Stanton City Council
March 26, 2024

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-7

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Retail‐Oriented Mixed‐Use
The intent of the Retail-Oriented Mixed-Use (ROMU) land use district is to encourage retail and mixed-use development in areas with a high degree of exposure to vehicular and anticipated pedestrian traffic. The ROMU district occurs primarily along Beach Boulevard and Main Street within the Specific Plan area. The intent of this district to create a true town center with mixed-uses that would cater to visitors. Thus, with implementation of design guidelines and development standards specifically envisioned for this district, no aesthetic impacts would be anticipated.

Town Center Residential
Neighborhoods within the existing residential land use district are designated to preserve the residential character of these places. Land uses within this area will be restricted to those uses currently allowed in the City’s residential zoning designation and development standards will preserve the residential character of the neighborhood.

Implementation of the Specific Plan would alter existing view in the residential areas to include residential buildings that would be designed to fit into the context of neighboring development as best possible. A mix of housing types appealing to a wide variety of residents and family sizes is encouraged. Townhouses may be located to transition between highdensity development and existing neighborhoods adjacent to the Specific Plan area. In light of this concept and with restrictions/limits in place, the visual quality of this area will be improved and not impacted with implementation of the proposed Project. Thus, no adverse aesthetics impacts are anticipated.

Impact Conclusion
The proposed Specific Plan would establish a vision for future development and revitalization within the area that would appear to transition from existing surrounding land uses to a variety of mixed uses within the Transit Plaza and along Main Street and Beach Boulevard. Although implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would alter the visual character of the area by redeveloping existing buildings with new construction and enhancing streetscapes, it would not degrade the existing visual character and quality of the area and its surroundings. The Specific Plan is a cohesive long-range plan for logical growth that would be compatible with existing adjacent neighborhoods. Overall, the proposed Specific Plan would establish a consistent and compatible framework for development that would improve the visual character of individual sites and the area as a whole. The addition of three future public open spaces throughout the Specific Plan area would introduce open space/recreational elements into an area that is devoid of open space. This future open space would include both passive and active landscaped open space areas for the public.

The Specific Plan contains the development specifications, regulations, and design guidelines for future development projects within the Specific Plan area. The design guidelines included in the Specific Plan assist in creating a consistent urban form and landscape character for private and public development within the Specific Plan area. The development standards establish permitted uses, building setbacks, and general development criteria and Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-8

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR requirements for the new residential development and redevelopment of existing uses.

Additional design regulations and guidelines are identified to further define the desired character and image of development in the Specific Plan, which include landscaping, streetscapes, plazas, pedestrian walkways and courtyards, and parking.

Additionally, it should be noted that any development within the Specific Plan area would be subject to review through the development application process and would be analyzed by the City to ensure that the development is consistent with the development regulations and requirements of the Specific Plan. Therefore, in light of the requirements in place, visual changes would be considered less than significant.

Further, in the absence of scenic resources in the vicinity of the site, the Project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality and resources.

Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less Than SignificantImpact. There are two primary sources of light: light emanating from building interiors that pass-through windows and light from exterior sources (e.g., street lighting, parking lot lighting, building illumination, security lighting, and landscape lighting).

Depending upon the location of the light source and its proximity to adjacent light sensitive uses, light introduction can be a nuisance, affecting adjacent areas and diminishing the view of the clear night sky. Spill light, or trespass light, is light that trespasses or “spills” off the intended area and illuminates adjacent property, and it is generally considered as unwanted.

An example would be light from a streetlight that enters an adjacent residential property.

The Specific Plan area is primarily developed and is already subject to various sources of lighting through streetlights; lighting from passing vehicles along these roadways; interior and exterior lighting from commercial and residential buildings, signage illumination, and security lighting. Implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would introduce new sources of light as identified in the Specific Plan document, including streetscape lighting (i.e., roadways lighting, pedestrian lighting, accent lighting, and decorative lighting), and streetscape lighting within public ROW would include, but not be limited to, street light fixtures, pedestrian-scaled light fixtures, lower-height pedestrian light fixtures such as bollards, accent lighting, and decorative lighting. Lighting within the streetscape and in public area would contribute to nighttime aesthetics, increase safety and visibility for drivers and pedestrians, and minimize light pollution and impacts on night sky. Future projects within the Specific Plan area would comply with the guidelines for streetscape lighting (RR AES-1) (Stanton 2021a).

Additionally, the Specific Plan guidelines pertaining to exterior lighting indicate that exterior lighting should be located to avoid light spillage onto adjacent property, especially when adjacent to residential or mixed-use development. Further, Section 4.7.2, Exterior Lighting, of the Specific Plan promotes consideration of sustainable lighting guidelines (i.e., use of high-efficiency solid-state LED lighting for outdoor uses and appropriate color spectral distribution to reduce glare and enhance safety and navigation) by future developers.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-9

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Implementation of the Specific Plan would occur in accordance with Section 20.300.080, Outdoor Light and Glare, of the City of Stanton Municipal Code (RR AES-1) (Stanton 2021a).

Section 20.300.080 establishes outdoor lighting standards in order to reduce the impacts of glare, light trespass, over lighting, sky glow, and poorly shielded or inappropriately directed lighting fixtures, and promote safety and encourage energy conservation. Proposed lighting would be designed in accordance with Section 20.300.080 which includes outdoor lighting fixtures to be designed, shielded, aimed, located, and maintained to shield adjacent properties and to not produce glare onto adjacent properties or roadways. Proposed lighting associated with the Specific Plan would not adversely affect any existing land uses within or adjacent to the Specific Plan area with compliance with regulatory requirement (RR AES-2) (Stanton 2021a. Potential impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

During construction activities, security lighting in the evening and nighttime hours may be used. As applicable, construction lighting would be used in compliance with RR AES-2.

Because of its short-term nature, construction related lighting is considered temporary and therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Glare is a common daytime phenomenon and is due mainly to the occurrence of a high number of days per year with direct sunlight and the presence of large reflective surfaces.

Excessive glare not only restricts visibility but also increases the ambient heat reflectivity in a given area. Glare is caused by light reflections from pavement, vehicles, and building materials such as reflective glass and polished surfaces. Glare can create hazards to motorists and nuisances for pedestrians and other viewers. The Specific Plan discourages the use of large expanses of reflective materials on building facades to minimize glare. Additionally, roofing material is encouraged to not be highly reflective. Specific building materials would be identified during the application process for new development It is anticipated that the use of glass would be confined to windows and thus would not generate substantial glare affecting surrounding uses. Therefore, with compliance with the Specific Plan guidelines potential glare impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirements
RR AES‐1 Future projects within the Specific Plan area shall comply with Streetscape Lighting and Exterior Lighting guidelines identified in the Town Center Specific Plan.

RR AES‐2 Future projects within the Specific Plan area shall comply with Section

20.300.080, Outdoor Light and Glare, of the City of Stanton Municipal Code.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to Aesthetics; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-10

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no new significant impacts beyond the impacts analyzed in the GP EIR.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-11

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use?
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?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the Initial Study for the GP EIR concluded that the General Plan Update would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use; would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson act contract; and would not involve other changes in the existing environment that could result in conversion of Farmland top non-agricultural use. Thus, this topic was focused out from further analysis in the GP EIR.

Supplemental Analysis
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?
No Impact. Based on latest farmland mapping published by the California Department of Conservation (2016), the Project site is designated in the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) as Urban and Built-Up Land (FMMP 2021). The Town Center Specific Plan area is developed with residential, industrial, and commercial land uses and located in an urbanized area. No portion of the Specific Plan area is located on land designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The Specific Plan does not include agricultural uses, and Project implementation would not result in conversion of Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-12

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR existing farmland to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, the Project does not affect an agricultural resource area and does not impact designated Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The Project site consists of different zoning designations, including “CN” Commercial neighborhood Zone, “CG” Commercial General Zone, “PR” Parks and Recreation Zone, “OS” Open Space/Buffer Zone, “IG” Industrial General Zone, “RL” Single-Family Residential, “RM” Medium Density Residential, and “PI” Public Institutional Zone. The site is not being used, nor anticipated to be used or zoned for agricultural purposes. The Project site is not subject to a Williamson Act and does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as discussed under Checklist Response

4.2(a), above. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would not result in any conflicts with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act Contract. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production?
No Impact. There is no forest land on the Project area and in the surrounding area, and the Specific Plan area is not zoned for forest land or timberland. The proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning or cause rezoning of forest land, as defined pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 12220(g), timberland, as defined pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 4526, or timberland zoned Timberland Production, as defined pursuant to Government Code Section 51104(g). No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non‐forest use? No Impact. As noted in Checklist Response 5.2(c), forest land does not occur on-site or in the surrounding area. Thus, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in conversion of forest land to non-forest land. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.
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? No Impact. As has been previously noted in this section, the Project site is developed and located in an urbanized area of the City. The proposed Project does not involve converting farmland to non-agricultural use. Therefore, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirements
No regulatory requirements have been identified.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-13

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to Agriculture and Forestry Resources; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no significant impacts beyond the impacts analyzed in the Initial Study for the General Plan Update.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-14

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.3 AIR QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the GP EIR indicated that Citywide short-term construction activities under the General Plan Update could result in a cumulatively considerable increase of criteria pollutants violating air quality standards (significant unavoidable impact); a long-term mobile and stationary emissions within the City exceeding South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Air Quality Standards (significant unavoidable impact); an overall increase in carbon monoxide hotspot emissions within the City exceeding SCAQMD Air Quality Standards; and potentially conflict with implementation of the SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan Guidelines and the SCAQMD’s Air Quality Management Plan. The cumulative impact pertaining to regional air quality levels was considered significant and unavoidable.

Introduction
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has established quantitative thresholds for short-term (construction) emissions and long-term (operational) emissions for the following criteria pollutants: ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter 10 and 2.5 microns. The characteristics and health effects of these criteria pollutants are described below:
 Ozone (O3) is a nearly colorless gas that is formed by photochemical reaction (when nitrogen dioxide is broken down by sunlight). Ground-level O3 exposure can cause a variety of health problems, including lung irritation, wheezing, coughing, pain when taking a deep breath, and breathing difficulties during exercise or outdoor activities; permanent lung damage; aggravated asthma; and increased susceptibility to respiratory illnesses.
 Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless and odorless toxic gas which, in the urban environment, is associated primarily with the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels in motor vehicles. CO combines with hemoglobin in the bloodstream and reduces the Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-15

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR amount of oxygen that can be circulated through the body. High CO concentrations can lead to headaches, aggravation of cardiovascular disease, and impairment of central nervous system functions.
 Nitrogen oxides (NOx) are yellowish-brown gases, which at high levels can cause breathing difficulties. NOx are formed when nitric oxide (a pollutant from internal combustion processes) combines with oxygen.
 Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is a colorless, pungent gas formed primarily by the combustion of sulfur-containing fossil fuels. Health effects include acute respiratory symptoms and difficulty in breathing for children.
 Particulate Matter 10 (PM10) and Particulate Matter 2.5 (PM2.5) refer to particulate matter less than ten microns and two and one-half microns in diameter, respectively.

Particulates of this size cause a greater health risk than larger-sized particles since fine particles can more easily cause irritation. Particulate matter includes both aerosols and solid particles. An example of particulate matter is fugitive dust.

Short-term exposure to high PM2.5levels is associated with premature mortality and increased hospital admissions and emergency room visits. Long-term exposure to high PM2.5levels is associated with premature mortality and development of chronic respiratory disease. Short-term exposure to high PM10 levels is associated with hospital admissions for cardiopulmonary diseases, increased respiratory symptoms, and possible premature mortality.

The SCAQMD regulates air quality in the Orange County and is the agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB).

The SCAQMD develops rules and regulations, establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources, inspects emissions sources, and enforces such measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary. The SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary (area and point), mobile, and indirect sources. It has responded to this requirement by preparing a sequence of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs).

The 2022 AQMP was adopted on December 2, 2022, by the SCAQMD Governing Board. The 2022 AQMP is a regional and multi-agency effort among the SCAQMD, CARB, SCAG, and USEPA. The 2022 AQMP includes an analysis of emissions, meteorology, atmospheric chemistry, regional growth projections, and the impact of existing control measures. The purpose of the 2022 AQMP is to set forth a comprehensive program that would promote reductions in criteria pollutants, greenhouse gases, and toxic risk and efficiencies in energy use, transportation, and goods movement. The 2022 AQMP incorporates the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including SCAG’s 2020-2045 RTP/SCS; updated emission inventory methods for various source categories; and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. The 2022 AQMP includes strategies and measures necessary to meet the NAAQS. The AQMP is based on projections of energy usage and vehicle trips from land uses within the SoCAB.

The 2022 AQMP evaluates integrated strategies and measures to meet the following NAAQS (SCAQMD 2022):

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-16

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR  8-hour O3 target of 80 parts per billion (ppb) by 2024, 75 ppb by 2032, 70 ppb by 2038;
 Annual PM2.5 (12 micrograms per cubic meter [µg/m3]) by 2025;  1-hour O3 (120 ppb) by 2023; and
 24-hour PM2.5 (35 µg/m3) by 2023.

The two principal criteria for conformance to an AQMP are:

1. Whether a project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions in the AQMP.

2. Whether a project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP based on the year of Project buildout.

To estimate if a project may adversely affect the air quality in the region, the SCAQMD has prepared the Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) to provide guidance to those who analyze the air quality impacts of projects. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook provides significance thresholds for both construction and operation of projects within the SCAQMD’s jurisdictional boundaries. The SCAQMD recommends that projects be evaluated in terms of the quantitative thresholds established to assess both the regional and localized impacts of project-related air pollutant emissions. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that any project in the SoCAB with daily emissions that exceed any of the identified significance thresholds may have an individually and cumulatively significant air quality impact. The City of Stanton uses the current SCAQMD thresholds to determine whether a project would have a significant impact. These SCAQMD thresholds are identified in Table 4-1, South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality Significance Thresholds (SCAQMD 2019).

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-17

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐1

SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT

DISTRICT AIR QUALITY SIGNIFICANCE

THRESHOLDS
Mass Daily Thresholds (lbs./day)
Pollutant Construction Operation
VOC 75 55
NOx 100 55
CO 550 550
PM10 150 150
PM2.5 55 55
SOx 150 150
Lead 3 3
lbs./day: pounds per day; VOC: volatile organic compound; NOx: nitrogen oxides; CO:
carbon monoxide; PM10: respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5: fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; SOx: sulfur oxides.

Source: SCAQMD 2019.

Existing Air Quality Conditions
The monitoring data presented in Table 4-2, Air Quality Measurements at the Anaheim Monitoring Station, were obtained from CARB. Federal and State air quality standards are presented with the number of times those standards were exceeded. The Project site is in the area represented by measurements made at the Anaheim-Pampas Lane (Anaheim) Monitoring Station, located on 1630 West Pampas Lane, Anaheim. Table 4-2 shows the pollutant levels for CO, O3, NO2, PM2.5, and PM10.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-18

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐2

AIR QUALITY MEASUREMENTS AT THE ANAHEIM MONITORING

STATION
Pollutant
California
Standard
National
Standard Year Max. Level a
State
Standard
Days Exceeded
National
Standard
Days Exceeded
CO
(1 hour) 20 ppm 35 ppm
2018 2.3 0 0
2019 1.3 0 0
2020 1.7 0 0
CO
(8 hour) 9 ppm 9 ppm
2018 1.9 0 0
2019 2.4 0 0
2020 2.3 0 0
O3
(1 hour) 0.09 ppm None
2018 0.112 1 1
2019 0.096 1 1
2020 0.142 6 15
O3
(8 hour) 0.070 ppm 0.070 ppm
2018 0.071 N/A 1
2019 0.082 N/A 1
2020 0.097 N/A 15
NO2
(1 Hour) 0.18 ppm 0.100 ppm
2018 0.0660 0 0
2019 0.0594 0 0
2020 0.0709 0 0
PM10
(24 hour) 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3
2018 129 13 0
2019 127 13 0
2020 120 13 0
PM2.5
(24 Hour) None 35 µg/m3
2018 68.0 N/A 7
2019 37.1 N/A 4
2020 41.4 N/A 1
O3: ozone; ppm: parts per million; PM10: respirable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less; µg/m3:
micrograms per cubic meter; AAM: annual arithmetic mean; NO2: nitrogen dioxide; CO: carbon monoxide; PM2.5: fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less N/A indicates that there is no applicable standard.
a California maximum levels were used.

Regulatory Background
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) defines seven “criteria” air pollutants, as described above. These pollutants are called criteria pollutants because the USEPA has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for the concentrations of these pollutants (USEPA 2014). The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has also established standards for the criteria pollutants, known as California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), and the State standards are generally more restrictive than the NAAQS. When a region has air quality that fails to meet the standards, the USEPA and the CARB designate the region as “nonattainment” and the regional air quality agency must develop plans to attain the standards.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-19

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Based on monitored air pollutant concentrations, the USEPA and the CARB designate an area’s status in attaining the NAAQS and the CAAQS, respectively, for selected criteria pollutants. These attainment designations are shown in Table 4-3. As identified in Table 4-3, Orange County is a nonattainment area for O3, PM10, and PM2.5 for the State standards and a nonattainment area for O3, and PM2.5 for the federal standards.

TABLE 4‐3

ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS

IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
Pollutant State Federal
O3 (1 hour) Nonattainment No standards
O3 (8 hour) Nonattainment Nonattainment
PM10 Nonattainment Attainment/Maintenance
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
CO Attainment Unclassified/Attainment
NO2 Attainment Unclassified/Attainment
SO2 Attainment Attainment
Lead Attainment Attainment/Nonattainment*
All others Attainment/Unclassified No standards
O3: ozone; PM2.5: respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5: fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; CO: carbon monoxide; NO2: nitrogen dioxide; SO2: sulfur dioxide; SoCAB: South Coast Air Basin.
* Los Angeles County is classified nonattainment for lead; the remainder of the SoCAB is in attainment of the State and federal standards.

Source: CARB 2018
CARB, a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), is responsible for coordinating and administering both the federal and State air pollution control programs in California. In this capacity, CARB conducts research, sets the CAAQS (as shown in Table 4-4), compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures, oversees local programs, and prepares the State Implementation Plan (SIP). For regions that do not attain the CAAQS, CARB requires the air districts to prepare plans for attaining the standards. These plans are then integrated into the SIP. CARB establishes emissions standards for (1) motor vehicles sold in California, (2) consumer products (e.g., hair spray, aerosol paints, barbecue lighter fluid), and (3) various types of commercial equipment. It also sets fuel specifications to further reduce vehicular emissions.

Ozone (O3) is a secondary pollutant and is created when nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) react in the presence of sunlight. The predominant source of air emissions generated by Project development would be from vehicle emissions. Motor vehicles primarily emit CO, NOx, and VOCs. The NAAQS and CAAQS are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace within a reasonable margin of safety. The NAAQS and CAAQS for O3, CO, NO2, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and lead are shown in Table 4-4.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-20

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐4

CALIFORNIA AND FEDERAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Pollutant Averaging Time
California
Standards
Federal Standards
Primary a Secondary b
O3
1 Hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3) – –
8 Hour 0.070 ppm (137
µg/m3) 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) Same as Primary
PM10 24 Hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3 Same as Primary
AAM 20 µg/m3 – Same as Primary
PM2.5 24 Hour – 35 µg/m3 Same as Primary
AAM 12 µg/m3 12.0 µg/m3 15.0 µg/m3
CO
1 Hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3) 35 ppm (40 mg/m3) –
8 Hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) –
8 Hour
(Lake Tahoe) 6 ppm (7 mg/m3) – –
NO2
AAM 0.030 ppm (57 µg/m3) 0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3) Same as Primary 1 Hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3) 0.100 ppm (188 µg/m3) –
SO2
24 Hour 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m3) – –
3 Hour – – 0.5 ppm
(1,300 µg/m3)
1 Hour 0.25 ppm (655 µg/m3) 0.075 ppm (196 µg/m3) –
Lead
30-day Avg. 1.5 µg/m3 – –
Calendar Quarter – 1.5 µg/m3
Same as Primary Rolling 3-month Avg. – 0.15 µg/m3
Visibility
Reducing
Particles
8 Hour
Extinction coefficient
of 0.23 per km –
visibility ≥ 10 miles
(0.07 per km – ≥30
miles for Lake Tahoe) No
Federal
Standards Sulfates 24 Hour 25 µg/m3
Hydrogen
Sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3)
Vinyl
Chloride 24 Hour 0.01 ppm (26 µg/m3)
O3: ozone; ppm: parts per million; µg/m3: micrograms per cubic meter; PM10: respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; AAM: Annual Arithmetic Mean; –: No Standard; PM2.5: fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; CO: carbon monoxide; mg/m3: milligrams per cubic meter; NO2: nitrogen dioxide; SO2: sulfur dioxide; km:
kilometer.
a National Primary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary, within an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health.
b National Secondary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant.

Note: More detailed information in the data presented in this table can be found at the CARB website (www.arb.ca.gov).

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-21

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Supplemental Analysis
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less Than Significant Impact. CEQA requires a discussion of any inconsistencies between a project and applicable General Plans (GPs) and regional plans (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125). The regional plan that applies to the proposed Project includes the SCAQMD’s AQMP, as discussed above.

The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that “New or amended GP Elements (including land use zoning and density amendments), Specific Plans, and significant projects must be analyzed for consistency with the AQMP”. Strict consistency with all aspects of the plan is usually not required. A project should be considered to be consistent with the AQMP if it furthers one or more policies and does not obstruct other policies. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook identifies two key indicators of consistency, as discussed above:

1. Whether the project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP.

2. Whether the project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the year of project buildout and phase.

Both criteria are evaluated for the Project, as shown below.

With respect to the first criterion, based on the air quality modeling analysis conducted for the proposed Project [thresholds 4.3(b) and 4.3(c), below)], construction and operation of the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD’s CEQA thresholds of significance and consequently would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations nor cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions in the AQMP. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the first criterion.

With respect to the second criterion, the proposed Project was assessed as to whether it would exceed the assumptions in the AQMP. The SCAQMD’s current air quality planning document is the 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (2022 AQMP). The AQMP is a regional and multi-agency effort among the SCAQMD, CARB, SCAG, and USEPA. The 2022 AQMP includes an analysis of emissions, meteorology, atmospheric chemistry, regional growth projections, and the impact of existing control measures. The purpose of the 2022 AQMP is to set forth a comprehensive program that would promote reductions in criteria pollutants, greenhouse gases, and toxic risk and efficiencies in energy use, transportation, and goods movement. The 2022 AQMP incorporates the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including SCAG’s 2020-2045 RTP/SCS RTP/SCS; updated emission inventory methods for various source categories; and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. The 2022 AQMP includes strategies and measures necessary to meet the NAAQS. The AQMP is based on projections of energy usage and vehicle trips from land uses within the SoCAB.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-22

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR As discussed previously, the Specific Plan area currently consists of different zones. Most of the Specific Plan area is zoned “Industrial General” (IG). Businesses fronting Beach Boulevard are generally zoned “Commercial Neighborhood” (CN) and “Commercial General” (CG). Existing residential neighborhoods are zoned “Medium Density Residential” (RM).

Small portions of the Specific Plan area are zoned “Open Space/Buffer” (OS), “Parks and Recreation” (PR), and Public Institutional” (PI). The entire area will be rezoned as “Town Center Specific Plan” (TCSP). The Town Center Specific Plan will become the implementing document for the Specific Plan area. Neighborhoods within the 13.9-acre Existing Residential land use district are designated to preserve the residential character of these places. Land uses within this area would be restricted to those uses currently allowed in the City’s residential zoning designation and development standards would preserve the residential character of the neighborhood. The 139 additional residential units within the Specific Plan over the course of 30 years is not substantial and would assist with the housing deficiency.

The Orange County Business Council’s 2019-20 Workforce Housing Scorecard states that there is an existing housing shortfall of 58,000 units and anticipates that this shortfall will grow to 114,031 units by 2045. This housing shortfall will be met with housing outside of Orange County which will result in longer vehicle trips by employees living outside of Orange County and commuting there for employment. These longer vehicle trips will result in more air pollutant emissions. Development of residential units proposed by the Project will assist Orange County in meeting its housing demand and will reduce vehicular emissions. Section

4.14 Population and Housing of this Subsequent IS/MND also analyzes planned population growth within the City and found that the Project would not result in substantial unplanned indirect population growth.

In addition, the Specific Plan has numerous sustainability guidelines which promote energy efficiency such as installation of high R-value wall and ceiling thermal insulation, incorporation of Low-E windows or use Energy Star window, high-efficiency lighting, and inclusion of electric vehicle charging infrastructure. Other sustainability guidelines address exterior lighting, minimization of heat islands, and water conservation. As such, the proposed Project is not anticipated to exceed the AQMP assumptions for the Project site and is found to be consistent with the AQMP for the second criterion. Therefore, the Project would not result in an inconsistency with the SCAQMD’s 2022 AQMP. Less than significant impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. Orange County is a nonattainment area for O3, PM10, and PM2.5, as shown in Table 4-3. The Project would generate PM10, PM2.5, NO2, and O3 precursors (NOx and VOC) during short-term construction and long-term operations. It should be noted that for purposes of analysis in this section, “Project” is inclusive of all future projects within the Specific Plan area.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-23

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Construction Impacts
Construction-Related Regional Impacts
A project may have a significant impact where project-related emissions would exceed federal, State, or regional standards or thresholds, or where project-related emissions would substantially contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation.

A project with daily emission rates below the SCAQMD’s established air quality significance thresholds (shown in Table 4-1) would have a less than significant impact on regional air quality. Project emissions were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1.1.20 computer program. CalEEMod is designed to model construction and operational emissions for land development projects and allows for the input of project specific information. The CalEEMod inputs for construction emissions were based on the Project’s construction assumptions and default assumptions derived from CalEEMod. All construction activities shall be conducted in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD’s) Rule 403, Fugitive Dust, for controlling fugitive dust and avoiding nuisance (RR AQ-1) (SCAQMD 2022)
Table 4-5, Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions, presents the estimated maximum daily emissions during construction of the proposed Project (all future projects) and compares the estimated emissions with the SCAQMD’s daily regional emission thresholds. These estimated maximum daily emissions are based on the construction schedule of two years based on CalEEMod’s default data. However, the Specific Plan is anticipated to occur over an approximate 30-year time frame and consequently emissions may be spread over a longer time frame than two years, which would reduce the intensity of construction activities and its associated emissions. To provide a conservative analysis, construction activities were assumed to occur in 2024 and 2025 because air pollution from vehicles become progressively lower in the future due to the phase-out of older more polluting engines and the phase-in of cleaner vehicles. As such, use of a two-year construction period and near-term construction vehicles within CalEEMod represents a conservative analysis of potential air quality impacts. As shown in Table 4-5, all Projectrelated construction emissions would be below the regional significance thresholds. As such, construction impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-24

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐5

ESTIMATED MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Year
Emissions (lbs./day)
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
2024 4 36 34 <1 7 4
2025 49 11 19 <1 2 1
Maximum Emissions 49 36 34 <1 7 4
SCAQMD Thresholds (Table 8‐1) 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceeds SCAQMD Thresholds? No No No No No No
lbs./day: pounds per day; VOC: volatile organic compound; NOx: nitrogen oxides; CO: carbon monoxide; SOx:
sulfur oxides; PM10: respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5: fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; SCAQMD: South Coast Air Quality Management District.

See Appendix A, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling Data, for CalEEMod model outputs.

