEO-1: Geotechnical/Geological Engineering
Recommendations. Prior to any ground- disturbing construction activities, the project applicant shall incorporate the recommendations of the geotechnical/geological engineering studies prepared by Group Delta Consultants Inc. (March 18, 2022) into project plans related to the proposed project. The project’s building plans shall demonstrate that they incorporate all applicable recommendations of the design-level geotechnical study and comply with all applicable requirements of the latest adopted version of the California Building Code. A licensed professional Applicant (City of
Santee); Construction
Contractor; licensed
geotechnical engineer
or certified engineering
geologist
City of Santee
Engineering and
Planning & Building
Departments
Prior to any grounddisturbing construction
activities.

Onsite supervision during
grading/construction.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-14
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation engineer shall prepare the plans, including those that pertain to soil engineering, structural foundations, pipeline excavation, and installation. All on-site soil engineering activities shall be conducted under the supervision of a licensed geotechnical engineer or certified engineering geologist.

MM-GEO-2: Inadvertent Discovery. Prior to ground-disturbing activities, the qualified paleontologist shall conduct a WEAT (worker environmental awareness training) for the construction crew members informing them of the potential to inadvertently encounter paleontological resources and the proper procedures to be enacted in the event of an inadvertent discovery. A qualified project paleontologist is a person with a doctorate or master’s degree in paleontology or related field and who has knowledge of the County of San Diego paleontology and documented experience in
professional paleontological procedures and techniques. The applicant shall ensure that construction personnel attend the training and sign an attendance acknowledgement form. The applicant shall retain documentation demonstrating attendance. The qualified paleontologist shall observe all initial ground disturbing activities including grading and excavation. The qualified paleontologist, in coordination with the applicant and the City, may reduce or discontinue monitoring if it is determined by the qualified paleontologist that the possibility of encountering buried paleontological resources is low based on observations of soil stratigraphy or other factors. In the unlikely event that paleontological resources (i.e., fossils) are exposed during construction activities, all construction work occurring within 50 feet of the find shall immediately stop and the lead agency
representative contacted. The qualified vertebrate paleontologist meeting the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards, shall be assigned to review the unanticipated find to determine the significance. If the discovery proves potentially significant under CEQA as determined by the qualified vertebrate paleontologist, and the area cannot be feasibly avoided, additional work, such as preparation of a Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program and paleontological monitoring shall be warranted.

Applicant (City of
Santee); Qualified
Project Paleontologist;
Qualified Vertebrate
Paleontologist meeting
the Society of
Vertebrate Paleontology
standards
City of Santee
Engineering and
Planning & Building
Departments
Prior to ground-disturbing
activities.

During all initial grounddisturbing activities including grading and excavation.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-15
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation Section 3.13, Noise
MM-NOI-1 : Temporary Construction Noise Reduction. The
Applicant, or its designee, shall implement one or more of the following measures, as necessary, in order to achieve on- site noise control and sound abatement that, in the aggregate, would result in a minimum construction noise reduction of approximately 16 decibels (dB) at the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area immediately south and east of the project:
• Install noise abatement on the site boundary fencing (or within, as practical and appropriate) in the form of sound blankets or comparable temporary solid barriers of at least 12 feet tall to occlude construction noise emission between the site (or specific equipment operation as the situation may define) and the noise-sensitive receptor(s) of concern (i.e., the Woodglen Vista Creek protected open space area).
o By way of example, suspended sound blankets, fielderected plywood sheeting, or comparable temporary solid (or flexible but sufficiently massive) barriers (of minimum sound transmission class [STC] rating of 25,
which per California Department of Transportation
guidance indicates would permit up to 16 dB of
expected barrier insertion loss) would occlude
construction noise emission between the site (or
specific equipment operation as the situation may
define) and the noise-sensitive receptor(s) of concern. o Temporary barriers shall adhere to a minimum height
standard of 12 feet to serve as an effective deterrent
against noise pollution and shielding for adjoining offsite receptors. o To determine the extent/length of these temporary
noise barrier(s) required for each phase of construction, see Figure 11. Appendix H includes a worksheet
illustrating the predicted noise exposure levels at a
nearest receptor (i.e., Woodglen Vista Creek protected
open space area) as close as 15 feet to the exterior of Applicant (City of
Santee) or designee
City of Santee
Engineering and
Planning & Building
Departments
During grading/construction.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMRP-16
Mitigation Measure Responsible Party Approving Agency Time Frame of Mitigation the temporary barrier, with the listed onsite noiseproducing construction equipment as close as 10 feet to the interior of the barrier. Equipment operating
further away would have quieter acoustic contribution
due to the increased distance, and equipment
operating closer to the barrier would improve the
barrier’s insertion loss performance (due to greater
path length difference) and thus yield lower noise
exposure levels at the offsite receptor. Similarly, should the offsite receptor be more distant from the temporary barrier than 25 feet, the added overall distance to the onsite operating equipment will—due to principles of
geometric divergence—attenuate the sound path and
yield less noise exposure at the receptor. Such a wall
should be located on the project boundary (focusing on
the southern and eastern boundary), as shown in
Figure 11, to reduce construction noise exposure.
• Administrative controls (e.g., reduce operating time of equipment and/or prohibit usage of equipment type[s]
within certain distances to a nearest receiving occupied offsite property). • Engineering controls (change equipment operating
parameters [e.g., speed, capacity], or install features or elements that otherwise reduce equipment noise emission [e.g., upgrade engine exhaust mufflers]).