Cumulative Construction Impacts
Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would result in less than significant construction-related regional and localized air quality impacts, as quantified above in Table 4-5, Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions, and Table 4-7, Localized Significance Threshold Construction Emissions (discussed under Threshold 4.3c), respectively. Short-term cumulative impacts related to air quality could occur if construction of the future project within the Specific Plan area and other projects in the surrounding area were to occur simultaneously. In particular, with respect to local impacts, the consideration of cumulative construction particulate (PM10 and PM2.5) impacts is limited to cases when projects constructed simultaneously are within a few hundred yards of each other because of: (1) the combination of the short range (distance) of particulate dispersion (especially when compared to gaseous pollutants), and (2) the SCAQMD’s required dust-control measures (RR AQ-1), which further limit particulate dispersion from the Project site.

SCAQMD’s policy with respect to cumulative impacts associated with the above-referenced pollutants and their precursors is that impacts that would be directly less than significant on a project level would also be cumulatively less than significant. Because the Project’s construction emissions are below the SCAQMD’s regional and local significance thresholds, local construction emissions would not be cumulatively considerable, and the impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Operational Impacts
The following section provides an analysis of potential long-term air quality impacts to regional air quality with the long-term operation of the proposed Project (future projects within the Specific Plan area). The potential operations-related air emissions have been analyzed below for the regional and local criteria pollutant emissions and cumulative impacts.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-25

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Operations-Related Regional Impacts
Operational emissions associated with the Project are comprised of area, energy, and mobile source emissions. The principal source of VOC emissions associated with the Project would result from consumer products associated with residential uses. Area and energy source emissions are based on CalEEMod assumptions for the specific land uses and size. Mobile source emissions are based on estimated Project-related trip generation forecasts, as contained in the Stanton Town Center Specific Plan Traffic Impact Study. The Project would generate 937 daily trips on the weekday, 1,042 Saturday trips, and 894 Sunday trips. The peak day operational emissions for VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, and PM2.5 daily emissions that would be created from the Project’s long-term operation have been calculated and are summarized below in Table 4-6, Peak Daily Operational Emissions.

TABLE 4‐6

PEAK DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Source
Emissions (lbs./day)*
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Area sources 4 <1 8 <1 <1 <1
Energy sources <1 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Mobile sources 4 2 28 <1 5 1
Total Operational Emissions* 8 3 36 <1 5 1
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds
(Table 4‐1) 55 55 550 150 150 55
Significant Impact? No No No No No No
lbs./day: pounds per day; VOC: volatile organic compound; NOx: nitrogen oxides; CO: carbon monoxide; SOx: sulfur oxides; PM10: respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5: fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; SCAQMD: South Coast Air Quality Management District. * Some totals do not add due to rounding.

See Appendix A, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling Data, for CalEEMod model outputs.

The emissions generated by the Project shown in Table 4-6 shows that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the regional emissions operational thresholds. Therefore, a less than significant regional air quality impact would occur from operation of the Project, and no mitigation is required.

Cumulative Operational Impacts
As shown in Table 4-6, Peak Daily Operational Emissions, and Table 4-8, Localized Significance Thresholds Operational Emissions (under Threshold 4.3c, below) operational emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, and PM2.5 would be below the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds. Consistent with the approach described above (under Cumulative Construction Impacts), SCAQMD’s policy with respect to cumulative impacts associated with the above-referenced pollutants and their precursors is that impacts that would be directly less than significant on a project level would also be cumulatively less than significant.

Therefore, because the Project’s operational emissions are less than the respective SCAQMD daily operational thresholds, the Project’s operations phase activities would not contribute Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-26

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR to a cumulatively considerable increase of a pollutant for which the SoCAB is in nonattainment. Emissions of nonattainment pollutants or their precursors would not be cumulatively considerable and would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Cumulative Health Impacts
The SoCAB is designated as nonattainment for O3, PM10, and PM2.5, which means that the background levels of those pollutants are, at times, higher than the ambient air quality standards. The air quality standards were set to protect public health, including the health of sensitive individuals (the elderly, children, and the sick). Therefore, when the concentrations of those pollutants exceed the standard, it is likely that some sensitive individuals in the population would experience health effects. These health effects are not identified for specific individual receptors nor does the analysis identify the magnitude of health effects. The regional analysis detailed above found that the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD regional significance thresholds for VOC and NOx (ozone precursors), PM10, and PM2.5. As such, the Project would result in a less than significant cumulative health impact, and no mitigation is required.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. A significant impact may occur when a project would generate pollutant concentrations to a degree that would significantly affect sensitive receptors (i.e., populations that are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than the population at large). Exposure of sensitive receptors is addressed for emissions from construction and operation of the proposed Project. To address construction activities, the analysis below includes the following analyses: localized air quality impacts from construction and toxic air contaminants (TACs), specifically diesel particulate matter (DPM) from on-site construction. To address operational emissions exposure to sensitive receptors, the analysis below discusses local air quality impacts from on-site operations and CO hotspots. Operational, long-term TACs may be generated by some industrial land uses; commercial land uses (e.g., gas stations and dry cleaners); and diesel trucks on freeways.

Residential uses do not generate substantial quantities of TACs and are therefore not addressed further in this analysis.

Construction
Localized Criteria Pollutants from On-Site Construction In addition to the mass daily emissions thresholds established by the SCAQMD, short-term local impacts to nearby sensitive receptors from on-site emissions of NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 are examined based on SCAQMD localized significance threshold (LST) methodology.

To assess local air quality impacts for development projects without complex dispersion modeling, the SCAQMD developed screening (lookup) tables to assist lead agencies in evaluating impacts.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-27

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR The LST method is recommended to be limited to projects that are five acres or less. For the purposes of an LST analysis, the SCAQMD considers receptors where it is possible that an individual could remain for 1 hour for NO2 and CO exposure and 24 hours for PM10 and PM2.5 exposure. The emissions limits in the lookup tables are based on the SCAQMD’s Ambient Air Quality Standards. It is currently unknown where the closest receptors would be located to the Project site. As such, the emissions thresholds for receptors are set within 25 meters (82 feet) of the Project site, which is the closest available threshold. The thresholds for receptors located farther away would be higher, and the Project emissions would be a smaller fraction of the thresholds.

Table 4-7, Localized Significance Threshold Construction Emissions, shows the maximum daily on-site emissions for construction activities compared with the SCAQMD LSTs with receptors within 25 meters. The Project’s maximum daily on-site emissions would occur during the grading phase in 2024. As shown in Table 4-7, the localized emissions from the Project would be below the thresholds, and no significant impacts would result to sensitive receptors. No mitigation is required.

TABLE 4‐7

LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS Emissions and Thresholds
Emissions (lbs./day)
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Project maximum daily on-site emissions 36 33 7 4
SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold a 171 1,160 12 6 Exceed threshold? No No No No
lbs./day: pounds per day; NOx: nitrogen oxides; CO: carbon monoxide; PM10: respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5: fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter. a Data is for SCAQMD Source Receptor Area 17, Central Orange County, 25-meter distance, 4.5 acres of daily soil disturbance.

See Appendix A, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling Data, for CalEEMod outputs.

Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions from On-Site Construction Construction activities would result in short-term, project-generated emissions of DPM from the exhaust of off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment used for site preparation (e.g., demolition, excavation, and grading); paving; building construction; and other miscellaneous activities. CARB identified DPM as a TAC in 1998. The dose to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk. Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance or substances in the environment and the duration of exposure to the substance. Thus, the risks estimated for a maximally exposed individual (MEI) are higher if a fixed exposure occurs over a longer time period. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), health risk assessments—which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to TAC emissions—should be based on a 40- year exposure period; however, such assessments should be limited to the period/duration of activities associated with the project.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-28

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR There would be relatively few pieces of off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment in operation, and the total construction period would be relatively short to construct 139 dwelling units when compared to a 40-year exposure period. In addition, the 139 dwelling units may be constructed in different locations, which would further dilute the intensity of emissions by a reduced construction period and less equipment exhaust exposure because the activities are distributed in different geographic locations. Combined with the highly dispersive properties of DPM over a large project area and additional reductions in particulate emissions from newer construction equipment, as required by USEPA and CARB regulations, construction emissions of TACs would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial emissions of TACs. The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Operation
Localized Criteria Pollutants from On-site Operations
Project-related air emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and federal air quality standards in the vicinity of the Project even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the SoCAB. Project-related air emissions from on-site sources such as architectural coatings, landscaping equipment, and on-site usage of natural gas appliances may have the potential to generate emissions that exceed the State and federal air quality standards in the vicinity of the Project even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the SoCAB.

The local air quality emissions from on-site operations were analyzed using the SCAQMD’s Mass Rate LST Look-up Tables and the LST Methodology. Table 4-8, Localized Significance Threshold Operational Emissions, shows the on-site operational emissions from area sources, energy usage, vehicles operating on-site, and the calculated emissions thresholds.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-29

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐8

LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD OPERATIONAL

EMISSIONS
On‐Site Emission Source
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Area Sources <1 8 <1 <1
Energy Sources <1 <1 <1 <1
Mobile Sources a <1 2 <1 <1
Project’s total maximum daily on-site
emissions 1 10 <1 <1
SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold b 98 60 1 1
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
lbs./day: pounds per day; NOx: nitrogen oxides; CO: carbon monoxide; PM10: respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5: fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter. a Onsite vehicle emissions based on 5% of the gross vehicular emissions, which is the estimated portion of vehicle emissions occurring within a quarter mile of the Project site. b Data is for SCAQMD Source Receptor Area 17, Central Orange County, with a source receptor distance of 25-meters, 4.5 acres.

See Appendix A, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling Data, for CalEEMod outputs.

The data provided in Table 4-8 shows that the operations of the Project would not exceed the local NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 thresholds of significance. Therefore, operation of the Project would create a less than significant impact to sensitive receptors, and no mitigation is required.

Carbon Monoxide Hotspot
In an urban setting, vehicle exhaust is the primary source of CO. Consequently, the highest CO concentrations generally are found close to congested intersections. Under typical meteorological conditions, CO concentrations tend to decrease as the distance from the emissions source (e.g., congested intersection) increases. Therefore, for purposes of providing a conservative worst-case impact analysis, CO concentrations typically are analyzed at congested intersection locations. If impacts are less than significant close to congested intersections, impacts would also be less than significant at more distant sensitive-receptor and other locations. Per the Traffic Study prepared for the proposed Project, implementation of the Project would result in 56 trips in the AM peak hour and 71 trips in the PM peak hour with a total of 937 trips per day. The 2003 AQMP and the 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide evaluated numerous intersections for the potential to result in CO hotspots and found that the 1-hour CO standard (20.0 ppm) would likely not be exceeded until the daily traffic at the intersection exceeded more than 400,000 vehicles per day. Because the roadways proximate to the Project site have substantially less traffic than 400,000 trips per day, CO concentrations at nearby roadway intersections are anticipated to be substantially less than the CO ambient air quality standards. Moreover, vehicle standards have become increasingly more stringent since 1992 and background CO concentrations are less than in 1992. As such, existing CO concentrations would be less than the ambient air quality concentration standards, and the small contribution of Project- Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-30

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR related traffic would likewise not result in CO concentrations that would exceed either the State or federal ambient air quality standards. The Project would result in less than significant impacts related to CO hotspots, and no mitigation is required. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less Than SignificantImpact. Project construction would use equipment and activities that could result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors). However, these odors would be typical during construction and not significantly objectionable. Potential construction odors include on-site construction equipment’s diesel exhaust emissions as well as roofing, painting, and paving operations. There may be situations where construction activity odors could be noticed; however, these odors would be temporary and would dissipate rapidly from the source with an increase in distance. These odors would not be of such magnitude to cause a public nuisance. Therefore, the impacts would be short-term; would not affect a substantial number of people; and would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

According to the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, sewer treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The Project does not include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as being associated with odors, and therefore, would not produce objectionable odors. In addition, the Project uses are regulated from nuisance odors or other objectionable emissions by SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance (RR AQ-2).

Rule 402 prohibits discharge from any source of air contaminants or other material, which would cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to people or the public. Overall, there would be a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required (SCAQMD 2022).

Regulatory Requirements
RR AQ‐1 All construction activities shall be conducted in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District’s Rule 403, Fugitive Dust, for controlling fugitive dust and avoiding nuisance. Contractor compliance with Rule 403 requirements shall be mandated in the contractor’s specifications (SCAQMD 2022).

RR AQ‐2 All construction activities shall be conducted in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 402, Nuisance, which states that a project shall not “discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property” (SCAQMD 2022).

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-31

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to Air Quality; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no new significant impacts beyond the impacts analyzed in the GP EIR.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-32

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and 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?
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?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the Initial Study for the GP EIR concluded that the General Plan Update would not have an impact, directly or through habitat modifications, on any candidate, sensitive, or special status species; would not have an effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community; would not affect federally protected wetlands; would not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species; would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy; and would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Thus, this topic was focused out from further analysis in the GP EIR.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-33

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Supplemental Analysis
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S, Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. The Specific Plan area is located within an urbanized area and currently consists of a mix of land uses including industrial uses, commercial, single- and multi- family residential, and railroad right of way. As a result of urbanization, the entire Project area and immediate surrounding areas are fully developed and no longer support naturally vegetated areas or stands of native vegetation. The vegetation in the Project area consists of ornamental landscaping including mature trees, shrubs, and open turf, which provide minimal foraging habitat for common animal species that are typically found in urban areas.

Thus, the site does not contain any habitat suitable for special status plant and animal species, and as such none occurs in the Project area. Further, review of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS’) Critical Habitat for Threatened and Endangered Species shows that there are no designated critical habitat areas in or near the City or the Specific Plan area.

The nearest critical habitats are located approximately 6.5 miles to the northeast in West Coyote Hills (east of Route 39/Beach Boulevard, South of Route 9/Imperial Boulevard, north of Rosecrans Avenue, and west of Euclid Street) and approximately 7.5 miles to the south in Huntington Beach State Park in the City of Huntington Beach adjacent to the Santa Ana River (USFWS 2021).

The proposed Project would not impact any candidate, sensitive, or special status species, as identified in the local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or USFWS, and no mitigation is required. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. The Project area is developed with the exception of a few vacant disturbed parcels and does not contain any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. No natural sensitive communities have been identified in local or regional plans or by the CDFW or by the USFWS occur within the Specific Plan area. The existing Project area is generally comprised of impervious surfaces from infill development with scattered ornamental landscaping including mature trees, shrubs, and open turf. There would be no impact to riparian habitats or sensitive natural vegetation communities, and no mitigation is required. 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?
No Impact. As previously described in Checklist Response 4.4(a), the Project site is developed and within an urbanized area. The Project area is devoid of any wetlands, including marsh, vernal pool and is not in proximity to the coast. As such, it would not impact Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-34

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR any wetlands through direct removal, filling, and other means. Thus, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project area is within and surrounded by urban infill development as discussed in Checklist Response 4.4(a). The City currently has eight public parks, four of which are near the Project area (Martha Wesihaupt Linear Park, Stanton Central Park, Veterans Memorial Park, and Zuniga Park); however, no parks and/or open space exists in the Specific Plan area. Additionally, the Specific Plan area lacks connectivity to natural open space areas and is not within any regionally or locally recognized wildlife movement corridors. The Project site is isolated from regional wildlife corridors and linkages, and there are no riparian corridors, creeks, or useful patches of steppingstone habitat (natural areas) within or connecting the Project site to any identified wildlife corridors or linkages. Additionally, there are no native wildlife nursery sites on or adjacent to the site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not disrupt or have any adverse effect on any migratory corridors or linkages in the surrounding area. The Project would not affect the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or the established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors.

Due to the presence of trees and vegetation within the Project area, there is potential for birds protected by the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code to nest at the site. The MBTA protects common and special status migratory birds and their nests and eggs. Bird species protected under the provisions of the MBTA are identified by the List of Migratory Birds (50 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 10.13, as amended). Since the 1970s, the MBTA has been interpreted to prohibit the accidental or “incidental” take of migratory birds.

Multiple sections of California Fish and Game Code provide protection for nesting birds and raptors. Section 3503 makes it unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird. Section 3503.5 specifically addresses raptors (i.e., birds of prey) and makes it unlawful to take, possess, or destroy these birds or their nest or eggs. Section 3513 prohibits the take or possession of migratory non-game birds or any part of such bird, as designated by the MBTA.

If demolition and site clearing activities occur during the nesting season, active bird nests on the site may be disturbed or destroyed, resulting in a significant impact. Therefore, MM BIO1 is recommended to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds and their fledglings. Therefore, while impacts to migratory birds may occur during the construction phase, they would be mitigated to less than significant level with implementation of MM BIO-1.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-35

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project would potentially involve the removal of ornamental trees and replacing the existing landscaping with a variety of drought tolerant trees and vegetation. The City’s Municipal Code Ordinance 271 (Chapter 12.20, Street Tree Plan) is the City’s Master Plan of Street Trees. According to Chapter 12.20, no person, firm or corporation shall plant, remove, replace or cause to be planted, removed or replaced any tree within a dedicated ROW without having first obtained a permit in writing from the City Engineer to do so. Additionally, any trees planted shall be of the kind specified in the Master Plan of Street Trees and all work in planting, removing, or replacing a street tree shall be done to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. All future development with the Specific Plan area would be required to comply with RR BIO-1, which includes compliance with Chapter 12.20. Proposed projects would comply with the most current adopted City Municipal Codes regarding landscaping standards and requirements.

Additionally, future projects would comply with the Town Center Specific Plan Landscape Design Guidelines (RR BIO-2) Therefore, with compliance with RR BIO-1 and RR BIO-2, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 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?
No Impact. The proposed Project site is not located in any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirement
RR BIO‐1 All future projects within the Town Center Specific Plan area shall comply with the most current adopted City of Stanton Municipal Codes regarding landscaping standards and requirements, including but not limited to, City of Stanton Municipal Code Chapter 12.20, Street Tree Plan.

RR BIO‐2 All future projects within the Town Center Specific Plan area shall comply with the Design Guidelines and Development Standards pertaining to landscaping.

Mitigation Measures
MM BIO‐1 Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the Community & Economic Development Director or designee shall verify that the following requirements for nesting birds and preconstruction survey are completed:
 The start of site-preparation activities and subsequent construction activity initiation shall be scheduled outside of the bird nesting and breeding season (typically February 15 through August 30). If sitepreparation activities start during the nesting season, a qualified Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-36

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey in potential bird nesting areas within 200 feet of any proposed disturbance. The survey shall be conducted no more than three days prior to the start of any ground disturbance activities.
 If active nests of bird species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and/or California Fish and Game Code are present in the impact area or within 200 feet of the impact area, a no-entry buffer shall be established around the nest site to minimize potential impacts to the nest occupants. The size and duration of this temporary buffer shall be determined by the qualified Biologist who will account for the bird species and type of disturbance proposed.
 Clearing and/or construction activities within buffer areas shall be postponed or halted until the nest is complete (e.g., juveniles have fledged from the nest and there is no evidence of a second nesting attempt) as determined by a qualified Biologist.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no significant impacts beyond the impacts analyzed in the Initial Study for the General Plan Update.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-37

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the Initial Study for the GP EIR concluded that the General Plan Update would not cause an adverse change in the significance of historic and archaeological resources; would not destroy, directly or indirectly, a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic features; and would not disturb any human remains. Thus, this topic was focused out from further analysis in the GP EIR.

Introduction
This analysis used the results of a historic and archaeological record search conducted on March 22, 2021, at the South-Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), located on the campus of California State University, Fullerton. The SCCIC houses records of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) for Los Angeles, Orange, and Ventura counties. The records search included a 1.0-mile) radius around the Project site.

Existing Setting
The approximate 156.9-acre Project site is located within the northern portion of the City of Stanton, which is generally situated south of the cities of Anaheim and Buena Park, west of Garden Grove, and north of Westminster.

On March 22, 2021, the SCCIC completed a record search for the Project site, which included a one-mile radius around the site. The purpose of the literature search was to identify prehistoric or historic archaeological sites or historic buildings and structures, previously recorded within and around the Project site. The SCCIC record search identified 22 prior cultural resources studies within the one-mile search, one of which was identified within the Project site (Table 4-9).

The one study located within the project area, OR-03337, included an Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment of the Proposed Peaker Project Location at Bare Substation.

The records search did not identify any previously recorded cultural resource within the one-mile search radius of the Project site.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-38

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐9
CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDIES WITHIN 0.5‐MILE OF THE PROJECT SITE Report
No. Year Author(s) Affiliation Type of Study Title of Study Within the
Project Site
OR-01803 1998 Bonner, Wayne H. Chambers Group, Inc. Literature search Cultural Resources Records Search and Literature Review Report for a Pacific Bell Mobile Services Telecommunications Facility: Cm 179-06 in the City of Stanton, California
OR-01949 1995
Padon, Beth, McLean, Deborah, and Strudwick, Ivan
LSA Associates, Inc. Literature search Cultural Resource Assessment for the City of Garden Grove OR-02547 1977 Huey, Gene and Lois M. Webb Caltrans District 7 Other research Widening of Katella Avenue Between Beach Boulevard and Dale Street in Stanton, Orange County, California OR-02548 1976 Cameron, Constance Public Antiquities Salvage Team, CSUF Other research Historic Property Survey of Valley View//Katella City Project No. 7505-10 OR-02745 2002 Duke, Curt LSA Associates, Inc. Archaeological, Field study Cultural Resource Assessment at & T Wireless Services Facility No. 13116a Orange County, California OR-02822 2004 Thal, Sean EarthTouch Inc. Literature search Magnolia Katella/CA-8257a Telecommunications 10701 Magnolia Avenue, Stanton, Ca OR-02851 2004 Thal, Sean Tetra Tech, Inc. Literature search Kennedy/ca8241b Telecommunications Near Western and Chapman Avenues, Stanton, Ca Orange County OR-02907 2002 Bonner, Wayne H. W. H. Bonner Associates Literature search Records Search Results for Cingular Wireless Site Sm-190-01 (the Magnolia Baptist Church Site), Located at 720 S. Magnolia Ave., Anaheim, Orange County, California OR-02915 2002 Bonner, Wayne H. W. H. Bonner Associates Literature search Records Search Results for Cingular Wireless Site Sm-190-02 (chia Supermarket Shopping Center), 1222 S. Magnolia Ave., Orange County, California OR-03021 2006 Wlodarski, Robert J. Cellular, Archaeological Resource, Evaluations Archaeological, Field study Records Search for Royal Street Communications, LLC Wireless Telecommunications Site La0676a (SCE Orangewood Avenue), Located at 7600 Orangewood Avenue, Stanton, Orange County, California OR-03304 2006 Taniguchi, Christeen Galvin Preservation Associates, Inc. Archaeological, Field study Historic Architectural Report for the Proposed Development of Hobby City in the Cities of Anaheim and Stanton, Orange County OR-03337 2006 Pollock, Katherine H. Southern California Edison Archaeological, Field study Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment of the Proposed Peaker Project Location at Bare Substation X OR-03486 2007 Baker, Cindy and Mary L. Maniery PAR Environmental Services, Inc. Archaeological, Evaluation, Field study Cultural Resource Inventory and Evaluation of United States Army Reserve 63d Regional Readiness Command Facilities Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-39

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐9
CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDIES WITHIN 0.5‐MILE OF THE PROJECT SITE Report
No. Year Author(s) Affiliation Type of Study Title of Study Within the
Project Site
OR-03491 2007 Sorrell, Tanya and Shannon Carmack LSA Associates, Inc. Archaeological, Field study Draft Cultural Resource Assessment Report the Hobby City Development Project, Cities of Stanton and Anaheim, Orange County, California OR-03524 2009 Bonner, Wayne H. Michael Brandman Associates Archaeological, Field study Cultural Resource Records Search and Site Visit Results for T- Mobile USA Candidate LA03190I (Magnolia & Ball), 1226 South Magnolia Ave, Anaheim, Orange County, California OR-03859 2010 Wlodarski, Robert C.A.R.E Archaeological, Field study, Other research AT&T Wireless Telecommunications Site LA3078, Located at 2719 West Ball Road, Anaheim, Orange County, California OR-03901 2009 Fulton, Phil LSA Associates, Inc. Literature search Cultural Resource Assessment - Verizon Wireless Services, Webster Facility, City of Anaheim, Orange County, California OR-03972 2007 Kim, Steve FAA Archaeological, Field study Proposed Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Surface Detection Equipment, Model X (ASDE-X) System to Serve John Wayne--Orange County Airport (SNA), Santa Ana, California OR-04001 1998 Anthofer, Joseph and Regier, Jeanna Union Railroad Company Archaeological, Field study Union Pacific Railroad Company, Abandonment and Discontinuance Exemption, in Orange County, CA (Los Alamitos Branch) Combined Environmental and Historic Report OR-04010 2008 Fulton, Phil and Terri Fulton LSA Associates, Inc. Archaeological, Field study Cultural Resource Assessment, Verizon Wireless Services, West Ball Facility, City of Stanton, Orange County, California OR-04300 2013 Bonner, Wayne MBA Archaeological, Field study Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit Results for Verizon Wireless Candidate (Anaconda) 7581 Chapman Avenue, Garden Grove, Orange County, California OR-04528 2014 Bonner, Diane F., Carrie D. Wills, and Kathleen A. Crawford Environmental Assessment Specialists, Inc.

Archaeological, Architectural/Historical, Field study
Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit Results for T Mobile West, LLC Candidate IE95007A (Ball Road-SCE), 2722 West Stonybrook Drive (N/O Ball Road, E/O Dale Street), Anaheim, Orange County
OR-04528 2014
Wills, Carrie D. and Kathleen A. Crawford
Environmental Assessment Specialists, Inc.

Architectural/Historical, Evaluation
Direct APE Historic Architectural Assessment for T Mobile West, LLC Candidate IE95007A (Ball Road-SCE), 2722 West Stonybrook Drive (N/O Ball Road, E/O Dale Street), Anaheim, Orange County OR-04578 2016 Roland, Jennifer NWB Environmental Services, LLC Archaeological, Field study Phase I Investigation for the Verizon Wireless Katella/Brookhurst Antenna Installation Project, Garden Grove, Orange County, California Source: SCCIC 2021.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-40

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Supplemental Analysis
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact. As stated previously, the SCCIC record search identified 22 prior cultural resources studies within the one-mile search, one of which was identified within the Project area. Additionally, the SCCIC did not identify any previously recorded cultural resource within the one-mile search radius of the Project site. Also, no historical resources were identified on the Project site. Therefore, the Project’s impacts on historical resources are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the searches conducted, one study within the Project area, OR-03337, included an Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment of the Proposed Peaker Project Location at Bare Substation. No archaeological resources were discovered on the Project site. However, there is a possibility that buried historical and/or archaeological materials would be uncovered during necessary subsurface excavations for the construction of the Project. To make sure no significant impacts would result, MM CUL-1 is proposed and calls for a qualified archaeologist to monitor earth-moving activities during construction and sets procedures to follow in the event of the discovery of archaeological resources. Implementation of MM CUL-1 would reduce the potential for the destruction of any significant archaeological resources. Therefore, potential impacts pertaining to adverse change in the significant of an archaeological resource would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation.
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less Than Significant Impact. There is no indication that human remains are present within the Project site, and the SCCIC records search does not indicate evidence of human remains within the one-mile search radius of the site. However, construction activities may unearth previously undiscovered human remains.

In compliance with State and federal regulations, if human remains are encountered during excavation activities, all work shall halt at the site and or any nearby areas reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains, and the County Coroner shall be notified (RR CUL-1).

The Coroner shall determine whether the remains are of forensic interest within two working days of receiving notification. If the Coroner, with the aid of the qualified archaeologist, determines that the remains are prehistoric, the Coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours of the determination. The NAHC shall be responsible for designating the Most Likely Descendant (MLD), who will be responsible for the ultimate disposition of the remains, as required by Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code.

Compliance with RR CUL-1 would ensure that impacts on human remains would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-41

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Regulatory Requirements
RR CUL‐1 If human remains are encountered during any Project-related grounddisturbing activities, Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition of the materials pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code. The provisions of Section 15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines shall also be followed. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD must complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. These requirements shall be included as notes on the contractor specification and verified by the Community Development Department, prior to issuance of grading permits. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City in consultation with the County Coroner.

Mitigation Measures
MM CUL‐1 A qualified archaeologist (the “Project Archaeologist”) that meets the Secretary of Interior Standards (SOI) shall be retained prior to the start of grading for Project-related construction. The Project Archaeologist shall monitor all ground-disturbing activities within the areas of native soil (i.e., below existing areas of artificial fill from previous construction). If archaeological or historical resources are encountered during implementation of any phase of the Project, the Project Archaeologist will be allowed to temporarily divert or redirect grading or excavation activities in the vicinity of the find in order to make an evaluation of the find.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no significant impacts beyond the impacts analyzed in the Initial Study for the General Plan Update.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-42

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.6 ENERGY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or
operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
Energy was not included as a topical issue in Appendix G of Environmental Checklist Form at the time the GP EIR was prepared, and thus was not included as a section in the EIR.

However, the discussion in Section 10.0, Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes which would be Involved if the Proposed Project were Implemented, of the GP EIR, identified that implementation of the project would commit energy resources in the form of petroleum products (diesel fuel and gasoline), natural gas, and electricity and considered this an irreversible environmental change.

Supplemental Analysis
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
Construction
Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction would require the use of construction equipment for excavation, building, and paving activities. Construction also includes the vehicles of construction workers and vendors traveling to and from the Project site. Off-road construction equipment use was calculated from the equipment data (i.e., mix, hours per day, horsepower, load factor, days per phase) provided in the CalEEMod version 2022.1.1.20 construction output files included in Appendix A of this Subsequent IS/MND. The total horsepower hours for the Project was then multiplied by fuel usage estimates per hours of construction activities included in the OFFROAD Model. Fuel consumption from construction worker, vendor, and delivery/haul trucks was calculated using the trip rates and distances provided in the CalEEMod construction output files. Total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) was calculated for each type of construction-related trip and divided by the corresponding miles per gallon factor using CARB’s EMissions FACtor 2021 (EMFAC 2021) model. EMFAC 2021 provides the total annual VMT and fuel consumed for each vehicle type. Construction vendor trucks were assumed to be heavy-duty diesel trucks. Total fuel consumption for Project related construction activities are shown in Table 4-10.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-43

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐10

ENERGY USE DURING CONSTRUCTION
Source
Gasoline Fuel
(gallons)
Diesel Fuel
(gallons)
Off-road Construction Equipment 12,380 13,842
Worker commute trips 24,856 59
Vendor trips 2,355 24
Haul Trucks 6 5,157
Total 39,598 19,082
Total may not add due to rounding.

See Appendix A for Energy data. Data based on CalEEMod 2022.1.1.20 (Appendix A), OFFROAD, and EMFAC2021 programs.

Fuel energy consumed during construction would be temporary in nature and would not occur after completion of construction activities. Furthermore, there are no unusual Project characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment that would be less energy-efficient than at comparable construction sites in other parts of the State. Therefore, the proposed construction activities would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary fuel consumption.

Operation
Project operations would result in energy consumption related to electricity, natural gas, water, solid waste, and transportation. In addition, potential energy impacts of the Project are evaluated with emphasis on avoiding or reducing inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy. The regulations, plans, and policies adopted for the purpose of maximizing energy efficiency that are directly applicable to the Project include (1) California’s Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential Buildings, (2) the CALGreen Code, and (3) the City of Stanton Energy Resources section of the General Plan. Development of the Project site would comply with the applicable energy efficiency standards at the time of application. The City of Stanton Energy Resources section of the General Plan establishes goals of conserving energy in homes and businesses as well as expanding renewable energy generation sources. These codes are enforced by the City, and adherence to standard requirements for construction and operations would ensure that the Project would comply with these regulations.

Transportation energy use would be associated with daily trips associated with the Project.

Based on data obtained from CalEEMod (refer to Appendix A), the Project would generate

3.2 million annual VMT. The gasoline and diesel consumption rates were calculated using estimated miles per gallon factors based on data from EMFAC 2021 that provides average vehicle emissions rates for the SoCAB in California. It is estimated that Project-generated operational traffic would consume 73,776 gallons of gasoline fuel and 1,065 gallons of diesel fuel per year (Table 4-11, Energy Use During Operations). Transportation fuels consumption would steadily decline with increases to the Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency Standards and phase-out of older, more fuel-consumptive vehicles with energy-efficient electric vehicles and vehicles with greater fuel efficiency. As discussed in Section 4.3, Air Quality, the Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-44

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Project would assist Orange County in addressing the housing deficiency, which would lead to shorter vehicle trip lengths from employees living in the Town Center Specific area.

Because the Project would incorporate the latest energy efficiency standards for residential buildings, assist in meeting housing demands locally, and have no unusual characteristics that would cause greater energy consumption than a comparable project elsewhere in the State, impacts would thus be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

TABLE 4‐11

ENERGY USE DURING OPERATIONS
Gasoline
(Gallons/yr)
Diesel
(Gallons/yr)
Natural Gas
(kBtu/yr)
Electricity
(kWh/yr)
73,776 1,065 2,294,260 671,692
yr: year; kBtu: kilo-British thermal unit; kWh: kilowatt hour. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
No Impact. The State’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6 of the CCR) were established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. The current 2022 Title 24 Standards, effective January 1, 2022 (RR GHG-1). The 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (24 CCR, Part 11), also known as the CALGreen code, contains mandatory requirements and voluntary measures for new residential and nonresidential buildings (including buildings for retail, office, public schools and hospitals) throughout California (RR GHG-2). The development of the CALGreen Code is intended to improve public health, safety, and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the following construction practices: (1) planning and design; (2) energy efficiency; (3) water efficiency and conservation; (4) material conservation and resource efficiency; and (5) environmental quality. In short, the code is established to reduce construction waste; make buildings more efficient in the use of materials and energy; and reduce environmental impact during and after construction.

The CALGreen Code contains requirements for construction site selection, storm water control during construction, construction waste reduction, indoor water use reduction, material selection, natural resource conservation, site irrigation conservation, and more. The code provides for design options allowing the designer to determine how best to achieve compliance for a given site or building condition. The code also requires building commissioning, which is a process for verification that all building systems (e.g., heating and cooling equipment and lighting systems) are functioning at their maximum efficiency.

The CALGreen Code provides standards for light and glare reduction, grading and paving, energy efficient appliances, renewable energy, graywater systems, water efficient plumbing fixtures, recycling and recycled materials, pollutant controls (including moisture control and indoor air quality), acoustical controls, storm water management, building design, Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-45

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR insulation, flooring, and framing, among others. The Project would comply with the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and the 2022 CALGreen Code.

The Project would achieve the City’s goals of energy conservation and expansion of renewable energy generation as required under 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and 2022 CALGreen. The Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen are updated on three-year cycles. Each triennial edition of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards improves on the energy efficiency of the previous edition. The CALGreen likewise improves in energy efficiency between each successive edition. Project development would comply with the latest State of California energy efficiency standards related to building energy use and the provision of electric vehicle charging stations. Compliance with City and State requirements would result in consistency with State and local plans related to energy conservation and energy efficiency. The 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen requirements adopted by the Project would also be consistent with the City’s goal of energy conservation and renewable energy generation. The Project would be built over an extended time frame. During this time, updated Title 24 and CALGreen requirements can be expected that would lead to greater energy efficiency for the future projects as they develop. As discussed previously in Section 4.3 Air Quality, the Specific Plan has numerous sustainability guidelines, which seek to promote energy efficiency, minimize heat islands, and conserve water resulting in reduced GHG emissions. Because the Project is required to comply with the State of California’s Title 24 and CALGreen requirements, as well as follow the Specific Plan’s Sustainability Guidelines, there would be no impact associated with conflicting or obstructing local or State energy plans. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirements
RR GHG-1 and RR GHG-2, presented in Section 5.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, would be applicable.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to Energy; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no significant impacts beyond the discussion in Section 10.0, Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes which would be Involved if the Proposed Project were Implemented, of the GP EIR.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-46

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of a known
fault?
ii) Strong seismic groundshaking?
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 wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the GP EIR indicated that the City would experience high levels of ground shaking during a seismic event, which would result in substantial damage to some buildings; soils could become unstable during intense ground shaking resulting in potential liquefaction; future development could result in impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil and expansive soils. Cumulative impacts related to geologic, soils, and seismic condition were considered potentially significant.

Introduction
Analysis for this section was prepared using Chapter 6, Community Health and Safety of the City of Stanton General Plan (Stanton 2008) and information derived from the State of California Geological Survey.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-47

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Supplemental Analysis
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist‐ Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Less Than Significant Impact. Ground rupture occurs when movement on a fault break through the surface. The State of California has established Earthquake Fault Zones for the purpose of mitigating the hazard of fault rupture by prohibiting the location of most human occupancy structures across the traces of active faults. According to the Stanton General Plan, Chapter 6 Community Health and Safety, and the California Geological Survey (CGS), there are several potentially active faults within proximity to the City, such as the NewportInglewood Fault Zone; the Elsinore Fault Zone-Whittier Section; the Norwalk Fault, the Elysian Park Fault, and the San Andreas Fault; however, there are no Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones or known faults located within the City (Stanton 2008a; CGS 2015b).

Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving ground rupture. Impacts would be less that significant, and no mitigation is required.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact. The City of Stanton and the rest of California are located within a seismically active region. Moderate to strong earthquakes can occur on numerous local faults. Some of the major active nearby faults to the City include the NewportInglewood Fault Zone; the Elsinore Fault Zone-Whittier Section; the Norwalk Fault, the Elysian Park Fault, and the San Andreas Fault (CGS 2015b). The proximity of active faults indicates potential ground shaking during the life of the Project. These impacts depend on which fault the earthquake occurred, fault location, distance from the development area, and magnitude of the earthquake.

As discussed above in Checklist Response 4.7(a)(i), there are no known active or potentially active faults within the City and the Project area. However, in order to reduce the effects of ground shaking, geotechnical design considerations for construction in the City of Stanton, including the Project area, are governed by the Stanton Building Code, as set forth in Title 16, Division 1, Chapter 16.04 (Building Code) of the City’s Municipal Code, which incorporates by reference the California Building Code (CBC) (RR GEO-1). All buildings and other structures constructed as part of the proposed Project would be designed in accordance with applicable requirements of the CBC in effect at the time of grading plan submittal, the Stanton Municipal Code, and any applicable building and seismic codes in effect at the time the grading plans are submitted. Therefore, compliance with RR GEO-1 would ensure a less than significant impact from strong seismic ground shaking. No mitigation is required.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-48

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR iii) Seismic‐related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Liquefaction is a seismic phenomenon in which loose, saturated, granular soils behave similarly to a fluid when subject to high-intensity ground shaking. Liquefaction occurs when three general conditions coexist: (1) shallow groundwater; (2) low density non-cohesive (granular) soils; and (3) high-intensity ground motion. Studies indicate that saturated, loose near surface cohesionless soils exhibit the highest liquefaction potential, while dry, dense, cohesionless soils and cohesive soils exhibit low to negligible liquefaction potential. In general, cohesive soils are not considered susceptible to liquefaction, depending on their plasticity and moisture content. Effects of liquefaction on level ground include settlement, sand boils, and bearing capacity failures below structures. Dynamic settlement of dry loose sands can occur as the sand particles tend to settle and densify as a result of a seismic event.

According to the General Plan and based on review of the State of California Seismic Hazard Zone for liquefaction potential, the proposed Specific Plan area is located entirely within a liquefaction hazard zone (Stanton 2008a; CGS 2021). Therefore, the potential for seismicrelated ground failure, including liquefaction, represents a significant impact. The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (SHMA) requires site-specific geotechnical investigations be conducted identifying the hazard and formulating mitigation measures prior to permitting most developments designed for human occupancy within the Zones of Required Investigation. Before a development permit can be issued or a subdivision approved, cities and counties must require a site-specific investigation to determine whether a significant hazard exists at the site and, if so, recommend measures to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. The investigation must be performed by State-licensed engineering geologists and/or civil engineers (DOC 2021).

Implementation of RR GEO-1 requires that Seismic Design Considerations, are fully incorporated in the design and construction of all development, and MM GEO-1 requires sitespecific geotechnical investigations on all proposed Project sites within the Specific Plan area. Therefore, with compliance with RR GEO-1 and implementation of MM GEO-1, impacts related to seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, would be less than significant.
iv) Landslides?
No Impact. According to the General Plan, the City does not have the potential for landslides (Stanton 2008a). Further, the City and surrounding area are located in a generally flat, urbanized portion of Southern California. Therefore, landslides are not anticipated in the Project area. The Project would not result in a substantial adverse effect, including the risk of loss, injury, or death, due to landslides. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Specific Plan area has a relatively flat topography and is primarily developed with residential, industrial, and commercial land Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-49

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR uses. The proposed Specific Plan includes development and redevelopment opportunities mostly located at infill sites primarily covered by disturbed vegetation or impermeable surfaces. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Specific Plan is anticipated to result in minimal soil erosion or loss of topsoil. However, the City is characterized as gently sloping to the west and southwest. Alluvial sediments, deposited by an ancestral Santa Ana River, underlie the City. Alluvium sediments are typically comprised of a variety of materials including fine particles of silt and clay and larger particles of sand and gravel (Stanton 2008a).

During demolition and construction activities, temporary soil erosion may occur due to soil disturbance and the removal of buildings and paved surfaces. In addition, soil erosion due to rainfall and wind may occur if unprotected soils are exposed during construction. When applicable, future development in the Specific Plan area would be required to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for construction activities or coverage under the NPDES Construction General Permit. The Construction General Permit requires preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and implementation of erosion control, sediment control, tracking, waste management, and construction site maintenance best management practices (BMPs) to reduce the potential for soil and wind erosion during construction activities (see RR HWQ-1, in Section 4.10).

Further, all Specific Plan development must comply with the City’s grading ordinance, which requires preparation of an erosion control plan for City approval prior to issuance of a grading permit (see RR HWQ-4 in Section 4.10). With compliance with these regulations, potential impact pertaining to construction-related soil erosion would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Additionally, Specific Plan development would implement site improvements and landscaping to prevent long-term erosion (RR HWQ-2). Therefore, operation-related soil erosion would also be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 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?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Checklist Response

4.7(a)(iv), above, the Project site is not located in a potential landslide area. Potential landslide impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

As indicated in Checklist Response 4.7(a)(iii), the City, including the Project area, is in a liquefaction zone. As discussed previously, RR GEO-1 and MM GEO-1 which require Seismic Design Considerations, would be incorporated into the design and construction of all development and a site-specific geotechnical investigation by a State-licensed geologist and/or civil engineer would be conducted on all proposed Project sites within the Specific Plan area. Therefore, compliance with RR GEO-1 and implementation of MM GEO-1 would ensure impacts related to liquefaction would be less than significant.

Lateral spreading is the downslope movement of surface sediment due to liquefaction in a subsurface layer during an earthquake. As discussed above, liquefaction is a potential risk in Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-50

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR the City; however, there are no Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones located in the City.

Due to the generally low potential for a major earthquake damage and the City’s flat topography and lack of significant slopes, the City is not subject to lateral spreading conditions. Therefore, impacts related to lateral spreading would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

The City is comprised of extensive alluvial deposits resulting from erosion of sediments from the Santa Ana River. Alluvium sediments are typically comprised of a variety of materials including fine particles of silt and clay and larger particles of sand and gravel (Stanton 2008).

Subsidence involves a sudden sinking or gradual settling and compaction of soil and other surface material with little or no horizontal motion. Alluvial regions, such as the City, are particularly susceptible to subsidence. Expansive soils have a significant amount of clay particles that can give up water (shrink) or take on water (swell). The major cause of ground subsidence is the excessive withdrawal of groundwater, gas, oil, or hydrocompaction, and underground mining, among others. The change in volume exerts stress on buildings and other loads placed on these soils. There are no known ongoing or planned large-scale extractions of groundwater, gas, oil, or geothermal energy that would cause subsidence within the Specific Plan area.

The proposed Specific Plan Project would adhere to all applicable standards, regulations, and codes. Impacts would be less than significant for onsite or offsite landslides and lateral spreading, and not mitigation is required. Compliance with RR GEO-1 and implementation of MM GEO-1 would ensure impacts related to subsidence and liquefaction, and therefore potential collapse, would be less than significant.
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? Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. Expansive soils are characterized by their ability to undergo significant volume changes (shrink or swell) due to variations in moisture content. Changes in soil moisture content can result from rainfall, landscape irrigation, utility leakage, roof drainage, perched groundwater, drought, or other factors, and may cause settlement or heave of structures, concrete slabs supported on-grade, or pavements supported over these materials. Depending on the extent and location below finished subgrade, these soils could have a detrimental effect on construction.

All Project construction within the Specific Plan area would be required to comply with the current CBC (RR GEO-1). Additionally, MM GEO-1 requires a site-specific geotechnical investigation by a State-licensed geologist and/or civil engineer for all proposed developments within the Specific Plan area. With adherence to RR GEO-1 and implementation of MM GEO-1, Project impacts related to expansive soils would be less than significant.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-51

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR 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 wastewater?
No Impact. The City of Stanton is currently served by a municipal sewer system. Future development within the Specific Plan area would be served by the existing municipal sewer system. The proposed Project would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required. f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The Project site is generally located within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California and roughly 8 miles northeast of Los Alamitos Bay and about 11 miles from the coast of the Pacific Ocean. Several nearby river systems consisting of Anaheim Creek, Coyote Creek, 19th and 20th century alignments of the San Gabriel and Los Angeles River, and the Santa Ana River have resulted in the accumulation of sediments for this region of Orange County. More specifically, the City of Stanton is comprised of extensive alluvial deposits resulting from erosion of sediments from the Santa Ana River. Alluvium sediments are typically comprised of a variety of materials including fine particles of silt and clay and larger particles of sand and gravel (Stanton 2008a).

Based on a review of available geologic maps and from the results of the literature review and records check conducted on October 31, 2021, through the Natural History Museum (NHM) of Los Angeles County, the primary geologic unit underlying the site is Quaternary young alluvial to Pleistocene deposits that occur at depth below the artificial fill. These materials are defined as Holocene to late Pleistocene deposits consisting of silt, sand, and gravels in general.

The record search also included a thorough search of the NHM paleontology collection records for the locality and specimen data for the Project site and surrounding area. The record search did not identify any fossil localities within the site. However, five localities were located nearby from the same sedimentary deposits that occur in the Project site, either at the surface or at depth. The Project site is underlain by Alluvium to late Pleistocene deposits, which could contain unknown fossils. Therefore, if grading and/or ground disturbing activities encounter unknown paleontological resources, implementation of MM GEO-2 would reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

Regulatory Requirements
RR GEO‐1 The proposed Project shall be constructed in accordance with the Stanton Building Code, Title 16, Division 1, Chapter 16.04 (Building Code) of the City’s Municipal Code and any other applicable building standards.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-52

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Mitigation Measures
MM GEO‐1 Site specific geotechnical investigations by a State-licensed geologist and/or civil engineer shall be required for all future projects within the Town Center Specific Plan.

MM GEO‐2 In the event paleontological resources are encountered during construction, ground-disturbing activity shall cease. A Qualified Paleontologist that meets the Society for Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) shall be retained by the Applicant to examine the materials encountered, assess the nature and extent of the find, and recommend a course of action to further investigate and protect or recover and salvage those resources that have been encountered.

Criteria for discard of specific fossil specimens shall be made explicit. If a Qualified Paleontologist determines that impacts to a sample containing significant paleontological resources cannot be avoided by project planning, then recovery may be applied. Actions may include recovering a sample of the fossiliferous material prior to construction; monitoring work and halting construction if an important fossil needs to be recovered; and/or cleaning, identifying, and cataloging specimens for curation and research purposes. The cost associated with recovery, salvage, and treatment shall be borne by the Applicant. All recovered and salvaged resources shall be prepared to the point of identification and permanent preservation by the Qualified Paleontologist.

Resources shall be identified and curated into an established accredited professional repository. The Qualified Paleontologist shall have a repository agreement in hand prior to initiating recovery of the resource.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units would result in new significant impacts beyond the impacts analyzed in the GP EIR. Implementation of mitigation measures would reduce the impacts to less than significant level.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-53

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions was not included as a topical issue in Appendix G of Environmental Checklist Form at the time the GP EIR was prepared, and thus was not included as a section in the EIR.

Introduction
Climate change refers to any significant change in measures of climate (e.g., average temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns) over a period of time. Climate change may result from natural factors, natural processes, and human activities that change the composition of the atmosphere and alter the surface and features of the land. Significant changes in global climate patterns have recently been associated with global warming, which is an average increase in the temperature of the atmosphere near the Earth’s surface; this is attributed to an accumulation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the atmosphere. GHGs trap heat in the atmosphere which, in turn, increases the Earth’s surface temperature. Some GHGs occur naturally and are emitted to the atmosphere through natural processes, while others are created and emitted solely through human activities. The emission of GHGs through fossil fuel combustion in conjunction with other human activities are associated with global warming.

GHGs, as defined under California’s Assembly Bill (AB) 32, include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). General discussions on climate change often include water vapor, atmospheric ozone, and aerosols in the GHG category. Water vapor and atmospheric ozone are not gases that are formed directly in the construction or operation of development projects, nor can they be controlled in these projects. Aerosols are not gases. While these elements have a role in climate change, they are not considered by either regulatory bodies, such as CARB, or climate change groups, such as the California Climate Action Registry, as gases to be reported or analyzed for control. Therefore, no further discussion of water vapor, atmospheric ozone, or aerosols is provided.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-54

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Regulatory Background
On June 1, 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, which calls for a reduction in GHG emissions to the year 2000 level by 2010, to year 1990 levels by 2020, and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

The principal overall State plan and policy adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions is Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006). AB 32 establishes regulatory, reporting, and market mechanisms to achieve quantifiable reductions in GHG emissions and establishes a cap on statewide GHG emissions. AB 32 recognizes that California is the source of substantial amounts of GHG emissions. The statute states the following:

Global warming poses a serious threat to the economic well-being, public health, natural resources, and the environment of California. The potential adverse impacts of global warming include the exacerbation of air quality problems, a reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snowpack, a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment, and an increase in the incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human health-related problems. In order to avert these consequences, AB 32 establishes a State goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, codifying the goal of EO S-3-05.

CARB approved a Climate Change Scoping Plan as required by AB 32 in 2008; this plan is required to be updated every five years. The Climate Change Scoping Plan proposes a “comprehensive set of actions designed to reduce overall carbon GHG emissions in California, improve our environment, reduce our dependence on oil, diversify our energy sources, save energy, create new jobs, and enhance public health”. The Climate Change Scoping Plan has a range of GHG-reduction actions which include direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, market-based mechanisms such as a cap-and-trade system, and an AB 32 implementation regulation to fund the program. The 2022 Scoping Plan is the latest update and implements the reduction target adopted under SB 32 and seeks to reduce GHG emissions through a number of measures. The measures applicable to the proposed Project from the 2022 Scoping Plan include energy efficiency measures, water conservation and efficiency measures, and transportation and motor vehicle measures, as discussed below.

Energy efficiency measures are intended to maximize energy efficiency building and appliance standards, pursue additional efficiency efforts including new technologies and new policy and implementation mechanisms, and pursue comparable investment in energy efficiency from all retail providers of electricity in California. In addition, these measures are designed to expand the use of green building practices to reduce the carbon footprint of California’s new and existing inventory of buildings.

The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, Senate Bill (SB) 375, established a process to coordinate land use planning, regional transportation plans, and funding priorities in order to help California meet the GHG reduction goals established in AB

32. SB 375 required SCAG to incorporate a “sustainable communities strategy” (SCS) into its regional transportation plans (RTPs) that will achieve GHG emission reduction targets Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-55

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR though several measures, including land use decisions. SCAG’s SCS is included in the SCAG 2020–2045 RTP/SCS. The goals and policies of the RTP/SCS that reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) focus on transportation and land use planning that include building infill projects; locating residents closer to where they work and play; and designing communities so there is access to high quality transit service.

On April 29, 2015, Governor Brown signed EO B-30-15, which ordered an interim statewide GHG emission reduction target to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 to ensure California meets its target of reducing GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Five key goals for reducing GHG emissions through 2030 include (1) increasing renewable electricity to 50 percent; (2) doubling the energy efficiency savings achieved in existing buildings and making heating fuels cleaner; (3) reducing petroleum use in cars and trucks by up to 50 percent; (4) reducing emissions of short-lived climate pollutants; and (5) managing farms, rangelands, forests and wetlands to increasingly store carbon. EO B-30-15 also directs CARB to update the Climate Change Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.

On September 8, 2016, the Governor signed Senate Bill 32 (SB 32) to codify the GHG reduction goals of EO B-30-15, requiring the State to reduce GHG emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (Health and Safety Code Section 38566). As stated above, this goal is expected to keep the State on track to meeting the goal set by EO S-3-05 of reducing GHG emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

AB 197 was signed at the same time to ensure that the SB 32 goals are met by requiring CARB to provide annual reports of GHGs, criteria pollutants, and TACs by facility, City and subcounty level, and sector for stationary sources and at the County level for mobile sources. It also requires the CARB to prioritize specified emission reduction rules and regulations and to identify specified information for emission reduction measures (e.g., alternative compliance mechanism, market-based compliance mechanism, and potential monetary and nonmonetary incentive) when updating the Scoping Plan.

SB 350, signed on October 7, 2015, is the Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015.

SB 350 is the implementation of some of the goals of EO B-30-15. The objectives of SB 350 are as follows:

1. To increase from 33 percent to 50 percent, the procurement of our electricity from renewable sources

2. To double the energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas final end uses of retail customers through energy efficiency and conservation The text of SB 350 sets a December 31, 2030, target for 50 percent of electricity to be generated from renewable sources. SB 350 also requires the State to double statewide energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas end uses by 2030. Additionally, SB 350 sets requirements for large utilities to develop and submit integrated resources plans (IRPs), which detail how utilities would meet their customers’ resource needs, reduce GHG emissions, and integrate clean energy resources.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-56

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR On September 10, 2018, Governor Brown signed SB 100, the 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018. SB 100 requires renewable energy and zero-carbon resources to supply 100 percent of electric retail sales to end-use customers and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve state agencies by December 31, 2045. This policy requires the transition to zero-carbon electric systems that do not cause contributions to increase of GHG emissions elsewhere in the western electricity grid. SB 100 also creates new standards for the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) goals established by SB 350 in 2015. Specifically, the bill increases required energy from renewable sources for both investor-owned utilities and publicly owned utilities from 50 percent to 60 percent by 2030.

Further, on September 10, 2018, Governor Brown also signed California EO B-55-18, which sets a new statewide goal of carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045 and achieve net negative emissions thereafter. EO B-55-18 was added to the existing Statewide targets of reducing GHG emissions, including the targets previously established by Governor Brown of reducing emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (EO B-30- 15 and SB 32), and by Governor Schwarzenegger of reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2040 (EO S-3-05).

The City of Stanton addresses GHGs through the Regional Coordination Element of the City’s General Plan. This Element provides a discussion of how coordination with the City’s planning, the County, regional and state bodies is essential for fostering a positive economic and political environment. The three components of this Element is comprised of housing, growth management, and air quality. The housing component recognizes that Stanton is a built-out City and “As such, the reuse and redevelopment of underutilized properties provide the greatest opportunity for housing within the city.” (Stanton 2008a). The Growth Management component of the Element addresses the redevelopment of existing parcels as well as transportation networks within the City to reduce traffic congestion. “The majority of recent development in the city has therefore involved the recycling of older uses into new more efficient uses. For Stanton, growth management involves the efficient and productive reuse of these parcels in an orderly manner, benefiting current and future residents.” (ibid).