Appendix A
Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Calculations
Appendix A-1
CalEEMod Regional Emissions

Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 1 / 85
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions 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
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 2 / 85

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
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 3 / 85

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
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 4 / 85

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
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 5 / 85

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
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 6 / 85

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 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 7 / 85

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
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 8 / 85

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
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 9 / 85

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Construction Start Date 8/4/2025
Operational Year 2026
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.60
Precipitation (days) 7.60
Location 10123 Riverwalk Dr, Santee, CA 92071, USA
County San Diego
City Santee
Air District San Diego County APCD
Air Basin San Diego
TAZ 6529
EDFZ 12
Electric Utility San Diego Gas & Electric
Gas Utility San Diego Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.21

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
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 10 / 85
Government (Civic
Center)

12.5 1000sqft 0.95 12,500 33,106 0.00 — —
Parking Lot 67.7 1000sqft 1.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

30.9 1000sqft 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Construction C-10-A Water Exposed Surfaces
Energy E-10-B Establish Onsite Renewable Energy Systems: Solar Power

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.03 4.43 31.9 31.1 0.05 1.37 19.8 21.2 1.26 10.1 11.4 — 5,616 5,616 0.24 0.34 5.02 5,644 Mit. 4.03 4.43 31.9 31.1 0.05 1.37 7.86 9.22 1.26 3.99 5.24 — 5,616 5,616 0.24 0.34 5.02 5,644 %
Reduced
— — — — — — 60% 57% — 61% 54% — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.40 1.17 10.6 13.5 0.02 0.43 0.11 0.54 0.40 0.03 0.43 — 2,587 2,587 0.11 0.04 0.02 2,601 Mit. 1.40 1.17 10.6 13.5 0.02 0.43 0.11 0.54 0.40 0.03 0.43 — 2,587 2,587 0.11 0.04 0.02 2,601 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 11 / 85
%——————————————————
Reduced
Average
Daily
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit. 0.59 0.74 4.42 5.99 0.01 0.17 0.54 0.71 0.16 0.23 0.39— 1,138 1,138 0.05 0.03 0.19 1,144 Mit. 0.59 0.74 4.42 5.99 0.01 0.17 0.29 0.46 0.16 0.11 0.26— 1,138 1,138 0.05 0.03 0.19 1,144 %
Reduced
—————— 47% 35%— 54% 32%———————
Annual
(Max)
——————————————————
Unmit. 0.11 0.14 0.81 1.09 < 0.005 0.03 0.10 0.13 0.03 0.04 0.07— 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 0.03 189 Mit. 0.11 0.14 0.81 1.09 < 0.005 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.05— 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 0.03 189 %
Reduced
—————— 47% 35%— 54% 32%———————
Exceeds
(Daily
Max)
——————————————————
Threshol d— 75.0 250 550 250—— 100—— 55.0———————
Unmit.— No No No No—— No—— No———————
Mit.— No No No No—— No—— No———————
Exceeds
(Average
Daily)
——————————————————
Threshol d— 75.0 250 550 250—— 100—— 55.0———————
Unmit.— No No No No—— No—— No———————
Mit.— No No No No—— No—— No———————
Exceeds
(Annual)
——————————————————
Threshol d— 13.7 40.0 100 40.0—— 15.0—— 10.0———————
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 12 / 85
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Mit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 4.03 3.39 31.9 31.1 0.05 1.37 19.8 21.2 1.26 10.1 11.4 — 5,616 5,616 0.24 0.34 5.02 5,644 2026 2.23 4.43 16.4 23.2 0.04 0.64 0.29 0.93 0.59 0.07 0.66 — 4,174 4,174 0.17 0.06 1.34 4,197 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 1.40 1.17 10.6 13.5 0.02 0.43 0.11 0.54 0.40 0.03 0.43 — 2,587 2,587 0.11 0.04 0.02 2,601 2026 1.33 1.11 10.0 13.4 0.02 0.38 0.11 0.49 0.35 0.03 0.38 — 2,583 2,583 0.11 0.04 0.01 2,597 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.55 0.46 4.28 4.71 0.01 0.17 0.54 0.71 0.16 0.23 0.39 — 972 972 0.04 0.03 0.19 982 2026 0.59 0.74 4.42 5.99 0.01 0.17 0.06 0.23 0.15 0.01 0.17 — 1,138 1,138 0.05 0.02 0.13 1,144 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.10 0.08 0.78 0.86 < 0.005 0.03 0.10 0.13 0.03 0.04 0.07 — 161 161 0.01 < 0.005 0.03 163 2026 0.11 0.14 0.81 1.09 < 0.005 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.03 < 0.005 0.03 — 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 189

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 TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 13 / 85
Daily - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
2025 4.03 3.39 31.9 31.1 0.05 1.37 7.86 9.22 1.26 3.99 5.24 — 5,616 5,616 0.24 0.34 5.02 5,644 2026 2.23 4.43 16.4 23.2 0.04 0.64 0.29 0.93 0.59 0.07 0.66 — 4,174 4,174 0.17 0.06 1.34 4,197 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 1.40 1.17 10.6 13.5 0.02 0.43 0.11 0.54 0.40 0.03 0.43 — 2,587 2,587 0.11 0.04 0.02 2,601 2026 1.33 1.11 10.0 13.4 0.02 0.38 0.11 0.49 0.35 0.03 0.38 — 2,583 2,583 0.11 0.04 0.01 2,597 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.55 0.46 4.28 4.71 0.01 0.17 0.29 0.46 0.16 0.11 0.26 — 972 972 0.04 0.03 0.19 982 2026 0.59 0.74 4.42 5.99 0.01 0.17 0.06 0.23 0.15 0.01 0.17 — 1,138 1,138 0.05 0.02 0.13 1,144 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.10 0.08 0.78 0.86 < 0.005 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.05 — 161 161 0.01 < 0.005 0.03 163 2026 0.11 0.14 0.81 1.09 < 0.005 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.03 < 0.005 0.03 — 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 189

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 6.92 6.66 5.49 42.7 0.10 0.16 8.44 8.61 0.16 2.14 2.30 43.2 10,760 10,803 4.84 0.40 33.2 11,076 Mit. 6.92 6.66 5.49 42.7 0.10 0.16 8.44 8.61 0.16 2.14 2.30 43.2 10,708 10,751 4.84 0.40 33.2 11,024 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.5% < 0.5% < 0.5% — — < 0.5% Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 14 / 85
Unmit. 6.71 6.44 5.87 40.0 0.10 0.16 8.44 8.60 0.15 2.14 2.30 43.2 10,318 10,361 4.87 0.42 0.89 10,610 Mit. 6.71 6.44 5.87 40.0 0.10 0.16 8.44 8.60 0.15 2.14 2.30 43.2 10,266 10,309 4.87 0.42 0.89 10,557 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1% 1% < 0.5% — — < 0.5%
Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 6.20 5.98 4.58 39.0 0.09 0.09 8.40 8.50 0.09 2.13 2.22 43.2 10,159 10,202 4.85 0.41 14.4 10,461 Mit. 6.20 5.98 4.58 39.0 0.09 0.09 8.40 8.50 0.09 2.13 2.22 43.2 10,107 10,150 4.85 0.41 14.4 10,409 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1% 1% < 0.5% — — < 0.5%
Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.13 1.09 0.84 7.12 0.02 0.02 1.53 1.55 0.02 0.39 0.41 7.15 1,682 1,689 0.80 0.07 2.38 1,732 Mit. 1.13 1.09 0.84 7.12 0.02 0.02 1.53 1.55 0.02 0.39 0.41 7.15 1,673 1,680 0.80 0.07 2.38 1,723 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1% 1% < 0.5% < 0.5% — < 0.5%
Exceeds
(Daily
Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 75.0 250 550 250 — — 100 — — 55.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Mit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Average
Daily)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 75.0 250 550 250 — — 100 — — 55.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Mit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 15 / 85
Exceeds — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(Annual)
Threshol
d
— 13.7 40.0 100 40.0 — — 15.0 — — 10.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Mit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 6.24 5.75 3.93 40.8 0.10 0.08 8.44 8.52 0.07 2.14 2.21 — 9,903 9,903 0.47 0.38 33.2 10,061 Area 0.10 0.39 < 0.005 0.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.24 2.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.24 Energy 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 559 559 0.04 < 0.005 — 561 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00 — 134 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Stationar
y

0.57 0.52 1.44 1.32 < 0.005 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 264 264 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 265 Total 6.92 6.66 5.49 42.7 0.10 0.16 8.44 8.61 0.16 2.14 2.30 43.2 10,760 10,803 4.84 0.40 33.2 11,076 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 6.13 5.62 4.32 38.6 0.09 0.08 8.44 8.52 0.07 2.14 2.21 — 9,464 9,464 0.50 0.40 0.86 9,597 Area — 0.30 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 559 559 0.04 < 0.005 — 561 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00 — 134 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 16 / 85
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Stationar
y

0.57 0.52 1.44 1.32 < 0.005 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 264 264 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 265 Total 6.71 6.44 5.87 40.0 0.10 0.16 8.44 8.60 0.15 2.14 2.30 43.2 10,318 10,361 4.87 0.42 0.89 10,610 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 6.06 5.55 4.26 38.5 0.09 0.08 8.40 8.48 0.07 2.13 2.20 — 9,530 9,530 0.49 0.40 14.3 9,676 Area 0.05 0.34 < 0.005 0.27 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.10 1.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.11 Energy 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 559 559 0.04 < 0.005 — 561 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00 — 134 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Stationar
y

0.08 0.07 0.21 0.19 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 37.7 37.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 37.8 Total 6.20 5.98 4.58 39.0 0.09 0.09 8.40 8.50 0.09 2.13 2.22 43.2 10,159 10,202 4.85 0.41 14.4 10,461 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.11 1.01 0.78 7.02 0.02 0.01 1.53 1.55 0.01 0.39 0.40 — 1,578 1,578 0.08 0.07 2.37 1,602 Area 0.01 0.06 < 0.005 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.18 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.18 Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 92.5 92.5 0.01 < 0.005 — 92.8 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.79 5.22 6.01 0.08 < 0.005 — 8.61 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 6.36 0.00 6.36 0.64 0.00 — 22.2 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01
Stationar
y

0.01 0.01 0.04 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 0.00 6.24 6.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 6.26 Total 1.13 1.09 0.84 7.12 0.02 0.02 1.53 1.55 0.02 0.39 0.41 7.15 1,682 1,689 0.80 0.07 2.38 1,732

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 17 / 85
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 6.24 5.75 3.93 40.8 0.10 0.08 8.44 8.52 0.07 2.14 2.21 — 9,903 9,903 0.47 0.38 33.2 10,061 Area 0.10 0.39 < 0.005 0.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.24 2.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.24 Energy 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 507 507 0.03 < 0.005 — 508 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00 — 134 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Stationar
y

0.57 0.52 1.44 1.32 < 0.005 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 264 264 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 265 Total 6.92 6.66 5.49 42.7 0.10 0.16 8.44 8.61 0.16 2.14 2.30 43.2 10,708 10,751 4.84 0.40 33.2 11,024 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 6.13 5.62 4.32 38.6 0.09 0.08 8.44 8.52 0.07 2.14 2.21 — 9,464 9,464 0.50 0.40 0.86 9,597 Area — 0.30 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 507 507 0.03 < 0.005 — 508 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00 — 134 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Stationar
y

0.57 0.52 1.44 1.32 < 0.005 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 264 264 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 265 Total 6.71 6.44 5.87 40.0 0.10 0.16 8.44 8.60 0.15 2.14 2.30 43.2 10,266 10,309 4.87 0.42 0.89 10,557 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 6.06 5.55 4.26 38.5 0.09 0.08 8.40 8.48 0.07 2.13 2.20 — 9,530 9,530 0.49 0.40 14.3 9,676 Area 0.05 0.34 < 0.005 0.27 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.10 1.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.11 Energy 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 507 507 0.03 < 0.005 — 508 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 18 / 85
Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00 — 134 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Stationar
y

0.08 0.07 0.21 0.19 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 37.7 37.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 37.8 Total 6.20 5.98 4.58 39.0 0.09 0.09 8.40 8.50 0.09 2.13 2.22 43.2 10,107 10,150 4.85 0.41 14.4 10,409 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.11 1.01 0.78 7.02 0.02 0.01 1.53 1.55 0.01 0.39 0.40 — 1,578 1,578 0.08 0.07 2.37 1,602 Area 0.01 0.06 < 0.005 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.18 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.18 Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 83.9 83.9 0.01 < 0.005 — 84.2 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.79 5.22 6.01 0.08 < 0.005 — 8.61 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 6.36 0.00 6.36 0.64 0.00 — 22.2 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01
Stationar
y

0.01 0.01 0.04 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 0.00 6.24 6.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 6.26 Total 1.13 1.09 0.84 7.12 0.02 0.02 1.53 1.55 0.02 0.39 0.41 7.15 1,673 1,680 0.80 0.07 2.38 1,723