The last component of the Element involves City coordination with State and federal regulations and governmental agencies to reduce air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions.

SCAQMD Significance Criteria
On December 5, 2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board presented the staff proposal for a tiered threshold approach wherein Tier 1 determines if a project qualifies for an applicable CEQA exemption, Tier 2 determines consistency with GHG reduction plans, and Tier 3 proposes a numerical screening value as a threshold. At their September 28, 2010, meeting, the Working Group suggested a Tier 3 threshold of 3,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per year for all land use types. Tier 4 determines if the project meets performance standards. Tier 4 has three options: Option 1—percent emission reduction target; Option 2—early implementation of applicable measures, and Option 3—sector-based standard. Tier 5 determines mitigation for CEQA offsets.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-57

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR In the absence of adopted thresholds, the Tier 3 standard is used for this analysis. The development of project-level thresholds in accordance with CEQA is an ongoing effort at the State, Regional, and County levels, and significance thresholds may differ for future projects based on new or additional data and information that may be available at that time for consideration. Neither the SCAQMD, the City of Stanton, nor Orange County has adopted a significance threshold for GHG emissions from non-industrial development projects.

Consequently, pursuant to the discretion afforded by Sections 15064.4(a) and 15064.4(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the impact of the Project’s GHG emissions are assessed based on the methodologies proposed by SCAQMD’s GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group, as described above. The City defers to assessment methods and significance thresholds developed by the SCAQMD. This impact analysis evaluates consistency with regulatory programs designed to reduce GHG emissions and that contribute to the achievement of AB 32’s and SB 32’s goals as the primary significance criterion. In addition, this impact analysis also evaluates the Project’s estimated emissions compared to the Tier 3 threshold (as discussed above) for impacts related to GHG emissions proposed by staff of the SCAQMD, but not adopted by the SCAQMD Board.

Supplemental Analysis
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. In developing methods for GHG impact analyses, there have been suggestions from local air pollution control districts of quantitative thresholds, often referred to as screening levels, which define an emissions level below which it may be presumed that climate change impacts would be less than significant.

Based on the proposed construction activities, the principal source of construction-related GHG emissions would be from internal combustion engines of construction equipment, onroad construction vehicles, and workers’ commuting vehicles. GHG emissions from construction activities were obtained from the CalEEMod model, described above. The estimated construction GHG emissions for the proposed Project would be 805 MTCO2e, over a period of 2 years, as shown in Table 8-12, Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Construction.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-58

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐12

ESTIMATED GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

FROM CONSTRUCTION
Year
Emissions
(MTCO2e)
2024 591
2025 214
Total 805
MTCO2e: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
Notes:
 Totals may not add due to rounding variances.
 Detailed calculations in Appendix A, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling Data.

Operational GHG emissions would come primarily from vehicle trips; other sources include electricity and water consumption; natural gas for space and water heating; and gasoline-powered landscaping and maintenance equipment. Table 4-13, Estimated Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Project Operation, shows the annual GHG emissions from proposed Project’s operations.

TABLE 4‐13

ESTIMATED ANNUAL GREENHOUSE GAS

EMISSIONS FROM PROJECT OPERATION
Source
Emissions
(MTCO2e/yr)
Area 2
Energy 308
Mobile 814
Waste 32
Water 13
Total Operational Emissions 1,169
MTCO2e/yr: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year Notes:
 Totals may not add due to rounding variances.
 Detailed calculations in Appendix A, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling Data.

Because impacts from construction activities occur over a relatively short period of time, they contribute a relatively small portion of the overall lifetime project GHG emissions. In addition, GHG emission reduction measures for construction equipment are relatively limited. The SCAQMD recommends that construction emissions be amortized over a 30-year project lifetime so that GHG reduction measures address construction GHG emissions as part of the operational GHG reduction strategies. Therefore, construction and operational emissions are combined by amortizing the construction and operations over an assumed 30-year project lifetime. This combination is shown in Table 4-14, Estimated Total Project Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-59

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions, using the proposed Project’s amortized construction and operational emissions.

TABLE 4‐14

ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT ANNUAL

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Source
Emissions
(MTCO2e/yr a)
Construction (Amortized) 27a
Operations (Table 8-13) 1,169
Total b 1,196
SCAQMD‐Recommended Threshold (Tier 3) 3,000
Exceeds Threshold? No
MTCO2e/yr: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year a Total derived by dividing construction emissions (see Table 4-14) by 30. b Total annual emissions are the sum of amortized construction emissions and operational emissions.

It is noted that there are no established applicable quantitative federal, State, regional, or local CEQA significance criteria for GHG emissions for non-industrial projects in the SoCAB.

The SCAQMD has proposed, but not adopted, a threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year for nonindustrial land use projects. As shown, the estimated GHG emissions from the Project would be less than this suggested threshold. The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less Than Significant Impact. State policy and standards adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions that are applicable to the proposed Project are EO S-3-05, AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, and SB 32. The quantitative goal of these regulations is to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, and for SB 32, to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Statewide plans and regulations (such as GHG emissions standards for vehicles, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Cap-and-Trade, and renewable energy) are being implemented at the Statewide level, and compliance at a project level is not addressed.

The regulations, plans, and polices adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions that are directly applicable to the Project include the latest Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (RR GHG-1) and the Title 24 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) (RR GHG-2). The Project would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 Standards at the time of building permit issuance. The 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards for residential buildings is currently in effect and includes requirements for updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat transfer from the interior to exterior and vice versa); ventilation requirements; and lighting requirements. CALGreen requirements include reductions in indoor and outdoor water use, Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-60

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR diversion of construction and demolition waste, inclusion of electric vehicle charging spaces or designated spaces capable of supporting future charging stations. These codes are enforced by the City, and adherence to standard requirements for construction and operations would ensure that the Project would comply with both regulations. As discussed previously in Section 4.3 Air Quality, the Specific Plan has Sustainability Guidelines, which seek to promote energy efficiency, minimize heat islands, and conserve water, which will reduce GHG emissions. Lastly, the Project is an infill development project. The Project would provide housing consistent with its surrounding uses; help address the severe housing shortage; and reduce GHG emissions associated with longer vehicle trips related to lack of local housing options. As such, the proposed Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirements
RR GHG‐1 The Project shall be designed in accordance with the applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 24, Part 6). These standards are updated, nominally every three years, to incorporate improved energy efficiency technologies and methods. The Building Manager, or designee shall ensure compliance prior to the issuance of each building permit.

RR GHG‐2 Projects shall be designed in accordance with the applicable California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code (24 CCR 11). The Building Manager, or designee shall ensure compliance prior to the issuance of each building permit.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to GHG Emissions; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no significant impacts.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-61

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
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 onequarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
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?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the GP EIR indicated that the General Plan Update could result in increased risk of upset associated with the routine use, generation, and transport of hazardous materials, which may pose a health or safety hazard; could result in accidental release of hazardous materials causing public health risk; and could result in a safety hazard for people residing or working within the area. Cumulative impacts related to public health and safety were considered potentially significant.

The topic of hazards and hazardous materials was covered under Public Health and Safety in the GP EIR.

Supplemental Analysis
The information in this section is derived from The EDR Radius Map™ Report with GeoCheck®: City of Stanton Town Center Specific Plan Project, Katella/Cerritos Avenue, Stanton, CA 90680 (Inquiry Number 6680025.2s), prepared for the proposed Project by Environmental Data Resources (EDR) (2021). The EDR is included in Appendix B.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-62

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less Than Significant Impact. Currently, there are a variety of existing business operations in the Specific Plan area that use, store, or transport hazardous substances, as well as generate hazardous waste. In light of this, the nature of potential hazards would also be varied. Such substances can range from common automobile oil and household pesticides to chlorine, dry-cleaning solutions, ammonia, or substances used in commercial and industrial operations. Therefore, any non-residential development that occurs within the Specific Plan area may result in an increase in hazardous materials use, transport, or generation of hazardous waste.

It is anticipated that the proposed Specific Plan would maintain existing permitted industrial uses within the proposed Industrial District. However, this district is proposed to allow revitalized industrial uses that are compatible with future residential uses. Although this intended revitalized industrial area would be considered “light” industrial, nonetheless, this additional non-residential development in the Specific Plan area may result in an increase in the use and transport of hazardous materials and an increase in the generation of hazardous waste.

Demolition and construction activities for the proposed Project would involve the use of chemical substances such as solvents, paints, fuel for equipment, and other potentially hazardous materials. Hazards to the environment or the public would typically occur with the transport, use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials. As with any new development in the City, the applicants for future projects would be required to comply with existing regulations for the transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials to prevent public safety hazards. These regulations include the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), California Hazardous Waste Control Act (HWCA), and California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CalARPP), among others. In addition, Regulatory Requirement (RR) PS-1 from Section 4.15, Public Services, requires compliance with all applicable Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) codes, ordinances and standard conditions, including those related to hazardous materials usage and storage. With compliance of existing regulations for hazardous waste transport, use and disposal, as well as RR PS-1, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Specific Plan area is developed with varying intensities of light industrial, retail/commercial, and residential uses. This Subsequent IS/MND analyzes the potential impacts of the additional 139 multi-family dwellings units only. The existing General Plan for the City of Stanton allows for a total of 1,399 multi-family units within the Town Center Specific Plan area. Since 2008, 4 units have been built, resulting in a remaining capacity of 1,395 multi-family units. The Town Center Specific Plan would allow for an additional 139 units, increasing the remaining capacity to 1,534 multi-family units.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-63

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Any demolition, construction and grading activities within the Specific Plan area have the potential to result in the use and transport of hazardous materials, which would include fuel, oils, and other chemicals and liquids used during construction. As noted above, implementation of the Specific Plan has the potential to result in an increase in the use and transport of hazardous materials in the Specific Plan area. The increased use and transport of hazardous materials in the City increases the potential for accidental releases of hazardous materials, which poses a threat to the health and safety of residents. Storage and use of these materials would comply with all applicable federal, State, and local laws and regulations related to the use, handling, transport and storage of hazardous materials on site.

The Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law of 1985 (or the Business Plan Act) requires that a business that uses, handles, or stores hazardous materials above a certain quantity prepare a plan, which must include an inventory of hazardous substances on the premises. A Risk Management and Prevention Plan (RMPP) may be required for businesses that use acutely hazardous substances and are located in proximity to sensitive land uses. As a part of the Risk Management and Prevention Plan, businesses that handle acutely hazardous materials must include a hazard and operability study (HAZOP), which analyzes potential hazards to sensitive populations in the vicinity. The OCFA oversees the submittal of Business Emergency Plans, which are intended to mitigate potential release of hazardous substances and minimize potential harm or damage. Compliance with regulations established by federal, State and local regulatory agencies would reduce effects related to the reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials within the Specific Plan area. Additionally, future projects would comply with RR PS-1. Thus, the potential impacts pertaining to accidental release of hazardous materials would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous material, substances, or waste within one‐quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less Than Significant Impact. No schools are located within the Specific Plan area; however, there are four schools within 0.25 mile of the Specific Plan area. Three schools are located in Stanton and the fourth is located in Garden Grove. The names and addresses of the schools are as follows:
 Pyles Elementary School (10411 Dale Avenue in Stanton)  Carver Elementary School (11150 Santa Rosalia Street in Stanton)  New Hope University (10660 Western Avenue in Stanton)  Rancho Alamitos High School (11351 Dale Street in Garden Grove) Future projects within 0.25-mile of the above school may expose them to greater risk of exposure to hazardous materials, wastes, or emissions. There is a potential to expose children at these nearby schools to hazardous substances through accidental releases during demolition and construction activities. However, during demolition, existing hazardous materials and wastes would be removed and disposed in accordance with pertinent regulations, as identified in RR HAZ-1 through RR HAZ-3, discussed below. During Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-64

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR construction, a potential exists for the accidental release or spill of hazardous substances such as gasoline, oil, hydraulic fluid, diesel fuel, or other liquids associated with construction equipment operation and maintenance. However, use of these materials would be in limited quantities as typical during the operation and maintenance of construction equipment and would be conducted in compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations.

Additionally, the contractor would be required to use standard construction controls and safety procedures, which would avoid and minimize the potential for accidental release or spill of such substances into the environment. With compliance with pertinent regulations (RR HAZ-1 through RR HAZ-3), the level of risk associated with the accidental release of hazardous substances during demolition and construction would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Residential activities associated with occupancy of the proposed dwelling units would be similar to other residential uses within the Specific Plan area and would not generate hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste in quantities that may impact students at schools within ¼-mile of the site. There would be a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. Presented in Appendix B, The EDR Radius Map™ Report with GeoCheck (2021) was prepared for the proposed Project. Search parameters were based on a one-mile radius of the Project site and consisted of a search of federal, State, local, tribal, and other databases. The complete list of databases and additional information regarding the identified site can be found in Appendix C.

Eight Envirostor listings were reported within one mile of the Specific Plan, three of which are within the Specific Plan area and listed below:
 All Metals Processing Co. of Orange County, 8401 Sandustrial Avenue. Status is active.

Last reported activities listed in the EDR Report include a Supplemental Site Investigation Workplan on November 3, 2020, and a Monitoring Report on March 8, 2021. The EDR Report also indicates that a Corrective Measures Study Report, Remedial Action Completion Plan, and a Remedy Selection and Statement of Basis are due in 2023. Additionally, the EDR Report identifies that a Land Use Restriction document is due in 2024.
 Dichem Dresser/Calla Chemical, 8100 Electric Avenue. Status is unknown and references “Other Agency”.
 Quicksand, 8358 Standustrial Street. Status is active. Last reported activity in the EDR report is a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study on March 29, 2021. A Site Characterization Report was due in 2021, but no additional information about this characterization report is provided in EDR Report.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-65

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR The Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) database, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 56 LUST sites within approximately 0.5 mile of the Specific Plan area, 6 of which are located within the Specific Plan area. These six sites are listed below.  Santa Ana Regional W, 10632 Beach Blvd. Status is Open – Site Assessment. Facility Status is Preliminary Site Assessment Underway
 California Shipping, 8151 Electric Avenue. Status is Complete- Case Closed. Facility Status is Pollution Characterization
 California Comfort V, 8130 Electric Avenue. Status is Complete- Case Closed. Facility Status is Pollution Characterization
 Abel Concrete, 8251 Katella Avenue. Status is Complete – Case Closed. Facility Status is Preliminary Site Assessment Underway
 G&M Oil Co #50; 10961 Beach Blvd. Status is Open- Site Assessment.  G&M Oil #50, 10961 Beach Blvd. Facility Status is Pollution Characterization.

Development within the Specific Plan area may include redevelopment of one of these reported Envirostor and LUST regulatory properties in the future. Implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM) HAZ-1 would ensure that all new development on properties involving hazardous materials or waste, prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prior to future actions for land acquisition, demolition, and/or construction. With implementation of MM HAZ-1, potential impacts resulting from regulatory properties located within the Specific Plan would be reduced to less than significant levels. 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?
No Impact. The Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB) Los Alamitos is located in the City of Los Alamitos, approximately two miles to the west of the Specific Plan area. The Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) is a land use compatibility plan that is intended to protect the public from adverse effects of aircraft noise; to ensure the people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents; and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable space. The AELUP identifies standards for development in the airport’s planning area based on noise contours, accident potential zones, and building heights. The City of Stanton, which includes the Specific Plan area, is not located within the accident potential zone or the (AELUP) height restriction zone for JFTB (Stanton 2008b).

Thus, the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing on the site, as it relates to exposure to airport or aircraft hazards in areas within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-66

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Stanton has an emergency plan, called “Emergency Operations Plan,” which establishes policies and procedures to guide the City during emergency situations (Stanton 2008a). The plan provides for coordination of planning efforts of various members of the emergency staff and service elements using the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). SEMS is the system required for managing response to multi-agency and multi-jurisdiction emergencies in California. The purpose of SEMS is to improve the mobilization, deployment, utilization, tracking, and demobilization of needed mutual aid resources.

Emergency evacuations are coordinated by the Orange County Sheriff’s Department (OCSD).

The OCSD coordinates all law enforcement and traffic control operations during a disaster.

Regarding designated evacuation or emergency routes in the City, the unpredictable nature of any disaster on existing roadways makes evacuation route designation difficult (Stanton 2008a). The routes to be used for an evacuation would depend on the location of the incident, assuming major streets and freeways are functional, generally the routes would include major arterials and regional routes, which may include roadways within the Specific Plan boundaries such as Beach Boulevard, Katella Avenue, and Cerritos Avenue.

Specific Plan implementation would maintain the existing emergency vehicle access within the Specific Plan area. Any construction related lane closures resulting from projects within the Specific Plan buildout would be short term and would likely not involve full closure of any public roadway during construction. However, any development within the Specific Plan area would be required to coordinate with the City and OCFA regarding emergency access.

Applicable OCFA regulations, evacuation plans, and procedures would be considered in the building and site design. With compliance of applicable OCFA requirements, the Project’s impacts to emergency access would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. g) Expose people or structures, directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. The Project site is located in a highly urbanized area of the City, and there are no large, undeveloped areas and/or steep slopes on or near the site that may pose wildfire hazards. The site and the surrounding areas are not located in designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ), as identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention (CalFire). Rather, the site is within a Non-VHFHSZ area. Implementation of the proposed Project would not expose people or structures directly or indirectly to a significant risk of loss or death associated with wildland fires. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Mitigation Measures
MM HAZ‐1 A formal Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be prepared for a future project on any of the six Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) sites within the Stanton Town Center Specific Plan area. The Phase I ESA shall Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-67

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR be prepared in accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice E 1527-05 or the Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiry (AAI), prior to any land acquisition and/or construction activities. The Phase I ESA shall identify specific Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs), which may require further sampling/remedial activities by a qualified hazardous materials consultant with Phase II/site characterization and remedial experience prior to land acquisition, demolition, and/or construction.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units would result in new significant impacts beyond the impacts analyzed in the GP EIR. Implementation of a mitigation measure would reduce the impacts to less than significant level.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-68

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATERQUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the
project impede sustainable groundwater management of
the basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including the alternation 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 offsite; ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on- or 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?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the GP EIR indicated that the General Plan Update could contribute to runoff water, exceeding the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage system or providing additional sources of polluted runoff; could deplete groundwater resources; could result in impacts related to a 100-year flood event; could result in urban uses being located in dam inundation areas of the City; could impact water quality due to sheet erosion resulting from exposed soils and subsequent depositing of particles and pollutants in drainage areas; and could result in long-term impacts to quality of storm water and urban runoff impacting water quality. Cumulative impacts related to hydrology and water quality were considered potentially significant.

Introduction
This section is prepared based on findings of the Preliminary Hydrology and Water Quality Technical Report (Hydrology Report), prepared by Psomas in October 2021. The findings of the Hydrology Report is summarized herein, and the report is included in Appendix D.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-69

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Supplemental Analysis
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less Than Significant Impact.

Short‐Term Water Quality Impacts
The Project has the potential to result in short-term construction impacts to surface water quality from demolition, grading, and construction-related activities of future development.

Storm water runoff from the construction activities would contain loose soils, organic matter, pesticides/herbicides, and sediments. Spills or leaks from heavy equipment and machinery, such as fuel, oil and grease, and heavy metals, could also enter the runoff.

Building construction would involve the use of hazardous materials (e.g., paints, solvents, cleansers) that, if not properly handled, may enter the stormwater runoff.

The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes a framework for regulating potential water quality impacts from construction activities, as well as new development and major redevelopment, through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program.

Construction activities that disturb one acre or more of land are required to obtain an NPDES permit or coverage under the NPDES Construction General Permit. This is accomplished by completing and filing Permit Registration Documents (PRD) (including a Notice of Intent, risk assessment, site map, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan [SWPPP], an annual fee, and a signed certification) with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), prior to start of construction activities. The Best Management Practices (BMPs) in the SWPPP would be implemented during construction to reduce storm water pollutants to the maximum extent practicable. Coverage under the NPDES Construction General Permit and implementation of the Project’s SWPPP (RR HWQ-1); compliance with the Santa Ana RWQCB’s dewatering regulations (RR HWQ-2); construction and implementation of the BMPs in the approved Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) (RR HWQ-3); implementation of erosion control measures per the City’s Erosion Control and Water Quality Code (RR HWQ-4) would reduce pollutants in the runoff and prevent violation of water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, and degradation of surface and groundwater quality. Compliance with these requirements would ensure that short term, construction related impacts would be less than significant. Also, water quality standards or waste discharge requirements would not be violated, and surface and ground water quality would not be substantially degraded. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Long‐Term Water Quality Impacts
Stormwater pollutants that would be generated by future projects in the long-term include sediment, trash and debris, oil and grease, bacterial indicators, nutrients, and pesticides that would come from landscaped areas, drive aisles, parking areas, and outdoor residential, industrial, and commercial activities.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-70

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR According to Section 20.300.110, Water Quality, of the Stanton Municipal Code, projects are required to comply with: (1) Municipal Code Chapter 6.20 [Stormwater Discharge and Water Quality]; (2) Municipal Code Chapter 6.28 [Fats, Oils, Grease, Discharges into Sanitary Sewer System]; (3) Municipal Code Chapter 16.62 [Erosion Control and Water Quality]; and (4) Section 20.500.090 [Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Required] of the City’s Zoning Code (Ord. 1017, 2013). Chapter 6.20 requires all new development and significant redevelopment be in compliance with the Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and any conditions and requirements established by the Planning Department, which are related to the reduction or elimination of pollutants in stormwater runoff from a project site.

Therefore, consistency with the DAMP, would include preparation of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and implementation of BMPs on premises exposed to storm water, when applicable. Compliance with the DAMP would reduce the discharge of pollutants within the Specific Plan area to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP BMPs may include the removal and disposal of solid waste and other pollutants such as fuels, waste fuels, and chemicals from exposure to storm water. Compliance with RR HWQ-3 (Water Quality Management Plan) would ensure future projects adhere to regional and local regulations. The WQMP would include low impact development (LID), structural and nonstructural BMPs and source control BMPs. Compliance with RR HWQ-1 (SWPPP) and RR HWQ-2 (General Waste Discharge Requirements) would reduce the risk of water degradation from soil erosion and other pollutants related to short-term construction and long-term operations activities, and potential violations of water quality standards would be minimized through required BMPs. Therefore, future projects would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
b) 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. The Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin, which is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD), underlies the northern and central sections of Orange County within the lower Santa Ana River watershed, which includes the Specific Plan area. The Orange County Water District (OCWD) manages this Groundwater Basin to prevent overdraft conditions, seawater intrusion, land subsidence, and groundwater quality degradation. OCWD recharge basins are located in and adjacent to the Santa Ana River, Carbon Creek, and Santiago Creek, in the cities of Anaheim and Orange.

No recharge basins or wells are located within the City of Stanton or near the Project site. (OCWD 2018, CalGEM 2021).

Domestic water service for the City of Stanton, as described in Section 4.19 Utilities and Service Systems, would be provided by Golden State Water Company (GSWC) with water derived from groundwater, surface water, and imported water supplies (GSWC 2021). GSWC West Orange Service Area Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) reports that the single and multi-family residential land uses have a current water demand of 6,601 acre-feet per year (AFY) and 2,614 AFY, respectively using a population estimate of 114,235 (GSWC West Orange 2021) and would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-71

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Excavation activities may extend into the underlying groundwater. Because a large portion of the Town Center Specific Plan (primarily to the north and east) is within a shallow groundwater zone between depths of 5 to 10 feet, feasibility analyses as part of preparation of the WQMP may be performed to determine which infiltration BMPs, if any, would be used for the future site development projects (Psomas 2021a). Additionally, dewatering may be required as part of future construction and would occur in compliance with the Santa Ana RWQCB’s General Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) under Order No. R8-2015-0004 (RR HWQ-2).

Groundwater resources would be managed by OCWD to maintain withdrawals within a safe basin operating range to protect the basin’s long-term sustainability. With OCWD incentives to limit groundwater pumping by the City and other water suppliers and with the water conservation measures required for new developments, the proposed Project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies, interfere with groundwater recharge, or impede sustainable groundwater management of the Groundwater Basin. Impacts would be less than significant with compliance with regulatory requirement as identified above, and no mitigation is required.
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? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated in Section 4.7, Geology and Soils (Checklist Response 4.7b), future projects would be required to obtain a NPDES permit for construction activities or coverage under the NPDES Construction General Permit. The Construction General Permit requires preparation of a SWPPP and implementation of erosion control, sediment control, tracking, waste management, and construction site maintenance BMPs to reduce the potential for soil and wind erosion during construction activities (RR HWQ-1).

Further, the proposed Project must comply with the City’s grading ordinance, which requires preparation of an erosion and sediment control plan for City approval prior to issuance of a grading permit (RR HWQ-4). With compliance with these regulations, potential impacts pertaining to construction-related erosion would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

The Project area is located in an urbanized setting with a high percent of impervious surfaces in the existing condition. The majority of the new development in the Specific Plan area would be redevelopment rather than on undeveloped land. Additionally, future projectspecific development would be required to incorporate landscaping in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code Section 20.315.040 Landscape Standards, to prevent potential erosion.

There would be minimal areas of exposed soils following completion of future projects where erosion could occur. Site improvements and landscaping would also prevent longterm erosion. With increased pervious surfaces on the site, the runoff volume and rate are expected to decrease, resulting in less potential for downstream erosion. Therefore, operation-related erosion would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-72

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Regarding erosion, as discussed, the future projects would be required to obtain a NPDES permit for construction activities or coverage under the NPDES Construction General Permit.

The Construction General Permit requires preparation of a SWPPP and implementation of erosion control, sediment control, tracking, waste management, and construction site maintenance BMPs to reduce the potential for soil and wind erosion during construction activities (RR HWQ-1). Further, future projects would comply with the City’s grading ordinance, which requires preparation of an erosion and sediment control plan for City approval prior to issuance of a grading permit (RR HWQ-4).

Based on the hydromodification analysis for the proposed Project, the site is located in an area of the Santa Ana River watershed that is susceptible to hydromodification and therefore, the Project would have the potential to create hydrologic conditions of concern (HCOC) that may result in downstream flooding or the erosion of downstream natural channels. Therefore, compliance with RR HWQ-5 would ensure steps and requirements outlined in the Orange County Model WQMP mitigate potential runoff for future projects.

Therefore, construction- and operation-related erosion would be less than significant with compliance with existing regulatory requirements RR HWQ-1, RR HWQ-4, and RR HWQ-5.

No mitigation is required.
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on‐ or 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?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project area is located in an urbanized setting with a high percent of impervious surfaces in its existing condition. The drainage pattern for the Project area is generally to the southwest (Psomas 2021a). All City storm drain facilities are tributary to the existing Orange County Facility Stanton Storm Channel shown previously on Exhibit 1-2, Aerial Photograph.

A proposed Project hydrology analysis, (based on assumed flow paths and storm drain locations) was completed to determine the impacts that the Specific Plan would have on storm runoff. Hydrologic calculations to evaluate surface runoff associated with the 10-year, 25-year, and 100-year storm frequencies from the tributary drainage areas were performed using the AES Rational Method. The watershed subarea boundaries were delineated using proposed Project maps and were assumed to be equivalent to the existing condition watersheds. While future development is dependent on market conditions, it is anticipated that that there would be changes in overall pervious and impervious conditions at various times during buildout of the Specific Plan. This was taken into consideration while land uses were simplified for hydrologic calculations when compared to the General Plan. The results of the proposed 10-year, 25-year, and 100-year peak flow rates are presented in Table 4-15, Proposed Conditions Peak Flow Rates, below.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-73

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐15

PROPOSED CONDITIONS PEAK FLOW RATES
Watershed Total Area1 10‐Year Peak Q (cfs) 25‐Year Peak Q (cfs) 100‐Year Peak Q (cfs) A 71.8 66.0 83.1 116.5
B & C 9.4 16.1 19.7 25.8
D 1.5 2.9 3.6 5.0
E 1.4 2.4 3.4 4.8
F 32. 47.0 58.6 77.8
G 13.7 26.6 32.4 42.0
H 21.0 26.0 32.2 41.9
1 It should be noted that some areas along the periphery streets of the Specific Plan area were not included in the drainage analysis because the drainage flowed away from the Specific Plan area. This drainage was generally comingled with off-site drainage, outside of the Project boundary.