3. Construction Emissions Details

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

2.86 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 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 1.12 1.12 — 0.17 0.17 — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 19 / 85
Onsite
truck

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

0.16 0.13 1.22 1.09 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 — 188 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.06 0.06 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.03 0.02 0.22 0.20 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 31.1 31.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 31.2 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.74 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 152 152 0.01 0.01 0.57 154 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.20 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 150 150 0.01 0.02 0.39 157 Hauling 0.08 0.02 1.32 0.49 0.01 0.02 0.26 0.28 0.02 0.07 0.09 — 1,006 1,006 0.06 0.16 2.19 1,057 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.92 7.92 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.04 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 20 / 85
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.23 8.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.60 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 55.1 55.1 < 0.005 0.01 0.05 57.8 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.31 1.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.33 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.36 1.36 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.42 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.13 9.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 9.58

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

2.86 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 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 1.12 1.12 — 0.17 0.17 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.16 0.13 1.22 1.09 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 — 188 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.06 0.06 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 21 / 85
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 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 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.74 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 152 152 0.01 0.01 0.57 154 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.20 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 150 150 0.01 0.02 0.39 157 Hauling 0.08 0.02 1.32 0.49 0.01 0.02 0.26 0.28 0.02 0.07 0.09 — 1,006 1,006 0.06 0.16 2.19 1,057 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.92 7.92 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.04 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.23 8.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.60 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 55.1 55.1 < 0.005 0.01 0.05 57.8 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.31 1.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.33 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.36 1.36 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.42 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.13 9.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 9.58

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 22 / 85
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

3.94 3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 1.37 — 1.37 1.26 — 1.26 — 5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 19.7 19.7 — 10.1 10.1 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.04 0.04 0.35 0.33 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 58.0 58.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 58.2 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.22 0.22 — 0.11 0.11 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.01 0.01 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 9.61 9.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.64 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 23 / 85
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.83 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 171 171 0.01 0.01 0.64 173 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.20 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 150 150 0.01 0.02 0.39 157 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.78 1.78 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.81 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.65 1.65 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.72 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.30 0.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.30 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.27 0.27 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.28 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

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

3.94 3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 1.37 — 1.37 1.26 — 1.26 — 5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 24 / 85
Dust — — — — — — 7.67 7.67 — 3.94 3.94 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

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

0.04 0.04 0.35 0.33 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 58.0 58.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 58.2 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.08 0.08 — 0.04 0.04 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.01 0.01 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 9.61 9.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.64 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.02 0.02 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.83 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 171 171 0.01 0.01 0.64 173 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.20 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 150 150 0.01 0.02 0.39 157 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 25 / 85
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.78 1.78 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.81 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.65 1.65 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.72 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.30 0.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.30 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.27 0.27 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.28 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

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

2.07 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 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 7.09 7.09 — 3.43 3.43 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 26 / 85
Average — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily
Off-Road
Equipment

0.06 0.05 0.45 0.49 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 81.1 81.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 81.4 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.19 0.19 — 0.09 0.09 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.01 0.01 0.08 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 13.4 13.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.5 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.74 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 152 152 0.01 0.01 0.57 154 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.20 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 150 150 0.01 0.02 0.39 157 Hauling 0.15 0.04 2.45 0.92 0.01 0.03 0.48 0.52 0.03 0.13 0.17 — 1,868 1,868 0.10 0.29 4.07 1,962 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.96 3.96 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.02 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.11 4.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.30 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 27 / 85
Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 51.2 51.2 < 0.005 0.01 0.05 53.7 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.66 0.66 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.67 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.68 0.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.71 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.48 8.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.89

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

2.07 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 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 2.77 2.77 — 1.34 1.34 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.06 0.05 0.45 0.49 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 81.1 81.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 81.4 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.08 0.08 — 0.04 0.04 — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 28 / 85
Onsite
truck

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

0.01 0.01 0.08 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 13.4 13.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.5 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.74 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 152 152 0.01 0.01 0.57 154 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.20 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 150 150 0.01 0.02 0.39 157 Hauling 0.15 0.04 2.45 0.92 0.01 0.03 0.48 0.52 0.03 0.13 0.17 — 1,868 1,868 0.10 0.29 4.07 1,962 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.96 3.96 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.02 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.11 4.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.30 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 51.2 51.2 < 0.005 0.01 0.05 53.7 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.66 0.66 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.67 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.68 0.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.71 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.48 8.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.89 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 29 / 85

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

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

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

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

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

0.27 0.22 2.06 2.58 < 0.005 0.09 — 0.09 0.08 — 0.08 — 474 474 0.02 < 0.005 — 476 Onsite
truck

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

0.05 0.04 0.38 0.47 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.01 — 0.01 — 78.5 78.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 78.7 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 30 / 85
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 94.9 94.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.36 96.3 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.13 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 100 100 < 0.005 0.01 0.26 105 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 89.6 89.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 90.8 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.14 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 100 100 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 104 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 18.1 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 19.8 19.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 20.7 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.96 2.96 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.28 3.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.42 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.8. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 31 / 85
Off-Road 1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Equipment
Onsite
truck

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

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

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

0.27 0.22 2.06 2.58 < 0.005 0.09 — 0.09 0.08 — 0.08 — 474 474 0.02 < 0.005 — 476 Onsite
truck

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

0.05 0.04 0.38 0.47 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.01 — 0.01 — 78.5 78.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 78.7 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 94.9 94.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.36 96.3 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.13 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 100 100 < 0.005 0.01 0.26 105 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 89.6 89.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 90.8 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 32 / 85
Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.14 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 100 100 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 104 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17.9 17.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 18.1 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 19.8 19.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 20.7 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.96 2.96 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.28 3.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.42 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.28 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 Onsite
truck

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

1.28 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 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 33 / 85
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.51 0.43 3.95 5.20 0.01 0.15 — 0.15 0.14 — 0.14 — 962 962 0.04 0.01 — 965 Onsite
truck

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

0.09 0.08 0.72 0.95 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 159 159 0.01 < 0.005 — 160 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 93.0 93.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.33 94.4 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.13 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 98.3 98.3 < 0.005 0.01 0.24 103 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 87.8 87.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 89.0 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.13 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 98.3 98.3 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 103 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 35.5 35.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 36.1 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 39.4 39.4 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 41.2 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.88 5.88 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.97 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 34 / 85
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.53 6.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.82 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.10. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.28 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 Onsite
truck

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

1.28 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 Onsite
truck

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

0.51 0.43 3.95 5.20 0.01 0.15 — 0.15 0.14 — 0.14 — 962 962 0.04 0.01 — 965 Onsite
truck

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

0.09 0.08 0.72 0.95 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 159 159 0.01 < 0.005 — 160 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 35 / 85
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 93.0 93.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.33 94.4 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.13 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 98.3 98.3 < 0.005 0.01 0.24 103 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 87.8 87.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 89.0 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.13 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 98.3 98.3 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 103 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 35.5 35.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 36.1 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 39.4 39.4 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 41.2 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.88 5.88 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.97 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.53 6.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.82 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.11. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 36 / 85
Off-Road
Equipment

0.81 0.68 6.23 8.81 0.01 0.26 — 0.26 0.24 — 0.24 — 1,350 1,350 0.05 0.01 — 1,355 Paving — 0.20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.04 0.04 0.34 0.48 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 74.0 74.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 74.2 Paving — 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.01 0.01 0.06 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 12.2 12.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.3 Paving — < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.86 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 186 186 0.01 0.01 0.65 189 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 49.1 49.1 < 0.005 0.01 0.12 51.4 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 37 / 85
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.71 9.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 9.85 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.69 2.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.81 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.61 1.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.63 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.45 0.45 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.47 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.12. Paving (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.81 0.68 6.23 8.81 0.01 0.26 — 0.26 0.24 — 0.24 — 1,350 1,350 0.05 0.01 — 1,355 Paving — 0.20 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.04 0.04 0.34 0.48 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 74.0 74.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 74.2 Paving — 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 38 / 85
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.06 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 12.2 12.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.3 Paving — < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.86 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 186 186 0.01 0.01 0.65 189 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 49.1 49.1 < 0.005 0.01 0.12 51.4 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.71 9.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 9.85 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.69 2.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.81 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.61 1.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.63 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.45 0.45 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.47 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.13. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 39 / 85
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.15 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 4.27 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.01 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 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.23 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.21 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.22 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.04 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 93.0 93.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.33 94.4 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 40 / 85
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 49.1 49.1 < 0.005 0.01 0.12 51.4 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.85 4.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.92 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.69 2.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.81 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.80 0.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.82 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.45 0.45 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.47 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.14. Architectural Coating (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.15 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 4.27 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 41 / 85
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 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 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.23 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.21 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.22 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.04 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 93.0 93.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.33 94.4 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 49.1 49.1 < 0.005 0.01 0.12 51.4 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.85 4.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.92 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 42 / 85
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.69 2.69 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.81 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.80 0.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.82 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.45 0.45 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.47 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)

6.24 5.75 3.93 40.8 0.10 0.08 8.44 8.52 0.07 2.14 2.21 — 9,903 9,903 0.47 0.38 33.2 10,061 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 6.24 5.75 3.93 40.8 0.10 0.08 8.44 8.52 0.07 2.14 2.21 — 9,903 9,903 0.47 0.38 33.2 10,061 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 43 / 85
Governm 6.13 5.62 4.32 38.6 0.09 0.08 8.44 8.52 0.07 2.14 2.21 — 9,464 9,464 0.50 0.40 0.86 9,597 ent
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 6.13 5.62 4.32 38.6 0.09 0.08 8.44 8.52 0.07 2.14 2.21 — 9,464 9,464 0.50 0.40 0.86 9,597 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)

1.11 1.01 0.78 7.02 0.02 0.01 1.53 1.55 0.01 0.39 0.40 — 1,578 1,578 0.08 0.07 2.37 1,602 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 1.11 1.01 0.78 7.02 0.02 0.01 1.53 1.55 0.01 0.39 0.40 — 1,578 1,578 0.08 0.07 2.37 1,602

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

6.24 5.75 3.93 40.8 0.10 0.08 8.44 8.52 0.07 2.14 2.21 — 9,903 9,903 0.47 0.38 33.2 10,061 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 44 / 85
Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
Total 6.24 5.75 3.93 40.8 0.10 0.08 8.44 8.52 0.07 2.14 2.21 — 9,903 9,903 0.47 0.38 33.2 10,061 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)

6.13 5.62 4.32 38.6 0.09 0.08 8.44 8.52 0.07 2.14 2.21 — 9,464 9,464 0.50 0.40 0.86 9,597 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 6.13 5.62 4.32 38.6 0.09 0.08 8.44 8.52 0.07 2.14 2.21 — 9,464 9,464 0.50 0.40 0.86 9,597 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)

1.11 1.01 0.78 7.02 0.02 0.01 1.53 1.55 0.01 0.39 0.40 — 1,578 1,578 0.08 0.07 2.37 1,602 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 1.11 1.01 0.78 7.02 0.02 0.01 1.53 1.55 0.01 0.39 0.40 — 1,578 1,578 0.08 0.07 2.37 1,602

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) Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 45 / 85
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — 335 335 0.02 < 0.005 — 336
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 95.7 95.7 0.01 < 0.005 — 96.0
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 430 430 0.02 < 0.005 — 432 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — 335 335 0.02 < 0.005 — 336
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 95.7 95.7 0.01 < 0.005 — 96.0
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 430 430 0.02 < 0.005 — 432 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — 55.4 55.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 55.6 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 15.8 15.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.9 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 46 / 85
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 71.3 71.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 71.5

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — 283 283 0.02 < 0.005 — 284
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 95.7 95.7 0.01 < 0.005 — 96.0
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 378 378 0.02 < 0.005 — 380 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — 283 283 0.02 < 0.005 — 284
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 95.7 95.7 0.01 < 0.005 — 96.0
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 47 / 85
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 378 378 0.02 < 0.005 — 380 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — 46.8 46.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 47.0 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 15.8 15.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.9 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 62.6 62.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 62.9