Psomas 2021 (Hydrology and Water Quality Technical report) 2021.

Implementation of the Specific Plan may result in an increase in the amount of impervious area, which would increase the proposed condition runoff. The Stanton Storm Channel was designed and constructed to handle the 25-Year storm event; however, based on current County standards the Stanton Storm Channel is deficient because all regional facilities are to be designed for the 100-year storm event. This deficiency could potentially cause significant flooding around the channel and in the local storm drain systems. As shown below in Table 4-16, 100-year Storm Event Comparison, the discharge is generally matched or decreased in the project conditions, thus decreasing the overall flow exiting the Specific Plan area. No diversions to the tributary areas were considered when comparing existing and proposed conditions.

TABLE 4‐16
100‐YEAR STORM EVENT COMPARISON
Watershed Total Area1
Existing
Discharge
Condition
(cfs)
100‐Year
Peak Q
(cfs)
100‐Year
Peak Discharge
Comparison
A 71.8 123.0 116.5 -5.3%
B & C 9.4 22.3 25.8 15.7%
D 1.5 5.0 5.0 0.0%
E 1.4 4.8 4.8 0.0%
F 32. 84.8 77.8 -8.3%
G 13.7 46.6 42.0 -9.9%
H 21.0 45.4 41.9 -7.7%
1 It should be noted that some areas along the periphery streets of the Specific Plan area were not included in the drainage analysis because the drainage flowed away from the Specific Plan area. This drainage was generally comingled with off-site drainage, outside of the Project boundary.

Psomas 2021 (Hydrology and Water Quality Technical report) 2021.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-74

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR The potential for hydraulic impacts to existing facilities would require mitigation of site runoff. The impacts to Stanton Storm Channel would need to be thoroughly analyzed due to the fact that the channel was designed and constructed to handle the 25-year storm event.

Based on current County standards the Stanton Storm Channel is deficient because all regional facilities are to be designed for the 100-year storm event. This deficiency could potentially cause significant flooding around the channel and in the local storm drain systems. Flood control mitigation would be handled by each individual site on a project-byproject basis within the Specific Plan area, as required under MM HWQ-1. Until downstream facilities are constructed, development sites must contain proposed runoff or mitigate flow rates to equivalent or less than existing conditions for all storm events. It is noted that facility upgrades at Court Street, north and south of the Pacific Electric Railway easement are already part of the City of Stanton's Capital Improvement Plan. Therefore, with implementation of MM HWQ-1, impacts associated with the rate or amount of surface runoff which would result in flooding on- or off-site would be less than significant.

Therefore, the proposed Project would include storage volume infrastructure that would provide the required storage volume and ensure that 25-year frequency storm event is not exceeded. Further, the storm drain system would be designed to accommodate 100-year flood flows, in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code, the Orange County Hydrology Manual, and other City specifications (RR HWQ-4). The proposed changes resulting from the Project area would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or offsite. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Specific Plan area is located within a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Zone X, which is an area subject to flooding from the 500- year flood (0.2 percent annual chance of flooding) and the 100-year flood (with a reduced flood risk due to the protection of a levee) with average depths of less than one foot or drainage areas less than one square mile. Based on this classification, a flood hazard is not present in the Project area (Psomas 2021a). Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact. A seiche is the resonant oscillation of a body of water, such as a lake, reservoir, pool, bay, or harbor. Seiche hazards exist where ground shaking causes water to splash out of the body of water and inundate nearby areas and structures. Seiches are caused by strong winds and rapid changes in atmospheric pressure. Earthquake, tsunamis, and severe storm fronts may also cause seiches. The City is located inland over 7.0 miles from the Pacific Ocean.

Additionally, there is no large body of water near the City that may be subject to seiche and that could result in potential flooding within the Project area.

Tsunamis are seismic sea waves generated by undersea earthquakes or landslides. As noted above, the City and the Project area is over 7.0 miles from the Pacific Ocean and based on the Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-75

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR California Geological Society Tsunami Hazard Area Map, the site is located outside the hazard area (CGS 2015c). Therefore, the proposed Project would not influence the likelihood or severity of a seiche nor contribute significantly to inundation by tsunami. As a result, no impacts related to seiche or tsunami would occur, and no mitigation is required. e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. There are no groundwater wells within the City or the Project area, and no wells are proposed as part of the Project based on a review of the California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGem 2021). As discussed above, the proposed Project would not involve direct withdrawals of groundwater, nor would it interfere with groundwater recharge such that it would result in a net deficit in aquifer volume or lowering of the local groundwater table levels. As discussed previously in Checklist Response 4.10b, excavation activities for future projects may extend into the underlying groundwater. Compliance with RR HWQ-5, would ensure feasibility analyses to determine infiltration BMPs, if required, would be conducted for all future project-specific development.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. Impacts are less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirements
RR HWQ‐1 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate compliance with California’s General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number or other proof of filing in a manner meeting the satisfaction of the City’s Department of Public Works. Projects subject to this requirement shall prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during all phases of construction. A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the construction site and be available for State and City review on request.

RR HWQ‐2 General Waste Discharge Requirements. Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, if construction dewatering or discharges from other specific activities (e.g., dewatering from subterranean seepage, potable water system maintenance discharges, fire hydrant flushing, etc.) are required, the Project Applicant shall notify the Santa Ana RWQCB and any discharges into surface waters shall be conducted in compliance with the Santa Ana RWQCB’s Order No. R8-2015-0004 (NPDES No. CAG998001), which includes General Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for discharges to surface water that pose an insignificant (de minimis) threat to water quality.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-76

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR The General WDRs include provisions mandating notification, testing, and reporting of dewatering and testing-related discharges, and contain numeric and performance-based effluent limits depending upon the type of discharge.

RR HWQ‐3 Water Quality Management Plan. Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the Project Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City’s Public Works Department, a Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that address Pollutants of Concern. The WQMP shall comply with the requirements of the Orange County MS4 Permit, the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP), Model WQMP, and Technical Guidance Manual, and the City’s Local Implementation Plan (LIP), Citywide Urban Runoff Management Plan (CURMP), Project WQMP Preparation Guidance Manual, and pertinent regulations in the Municipal Code.

RR HWQ‐4 Grading and Erosion Control Plans. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the Project Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City’s Public Works Department, the grading and erosion control plans for the Project in compliance with pertinent requirements of the City’s Grading and Excavation Code, Title 16, Division II, Grading and Excavation Code of the Stanton Municipal Code.

RR HWQ‐5 Hydromodification Plan. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit on future project-specific development, the Project Applicant shall conduct a feasibility analysis to determine if the proposed Project-specific development would have the potential to create hydrologic conditions of concern (HCOC) and determine exact impacts. The Applicant shall submit a grading and construction plan that would adhere to the steps and requirements outlined in the Orange County Model WQMP and TGD in order to mitigate potential runoff on downstream natural channels. The plan shall be submitted and approved by the City’s Public Works Department
Mitigation Measures
MM HWQ‐1 Prior to approval of Project tract maps, the Project developer(s) shall coordinate with the City of Stanton Director of Public Works to determine requirements necessary to mitigate impacts to drainage improvements to accommodate storage volumes and flood protection for existing and future runoff. Measures shall be included to contain runoff or mitigate flow rates to equivalent or less than existing conditions for all storm events until such time that downstream facilities are upgraded to maintain a 100-year storm event.

Proposed projects shall implement mitigation measures, if required, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-77

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Conclusion
The additional 139 units would result in a new significant impact beyond the impacts analyzed in the GP EIR. Implementation of a mitigation measure would reduce the impacts to less than significant level.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-78

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community?
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?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the GP EIR indicated that implementation of the General Plan Update could result in potential inconsistency impacts with Federal and State plans and policies in addition to policies in SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide; could result in inconsistencies with the principles and strategies of SCAG’s Southern California Compass Growth Visioning Program as well as local plans and policies; and could result in direct impacts regarding land use incompatibilities. Cumulative impacts related to increase in intensity of land uses in the area was considered less than significant.

Supplemental Analysis
a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact. The Specific Plan area includes varying intensities of industrial, retail/commercial, and residential uses. This Subsequent IS/MND analyzes the potential impacts of the additional 139 multi-family residential unit only. The existing General Plan for the City of Stanton allows for a total of 1,399 multi-family units within the Town Center Specific Plan area. Since 2008, 4 units have been built, resulting in a remaining capacity of 1,395 multi-family units. The Town Center Specific Plan would allow for an additional 139 units, increasing the remaining capacity to 1,534 multi-family units.

New development within the Specific Plan area would occur through infill development of underutilized parcels, existing vacant parcels, or through redevelopment of currently developed land. Due to the built out nature of the surrounding area, implementation of the Specific Plan would not physically divide an established community. Thus, no impact would occur on an established community, and no mitigation is required. b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Less Than Significant Impact. With respect to regional planning, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial counties. As the Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-79

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR designated MPO, the federal government mandates SCAG to prepare plans for growth management, transportation, air quality, and hazardous waste management. In addition, SCAG reviews projects of regional significance for consistency with the existing regional plans. The Project would contribute to new housing development in the City of Stanton, and thus would contribute to the City’s RHNA housing goal of 313 new dwelling units between 2014 and 2021. Plans and programs relevant to the Project and the consistency of the proposed Project with these plans and programs are discussed below.

Southern California Association of Governments
The fundamental goals of SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) are to make the SCAG region a better place to live, work, and play for all residents regardless of race, ethnicity, or income class. Table 4-17, below, presents the proposed Project consistency with the relevant adopted 2020-2045 RTP/SCS goals. The adopted 2020-2045 RTP/SCS seeks to link the goal of sustaining mobility with the goals of fostering economic development; enhancing the environment; reducing energy consumption; promoting transportation-friendly development patterns; and encouraging fair and equitable access to residents impacted by socioeconomic, geographic, and commercial conditions. Implementation of the proposed Project would be consistent with the goals of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS.

The proposed Project would result in an additional 139 multi-family housing units and the associated direct population of 481 people within the City of Stanton, as discussed in detail in Section 4.11, Population and Housing.

Additionally, the proposed Project functions as an infill project and would not substantially extend infrastructure and other improvements that would encourage development levels beyond what is already planned elsewhere in the City. Therefore, substantial direct and indirect growth related to the proposed Project is not anticipated, and impacts would be less than significant.

TABLE 4‐17
CONSISTENCY WITH 2020‐2045 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION

PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY (RTP/SCS) GOALS
RTP/SCS Goal Consistency Analysis
RTP/SCS G1: Encourage regional
economic prosperity and global
competitiveness.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Town Center Specific Plan is a mixed-use area. The Project proposes to enhance and improve the existing area and develop additional 139 multifamily units. Design Guidelines and Development Standards encourage highquality development and enhanced quality of life. The Project would contribute to attracting skilled workers and encouraging regional economic prosperity.

RTP/SCS G2: Improve mobility,
accessibility, reliability, and travel safety
for people and goods.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan includes improvements to the circulation system and streetscape that increase overall access, safety, and encourage multi- transit throughout the Specific Plan area. The circulation system that is outlined in Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-80

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐17
CONSISTENCY WITH 2020‐2045 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION

PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY (RTP/SCS) GOALS
RTP/SCS Goal Consistency Analysis
the Specific Plan and described in Section 3.0, Project Description, and Section

4.17, Traffic and Circulation, of the Subsequent IS/MND.

The proposed Project includes mixed-use development areas that would provide on-site residents with easier access to goods, services, and employment opportunities. This would promote walking and biking as alternatives to automobile use.

RTP/SCS G3: Enhance the preservation,
security, and resilience of the regional
transportation system.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
While not a transportation project, the Specific Plan includes improvements to the circulation system and streetscape that increase overall access, safety, and encourage multi-modal transit throughout the Specific Plan area.

Therefore, the Project would not preclude the preservation, security and resilience of the regional transportation system.

RTP/SCS G4: Increase person and
goods movement and travel choices
within the transportation system.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Town Center Specific Plan is a mixed-use area that would be enhanced and improved with an additional 139 multi-family units. The Project includes improvements to the City’s circulation system and streetscape that would increase overall access and safety. These benefits would contribute to a more sustainable regional transportation system that would allow for the increase of person and goods movement within the transportation system.

RTP/SCS G5: Reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and improve air quality.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The proposed Project is an in-fill development that does not require the extension of the regional transportation system to previously undeveloped areas. The Specific Plan includes improvements to the City’s circulation system and streetscape that would increase overall access, safety, and encourage multi-modal transit throughout the Specific Plan area. A few the Specific Plan vision objectives relate to circulation and mobility, including:
 Reduce vehicle trips and trip duration by encouraging efficiency between trip origin and trip destination.
 Reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and pollution through zoning changes that reduce reliance on motorized vehicles and supporting active transportation modes.

Per the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions analyses conducted, the Project would result in less than significant impact without mitigation.

RTP/SCS G6: Support healthy and
equitable communities.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan supports healthy and equitable communities by providing streetscape improvements that support the pedestrian and bicycle transportation network. Sidewalk and bicycle infrastructure improvements would encourage walkability and non-motorized movement. Project area is in close proximity to a variety of public transit options, as previously described above. The Specific Plan includes open space areas that would provide for active and passive recreation. The proposed pedestrian and bicycle network, and sidewalk enhancements would better connect the Specific Plan area to encourage more movement and subsequently promoting a healthy community.

RTP/SCS G7: Adapt to a changing climate
and support an integrated regional
development pattern and transportation
network.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The proposed Project includes streetscape improvements, and the pedestrian and bicycle transportation network that that connect to the existing roadways in the Project vicinity. Thus, the Project would integrate into the existing transportation network.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-81

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐17
CONSISTENCY WITH 2020‐2045 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION

PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY (RTP/SCS) GOALS
RTP/SCS Goal Consistency Analysis
RTP/SCS G8: Leveraging new
transportation technologies and datadriven solutions that result in more efficient travel.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The proposed Project would facilitate non-vehicular circulation through the provision of streetscape improvements such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities within the Project area. The Specific Plan incorporates a “complete streets” approach that prioritizes creation of a true multi-modal transportation system and that creates new connections throughout the Specific Plan area. This is achieved by using the existing circulation infrastructure to facilitate multi-modal movement throughout the area. Circulation enhancements are proposed to facilitate multi-modal connectivity and increase pedestrian safety. While not new transportation technology, the proposed approach uses a multimodal approach to provide more efficient and safe travel throughout the Specific Plan area.

RTP/SCS G9: Encourage development of
diverse housing types in areas that are
supported by multiple transportation
options.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Project would blend the proposed additional residential units within the existing uses and proposes a pedestrian and bicycle transportation network.

The Specific Plan also incorporates conceptual future transit opportunities into its design, while ensuring that the success of the multi-modal network does not depend on the completion or final details of potential future transit opportunities.

RTP/SCS G10: Promote conservation of
natural and agricultural lands and
restoration of habitats.

Proposed Project Would Conflict
The Specific Plan is a mixed-use area within a fully urbanized portion of the City, and no natural or agricultural lands exist within or in the vicinity of the Specific Plan area. The Project would introduce an open space concept that would create separate open space areas with landscaping and active and passive recreational opportunities. While the Project would not conflict with conservation of natural and agricultural lands and restoration of habitat, there is none within the Specific Plan area that can be conserved or restored.

Source (policies): SCAG 2020.

City of Stanton General Plan
The City of Stanton General Plan, adopted on September 23, 2008, is the primary planning and policy document of the City of Stanton. It is a policy document designed to guide the City of Stanton in achieving its economic and community development goals. It outlines specific steps to be taken to direct Stanton’s land use planning, economic development, image, and overall quality of life. The General Plan is Stanton’s fundamental policy document regarding community and economic development of the City. The General Plan describes Stanton’s goals and strategies regarding land use, economic development, transportation, housing, open space/conservation, safety, public facilities, infrastructure, and community design.

Along with the goals and strategies is an action guide geared toward implementing the goals and strategies.

The City’s General Plan consists of seven chapters to most accurately reflect the issues and needs of Stanton. These chapters are: Community Development; Community Design; Economic Development; Infrastructure & Community Services; Community Health & Safety; Housing; and Regional Coordination. An evaluation of the Project’s consistency with Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-82

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR applicable goals and policies is provided in Table 4-18, Proposed Project General Plan Consistency Analysis.

TABLE 4‐18

PROPOSED PROJECT GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
Policy Compliance with Policy
Chapter 2 – Community Development
Goal LU‐1.1: Create an economic and fiscal balance of residential, commercial and industrial uses.

Strategy LU‐1.1.1: Encourage land uses which
maximize economic development and enhance
the quality of life.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan is designed to encourage a desirable mix of commercial, residential, mixed-use, and industrial uses. Design Guidelines and Development Regulations encourage high-quality development and enhanced quality of life within Stanton. Objective 12 of the Specific Plan encourages economic development and incentivizes investing in infill development.

Strategy LU‐1.1.2: Ensure adjacent land uses
are compatible with one another.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Town Center Specific Plan includes a Land Use Plan (Exhibit 3.1) where sensitive uses such as single-family residential uses are buffered from the impacts of industrial and commercial development by limiting uses and intensity surrounding the single-family residential areas.

Goal LU‐2.1: Encourage land uses which provide employment opportunities for Stanton residents.

Strategy LU‐2.1.1: Encourage revitalization and
intensification of underutilized commercial uses
within the city through the redevelopment
process.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan includes a series of land use policies that encourage revitalization and mixed-use redevelopment and encourages intensification of underutilized commercial development that intensifies existing uses and better responds to changing economic market conditions. The Specific Plan’s Objective 2 is to maintain existing businesses while encouraging a broader mix of uses and encouraging the revitalization of existing industrial uses.

Strategy LU‐2.2.1: Develop an incentive
program and other measures to encourage
“business park” environments and improve
project design.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Section 4.7.2.3 of the Specific Plan includes design guidelines for future industrial development within the Specific Plan area to be of highquality designs and the development regulations included allow for only light-industrial uses that have fewer impacts on surrounding uses.

Goal LU‐3.1: A range and balance of residential densities which are supported by adequate city services.

Strategy LU‐3.1.1: Preserve single-family
residential neighborhoods.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan maintains the existing single-family residential land uses and preserves the low-density character of these neighborhoods.

The Specific Plan also includes buffers from neighboring commercial and industrial uses by limiting uses and intensity surrounding the single-family residential areas. Objective 1 of the Specific Plan aims to preserve existing residential neighborhoods and create a vibrant, pedestrian friendly environment.

Strategy LU‐3.1.2: Encourage infill and mixeduse development within feasible development sites.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Mixed-use development is encouraged by the Specific Plan. The Retail Oriented Mixed-Use (ROMU), Town Center Mixed-Use (TCMU), and Industrial land uses encourage mixed uses, with the ROMU and TCMU zones including residential uses. Also, Objective 12 of the Specific Plan encourages economic development and incentivizes investing in infill development.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-83

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐18

PROPOSED PROJECT GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
Policy Compliance with Policy
Goal LU‐5.1: Encourage the consolidation of existing non‐conforming lots in commercial, industrial, and medium and high‐density residential areas.

Strategy LU‐5.1.1: Increase the non-financial
incentives for lot consolidation in selected
industrial, commercial, and medium and highdensity residential areas.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Section 2.2.2 of the Specific Plan includes new regulations that encourages private development to consolidate lots for industrial, commercial, high-density residential, and mixed-use development. Lot consolidation aligns with the Specific Plan Objective 7 of creating a true “main street” through focusing on developing in a centralized area.

Goal LU‐7.1: Provide infrastructure to create foundation for future development.

Strategy LU‐7.1.2: Ensure adequate funding
for the financing of public facilities and capital
improvements related to new development.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Chapter 6 of the Specific Plan identifies various funding mechanisms that may be utilized to ensure adequate funding for public facilities, capital improvement, and expansion of future services. Objective 11 of the Specific Plan aims to ensure adequate and efficient infrastructure to support existing and future development.

Chapter 3 – Community Design
Goal CD‐1.1: Promote quality development and design that preserves and enhances a positive and unique image of Stanton, and fosters a sense of community pride.

Strategy CD‐1.1.1: Identify a desired image and
vision for the city of Stanton that can provide
the basis for the design of new development,
redevelopment, and all other facets of the city’s
physical environment.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Preliminary phases of the Specific Plan included extensive outreach and visioning efforts, ensuring the identity of the Specific Plan area and future development patterns reflect the desires of residents and stakeholders within Stanton, as detailed in the project vision and objectives in Section 1.1.1.

Strategy CD‐1.1.2: Ensure that new
development within the city contributes to the
image of Stanton in a positive way and places a
high standard of architecture and site design.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Chapter 4 of the Specific Plan includes Design Guidelines and Development Regulations that require future projects to include highquality architecture, site design, and orientation.

Goal CD‐1.2: Promote an attractive streetscape and public right‐of‐way, especially along major primary and secondary corridors, that is consistent with the desired version and image of Stanton.

Strategy CD‐1.2.1: Create a unified and
consistent streetscape.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Section 4.3, Streetscape Design Guidelines, of the Specific Plan includes guidelines for streetscape within the public rights-of way, and includes recommendations for streetscaping enhancements along major arterials, such as Beach Boulevard, as well as other streets within the Specific Plan area.

Goal CD‐1.3: Promote compatibility between land uses, including existing, redeveloped, and new uses, to further cohesiveness along the City’s primary and secondary corridors.

Strategy CD‐1.3.1: Discourage placement of
incompatible land uses next to each other.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Town Center Specific Plan includes varying land uses and development regulations that eliminate incompatible uses being located next to each other and minimizes the effects of commercial and industrial development upon residential uses (Specific Plan Table 5.1, Permitted Land Uses). Industrial uses are envisioned to be those compatible with residential uses.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-84

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐18

PROPOSED PROJECT GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
Policy Compliance with Policy
Strategy CD‐1.3.2: Support redevelopment of
existing commercial, industrial, and residential
structures and site improvements.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
By increasing the allowed intensity within the Specific Plan area, the Specific Plan supports the redevelopment of existing commercial, industrial, and residential parcels. In an effort to facilitate the redevelopment of the commercial and industrial areas within the Specific Plan area, section 3.5.3, Alley Vacations, of the Specific Plan encourages vacating and reusing alleys within the area.

Goal CD‐2.1: Increase the number of public spaces within the City, as well as the quality of existing and new public spaces.

Strategy CD‐2.1.1: Encourage the provision of
public spaces as part of private development
and redevelopment projects.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan includes requirements for additional public open space. Sections 3.4, Open Space Framework, and 4.4, Open Space Framework Concept, of the Specific Plan include an open space framework that requires the future dedication of new open spaces within the Specific Plan area. Properties outside of these locations would be encouraged to include new open spaces.

Goal CD‐4.1: Create a well‐connected, multi‐modal urban environment that increases mobility for all Stanton residents, whether they choose or are required to travel through the City by car, bicycle, foot, or public transportation modes.

Strategy CD‐4.1.1: Promote a pedestrian
friendly environment with attractive, walkable
neighborhoods and commercial areas.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan includes improvements to the City’s circulation system and streetscape that increase overall access, safety, and encourage multi-modal transit throughout the Specific Plan area.

Through encouraging efficiency between trip origin and trip destination in the Specific Plan area, the number of vehicle trips and durations will reduce (Objective 10 of the Specific Plan).

Strategy CD‐4.1.2: Promote a pedestrian
friendly environment with attractive, walkable
neighborhoods and commercial areas.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan encourages a mix of uses that increases walkability and promotes a pedestrian-friendly environment by providing guidelines and standards related to future development, particularly pedestrian safety. Streetscaping improvements proposed within the Specific Plan area encourage walkability by providing an aesthetically appealing pedestrian experience (Section 3.5.4).

Strategy CD‐4.1.3: Provide for points of
connection between various modes of
transportation, including pedestrian, bicycle,
and public transportation connections.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Section 3.5 of the Specific Plan includes improvements to the circulation network and streetscape that will facilitate multi-modal transportation throughout the Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan also includes additional connections between existing circulation facilities to increase access (e.g., Court Street crossing).

Chapter 4 – Economic Development
Goal ED‐1.2: Prevent retail leakage – encourage Stanton residents to shop within the City by providing a retail and service market that can compete with new commercial developments in surrounding cities.

Strategy ED‐1.2.1: Improve the
competitiveness of shopping centers within
Stanton through the provision of a greater mix
of available retailers and more attractive retail
centers.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan includes providing a new set of development regulations and design guidelines to existing retail areas, as well as updating uses to allow for a greater mix of businesses. This will create opportunities for new commercial development to better respond to changing demands in the retail space, as well as encourage more attractive retail centers. Additionally, this will provide for more locally serving retail and commercial developments (Objective 4).

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-85

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐18

PROPOSED PROJECT GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
Policy Compliance with Policy
Goal ED‐1.3: Improve the quality of industrial uses located within the City.

Strategy ED‐1.3.1: Direct industrial business
attraction efforts at light manufacturing and flex
tech industrial uses.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Chapter 4 of the Specific Plan includes Design Guidelines and Development Regulations for the existing industrial area that prohibit incompatible development with neighboring residential
neighborhoods. The provisions within the Specific Plan allows for lightindustrial and tech-oriented industrial uses that are appropriate for anticipated mixed-use developments within the Specific Plan area.

Goal ED‐2.2: Promote economic revitalization at key locations within the City, specifically the major arterials Beach Boulevard and Katella Avenue, which carry commuters and other travelers through Stanton.

Strategy ED‐2.2.1: Encourage mixed-use
development along major corridors, specifically
Beach Boulevard and Katella Avenue, as well as
at major city intersections and activity nodes.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan includes mixed-use zones for the portions of the Specific Plan along Beach Boulevard, Katella Avenue, and Main Street, as seen in Exhibit 3.1 of the Specific Plan.

Strategy ED‐2.2.2: Improve the look and
character of commercial developments located
along Beach Boulevard and Katella Avenue, or
at other major arterials, corridors and
intersections.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Chapter 4 of the Specific Plan includes Design Guidelines and Development Regulations that require high-quality architecture for future developments and improvements to existing businesses. Special treatments are required at major gateway intersections.

Goal ED‐3.2: Avoid further over‐saturation of convenience uses and strip commercial centers.

Strategy ED‐3.2.1: Strengthen Stanton’s mix of
retailers to improve shopping and employment
opportunities for residents.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Chapter 5 of the Specific Plan includes providing a new set of development regulations and design guidelines to existing retail areas, as well as updating uses to allow for a greater mix of businesses. This will create opportunities for new commercial development to better respond to changing demands in the retail space, as well as encourage more attractive retail centers.

Chapter 5 ‐ Infrastructure and Community Services
Goal ICS‐1.1: Provide an efficient, coherent, and well‐maintained transportation network that adequately supports the General Plan land use concept.

Strategy ICS‐1.1.2: Improve efficiency of the
city’s existing transportation network.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan includes the potential for the creation of a parking district within the Specific Plan area. Additionally, Section 2.2.2 of the Specific Plan includes new connections to increase multi-modal accessibility, via active and inactive rail corridors traversing the Specific Plan area.