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

0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 128 128 0.01 < 0.005 — 129 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 128 128 0.01 < 0.005 — 129 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 48 / 85
Governm 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 128 128 0.01 < 0.005 — 129 ent
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 128 128 0.01 < 0.005 — 129 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 21.2 21.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 21.3 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 21.2 21.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 21.3

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

0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 128 128 0.01 < 0.005 — 129 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 49 / 85
Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
Total 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 128 128 0.01 < 0.005 — 129 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)

0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 128 128 0.01 < 0.005 — 129 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 128 128 0.01 < 0.005 — 129 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 21.2 21.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 21.3 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 21.2 21.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 21.3

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 50 / 85
Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.28 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.10 0.09 < 0.005 0.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.24 2.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.24 Total 0.10 0.39 < 0.005 0.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.24 2.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.24 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.28 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — 0.30 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.05 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.18 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.18 Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 51 / 85
Total 0.01 0.06 < 0.005 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.18 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.18

4.3.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.28 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.10 0.09 < 0.005 0.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.24 2.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.24 Total 0.10 0.39 < 0.005 0.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.24 2.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.24 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.28 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — 0.30 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.05 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 52 / 85
Architect — < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
ural
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.18 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.18 Total 0.01 0.06 < 0.005 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.18 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.18

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 53 / 85
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.79 5.22 6.01 0.08 < 0.005 — 8.61 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.79 5.22 6.01 0.08 < 0.005 — 8.61

4.4.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 54 / 85
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 4.76 31.5 36.3 0.49 0.01 — 52.0 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.79 5.22 6.01 0.08 < 0.005 — 8.61 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.79 5.22 6.01 0.08 < 0.005 — 8.61

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 55 / 85
Daily,——————————————————
Summer
(Max)
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
——————————— 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00— 134
Parking
Lot
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Total——————————— 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00— 134
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
——————————— 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00— 134
Parking
Lot
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Total——————————— 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00— 134
Annual——————————————————
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
——————————— 6.36 0.00 6.36 0.64 0.00— 22.2
Parking
Lot
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 56 / 85
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 6.36 0.00 6.36 0.64 0.00 — 22.2

4.5.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00 — 134
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00 — 134 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00 — 134
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 38.4 0.00 38.4 3.84 0.00 — 134 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 57 / 85
Governm — — — — — — — — — — — 6.36 0.00 6.36 0.64 0.00 — 22.2 ent
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 6.36 0.00 6.36 0.64 0.00 — 22.2

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 58 / 85
Governm — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01
ent
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01

4.6.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Governm
ent
(Civic
Center)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 59 / 85

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

4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 60 / 85

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
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r

0.57 0.52 1.44 1.32 < 0.005 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 264 264 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 265 Total 0.57 0.52 1.44 1.32 < 0.005 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 264 264 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 265 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r

0.57 0.52 1.44 1.32 < 0.005 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 264 264 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 265 Total 0.57 0.52 1.44 1.32 < 0.005 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 264 264 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 265 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r

0.01 0.01 0.04 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 0.00 6.24 6.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 6.26 Total 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 0.00 6.24 6.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 6.26

4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 61 / 85
Equipme TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e nt
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r

0.57 0.52 1.44 1.32 < 0.005 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 264 264 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 265 Total 0.57 0.52 1.44 1.32 < 0.005 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 264 264 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 265 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r

0.57 0.52 1.44 1.32 < 0.005 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 264 264 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 265 Total 0.57 0.52 1.44 1.32 < 0.005 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 264 264 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 265 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r

0.01 0.01 0.04 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 0.00 6.24 6.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 6.26 Total 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 0.00 6.24 6.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 6.26

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 62 / 85
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

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

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) Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 63 / 85
Vegetatio TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 64 / 85
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 65 / 85
Remove — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
d
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 66 / 85
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 67 / 85
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 8/4/2025 9/1/2025 5.00 20.0 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 9/2/2025 9/5/2025 5.00 4.00 — Grading Grading 9/8/2025 9/19/2025 5.00 10.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 9/22/2025 7/24/2026 5.00 220 — Paving Paving 7/13/2026 8/7/2026 5.00 20.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 8/10/2026 9/4/2026 5.00 20.0 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 68 / 85
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40 Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 10.0 0.56
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48

5.2.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 69 / 85
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40 Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 10.0 0.56
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 70 / 85
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 16.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor 6.00 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 14.0 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck 0.00 — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 18.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor 6.00 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck 0.00 — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 16.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 6.00 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 26.0 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck 0.00 — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 10.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 4.00 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck 0.00 — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 20.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 2.00 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck 0.00 — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 71 / 85
Architectural Coating Worker 10.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor 2.00 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck 0.00 — HHDT

5.3.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 16.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor 6.00 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 14.0 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck 0.00 — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 18.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor 6.00 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck 0.00 — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 16.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 6.00 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 26.0 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck 0.00 — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 10.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 4.00 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck 0.00 — HHDT
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 72 / 85
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 20.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 2.00 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck 0.00 — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 10.0 12.0 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor 2.00 7.63 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck 0.00 — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

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

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 18,750 6,250 5,918

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (Cubic Yards) Material Exported (Cubic Yards) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Ton of Debris)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,030 —
Site Preparation 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.00 —
Grading 2,000 0.00 10.0 0.00 —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 73 / 85
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.26

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

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Government (Civic Center) 0.00 0%
Parking Lot 1.55 100%
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.71 0%

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

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Government (Civic
Center)
1,441 1,441 1,441 525,965 11,960 11,960 11,960 4,365,539 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.9.2. Mitigated
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 74 / 85
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Government (Civic
Center)
1,441 1,441 1,441 525,965 11,960 11,960 11,960 4,365,539 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 18,750 6,250 5,918

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

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 75 / 85

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Government (Civic Center) 207,432 589 0.0330 0.0040 400,288 Parking Lot 59,288 589 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 589 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.11.2. Mitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Government (Civic Center) 175,204 589 0.0330 0.0040 400,288 Parking Lot 59,288 589 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 589 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Government (Civic Center) 2,483,246 494,741
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00

5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 76 / 85
Government (Civic Center) 2,483,246 494,741
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Government (Civic Center) 71.2 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —

5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Government (Civic Center) 71.2 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Government (Civic
Center)
Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.02 0.60 0.00 1.00
Government (Civic
Center)
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 77 / 85

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

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

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

5.15.2. Mitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor Emergency Generator Diesel 1.00 1.00 52.0 315 0.73

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
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 78 / 85

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

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

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

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

5.18.2.2. Mitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year) Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 79 / 85

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

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

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 12.4 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 3.90 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 7.98 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

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

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events.

Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding 0 0 0 N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 80 / 85
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

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

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

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

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

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

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

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

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 81 / 85
AQ-Ozone 64.7
AQ-PM 45.1
AQ-DPM 25.7
Drinking Water 10.9
Lead Risk Housing 17.5
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 25.6
Traffic 48.6
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 37.8
Groundwater 40.8
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 84.7
Impaired Water Bodies 77.3
Solid Waste 9.67
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 35.6
Cardio-vascular 30.2
Low Birth Weights 18.6
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 43.4
Housing 19.8
Linguistic 10.4
Poverty 16.6
Unemployment 28.2

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

Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 82 / 85
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 66.11061209
Employed 1.296034903
Median HI 58.75785962
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 47.36301809
High school enrollment 17.87501604
Preschool enrollment 14.26921596
Transportation —
Auto Access 76.73553189
Active commuting 33.56858719
Social —
2-parent households 27.65302194
Voting 75.72180162
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 42.80764789
Park access 24.26536635
Retail density 59.4636212
Supermarket access 60.82381625
Tree canopy 8.135506224
Housing —
Homeownership 43.19260875
Housing habitability 69.11330681
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 75.55498524 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 83.49801104
Uncrowded housing 47.26036186
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 83 / 85
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 74.51559091
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 59.9
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 1.7
Cognitively Disabled 36.6
Physically Disabled 78.7
Heart Attack ER Admissions 49.6
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 84 / 85
Children 48.8
Elderly 83.1
English Speaking 76.6
Foreign-born 6.0
Outdoor Workers 58.3
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 55.9
Traffic Density 49.3
Traffic Access 51.5
Other Indices —
Hardship 31.7
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 76.0

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 18.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 34.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

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

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Santee Community Center Regional Emissions Detailed Report, 2/26/2024 85 / 85
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

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

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Construction: Construction Phases Based on applicant provided schedule ~ 14 mos of construction. Note: duration of construction is greater than CalEEMod default values, therefore, it represents a conservative estimate.

Land Use Adjusted acreage so total site acreage disturbed = 3.2 Construction: Trips and VMT Even numbers for worker, vendor, and haul trips.

Operations: Vehicle Data Based on Transportation Analysis. 115.28 trips per thousand square feet.

Operations: Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps Based on Project Specs Appendix A-2
CalEEMod Construction HRA Emissions

Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 1 / 52
Santee Community Center Construction HRA 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

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated

3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated

3.4. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 2 / 52

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

4.10. 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 Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 3 / 52

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.2.2. Mitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.3.2. Mitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.18. Vegetation
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 4 / 52

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2.2. Mitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

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
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 5 / 52

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
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 6 / 52

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Santee Community Center Construction HRA
Construction Start Date 8/4/2025
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.60
Precipitation (days) 7.60
Location 10123 Riverwalk Dr, Santee, CA 92071, USA
County San Diego
City Santee
Air District San Diego County APCD
Air Basin San Diego
TAZ 6529
EDFZ 12
Electric Utility San Diego Gas & Electric
Gas Utility San Diego Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.21

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
Government (Civic
Center)

15.2 1000sqft 0.95 15,171 33,106 0.00 — —
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 7 / 52
Parking Lot 67.7 1000sqft 1.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

30.9 1000sqft 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Construction C-5 Use Advanced Engine Tiers

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 3.94 5.01 31.7 30.2 0.05 1.37 19.7 21.0 1.26 10.1 11.4 — 5,307 5,307 0.22 0.04 0.06 5,325 Mit. 0.96 5.01 5.67 28.4 0.05 0.21 19.7 19.8 0.19 10.1 10.2 — 5,307 5,307 0.22 0.04 0.06 5,325 %
Reduced
76% — 82% 6% — 85% — 6% 85% — 10% — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.35 1.13 10.5 13.1 0.02 0.43 < 0.005 0.43 0.40 < 0.005 0.40 — 2,405 2,405 0.10 0.02 < 0.005 2,414 Mit. 0.54 0.48 3.21 15.0 0.02 0.11 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 < 0.005 0.11 — 2,405 2,405 0.10 0.02 < 0.005 2,414 %
Reduced
60% 57% 69% -15% — 74% — 74% 73% — 73% — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 8 / 52
Unmit. 0.57 0.75 4.36 5.76 0.01 0.17 0.47 0.64 0.16 0.21 0.37 — 1,046 1,046 0.04 0.01 < 0.005 1,050 Mit. 0.24 0.49 1.45 6.59 0.01 0.05 0.47 0.51 0.05 0.21 0.25 — 1,046 1,046 0.04 0.01 < 0.005 1,050 %
Reduced
57% 34% 67% -14% — 71% — 21% 70% — 33% — — — — — — —
Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.10 0.14 0.80 1.05 < 0.005 0.03 0.09 0.12 0.03 0.04 0.07 — 173 173 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 174 Mit. 0.04 0.09 0.27 1.20 < 0.005 0.01 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.04 0.05 — 173 173 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 174 %
Reduced
57% 34% 67% -14% — 71% — 21% 70% — 33% — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Daily
Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 75.0 250 550 250 — — 100 — — 55.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Mit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Average
Daily)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 75.0 250 550 250 — — 100 — — 55.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Mit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Annual)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 13.7 40.0 100 40.0 — — 15.0 — — 10.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Mit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 9 / 52