Goal ICS‐1.2: Encourage alternatives to the private automobile by increasing access and opportunities to public transit, as well as to other alternative modes of transportation, such as biking and walking.

Strategy ICS‐1.2.2: Proactively plan for the
reuse of the Pacific Electric and Union Pacific
Corridors as a light rail facilities, or other
alternative transportation use, such as a
regional bikeway and linear park.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
As described in Section 2.3.3 of the Specific Plan incorporations the Pacific Electric and Union Pacific rail corridors into a light rail network or part of the open space networks. The Specific Plan also allows for the potential rail station at the vacant parcel along Beach Boulevard.

Chapter 6 – Community Health and Safety
Goal CHS‐3.3: Establish land uses which are compatible with noise levels within the community.

Strategy CHS‐3.3.1: Land use planning
decisions directly relate to potential noise
impacts. Therefore, careful consideration of
noise impacts should be a part of all land use
decisions.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan includes new land uses and development regulations that takes noise and other potential impacts into consideration by requiring buffers and limiting the types of industrial uses allowed to minimize land use incompatibilities. As indicated in Section 4.7.3.5 of Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-86

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐18

PROPOSED PROJECT GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
Policy Compliance with Policy
the Specific Plan, larger massings and wall planes on buildings near the railroad right-of-way are allowed.

Chapter 7 – Housing Element
Goal H‐1: Provide for a housing stock of sufficient quantity composed of a variety and range of types and costs.

Strategy H‐1.1.1: Review and revise
development standards, as appropriate, to
facilitate construction of a range of housing
types.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Chapter 5 of the Specific Plan includes new development standards that allow for a variety of medium- and higher-density housing types, as well as mixed-use housing, that may appeal to a range of demographics.

Strategy H‐1.1.2: Maximize the development
potential of vacant and underutilized land.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
The Specific Plan increases the development potential of vacant and underutilized land within the Specific Plan area and allows for a variety of uses, maximizing the development potential (Section 2.3.1 of the Specific Plan).

Goal H‐3.1: Retention of existing housing stock and housing opportunities for Stanton residents.

Strategy 3‐1.1: Ensure long term affordability
of housing units.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Chapter 5 of the Specific Plan encourages the development of affordable housing. These affordable units will include long-term affordability covenants to ensure they are preserved for an extended period of time.

Goal H‐4.1: Access to decent and suitable housing opportunities for all Stanton residents.

Strategy H‐4.1.1: Promote homeownership
opportunities.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Section 4.7.2.1 of the Specific Plan increases the allowed housing intensity within the Specific Plan area and allows for a variety of housing types, including single-family homes, townhomes and condominiums, thereby promoting homeownership opportunities.

Strategy H‐4.1.3: Provide opportunities for the
development of housing for large families.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Section 5.5 of the Specific Plan increases the allowed housing intensity within the Specific Plan area and allows for a variety of housing types, including single-family homes, townhomes and condominiums to accommodate large families.

Strategy H‐4.1.7: Provide opportunities for the
development of housing for extremely lowincome households.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Chapter 5 of the Specific Plan encourages the development of affordable housing, including those for extremely low-income households. These affordable units will include long-term affordability covenants to ensure they are preserved for an extended period of time.

Goal H‐6.1: Promote energy conservation, and green building techniques for residential construction and rehabilitation projects.

Strategy H‐6.1.1: Encourage use of energyefficient design and appliances.

Proposed Project Would Not Conflict
Chapter 4, Design Guidelines, of the Specific Plan encourages energy efficiency of new developments through encouraging solar panels, lowflow water fixtures, energy efficient appliances sustainable methods of construction, amongst others.

Source: Stanton 2008a.

As demonstrated in Table 4-18, the Project would be consistent with the General Plan’s applicable goals and strategies. The Specific Plan area is designated as “Medium Density Residential,” “High Density Residential,” “Town Center Mixed Use District” and “Industrial.” In order to be consistent with the General Plan, all parcels within the Specific Plan not Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-87

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR currently designated “Town Center Mixed Use District” are redesignated from their current designation to “Town Center Mixed Use District”. Therefore, in light of the above, there would be no conflict with the goals and policies of the General Plan or the land use designation for the site.

City of Stanton Zoning Code
Existing zoning for parcels within the Specific Plan includes the following zoning designations: “CN” Commercial neighborhood Zone, “CG” Commercial General Zone, “PR” Parks and Recreation Zone, “OS” Open Space/Buffer Zone, “IG” Industrial General Zone, “RL” Single-Family Residential, “RM” Medium Density Residential, and “PI” Public Institutional Zone. A Zone Change is required to adopt the Specific Plan. As such, the zoning of the site would change from the above designations to “‘TCSP’ Town Center Specific Plan”.

In light of the above analysis, the Project would not cause a significant environmental impact, as the Project would not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation, including the City’s General Plan and Zoning. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirements
No regulatory requirements have been identified.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to Land Use and Planning; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no new significant impacts beyond the impacts analyzed in the GP EIR.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-88

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
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?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the Initial Study for the GP EIR concluded that the General Plan Update would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State and would not result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local plan, specific plan, or other land use plan. Thus, this topic was focused out from further analysis in the GP EIR.

Supplemental Analysis
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? No Impact. The California Department of Conservation (DOC), California Geological Survey (CGS) designates Mineral Resources Zones (MRZs) according to the presence of or potential for underlying mineral resources. MRZ-1 is an area with no significant mineral deposits; MRZ-2 is an area with significant mineral deposits; and MRZ-3 is an area containing known mineral resources of undetermined significance. The Project site is designated as a MRZ-3 zone according to the CGS Mineral Resources Zones (CGS 2015a). There are no areas within the City of Stanton containing known mineral resources appropriate for mineral extraction.

There are no past or ongoing oil or gas drilling activities within the Specific Plan boundaries.

Review of the California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) Well Finder shows no oil or gas wells are located within the Project boundaries. The nearest wells are dry, plugged holes located near the corners of Katella Avenue/Western Avenue and David Land/Mission Way. These wells are located in the City but outside of the Project area boundaries (CalGEM 2021). Additionally, there is no mining activities or mines located within or near the Project area boundaries as shown by the DOC, Division of Mine Reclamation map (DOC 2016).

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-89

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Thus, the Project would not result in the loss of availability of locally important mineral resources. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirements
No regulatory requirements have been identified.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to Mineral Resources; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no significant impacts beyond the impacts analyzed in the Initial Study for the General Plan Update.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-90

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.13 NOISE
Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in 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?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the GP EIR indicated that implementation of the General Plan Update could generate short-term construction noise levels in excess of established standards and could contribute to an exceedance of the City’s long-term operational noise standards resulting in potential noise impacts to sensitive receptors (significant unavoidable impact). Cumulative impacts related to short-term construction was considered less than significant, and longterm operational noise were considered significant and unavoidable.

Introduction
Noise and Vibration Concepts
Several rating scales (or noise “metrics”) are used to analyze the effects of noise on a community. These scales include the equivalent noise level (Leq) and the community noise equivalent level (CNEL). Average noise levels over a period of minutes or hours are usually expressed as A-weighted decibels (dBA) Leq, which is the equivalent noise level for that period of time. The period of time averaging may be specified where Leq (3) would be a 3- hour average. When no period is specified, a 1-hour average is assumed. Noise of short duration (i.e., substantially less than the averaging period) is averaged into ambient noise during the period of interest. Thus, a loud noise lasting several seconds, or a few minutes may have minimal effect on the measured sound level averaged over a one-hour period.

To evaluate community noise impacts, CNEL was developed to account for human sensitivity to evening and nighttime noise. CNEL separates a 24-hour day into three periods: daytime (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM), evening (7:00 PM to 10:00 PM), and nighttime (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM).

The evening sound levels are assigned a 5-dBA penalty, and the nighttime sound levels are assigned a 10-dBA penalty prior to averaging them with daytime hourly sound levels. Other Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-91

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR statistical descriptors often used to describe noise, are Lmax and Lmin, which are the highest and lowest A-weighted sound levels that occur during a noise event, respectively.

Vibration amplitudes are commonly expressed in peak particle velocity (ppv) or root-mean square (RMS) vibration velocity. Ppv is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration signal. Ppv and RMS vibration velocity are normally described in inches per second. Similar to airborne sound, vibration velocity can be expressed in decibel notation as vibration decibels (VdB).

Existing Conditions
Existing ambient noise levels are comprised of local noise sources. The primary noise sources associated with developed areas are generally vehicle traffic along transportation corridors. To evaluate the existing noise environment, noise modeling of existing traffic volumes was conducted, as shown in Table 4-19, below. The complete noise modeling results are included in Appendix E, Noise Calculations.

TABLE 4‐19

EXISTING TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS
Roadway Segments Existing Traffic Volumes
Existing Traffic Noise Levels
(dBA Leq at 50 feet from
roadway centerline)
Cerritos, West of Rose 13,100 72
Cerritos, East of Dale 12,600 71
Katella, West of Beach 21,500 74
Katella, East of Court 21,600 74
Beach, North of Cerritos 44,100 78
Beach, South of Katella 46,200 78
dBA: A-weighted decibels; Leq: equivalent noise level
Sensitive Receptors
The State of California defines noise-sensitive receptors as those land uses that require serenity or are otherwise adversely affected by noise events or conditions. The land use categories requiring the lowest noise thresholds are schools, libraries, churches, hospitals, and residences. These uses proximate to the Project site are referred to as the Project’s “noise sensitive receptors” due to sensitivity of these uses to noise exposure.

City of Stanton General Plan
The City of Stanton is affected by several different sources of noise, including vehicle traffic, commercial and industrial activity, and periodic nuisances such as construction, loud parties, and other events. The Noise Element of the City of Stanton General Plan (adopted September 23, 2008) is intended to identify these sources and provide objectives and policies that ensure that noise from these sources does not create an unacceptable noise environment.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-92

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR The Noise Element addresses protecting noise-sensitive land uses, ensuring land use/noise compatibility, reducing noise from mobile sources and mitigating noise from construction, maintenance, and other sources.

The Noise Element has adopted a local Noise Control Ordinance (Municipal Code 9.28.050 Exterior Noise Standards) in order to control unnecessary, excessive, and annoying sounds emanating from incorporated areas of the City. The Ordinance is designed to control unnecessary, excessive, and annoying sounds in residential neighborhoods by the following noise standards:
 Exterior and interior noise of 55 dBA during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.;  Exterior noise of 50 dBA during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.; and,  Interior noise of 45 dBA during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

The Ordinance prohibits exterior noise sources to exceed the following:
 The noise standard for a cumulative period of more than thirty minutes in any hour; or
 The noise standard plus 5 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than fifteen minutes in any hour; or
 The noise standard plus 10 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than five minutes in any hour; or
 The noise standard plus 15 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour; or
 The noise standard plus 20 dB(A) for any period of time.

Interior noise sources cannot exceed the following:
 The interior noise standard for a cumulative period of more than five minutes in any hour; or
 The interior noise standard plus 5 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour; or
 The interior noise standard plus 10 dB(A) for any period of time.

The City’s land use noise compatibility standards are provided for reference in Table 4-20 Land Use Noise Compatibility Guidelines – California.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-93

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐20
LAND USE‐NOISE COMPATIBILITY GUIDELINES ‐ CALIFORNIA
General Plan
Land Use Designation
Normally
Acceptable
(dBA CNEL)
Conditionally
Acceptable
(dBA CNEL)
Normally
Unacceptable
(dBA CNEL)
Clearly
Unacceptable
(dBA CNEL)
Residential - Low Density, Single-Family,
Duplex, Mobile Homes 50 - 60 55 - 70 70-75 75-85
Residential - Multiple Family 50 - 65 60 - 70 70 - 75 70 - 85 Transient Lodging - Motels, and Hotels 50 - 65 60 - 70 70 - 80 80 - 85 Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals,
Nursing Homes 50 - 65 60 - 70 70 - 80 80 - 85
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
Amphitheaters NA 50 - 70 NA 65 - 85
Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports NA 50 - 75 NA 70 - 85 Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 50 - 70 NA 67.5 - 75 72.5 - 85 Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water
Recreation, Cemeteries 50 - 70 NA 70 - 80 80 - 85
Office Buildings, Business Commercial and
Professional 50 - 70 67.5 - 77.5 75 - 85 NA
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities,
Agriculture 50 - 75 70 - 80 75 - 85 NA
NA: Not Applicable
Source: General Plan Guidelines, Office of Planning and Research, California, October 2003.

Normally Acceptable – Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.

Conditionally Acceptable – New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning, will normally suffice.

Normally Unacceptable – New construction or development should be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.

Clearly Unacceptable – New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.

City of Stanton Municipal Code
Relevant sections of the City Municipal Code (Chapter 9.28, Noise Control) to the proposed residential uses of the Specific Plan are discussed further below.

9.28.090 Air conditioning and refrigeration—Special provisions Until January 19, 1979, the noise standards enumerated in Sections 9.28.050 and 9.28.060 shall be increased eight dB(A) where the alleged offensive noise source is an air conditioning or refrigeration system or associated equipment which was installed prior to the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter. (Prior code Section 9.44.090) Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-94

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

9.28.095 Special noise sources—Radios, television sets and similar devices A. Use Restricted. It is unlawful and a misdemeanor, subject to punishment in accordance with Chapter 1.10 of this code, for any person within the city of Stanton to use or operate any radio receiving set, musical instrument, phonograph, television set, or other machine or device for the producing or reproducing of sound at any time in such a manner as to produce noise levels on residential land which would disturb the peace, quiet, and comfort of neighboring residents or any reasonable person of normal sensitivity residing in the area.

B. Prima Facie Violation. Any noise exceeding the ambient noise level at the property line of any residential area (or if a condominium or apartment house, within any adjoining apartment) by more than five decibels shall be deemed to be prima facie evidence of a violation of the provisions of this section. (Ord. 838 Section 2, 2000)

9.28.096 Same—Machinery, fans and other mechanical devices Any noise level from the use or operation of any machinery, equipment, pump, fan, air conditioning apparatus, refrigerating equipment, or other mechanical or electrical device, or in repairing or rebuilding any motor vehicle, which exceeds the noise limits as set forth in this title at any property line, or, if a condominium or rental unit, within any condominium unit or rental unit within the complex, shall be a violation of this chapter. (Ord. 838 Section 3, 2000)

9.28.070 Special provisions
E. Noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property provided said activities do not take place between the hours of eight p.m. and seven a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a federal holiday;
I. Noise sources associated with the maintenance of real property provided said activities take place between the hours of seven a.m. and eight p.m. on any day except Sunday or federal holiday, or between the hours of nine a.m. and eight p.m. on Sunday or federal holiday;

20.300.100 Vibration
Existing and proposed uses shall not generate vibrations that can or may be considered a nuisance or hazard on any adjacent property or shall be cushioned or isolated to prevent generation of vibrations. (Ord. 1017, 2013).

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-95

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Supplemental Analysis
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? Project Related Temporary Noise Increases
Less Than Significant Impact. Construction activities of proposed residential uses would occur within the Specific Plan area. The specific locations of these activities within this Area are currently unknown. These construction activities are likely to involve demolition of existing structures, grading and excavation for utilities and building foundations, building construction, paving, and architectural coatings. Construction activities are anticipated to occur over a period of 30 years (Specific Plan buildout); however, due to a relatively small number of proposed units, construction is not anticipated to occur throughout that timeframe. It is assumed that there would be approximately 5 dwelling units developed annually if the development of the Proposed Project were averaged over the 30-year time period. It is expected that development of the proposed residential units would not follow this annual average and would be based on market demand, but this estimate provides an idea of the relatively small magnitude of development averaged over the full buildout of the Specific Plan. Even if the actual development’s magnitude is higher, the amount of haul truck and worker commute trips is low due to the relatively small amount of develop that is proposed. In addition, all construction activities would occur within the hours specified by the City’s Noise Ordinance. Local intersections analyzed in the traffic analysis have approximately 12,000 to 46,000 existing vehicle trips per day. Based on these vehicle trips, the addition of Project related construction trips from the development of the Specific Plan would not result in an audible change in the average traffic noise along the roadways. A doubling of traffic is generally required for a 3-decibel change in noise levels and 3-decibels is the minimum change in noise levels that is needed to be perceptible for human hearing in outdoor environments. As such, construction traffic would not result in an audible change in noise levels and would not result in a significant impact to receptors along local roadways.

In typical construction projects, such as the proposed Project, demolition and grading activities generate the highest noise levels, since they involve the use of the largest equipment. During demolition and grading, persons in the immediate vicinity of the construction site would experience short-term noise impacts related to the operation of heavy construction equipment such as bulldozers, hoe-rams, excavators, and dump trucks.

Noise levels would fluctuate depending on equipment type, duration of use, and distance between noise source and receiver.

Local residents and other receptors would be subject to elevated noise levels due to the operation of Project-related construction equipment. Construction activities are carried out in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These various sequential phases would change the character of the noise levels surrounding the construction site as work progresses. Construction noise levels reported in the USEPA’s Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances were used to estimate future construction noise levels for Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-96

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR future projects. Typically, the estimated construction noise levels are governed primarily by equipment that produces the highest noise levels. Construction noise levels for each generalized construction phase (ground-clearing/demolition, excavation, foundation construction, building construction, paving, and site cleanup) are based on a typical construction equipment mix for an industrial project and do not include use of atypical, very loud, and vibration-intensive equipment (e.g., pile drivers).

The degree to which noise-sensitive receptors are affected by construction activities depends heavily on their proximity. The distance of future construction sites to nearby noise sensitive uses is currently unknown. For informational purposes, estimated noise levels attributable to the development of the future projects at various distances are shown in Table 4-21, Construction Noise Levels at Noise-Sensitive Uses. Activities located closer to receivers would be louder and those that are located further than 50 feet would be lower depending on the separation distance. Calculations are included in Appendix E, Noise Calculations.

TABLE 4‐21
CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS AT NOISE‐SENSITIVE USES
Construction Phase
Noise Levels (Leq dBA)
Construction
at 25 feet
Construction
at 50 feet
Construction
at 100 feet
Construction
at 200 feet
Ground Clearing/Demolition 90 84 78 72
Excavation 95 89 83 77
Foundation Construction 84 78 72 66
Building Construction 93 87 81 75
Paving and Site Cleanup 95 89 83 77
Leq dBA: Average noise energy level; Max: maximum; avg: average; ft: feet, NA: Not Applicable Note: Noise levels from construction activities do not take into account attenuation provided by intervening structures.

Construction activities would comply with the City’s Municipal Code Section 9.28.070, which exempts construction noise from quantitative limits during specified hours. Because the Project would limit construction noise to the least noise sensitive portions of the day and would not involve especially loud pieces of construction equipment such as pile drivers, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Permanent Project‐Related Noise Increases
Permanent sources of noise associated with the Project involves vehicle trips traveling to and from the Project site, property maintenance activities (landscaping), parking lot activities, recreational activities within residential courtyards, and mechanical sources of noise.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-97

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Noise Generated by Project Traffic
Operation of the proposed Project would generate traffic along roadways in the Project vicinity. The Project is anticipated to generate an additional 937 trips per day with 56 AM peak-hour trips and 71 PM peak-hour trips. Project related traffic volumes would be distributed across roadways local to the Project. As shown in Table 4-22, below, the Project would result in minimal increases in traffic volumes. This increase in traffic volumes would result in noise levels increases of less than 1 decibel. A doubling of traffic volumes would result in traffic noise increases of 3 decibels. A 3-decibel increase is the minimum change in noise levels that is perceptible to human hearing in outdoor environments. Because traffic noise increases are below the limits of human hearing to detect an audible change in noise levels, traffic noise increases from the Project would not be perceptible or substantial. The impact pertaining to traffic noise levels would therefore be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

TABLE 4‐22
PROJECT‐RELATED OFFSITE TRAFFIC NOISE INCREASES
Roadway
Build‐Out
No Project
Traffic Volumes
Build‐Out
Project Traffic
Volumes
Project Only
Traffic Volume
Increase
Project Only
Traffic Noise
Increase
(dBA CNEL)
Cerritos, West of Rose 14,900 14,900 0 0.00
Cerritos, East of Dale 14,000 14,100 100 0.03
Katella, West of Beach 24,600 24,600 0 0.00
Katella, East of Court 24,400 24,500 100 0.02
Beach, North of Cerritos 49,800 50,100 300 0.03
Beach, South of Katella 52,200 52,500 300 0.02
Noise Generated by On-Site Sources
The primary noise sources generated by operation of the proposed Project would be heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment, landscape maintenance, parking lot activities, recreational activities within residential courtyards, and trash collection. Noise generated by trash collection is not regulated by the Municipal Code. This source of noise is common with land use development. Noise generated by landscaping activities is regulated by Section 9.28.070.I. Special Provisions, which restricts maintenance of property to the least noise sensitive hours of the day. Noise generated by recreational activities in residential courtyards are regulated under the City’s exterior and interior noise standards as well as Section 9.28.095 that addresses disturbances in residential areas from music. Parking lots generate noise from vehicle ingress/egress, door slams, car alarms, and engine starts. Noise generated by parking lot activities are generally of low magnitude and would not result in a public nuisance. Noise associated with car alarms are of high magnitude to attract public attention and deter theft, but the duration of these events are short and generally infrequent.

In addition, the California vehicle Code Section 22651.5 allows a peace officer to remove a vehicle with a car alarm after 20 minutes of activation.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-98

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR These sources of noise are typical of developed land uses and because they are regulated by the City, they would not result in noise levels of sufficient magnitude and frequency of occurrence to result in a significant noise impact. Impacts to noise generated by on-site sources would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Therefore, the Project would have less than significant impacts related to generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project, and no mitigation is required.
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. There are no applicable City standards for structural damage from vibration. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) vibration damage potential guideline thresholds are shown in Table 4-23.

TABLE 4‐23

VIBRATION DAMAGE THRESHOLD CRITERIA
Structure and Condition
Maximum ppv (in/sec)
Transient Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient
monuments 0.12 0.08
Fragile buildings 0.20 0.10
Historic and some old buildings 0.50 0.25
Older residential structures 0.50 0.30
New residential structures 1.00 0.50
Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.00 0.50
ppv: peak particle velocity; in/sec: inch(es) per second.

Note: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

Source: Caltrans 2020.

The Caltrans vibration annoyance potential guideline thresholds are shown in Table 4-24.

Based on the guidance in Table 4-24, the “strongly perceptible” vibration level of 0.9 ppv in/sec is used in this analysis as the threshold for a potentially significant vibration impact for human annoyance.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-99

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐24

VIBRATION ANNOYANCE CRITERIA
Average Human Response
Maximum ppv (in/sec)
Transient Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Barely perceptible 0.04 0.01
Distinctly perceptible 0.25 0.04
Strongly perceptible 0.90 0.10
Severe 2.0 0.4
ppv: peak particle velocity; in/sec: inch(es) per second.

Source: Caltrans 2020.

Table 4-25 summarizes typical vibration levels measured during construction activities for various vibration-inducing equipment at a distance of 25 feet.

TABLE 4‐25

VIBRATION LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION

EQUIPMENT
Equipment ppv at 25 ft (in/sec)
Impact pile driver 1.518
Vibratory roller 0.210
Large bulldozer 0.089
Caisson drilling 0.089
Loaded trucks 0.076
Jackhammer 0.035
Small bulldozer 0.003
ppv: peak particle velocity; in/sec: inches per second.

Source: Federal Transit Administration 2018.

The exact location of the nearest structures to the Project construction sites are currently unknown. It is also unknown which equipment would be used or the resiliency of the existing structures that would be proximate to the Project site. Table 4-26, Project Vibration Impacts, shows the vibration exposure levels for various distances of construction equipment from offsite buildings.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-100

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐26

PROJECT VIBRATION IMPACTS
Equipment
Vibration Levels at Different Distances
(ppv @ 10 ft) (ppv @ 20 ft) (ppv @ 30 ft) (ppv @ 40 ft) (ppv @ 50 ft) Impact pile driver 6.000 2.121 1.155 0.104 0.537
Vibratory roller 0.830 0.293 0.160 0.044 0.074
Caisson Drill 0.352 0.124 0.068 0.044 0.031
Large bulldozer 0.352 0.124 0.068 0.001 0.031
Loaded trucks 0.300 0.106 0.058 0.104 0.027
Jackhammer 0.138 0.049 0.027 0.038 0.012
Small bulldozer 0.012 0.004 0.002 0.017 0.001
Annoyance Criteria 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Building Damage Criteria:

Extremely Fragile
Historic Buildings 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08
Fragile Buildings 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Historic and Some Old
Buildings 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Older Residential
Structures 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
New Residential
Structures 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Modern Industrial/
Commercial Buildings 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
ppv: peak particle velocity; ft: feet
Note: Calculations can be found in Appendix E.

As shown in Table 4-26, vibration levels would potentially exceed the annoyance and building damage thresholds depending on the distances between the construction equipment and offsite structures. Because vibration levels could be above the significance thresholds, the future projects’ construction activities may result in annoyance and cosmetic building damage at the nearest offsite structures to the site without the implementation of mitigation. As such, MM NOI-1 is proposed to establish buffer distances so that vibration annoyance is minimized and building damage does not occur.

MM NOI-1 would avoid potential vibration induced cosmetic building damage to offsite buildings. MM NOI-1 provides flexibility in establishing setback distances based on the construction equipment that would be used and the types of structures that may be affected.

With the implementation of MM NOI-1, vibration levels produced by project related construction equipment would be below both the annoyance and building damage criteria and result in less than significant construction related vibration impacts.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-101

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR 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?
No Impact. The Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB) Los Alamitos is located in the City of Los Alamitos, approximately two and half miles to the west of the Specific Plan area. The Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) is a land use compatibility plan that is intended to protect the public from adverse effects of aircraft noise; ensure the people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents; and ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable space. The AELUP identifies standards for development in the airport’s planning area based on noise contours, accident potential zones, and building heights. The City of Stanton, which includes the Specific Plan area is not located within the accident potential zone or the (AELUP) height restriction zone for JFTB (Stanton 2008b) nor within the 65 and 60 dBA CNEL noise contours (JFTB Los Alamitos 2016).

Thus, the Project would not result in excessive noise for people residing on the site, as it relates to exposure to airport or aircraft hazards in areas within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirements
RR NOI‐1 The future projects shall comply with the City of Stanton Municipal Code Chapter 9.28, Noise Control.

Mitigation Measures
MM NOI‐1 During active construction phases, the Applicant shall require that all construction contractors for a future project restrict the operation of construction equipment to distances where vibration levels would be less than the vibration “annoyance” and “building damage” criteria shown in Table 4-26.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units would result in new significant impact beyond the impacts analyzed in the GP EIR. Implementation of a mitigation measure would reduce the impacts to less than significant level.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-102

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the GP EIR indicated that implementation of the General Plan Update could increase the residential population by 20,416 persons resulting in a population of approximately 59,397 persons in 2020; would result in the addition of 5,751 housing units to the City’s housing stock during the planning horizon of 2020; could result in the reduction of approximately 3,662 jobs for a total of 11,399 jobs within the City in the planning horizon year of 2020. Cumulative impacts related to inducing housing, population, and employment growth was considered less than significant.

Supplemental Analysis
This section is based on data available through the State of California Department of Finance, Southern California Associated Governments (SCAG), City of Stanton General Plan Housing Element Draft (October 2021), and City of Stanton General Plan EIR. Based on the General Plan EIR, buildout of the General Plan would meet housing demands projected for the City, induce population growth, and affect the jobs/housing balance. a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g.,through extensions of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less Than SignificantImpact. According to the State Department of Finance (DOF), the City of Stanton had a 2021 population of 39,573 persons and a housing stock of 11,448 dwelling units. The City had an average household size of 3.5 persons per household and a vacancy rate of 3.1 percent (DOF 2021).

Table 4-27, Population Projection, shows population growth for Stanton and Orange County in the region from 2000 through 2020. According to the California DOF, the population of Stanton in 2020 was 39,150 persons, an increase of approximately 2.5 percent from a population of 38,186 in 2010. During the previous decade (2000 to 2010), the City’s population increased 2.1 percent to total 38,186 in 2010. Comparatively, Stanton’s growth has been lower than Countywide growth, with Orange County experiencing population Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-103

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR growth rates during both the 2000 to 2010 and 2010 to 2020 periods higher than that experienced in Stanton. This is largely due to Stanton’s built-out nature and the availability of developable land in the County versus in the City. Based on the General Plan, the City’s population is anticipated to increase to approximately 59,397 persons upon buildout of lands within the City limits (Stanton2008a).

TABLE 4‐27

POPULATION PROJECTIONS
Jurisdiction 2000 2010 2020
Change 2000‐
2020
% Change
2000‐2020
Stanton 37,403 38,186 39,150 1,774 4.4%
Orange County 2,846,289 3,010,232 3,194,332 348,043 12.2% Source: DOF 2010, DOF 2021
Using SCAG data, the City’s 2016 population was 39,300 and is anticipated to increase to 44,200 by 2045. For the same time frame, County population was 125,900 in 2016 and 181,000 by 2045 (SCAG 2020b) As such, the County would have a population growth of approximately 43.8 percent from 2016 to 2045 (or 1.5 percent annually). The City would experience a population increase of approximately 12.5 percent from 2016 to 2045 (or 0.4 percent annually). Buildout of the General Plan would result in a population of 59,397 persons, which represents 14,601 more persons than projected by SCAG. However, it should be noted that population projections typically use Census data as a baseline; therefore, current projections are based on 2000 Census data, which are no longer current.

The General Plan allows for the construction of approximately 5,751 additional dwelling units within the City, resulting in a total of approximately 18,537 dwelling units at buildout.

Additionally, buildout of the General Plan results in a net reduction of 1,433,635 square feet of non-residential development within the City, resulting in a maximum of 6,144,748 square feet of non-residential development at buildout. Implementation of the General Plan is anticipated to increase the City’s population by 20,416 persons, resulting in a total population of approximately 59,896 persons (based on 3.55 persons per household and the maximum allowable land uses permitted in the General Plan).

Using the City’s population generation factor of 3.46 persons per unit (DOF 2021), the Project with the proposed 139 multi-family residential units would generate approximately 481 residents. Using the Orange County Population (OCP), this would increase the City’s 2020 resident population of 40,030 persons by 1.2 percent to 40,511 residents (OCP 2018). It would increase the City’s 2021 housing stock of 11,537 by 1.2 percent to 11,676 units (OCP 2018). It is anticipated that short-term construction jobs would be created over time. Jobs that would be created during construction would be short-term and would not increase the City’s job base permanently. However, the temporary construction crew and long-term residents of the Project would not create a significant change in demand for goods and services that may induce business investment, growth, or development in the area.

While the Project would result in direct population growth by generating a total of 481 residents, it would not result in indirect population growth. The Specific Plan area is Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-104

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR currently developed with the existing infrastructure and circulation system in place.

Additionally, the area surrounding the Specific Plan is also developed. As such, the Project would not result in extending infrastructure such that would induce growth in the area.

Major infrastructure, serving the area already exists. Thus, the Project would not result in substantial unplanned population growth indirectly. The impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Specific Plan area is developed with varying intensities of light industrial, retail/commercial, and residential uses. This Subsequent IS/MND analyzes the potential impacts of the additional 139 multi-family dwelling units only. The existing General Plan for the City of Stanton allows for a total of 1,399 multi-family units within the Town Center Specific Plan area. Since 2008, 4 units have been built, resulting in a remaining capacity of 1,395 multi-family units. The Town Center Specific Plan would allow for an additional 139 units, increasing the remaining capacity to 1,534 multi-family units. Future development associated with implementation of the Specific Plan, would require demolition of both existing residential and non-residential land uses.

There is the potential for existing onsite residential uses to be displaced temporarily, as sites are redeveloped, or permanently if the specific residential product type needs to be completely relocated. However, under either a temporary or permanent relocation scenario, qualifying residents would receive relocation assistance in compliance with State Redevelopment Law (MM PH-1). Therefore, implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would result in less than significant impacts with implementation of MM PH-1.

Regulatory Requirements
No regulatory requirements have been identified.

Mitigation Measures
MM PH‐1 Qualifying residents subject to displacement shall receive relocation assistance in compliance with California Community Redevelopment Law, State Relocation law (Government Code Sections 7260 through 7277), and the California Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 25, Chapter 6).1 Conclusion
The additional 139 units would result in new significant impact beyond the impacts analyzed in the GP EIR. Implementation of a mitigation measure would reduce the impacts to less than significant level.
1 Relocation assistance is applicable to projects where real property is acquired by the Stanton Community and Economic Development Department or by a private party pursuant to an agreement with the Stanton Community and Economic Development Department.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-105

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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:

i) Fire protection?
ii) Police protection?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the GP EIR indicated that implementation of the General Plan Update could result in the need for additional fire and police facilities or personnel and could result in adverse physical impacts to Stanton Unified School District facilities. Cumulative impacts related to fire and schools were considered potentially significant, except for demand for police services, which was considered less than significant.

The topic of parks was covered under Parks, Recreational Facilities, and Trails in the GP EIR.

Supplemental Analysis
a) Fire protection?
Less Than SignificantImpact. Fire protection services in the City, including the Project site, are provided by the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) Division 7, which maintains and operates five stations that serve the City. Locations of the OCFA stations, apparatus and staffing are provided in Table 4-28, below.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-106

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐28

ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY FIRE DEPARTMENTS
Fire Stations
and Locations
Distance to
the Project
Area (miles)2 Current Apparatus Current Daily Staffing
Fire Station 46
7871 Pacific St., Stanton 0.5
Paramedic
Assessment Unit,
Medic Van
1 Captain, 1 Engineer, 3
Firefighter/Paramedics
Fire Station 82
11805 Gilbert St., Garden Grove 1.75 Paramedic Engine
1 Captain/Paramedic, 1 Engineer,
1 Firefighter, 1
Firefighter/Paramedic
Fire Station 85
12751 Western Ave., Garden
Grove

2.0 Paramedic Truck 1 Captain, 1 Engineer, 2
Firefighter/Paramedics
Fire Station 84
12191 Valley View St., Garden
Grove

2.5 Paramedic Engine,
Type 3 Engine (cross
staffed)
1 Captain/Paramedic, 1 Engineer,
1 Firefighter, 1
Firefighter/Paramedic
Fire Station 63
9120 Holder St. Buena Park 3.0 Paramedic Engine
1 Captain, 1 Engineer/Paramedic,
1 Firefighter,
1Firefighter/Paramedic
Source: OCFA. 2021b.

OCFA provides response to fire protection, medical emergencies, hazardous materials incidents, natural and man-made disasters and related emergencies in an effort to reduce life and property loss (OCFA 2021a). OCFA also provides automatic and mutual aid assistance to adjacent counties and city fire departments within Orange County. OCFA’s Standard of Cover for fire/rescue/medical emergency response arrival times is listed below (OCFA 2021b).
 First-in engines should arrive on-scene to medical aids and/or fires within 7 minutes and 20 seconds 80 percent of the time.
 First-in truck companies should arrive on-scene to fires within 12 minutes 80 percent of the time.
 First-in paramedic companies should arrive on-scene at all medical aids within 10 minutes 80 percent of the time.

Fire Station 46 located at 7871 Pacific Street is west of Beach Boulevard within the Specific Plan area. It is the closest station and would provide the first line of response to the Project area; however, the other four locations listed in Table 4-28 would also provide fire/rescue/medical emergency services as needed for specific emergency needs. In 2020, OCFA dispatched units to 3,665 incidents in Stanton, arriving under their Standard of Cover response times listed above (OCFA 2021a).
2 Mileage is an estimate of distance within the Specific Plan Project area.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-107

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR At this time, there are no planned or ongoing construction or expansion projects for emergency services in the City. As shown in Checklist Response 4.14(a) in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, implementation of the proposed Project would generate 481 residents, which may have the potential to impact OCFA’s resources to maintain acceptable emergency response times. However, the City is a Cash Contract City with OCFA; therefore, the City takes responsibility to ensure funding is available to maintain emergency infrastructure (OCFA 2021b). In the event there is future demand for additional personnel, equipment, apparatus or facilities, this would be determined through the continued implementation of strategic planning that meets the population growth for emergency services funding by the City. Through this process, fire department needs are assessed, and budget allocations are revised accordingly to ensure that adequate levels of service are maintained throughout the City.

Compliance with regulatory requirements RR PS-1, which requires standard conditions and procedures according to current regulations and codes for fire prevention and emergency services; RR PS-2, which requires payment of development impact fees for fire suppression facilities; and RR PS-3 regarding fire/emergency access during construction would ensure that impacts to fire protection services would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
b) Police Protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Police protection services for the City, including the Project site, are provided by the Orange County Sheriff’s Department (OCSD). OCSD is headquartered in Santa Ana at 550 North Flower Street and consists of seven commands: Office of the Sheriff, Administrative Services Commands, Corrections and Court Operations Command, Custody and Inmate Services Operations Command, Investigations and Special Operations Command, Patrol Operations Command, and Professional Services Command. The Patrol Operations Command is split into four divisions: North Operations, Southeast Operations, Southwest Operations, and Transit Operations. The North Operations, based at the Sheriff’s Headquarters in Santa Ana, is responsible for patrol services in the north Orange County unincorporated areas and contract police services for the cities of Yorba Linda, Stanton, and Villa Park (OCSD 2021a; OCSD 2021c).

Since 1988, the City has contracted with the OCSD to provide police services. OCSD, as Stanton Police Services, operates out of a City-owned building located at 11100 Cedar Street.

The Stanton Police Services Branch (Branch) includes 31 sworn staff and 5 professional staff. The Branch is open to the public Monday through Friday from 10 AM to 2 PM. However, police patrol services operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. In addition to emergency calls, police assistance after hours is available through a non-emergency dispatch service and general police services phone as well as a physical intercom system outside of the Branch location (OSCD 2021a, OCSD 2021b).

The proposed Project would generate a demand for police protection services during construction and operation of future projects and during operation (once the proposed residential units are occupied). OCSD is the largest agency in the Orange County, with a wide range of capabilities at their disposal during natural disasters, protest, or any major event Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-108

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR where they may need additional resources. However, at any given time surrounding agencies may respond to any mutual aid request to the City (OCSD 2021a).

The build-out of the proposed Project would increase the overall population (full-time residential and daily visitor-related) to the Project area. This would increase the level of police services required through daily service calls, case volume, and increase response times. With the net increase of 481 residents, the demand for police protection services would increase over the existing condition; however, the demand is not substantial and may not require additional staffing for the police services to offset the increased population (OCSD 2021a).

OCSD, as mentioned previously, is contracted by the City, therefore, the City would anticipate and increase the level of police service as needed by the phased development of the proposed Project. At this time there are no plans for expansion of police facilities (OCSD 2021a), nor would the proposed Project require construction of new or physically altered police protection facilities to maintain an adequate level of service to the Project area. Compliance with regulatory requirement RR PS-4, which requires payment of development impact fees for police facilities (Stanton Municipal Code 19.18.030), would ensure that adequate police protection services are provided and impacts to police protection services would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
c) Schools?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project includes a maximum of 139 new residential units, which would generate new residents and potential school-aged children who would require future school services. The City of Stanton is supported by the following three school districts:
 Anaheim Union High School District
501 N. Crescent Way, Anaheim, CA 92803
Grades: Junior and High Schools
 Magnolia School District
2705 W. Orange Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92804
Grades: Pre-school; TK-K to 6th
 Savanna School District
1330 S. Knott Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92804
Grades: K-8
While Garden Grove Unified School District serves the City, the school district does not serve the proposed Project area (GGUSD 2021). Anaheim Union High School District, Magnolia School District, and Savanna School District serve the City including the Project area (AUHSD 2021, MSD 2021, SSD 2021).

The Project area is served by two elementary schools, one junior high school, and one high school. The number of students generated by the proposed Project are identified in Table 4- 29 below. Using student generation rates from the City of Stanton General Plan EIR (Stanton Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-109

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR 2008), the proposed Project would generate a total of 121 students across three school districts: Anaheim Union High School District, Magnolia School District, and Savanna School District.

TABLE 4‐29

STUDENTS GENERATED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT
School District
Proposed
Dwelling
Units K–6 7–8 9–12 Total
Anaheim Union High School District 139 -- 0.283 39
Magnolia School District 139 0.297 -- -- 41
Savannah School District 139 0.297 -- 41
Total students generated by the proposed Project 121
Source: Stanton 2008a.

As stated in Checklist Response 4.14(a), the proposed Project would result in a population increase of approximately 481 residents in the City over a 30 year build out. This population increase over time would generate new students to the schools that serve the Project area.

Table 4-30, below, identifies the available capacity of the schools that would serve the students generated by the proposed Project.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-110

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐30

ENROLLMENT AND CAPACITY OF SCHOOLS SERVING THE PROJECT
AREA
School
Name/Address
Enrollment
Capacity
Current
Enrollment
Available
Capacity
Current Permanent/
Portable Classrooms
Distance to
the Project
Area
Boundary
(miles)
Savannah School District
Twila Reid
Elementary School
720 S. Western
Avenue, Anaheim
Grades K–12
825 524 301 18 permanent
12 portable 1.0
Magnolia School District
Robert M. Pyles STEM
Academy
10411 Dale Avenue,
Stanton
Grades: TK–6
1272 723 549 26 permanent
21 portable 0.22
Anaheim Union School District
Dale Junior High
School
900 South Dale Street,
Anaheim
Grades 7–8
1848 1056 792 51 permanent
5 portable 0.87
Magnolia High School
2450 West Ball Road,
Anaheim
Grades 9–12
2852 1630 1222 59 permanent
12 portable 1.0
Source: AUHSD 2021, MSD 2021, SSD 2021.

The location of future residential development within the Specific Plan area would determine which school(s) would receive new students as the Specific Plan builds out. It is unknown which schools would be immediately affected; however, as shown in Table 4-30 above, all schools that serve Project area currently have capacity to serve the Project in the near term.

Future project development would be required to pay school development fees to the City and the relevant school district(s) for the improvement of school facilities that would be needed to serve the Project’s demand for school services and facilities (RR PS-5). As provided under Section 17620 of the California Education Code and Section 65970 of the California Government Code, the payment of statutory school development fees would fully mitigate a Project’s impacts on schools. Thus, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-111

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR d) Parks?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project is a Specific Plan development that would result in 139 new multi-family units in the City. The future projects’ applicants would comply with Stanton Municipal Code 19.42.090 and be required to pay the park in lieu fees to provide funds for improvement of City parks (see RR PS-5). Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a substantial increased demand for recreational facilities, requiring the construction of new parks that would adversely affect the environment.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. In addition, future project applicants would be required to pay in-lieu fees for improvements to existing City parks (RR PS-5). Given the phased increase in population and payment of park fees (RR PS-5), the potential impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Please refer to Section 4.16, Recreation, below for additional discussion. e) Other public facilities or governmental services?
Less Than Significant Impact. Increased demands for library services are primarily driven by increases in permanent population, which is associated with development of residential land uses only. Therefore, the following analysis addresses the potential impacts associated with library facilities based a maximum of 139 new residential units for the proposed Project.

The Orange Public Libraries (OCPL) provides library services to the City. Residents of Stanton can use any of the 32 branches, within the OCPL system, including those within neighboring cities of Anaheim, Cypress, and Garden Grove. However, future residents of the proposed Project are anticipated to be primarily served by the Stanton Library Branch located at 7850 Katella Avenue, approximately 0.1 mile west of the proposed Project area boundary. Additional library services are available through OCPL’s Mobile Library, which visits the City’s Central Park every third Thursday for two hours (OCPL 2021). It should be noted that library services have changed in recent years with an expansion into incorporating electronic materials (e-materials). OCPL’s online services continue to expand e-materials in the form of e-books, audiobooks, magazines, movies, and other resources for the public uses (OCPL 2021). Use of e-materials facilitates the trend for accessing information online and reduces the size of “brick and mortar” facilities needed to serve the population.

However, it should be noted that the proposed Project would not, in and of itself, trigger the need for construction of new or expanded library facilities. In compliance with the Stanton Municipal Code Section 19.18.030 Development Impact Fee Program, the future proposed development would contribute its fair share through payment of library development impact fees (see RR PS-6), which would ensure that adequate library services are provided.

Therefore, with compliance with RR PS-6, the proposed Project would not result in impacts associated with the need for new or physically altered facilities. Thus, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-112

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Regulatory Requirements
Fire Protection
RR PS‐1 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for a future project, the Project Applicant shall comply with all applicable Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) codes, ordinances, and standard conditions including, but not limited to fire prevention and suppression measures, water improvement plans, fire hydrants, automatic fire extinguishing systems, fire access, access gates, combustible construction, water availability, and fire sprinkler systems.

Compliance with this regulatory requirement shall be verified by the Chief Building Official.

RR PS‐2 Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy or final building permit approval for a future project, the Project Applicant shall pay the required development impact fees for fire suppression facilities, as required by Stanton Municipal Code Section 19.18.030.

Police Protection
RR PS‐3 Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy or final building permit approval for a future project, the Project Applicant shall pay required development impact fees for police facilities as required by Stanton Municipal Code Chapter 19.18.030.

Schools
RR PS‐4 The Project Applicant shall pay all applicable development impact fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance for a future project, to the City of Stanton and the relevant school district(s)t to cover additional school services required by the new development. The applicable development impact fees would be consistent with Senate Bill (SB) 50.

Parks
RR PS‐5 The Project Applicant/Developer shall comply with the Stanton Municipal Code 19.42.090 requirement of payment of in-lieu fees for park and recreation purposes to the satisfaction of the Community Services Department, prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy or final building permit approval for a future project.

Libraries
RR PS‐6 Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy or final building permit approval for a future project, the Project Applicant/Developer shall pay required library development impact fees as required by Stanton Municipal Code 19.18.03.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-113

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to Public Services; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no new significant impacts beyond the impacts analyzed in the GP EIR.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-114

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.16 RECREATION
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
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?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the GP EIR indicated that implementation of the General Plan Update could result in significant and unavoidable impacts to the adequate availability of parkland and recreational facilities within the City of Stanton. Cumulative impacts related to parkland were also considered significant and unavoidable.

Supplemental Analysis
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood, community and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Less Than Significant Impact. According to the City’s Community Services Department, the City currently has ten community development resources of which seven are public parks; two are public recreational facilities; and one is the City’s Veterans Memorial facility. The parks and public recreation facilities total 32.4 acres. Table 4-31 City of Stanton Community Development Resources, provided below, lists the parks and public recreational facilities with amenities located within one mile of the boundaries of the Project area. The Specific Plan area currently does not include any dedicated public open space.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-115

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐31

CITY OF STANTON PARKS AND FACILITIES
Name Location
Distance
from Site
Boundary
(mile)
Size
(acres) Amenities
Stanton Civic Center 7800 Katella Avenue 0.02 0.72 Community services department front counter, staff offices,
banquet hall, and various other
recreational facilities
Veterans Memorial
Park
10970 Cedar Street 0.10 0.28 Central Memorial Monument, Wall of Inspiration, and various
park benches
Stanton Park 1111 Cedar Street 0.10 5.50 Playground structure, picnic shelters and tables, open green
space, exercise equipment
Zuniga Park 10902 Date Street 0.20 0.61 Playground structure, full court basketball court, hand ball court
Martha Wesihaupt
Linear Park
10961 Date Street 0.25 0.19 Passive green space
Stanton Central Park 10660 Western Avenue 0.25 12.0 Water play area 12-5pm daily, playground, tennis courts, skate
park, reservable picnic shelters,
sports fields (baseball, soccer),
exercise loop trail, two halfbasketball court
Harry M. Dotson Park 10350 Fern Avenue 0.30 1.30 Two playground structures covered picnic shelter and
tables, ½ court basketball area,
open green space,
walking/exercise path, water
play area, restrooms
Hollenback Park North side of Cerritos,
between Magnolia and
Dale

0.40 10.75 Two playground structures
exercise training course, open
green space, walking path,
Stanton Community
Service Center (also
known as Stanton
Family Resource
Center)
11822 Santa Paula Street 0.65 0.30
Playground structure, provides
recreation, educational, social,
and human service programs
Premier Park 8340 Briarwood Street 0.85 0.75 Playground structure, ½ court basketball area
Stanton Civic Center 7800 Katella Avenue 0.02 0.72 Community services department front counter, staff offices,
banquet hall, and various other
recreational facilities
Veterans Memorial
Park
10970 Cedar Street 0.10 0.28 Central Memorial Monument, Wall of Inspiration, and various
park benches
Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-116

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐31

CITY OF STANTON PARKS AND FACILITIES
Name Location
Distance
from Site
Boundary
(mile)
Size
(acres) Amenities
Stanton Park 1111 Cedar Street 0.10 5.50 Playground structure, picnic shelters and tables, open green
space, exercise equipment
Zuniga Park 10902 Date Street 0.20 0.61 Playground structure, full court basketball court, hand ball court
Martha Wesihaupt
Linear Park
10961 Date Street 0.25 0.19 Passive green space
Stanton Central Park 10660 Western Avenue 0.25 12.0 Water play area 12-5pm daily, playground, tennis courts, skate
park, reservable picnic shelters,
sports fields (baseball, soccer),
exercise loop trail, two halfbasketball court
Harry M. Dotson Park 10350 Fern Avenue 0.30 1.30 Two playground structures covered picnic shelter and
tables, ½ court basketball area,
open green space,
walking/exercise path, water
play area, restrooms
Hollenback Park North side of Cerritos,
between Magnolia and
Dale

0.40 10.75 Two playground structures
exercise training course, open
green space, walking path,
Stanton Community
Service Center (also
known as Stanton
Family Resource
Center)
11822 Santa Paula Street 0.65 0.30
Playground structure, provides
recreation, educational, social,
and human service programs
Premier Park 8340 Briarwood Street 0.85 0.75 Playground structure, ½ court basketball area
Source: Google Earth 2021; Stanton 2021b
The Stanton Parks and Recreation Master Plan, adopted in November 2005, states the City has an established citywide parkland level of service goal of 0.94 or more acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, which is lower than the Subdivision Map Act and Quimby Act (Section 66477 of the Government Code) criteria of three acres per 1,000 people (Stanton 2008a).

This would require a total of approximately 39.58 acres of local parkland to serve the current population of 39,573 residents (DOF 2021). However, as discussed previously, the City currently has 32.4 acres of parks and public recreation facilities, and therefore, the City has a parkland deficiency of approximately 7.18 acres.

The proposed Project would generate new population in the City, as indicated in Checklist Response 4.14a., which would increase demand for parks and recreational facilities. Given Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-117

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR the City’s population generation factor of 3.46 persons per unit (DOF 2021), the Project would generate approximately 481 residents. Using the City’s current parkland requirement of 0.94 acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents, the Project would be required to provide

0.45 acre of parkland. However, the Subdivision Map Act and Quimby Act require a parkland requirement of 3.0 acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents. Using the Quimby requirement, the Project would be required to provide 1.4 acres of parkland. However, it is noted that for new residential development, parkland dedication requirements would comply with Chapter 19.42 of the Stanton Municipal Code.

While not contributing directly towards a parkland requirement, the Specific Plan development standards include provisions for 200 square feet private open space per unit.

This open space may be either private, common, or include both. Common open space would also be provided with shared access for all building tenants. These common open spaces may include courtyards, gardens, plazas, dog runs, pool decks, rooftop amenity areas, and playground areas. Additionally, while the Specific Plan area currently does not include dedicated public open space, the vision for the open space framework is to locate open space throughout the Specific Plan area. More specifically, the Specific Plan area would include a pocket park of minimum 10,000-square-feet for APN 126-562-08. Additionally, a plaza (occupying an entire lot) will be provided within the Retail-Oriented Mixed-Use (minimum of 7,500 square feet). Alternative development requirements for individual lot developments will be identified. Exhibit 3-1, Planning Areas and Plan Elements, depicts three potential open space locations within the Specific Plan area that are anticipated to function as the primary public open spaces within the Project area.

Regardless of the amount of open space provided, future projects’ applicants would be responsible for paying park in lieu fees (RR PS-5 in Section 4.15, Public Services) for future project-specific parkland requirements. Therefore, compliance with RR PS-5 would ensure substantial physical deterioration of park facilities would not be accelerated. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 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. The proposed Project is a Specific Plan development that currently is devoid of dedicated public open space. The Specific Plan proposes an open space concept that includes three public accessible parks/open spaces, as discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description. These three parks/open spaces (i.e., Beach Boulevard Plaza, the Eastern Neighborhood Park, and the Southern Pocket Park) are conceptual in nature and their locations may change but would be in the same general location. The Beach Boulevard Plaza with a minimum of 7,500 square feet and occupying the entire lot, will be located within the Retail-Oriented Mixed-Use. The vision is for retail uses to activate the open space by increasing pedestrian activity. While the Plaza is for more general passive recreation, the Eastern Neighborhood Park will include outdoor amenities and opportunities for active recreation and exercise, playground/tot lot, and small sport courts. The Southern Pocket Park, of minimum10,000 square feet is required for APN 126-562-08, would also provide areas for exercise and/or passive activities and playground/tot lot. The applicants for future Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-118

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR projects would pay the park in lieu fees to provide funds for improvement of City parks on future projects (RR PS-5). In addition to payment of the necessary park in lieu fees, future development projects would be designed to accommodate park facilities if warranted to the satisfaction of the City’s Planning Division. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a substantial increased demand for recreational facilities, requiring the construction of new parks that would adversely affect the environment. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirements
RR PS-5 in Section 4.15, Public Services applies.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to Recreation; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no new significant impacts beyond the impacts analyzed in the GP EIR.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-119

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b) Would the project 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?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the GP EIR indicated that implementation of the General Plan Update could cause a substantial increase in traffic volumes in relation to the capacity of the street system; could exceed standards established by the Orange County Congestion Management Program; could result in inadequate design features or incompatible uses; could result in inadequate emergency access; could result in inadequate parking; and could result in demand for transit service enhancing policies supporting alternative transportation. Cumulative impacts related to inducing traffic growth resulting in significant traffic and circulation was considered less than significant.

Introduction
A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) was prepared by Psomas for the Town Center Specific Plan Project, in July 2020. The findings of the TIS are incorporated in the following analyses, and the TIS is included as Appendix F in this Subsequent IS/MND.

Existing Conditions
Study Area
The Town Center Specific Plan includes a 156.9-acre area in the northern portion of the City of Stanton. The Specific Plan area is surrounded by Cerritos Avenue to the north, Dale Avenue to the east, Katella Avenue to the south, and Rose Street to the west. The study intersections listed below were selected in coordination with the City engineer.

1. Cerritos Avenue and Beach Boulevard

2. Main Street and Beach Boulevard

3. Pacific Street and Beach Boulevard

4. Central Avenue and Beach Boulevard
Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-120

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

5. Katella Avenue and Beach Boulevard

6. Cerritos Avenue and Rose Street

7. Cerritos Avenue and Court Avenue

8. Cerritos Avenue and Fern Avenue

9. Cerritos Avenue and Ashdale Street

10. Cerritos Avenue and Dale Avenue

11. Standustrial Street and Dale Avenue

12. Katella Avenue and Court Avenue
Exhibit 4-3 shows the study intersections and Exhibit 4-4 shows the existing lane geometry at each study intersection.