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 3.94 3.31 31.7 30.2 0.05 1.37 19.7 21.0 1.26 10.1 11.4 — 5,307 5,307 0.22 0.04 0.06 5,325 2026 2.10 5.01 16.2 21.8 0.04 0.64 < 0.005 0.64 0.59 < 0.005 0.59 — 3,758 3,758 0.15 0.03 0.01 3,772 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 1.35 1.13 10.5 13.1 0.02 0.43 < 0.005 0.43 0.40 < 0.005 0.40 — 2,405 2,405 0.10 0.02 < 0.005 2,414 2026 1.28 1.07 9.90 13.0 0.02 0.38 < 0.005 0.38 0.35 < 0.005 0.35 — 2,405 2,405 0.10 0.02 < 0.005 2,413 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.53 0.44 4.11 4.52 0.01 0.17 0.47 0.64 0.16 0.21 0.37 — 807 807 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 810 2026 0.57 0.75 4.36 5.76 0.01 0.17 < 0.005 0.17 0.15 < 0.005 0.15 — 1,046 1,046 0.04 0.01 < 0.005 1,050 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.10 0.08 0.75 0.82 < 0.005 0.03 0.09 0.12 0.03 0.04 0.07 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 134 2026 0.10 0.14 0.80 1.05 < 0.005 0.03 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.03 — 173 173 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 174

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 TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.85 0.75 5.67 28.4 0.05 0.17 19.7 19.8 0.16 10.1 10.2 — 5,307 5,307 0.22 0.04 0.06 5,325 2026 0.96 5.01 5.63 24.4 0.04 0.21 < 0.005 0.21 0.19 < 0.005 0.19 — 3,758 3,758 0.15 0.03 0.01 3,772 Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 10 / 52
Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.54 0.48 3.21 15.0 0.02 0.11 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 < 0.005 0.11 — 2,405 2,405 0.10 0.02 < 0.005 2,414 2026 0.53 0.47 3.17 15.0 0.02 0.11 < 0.005 0.11 0.10 < 0.005 0.10 — 2,405 2,405 0.10 0.02 < 0.005 2,413 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.17 0.15 1.05 4.79 0.01 0.04 0.47 0.51 0.03 0.21 0.25 — 807 807 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 810 2026 0.24 0.49 1.45 6.59 0.01 0.05 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.05 — 1,046 1,046 0.04 0.01 < 0.005 1,050 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.03 0.03 0.19 0.87 < 0.005 0.01 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.04 0.05 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 134 2026 0.04 0.09 0.27 1.20 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 — 173 173 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 174

3. Construction Emissions Details

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

2.86 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 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 1.12 1.12 — 0.17 0.17 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 11 / 52
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.16 0.13 1.22 1.09 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 — 188 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.06 0.06 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.03 0.02 0.22 0.20 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 31.1 31.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 31.2 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.07 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.3 11.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11.8 Hauling 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 36.4 36.4 0.01 0.01 0.03 38.4 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.62 0.62 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.65 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.00 2.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.11 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 12 / 52
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.33 0.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.35

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

0.83 0.74 5.39 18.4 0.03 0.17 — 0.17 0.16 — 0.16 — 3,425 3,425 0.14 0.03 — 3,437 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 1.12 1.12 — 0.17 0.17 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.05 0.04 0.30 1.01 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 — 188 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.06 0.06 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.01 0.01 0.05 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 31.1 31.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 31.2 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 13 / 52
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.07 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.3 11.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11.8 Hauling 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 36.4 36.4 0.01 0.01 0.03 38.4 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.62 0.62 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.65 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.00 2.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.11 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.33 0.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.35

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 14 / 52
Off-Road 3.94 3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 1.37 — 1.37 1.26 — 1.26 — 5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 Equipment
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 19.7 19.7 — 10.1 10.1 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.04 0.04 0.35 0.33 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 58.0 58.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 58.2 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.22 0.22 — 0.11 0.11 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.01 0.01 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 9.61 9.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.64 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 15 / 52
Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.07 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.3 11.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11.8 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.12 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 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 0.00 0.00

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

0.50 0.50 2.59 28.3 0.05 0.10 — 0.10 0.10 — 0.10 — 5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 19.7 19.7 — 10.1 10.1 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 16 / 52
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.03 0.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 58.0 58.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 58.2 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.22 0.22 — 0.11 0.11 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 9.61 9.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.64 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.07 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.3 11.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11.8 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 17 / 52
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.12 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 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 0.00 0.00

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

2.07 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 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 7.09 7.09 — 3.43 3.43 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.06 0.05 0.45 0.49 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 81.1 81.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 81.4 Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 18 / 52
Dust — — — — — — 0.19 0.19 — 0.09 0.09 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

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

0.01 0.01 0.08 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 13.4 13.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.5 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.07 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.3 11.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11.8 Hauling 0.03 0.02 0.41 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 67.6 67.6 0.01 0.01 0.05 71.3 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.31 0.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.33 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.86 1.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.96 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 19 / 52
Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.31 0.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.32

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

0.38 0.36 2.21 17.8 0.03 0.08 — 0.08 0.08 — 0.08 — 2,959 2,959 0.12 0.02 — 2,970 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 7.09 7.09 — 3.43 3.43 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

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

0.01 0.01 0.06 0.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 81.1 81.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 81.4 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.19 0.19 — 0.09 0.09 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 13.4 13.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.5 Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 20 / 52
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.07 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.3 11.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11.8 Hauling 0.03 0.02 0.41 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 67.6 67.6 0.01 0.01 0.05 71.3 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.31 0.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.33 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.86 1.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.96 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.31 0.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.32

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 21 / 52
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

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

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

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

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

0.27 0.22 2.06 2.58 < 0.005 0.09 — 0.09 0.08 — 0.08 — 474 474 0.02 < 0.005 — 476 Onsite
truck

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

0.05 0.04 0.38 0.47 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.01 — 0.01 — 78.5 78.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 78.7 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.52 7.52 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.89 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 22 / 52
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.57 7.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 7.94 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.49 1.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.56 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.25 0.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.26 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

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

0.54 0.48 3.16 15.0 0.02 0.11 — 0.11 0.11 — 0.11 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 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)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 23 / 52
Off-Road
Equipment

0.54 0.48 3.16 15.0 0.02 0.11 — 0.11 0.11 — 0.11 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck

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

0.11 0.09 0.63 2.96 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 474 474 0.02 < 0.005 — 476 Onsite
truck

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

0.02 0.02 0.11 0.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 78.5 78.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 78.7 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.52 7.52 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.89 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.57 7.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 7.94 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.49 1.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.56 Santee Community Center Construction HRA Detailed Report, 2/5/2024 24 / 52
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.25 0.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.26 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.28 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 Onsite
truck