Roadway Network
There are several existing roadways in the Project study area, as discussed, below:

Rose Street is a discontinuous two-lane undivided roadway oriented in the north-south direction. The roadway terminates northerly at Cerritos Avenue and southerly at Katella Avenue and is halved by the Union Pacific Railroad. On-street parking is permitted.

Beach Boulevard is an eight-lane divided roadway, which serves as a State Route (SR-39).

The roadway is classified as an 8-lane Smart Street in the 2022 Master Plan of Arterial Highways by Orange County, California and has a posted speed limit of 45 mph. On street parking is prohibited in the study area.

Court Avenue is a two lane, undivided roadway. Court Avenue terminates northerly at Cerritos Avenue and southerly at Katella Avenue and is discontinuous at the Union Pacific Railroad and Union Pacific Corridors. On-street parking is permitted.

Fern Avenue is a two lane, undivided roadway with a posted speed limit of 25 mph in the Specific Plan area. On-street parking is permitted.

Ashdale Street is a two lane, undivided roadway in a residential area which ends in a cul-desac approximately 500 feet north of Cerritos Avenue and 150 feet south of Cerritos Avenue.

On-street parking is permitted.

Dale Avenue is a four-lane roadway with a two-way left turn lane in the study area. The roadway in the study area is classified as a secondary arterial by Orange County. The posted speed limit is 40 mph and on-street parking is prohibited between Cerritos Avenue and Katella Avenue.

Cerritos Road is a four lane, undivided roadway west of Beach Boulevard and becomes a four-lane divided roadway with segments of raised medians east of Beach Boulevard. The roadway in the study area is classified as a secondary arterial by Orange County. The posted speed limit is generally 40 mph in the study area. On-street parking is prohibited.

Source: Psomas 2023
(11/13/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\KTG\3KTG010400\Graphics\MND\ex_Study_Area_Intersections.pdf D:\Projects\3KTG\010400\GRAPHICS\MND\ex_Study_Area_Intersections_20231113.ai Exhibit 4-3
Town Center Specific Plan Project
Study Area Intersections
Source: Psomas 2023
(11/13/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\KTG\3KTG010400\Graphics\MND\ex_Lane_Geometry.pdf D:\Projects\3KTG\010400\GRAPHICS\MND\ex_Lane Geometry_20231113.ai Exhibit 4-4
Town Center Specific Plan Project
Lane Geometry
Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-121

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Main Streetis a two lane, undivided roadway oriented in the east-west direction. Main Street terminates on the west at Rose Street and on the east at Fern Avenue. On-street parking is permitted.

Pacific Street is also a two lane, undivided roadway. The roadway terminates on the west at Rose Street and on the east at Fern Avenue, trending in an east-west direction generally along the Pacific Union Pacific Railroad. On-street parking is permitted.

Central Avenue is a two lane, undivided roadway trending in an east-west direction. The roadway becomes Grand Avenue east of Beach Boulevard. On-street parking is permitted.

Standustrial Street is a two lane, undivided roadway in an industrial area. The roadway is approximately 950 feet long west of Dale Avenue and serves a number of businesses along both sides of its frontage. Although on-street parking is not specifically permitted, portions of the roadway are sometimes used for parking.

Katella Road is a six lane, divided roadway with a posted speed limit of 40 mph west of Beach Boulevard in the study area. East of Beach Boulevard through Dale Avenue, the roadway becomes a six-lane roadway with a two-way left turn lane with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. The roadway is classified as a 6-lane Smart Street by Orange County. On-street parking is prohibited.

Traffic Volumes
Traffic volume data was collected at the 12 study intersections in February 2022 from 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and from 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM. The overall peak hours for the study area were found to be from 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM and from 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM. Exhibit 4-5 shows the existing traffic volumes. All collected traffic volume data is included in Appendix A of the TIA (Appendix F of the Subsequent IS/MND).

Analysis Methodology
Because the Subsequent IS/MND is tiering off the General Plan EIR, the discussion contained in this section includes an analysis of Level of Service (LOS) for the Specific Plan area intersections to determine if the additional units exacerbate the previously disclosed LOS impacts. LOS is the typical measure used to characterize the quality of traffic operations at an intersection or roadway segment. LOS A represents relatively free operating conditions, whereas LOS F has unstable flow and congestion with volumes at or near the capacity of the facility. Excessive delays and queues can occur when the LOS is not acceptable. Table 4-32 provides descriptions and thresholds for LOS A through LOS F for each intersection evaluation methodology used in this report.

Source: Psomas 2023
(11/13/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\KTG\3KTG010400\Graphics\MND\ex_Existing_Peak_Hour.pdf D:\Projects\3KTG\010400\GRAPHICS\MND\ex_Existing_Peak_Hour_20231113.ai Exhibit 4-5
Town Center Specific Plan Project
Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-122

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐32

INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
Level of
Service
(LOS)
Description
Intersection Volume
to Capacity (V/C)
Ratio / ICU Value
Signalized
Intersection Delay
(sec/veh)
Unsignalized
Intersection Delay
(sec/veh)
A Primarily free-flow
operation 0.000 - 0.600 ≤10 ≤10
B Reasonably unimpeded
operation >0.600 - 0.700 >10 and ≤20 >10 and ≤15
C Stable operation >0.700 - 0.800 >20 and ≤35 >15 and ≤25 D
Less than stable
conditions - small
increases in flow may
cause substantial
increases in delay
>0.700 - 0.800 >35 and ≤55 >25 and ≤35
E Unstable operation and
significant delay >0.900 - 1.000 >55 and ≤80 >35 and ≤50 F
Congested conditions,
including flow at
extremely low speed
> 1.000 >80 >50
The traffic generated by the Project or by the Project in combination with other projects in the area could worsen the LOS of a facility. To assess the potential traffic impacts due to the background traffic growth and completion of existing and future projects, the following scenarios were evaluated:
 Existing Conditions
 Existing Plus Project Conditions
 2050 Cumulative Developments Conditions
 2050 Cumulative Developments Plus Project Conditions
The City of Stanton does not have published guidelines for analyzing the impacts to intersections. Therefore, this TIS follows the 2021 Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Congestion Management Program Report (CMP), which applies the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology at signalized intersections and the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology at unsignalized intersections. The methodologies and significance thresholds are discussed further in the following sections.

Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU)
The ICU methodology is used to determine the operating LOS of signalized intersections. This methodology requires the calculation of the intersection volume/capacity (V/C) ratio, which is the summation of critical lane group flow ratios with a yellow clearance adjustment. The LOS estimated by the ICU methodology is directly related to the intersection V/C ratio. A lost time factor of 0.05 should be included in the calculations.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-123

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR To determine whether the addition of Project-generated trips at a signalized study intersection results in a significant impact, the City of Stanton has established the following threshold of significance consistent with the CMP: A significant impact occurs when a proposed project increases traffic demand at a signalized study intersection operating at a deficient LOS (LOS F) by one percent or more of capacity (V/C ⩾ 0.01), worsening LOS F (V/C > 1.00).

Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)
This study applies the HCM methodology to evaluate unsignalized intersections, which defines LOS based on delay. The analyses for the unsignalized intersections were conducted using the software Synchro and SimTraffic. The City of Stanton has not established thresholds of significant impacts for unsignalized intersections.

Vehicle Miles Traveled
The proposed Project is also subject to VMT evaluation to comply with Senate Bill 743. The County of Orange methodology is used, starting with the County’s screening tool to determine if the Project can be screened out and assumed to have a less than significant impact.

Supplemental Analysis
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Construction Traffic
Less Than Significant Impact. Even though detailed information about future projects may not be known at this time, it is reasonable to assume that construction related trips associated with trucks and employees traveling to and from the site in the morning and afternoon would result in some minor traffic delays. Potential traffic interference caused by construction vehicles may create a short-term impact. However, it should be noted that the potential construction related impacts would be temporary and would not result in long-term increase in VMT.

To minimize the potential disruptions on the local circulation system and to facilitate the movement of construction traffic, it is assumed that the City would require implementation of a construction management plan, which is provided as regulatory requirement RR TRAN-1. With compliance with City requirements, the future projects would not conflict with applicable plans, ordinance, or policy, and construction impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-124

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Projected Traffic Area Volumes
Existing Project Trip Generation
The existing project trip generation for the proposed Project was estimated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. Trip generation rates of the retail and industrial land uses were using the average of multiple retail and industrial land uses, respectively, which represent the mix of existing uses in the Project area, as shown in Table 2. Based on the assumptions, the 156.9-acre Specific Plan area generates approximately 9,113 daily trips in the existing year due to the Project, including 692 trips in the AM peak hour and 1,031 trips in the PM peak hour.

Project Traffic Distribution
Based on the location of the Stanton Town Center Specific Plan area and distribution of regional access to the area, it is estimated that approximately 5 percent of traffic would access the site to/from the west and 15 percent of traffic to/from the east via Cerritos Avenue; 5 percent to/from the west and 15 percent to/from the east via Katella Avenue; and 30 percent to/from the north and 30 percent to/from the south via Beach Boulevard. Exhibit 4-6 shows the assumed external trip distribution for the Stanton Town Center Specific Plan area.

Proposed Project Trip Generation
The proposed project trip generation for the Project was also based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. A similar variety of retail and industrial uses were used to estimate the trip generation for the Project area, but the breakdown was updated to better represent anticipated future conditions. Table 4-34 shows that the proposed Project is expected to generate 23,705 daily trips in the buildout year, including 1,845 trips in the AM peak hour and 2,278 trips in the PM peak hour.

While the Specific Plan area would increase in residential multifamily units, retail/commercial, and light industrial uses through new development and redevelopment, it should be noted that, this Subsequent IS/MND analyzes the potential impacts of the additional 139 multi-family dwelling units only. The existing General Plan for the City of Stanton allows for a total of 1,399 multi-family units within the Town Center Specific Plan area. Since 2008, 4 units have been built, resulting in a remaining capacity of 1,395 multifamily units. The Town Center Specific Plan would allow for an additional 139 units, increasing the remaining capacity to 1,534 multi-family units.

Project Traffic Volumes
Using the project trip generation and trip distribution, the estimated existing and future Project traffic volumes at each of the study intersections were calculated and are shown on Exhibit 4-7 and Exhibit 4-8, respectively.

Source: Psomas 2023
(11/13/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\KTG\3KTG010400\Graphics\MND\ex_External_Trip_Distribution.pdf D:\Projects\3KTG\010400\GRAPHICS\MND\ex_External_Trip_Distribution_20231113.ai Exhibit 4-6
Town Center Specific Plan Project
External Trip Distribution
Source: Psomas 2023
(11/13/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\KTG\3KTG010400\Graphics\MND\ex_Estimated_Existing_Project_Area_Volumes.pdf D:\Projects\3KTG\010400\GRAPHICS\MND\ex_Estimated_Existing_Project_Area_Volumes_20231113.ai Exhibit 4-7
Town Center Specific Plan Project
Estimated Existing Project Area Traffic Volumes
Source: Psomas 2023
(11/13/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\KTG\3KTG010400\Graphics\MND\ex_Proposed_Project_Volume.pdf D:\Projects\3KTG\010400\GRAPHICS\MND\ex_Proposed_Project_Volume_20231113.ai Exhibit 4-8
Town Center Specific Plan Project
Proposed Project Traffic Volume
Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-125

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐33

EXISTING TRIP GENERATION
ITE LU 210 ‐ Single Family Residential
Units 122
Period Trips/Unit Trips % In % Out Trips In Trips Out
AM Peak 0.70 85 26 74 22 63
PM Peak 0.94 115 63 37 72 42
Daily 9.43 1,150 50 50 575 575
ITE LU 220 ‐ Multifamily Residential (Low‐Rise)
Units 74
Period Trips/Unit Trips % In % Out Trips In Trips Out
AM Peak 0.40 30 24 76 7 22
PM Peak 0.51 38 63 37 24 14
Daily 6.74 499 50 50 249 249
Retail*
1,000 SF 155.986
Period Trips/Unit Trips % In % Out Trips In Trips Out
AM Peak 2.02 315 70 30 221 94
PM Peak 3.90 609 42 58 255 354
Daily 31.08 4,848 50 50 2,424 2,424
Industrial**
1,000 SF 962.611
Period Trips/Unit Trips % In % Out Trips In Trips Out
AM Peak 0.27 262 88 12 230 31
PM Peak 0.28 270 14 86 38 232
Daily 2.72 2,616 50 50 1,308 1,308
TOTAL
Period Total Trips Trips In Trips Out
AM Peak 692 481 211
PM Peak 1,031 389 642
Daily 9,113 4,557 4,557
*Assumes combination of general retail (LU 822), small office building (LU 712), and auto parts and service center (LU 943) to account for variety of uses in retail areas. **Assumes combination of industrial park (LU 130) and warehousing (LU 150) to account to variety of uses in industrial areas.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-126

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐34

PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
ITE LU 210 – Single Family Residential
Units 122
Period Trips/Unit Trips % In % Out Trips In Trips Out
AM Peak 0.70 85 26 74 22 63
PM Peak 0.94 115 63 37 72 42
Daily 9.43 1,150 50 50 575 575
ITE LU 220 – Multifamily Residential (Low‐Rise)
Units 384
Period Trips/Unit Trips % In % Out Trips In Trips Out
AM Peak 0.40 154 24 76 37 117
PM Peak 0.51 196 63 37 123 72
Daily 6.74 2,588 50 50 1,294 1,294
ITE LU 220 – Multifamily Residential (Low‐Rise)
Units 2,570
Period Trips/Unit Trips % In % Out Trips In Trips Out
AM Peak 0.37 951 23 77 219 732
PM Peak 0.39 1,002 61 39 611 391
Daily 4.54 11,668 50 50 5,834 5,834
Retail*
1,000 SF 161.172
Period Trips/Unit Trips % In % Out Trips In Trips Out
AM Peak 2.02 325 70 30 228 97
PM Peak 3.90 629 42 58 264 365
Daily 31.08 5,009 50 50 2,504 2,504
Industrial**
1,000 SF 1,110.344
Period Trips/Unit Trips % In % Out Trips In Trips Out
AM Peak 0.30 330 80 20 264 66
PM Peak 0.30 336 23 77 78 258
Daily 2.96 3,289 50 50 1,645 1,645
TOTAL
Period Total Trips Trips In Trips Out
AM Peak 1,845 770 1,075
PM Peak 2,278 1,149 1,129
Daily 23,705 11,852 11,852
*Assumes combination of general retail (LU 822), small office building (LU 712), and auto parts and service center (LU 943) to account for variety of uses in retail areas **Assumes combination of industrial park (LU 130) and warehousing (LU 150) to account for variety of uses in industrial areas

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-127

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR The table below, reflects the 139 units, which are being analyzed in this Subsequent IS/MND. As explained above, the General Plan allows for a total of 1,399 multi-family units within the specific plan area. In light of development of 4 units since 2008 and the currently proposed 139 units, the remaining capacity is 1,534 multi-family units.

ITE LU 220 ‐ Multifamily Residential (Low‐Rise)
Units 139
Period Trips/Unit Trips % In % Out Trips In Trips Out
AM Peak 0.40 56 24 76 13 42
PM Peak 0.51 71 63 37 45 26
Daily 6.74 937 50 50 468 468
Existing Year (2022)
Existing Plus Project Traffic Volumes
The Existing Plus Project traffic volumes were estimated by first removing the estimated existing Project traffic volumes from the existing peak hour traffic volumes then adding the total proposed Project traffic volumes, as shown on Exhibit 4-9. The Existing Plus Project analysis is included in this report because the Project is long-term and does not include a set opening year.

Buildout Year (2050)
Background Growth
The Traffic and Circulation section of the 2008 General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report indicates that there would be little to no growth in the Project area. Therefore, to be conservative, a 0.5 percent per year growth was assumed to calculate background growth for all the study intersections.

Buildout Year Traffic Volumes
The buildout year traffic volumes are the anticipated traffic volumes in 2050 without the Project, which include the existing Project area traffic volumes. The 0.5 percent annual growth rate was applied to the existing traffic volumes to estimate buildout year volumes without the Project. Exhibit 4-10 shows the 2050 cumulative traffic volumes.

Buildout Year Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Exhibit 4-11 depicts the cumulative plus Project traffic volumes in 2050 at each of the study intersections.

Source: Psomas 2023
(11/13/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\KTG\3KTG010400\Graphics\MND\ex_Existing_Plus_Project_Volume.pdf D:\Projects\3KTG\010400\GRAPHICS\MND\ex_Existing_Plus_Project_Volume_20231113.ai Exhibit 4-9
Town Center Specific Plan Project
Existing Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Source: Psomas 2023
(11/13/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\KTG\3KTG010400\Graphics\MND\ex_2050 Cumulative_Traffic_Volumes.pdf D:\Projects\3KTG\010400\GRAPHICS\MND\ex_2050 Cumulative_Traffic_Volumes_20231113.ai Exhibit 4-10
Town Center Specific Plan Project
2050 Cumulative Traffic Volumes
Source: Psomas 2023
(11/13/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\KTG\3KTG010400\Graphics\MND\ex_2050 Cumulative_Plus_Project_Traffic_Volumes.pdf D:\Projects\3KTG\010400\GRAPHICS\MND\ex_2050 Cumulative_Plus_Project_Traffic_Volumes_20231113.ai Exhibit 4-11
Town Center Specific Plan Project
2050 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-128

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Operational Analysis – Existing Year (2022)
Existing Conditions
As previously discussed, the signalized intersections were evaluated using the ICU methodology. Most of the unsignalized intersections were analyzed using the HCM methodology in Synchro, but the unsignalized intersections on Beach Boulevard were evaluated via SimTraffic, as the HCM methodology cannot be applied to intersections with more than three through lanes on the major approach. For existing conditions, the ICU spreadsheets and HCM reports are included in Appendix B of the TIA (Appendix F of the Subsequent IS/MND). Table 4-35 shows the resulting LOS for each of the study intersections under existing conditions. As seen in the table, the three signalized intersections currently operate at LOS B or better in both peak hours.

In addition, the worst minor street (stop controlled) movement would operate at LOS F in both peak hours at the intersections of Main Street and Beach Boulevard (#2), Pacific Street and Beach Boulevard (#3), and Central Street and Beach Boulevard (#4). However, in SimTraffic simulations, vehicles are not able to make two-stage left turns at unsignalized divided highway intersections. Therefore, the delays may be lower in reality if drivers make two-stage left-turns at unsignalized intersections on Beach Boulevard.

Existing Plus Project Conditions
The same approach was used to evaluate existing conditions plus the Project; the full buildout (2050) version of the Project was assumed in this analysis. It is noted that this analysis is serving as the opening year in the TIS. The ICU and HCM reports for existing conditions plus Project are included in Appendix C of the TIA (Appendix F of the Subsequent IS/MND). The resulting level of service for each of the study intersections for existing plus Project conditions is also shown in Table 4-35.

As shown in the table, the signalized intersections would continue to operate at LOS D or better with the Project. The worst minor street movement would operate at LOS F at four intersections, including the three which would operate at LOS F under existing conditions and the intersection of Cerritos Avenue and Fern Avenue, which would deteriorate from LOS C to LOS F in the PM peak hour with the Project. In addition, the intersection of Cerritos Avenue and Ashdale Street would operate at LOS E in the PM peak hour with the Project.

Existing Plus Project Impact Evaluation
Table 4-35 shows the LOS for existing and existing plus Project conditions for all study intersections as well as the increase in V/C for the signalized intersections. As indicated above, a significant impact occurs when a proposed Project increases traffic demand at a signalized study intersection operating at a deficient LOS (LOS F) by one percent or more of capacity (V/C ⩾ 0.01), worsening LOS F (V/C > 1.00). As shown in the Table 4-35, none of the signalized intersections would have a significant impact for the existing plus Project condition. In addition, because there are no operational thresholds for unsignalized intersections, no improvements are needed at those locations.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-129

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Operational Analysis – Buildout Year (2050)
2050 Cumulative Conditions
As previously discussed, the signalized intersections were evaluated using the ICU methodology, and the unsignalized intersections were evaluated using the HCM methodology. The ICU and HCM reports for 2050 cumulative conditions are included in Appendix D of the TIA (Appendix F of the Subsequent IS/MND), and the level of service for each of the study intersections for the 2050 cumulative conditions is shown in Table 4-36.

As seen in the table, the signalized intersections are expected to operate at LOS D or better for 2050 cumulative conditions without the Project in both peak hours. The worst minor street (stop controlled) movement would operate at LOS F in both peak hours, at the intersections of Main Street and Beach Boulevard (#2), Pacific Street and Beach Boulevard (#3), and Central Street and Beach Boulevard (#4). In addition, the intersection of Cerritos Avenue and Fern Street is expected to operate at LOS E in the PM peak hour. 2050 Cumulative Plus Project Conditions
For 2050 cumulative plus Project conditions, the same approach was used to evaluate the study intersections, assuming full buildout of the Project. The ICU and HCM reports for 2050 cumulative plus Project conditions are included in Appendix E of the TIA (Appendix F of the Subsequent IS/MND). Table 4-36 shows the resulting level of service for each of the study intersections for 2050 cumulative plus Project conditions.

The signalized intersections are expected to operate at LOS E or better in both peak hours with the Project. In addition, the three minor street movements expected to operate at LOS F without the Project would continue to operate at LOS F. The Cerritos Avenue/Fern Avenue minor street movement would deteriorate to LOS E in the AM peak hour and LOS F in the PM peak hour, and the Cerritos Avenue/Ashdale Street intersection would deteriorate to LOS E in the PM peak hour.
2050 Cumulative Plus Project Significant Impact Evaluation The increase in ICU due to the Project traffic is shown in Table 4-36. A significant impact occurs when a proposed project increases traffic demand at a signalized study intersection operating at a deficient LOS (LOS F) by one percent or more of capacity (V/C ⩾ 0.01), worsening LOS F (V/C > 1.00). As the signalized intersections are expected to operate at LOS E or better with the Project, the Project is not anticipated to have an impact on operations. In addition, as there are no operational thresholds for unsignalized intersections, no improvements are needed at those locations.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-130

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐35

EXISTING PLUS PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS
Intersection Intersection Control
Existing Existing + Project Increase in V/C or Delay(s) Significant Impact? AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

AM PM AM PM
Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS 1 Cerritos Ave/Beach Blvd Signalized 0.66 B 0.69 B 0.80 D 0.84 D 0.14 0.15 NO NO 2 Main St/Beach Blvd Unsignalized 1818.4* F 2035.2* F 2980.8* F 2836.4* F NO NO 3 Pacific St/Beach Blvd Unsignalized 867.5* F 1791.6* F 2443.3* F 2781.2* F NO NO 4 Central Ave/Beach Blvd Unsignalized 1654.8* F 1569.7* F 2165.1* F 749.9* F NO NO 5 Katella Ave/Beach Blvd Signalized 0.66 B 0.65 B 0.71 C 0.70 B 0.05 0.04 NO NO 6 Cerritos Ave/Rose St Unsignalized 19.4 C 23.5 C 20.5 C 25.6 D NO NO 7 Cerritos Ave/Court Ave Unsignalized 12.5 B 15.2 C 18.3 C 24.7 C NO NO 8 Cerritos Ave/Fern Ave Unsignalized 20.4 C 24.8 C 29.5 D 57.8 F NO NO 9 Cerritos Ave/Ashdale St Unsignalized 19.3 C 23.7 C 25.2 D 37.3 E NO NO 10 Cerritos Ave/Dale Ave Signalized 0.45 A 0.44 A 0.51 A 0.55 A 0.06 0.11 NO NO 11 Standustrial St/Dale Ave Unsignalized 13.0 B 13.5 B 14.1 B 14.5 B NO NO 12 Katella Ave/Court Ave Unsignalized 18.6 C 20.4 C 18.2 C 20.7 C NO NO *Delays may be lower if drivers make two-stage left turns **Highest lane delay for stop-controlled movements at TWSC intersections ***No significant impact because intersection delay is not defined for TWSC TABLE 4‐36
2050 CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS
Intersection Intersection Control
2050 Without Project 2050 Cumulative + Project Increase in V/C or Delay(s) Significant Impact? AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
AM PM AM PM Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS 1 Cerritos Ave/Beach Blvd Signalized 0.75 C 0.79 C 0.89 D 0.93 E 0.13 0.14 NO NO 2 Main St/Beach Blvd Unsignalized 2047.8* F 1891.4* F 2951.0* F 3096.4* F NO NO 3 Pacific St/Beach Blvd Unsignalized 1508.6* F 1777.6* F 2124.3* F 2872.4* F NO NO 4 Central Ave/Beach Blvd Unsignalized 2236.5* F 1460.9* F 1882.2* F 695.4* F NO NO 5 Katella Ave/Beach Blvd Signalized 0.75 C 0.75 C 0.79 C 0.78 C 0.05 0.03 NO NO 6 Cerritos Ave/Rose St Unsignalized 23.4 C 29.8 D 24.8 C 32.5 D NO NO 7 Cerritos Ave/Court Ave Unsignalized 13.7 B 17.5 C 20.7 C 30.6 D NO NO 8 Cerritos Ave/Fern Ave Unsignalized 28.7 D 36.5 E 46.7 E 103.4 F NO NO 9 Cerritos Ave/Ashdale St Unsignalized 24.4 C 30.2 D 32.2 D 39.9 E NO NO 10 Cerritos Ave/Dale Ave Signalized 0.51 A 0.50 A 0.55 A 0.59 A 0.04 0.10 NO NO 11 Standustrial St/Dale Ave Unsignalized 14.0 B 14.5 B 15.0 B 15.5 C NO NO 12 Katella Ave/Court Ave Unsignalized 22.3 C 24.2 C 20.9 C 24.2 C NO NO *Delays may be lower if drivers make two-stage left turns **Highest lane delay for stop-controlled movements at TWSC intersections ***No significant impact because intersection delay is not defined for TWSC Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-131

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Circulation System
The Town Center Specific Plan is planned as a mixed-use neighborhood that blends existing uses with new development, maximizes access to existing transit opportunities, and includes a pedestrian and bicycle transportation network. The Specific Plan also incorporates conceptual future transit opportunities into its design, while ensuring that the success of the multi-modal network does not depend on the completion or final details of potential future transit opportunities.

The Town Center Specific Plan incorporates a “complete streets” approach that prioritizes creation of a true multi-modal transportation system and that creates new connections throughout the Specific Plan area.

Pedestrian
Circulation enhancements are envisioned throughout the Specific Plan area to facilitate multi-modal connectivity increase pedestrian safety. Design features planned as part of intersection enhancement include but are not limited to: pavement enhancements such as textured and/or colored concrete or pavers; pedestrian bult-out crossings to increase pedestrian visibility; and new crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists.

Additionally, as part of future enhancements, a potential future trail is proposed along the existing east-west rail corridor traversing the Specific Plan area. This potential future trail is to connect to another potential trail along the Stanton Storm Channel, which would also provide connectivity to the northeastern portion of the Project site.

Court Avenue is also envisioned to include additional pedestrian enhancements, including a future connection across the east-west rail corridor. The pedestrian-focused enhancements along Court Avenue run from Katella Avenue north to Main Street, increasing connectivity between the southern and northern portions of the Plan Area.

Thus, the Project would not result in a conflict with, nor would it impact the existing public sidewalks or pedestrian travel.

Transit
The Specific Plan area is served by OCTA Routes 29 and 50, as depicted on Exhibit 2-1, Opportunities and Challenges. A potential future transit station is identified on the OCTA property located along Beach Boulevard. This transit center could connect users of a potential future light-rail along the former Pacific Electric rail corridor to the multi-modal network within the Specific Plan Area.

With the vision of facilitating multi-model connectivity, the proposed Project would not result in a conflict with, nor would it impact the existing transit circulation in the area.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-132

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Bicycle
The Town Center Specific Plan promotes bicycling as a means of mobility. As indicated above, as part of intersection improvements, new crossings are planned for pedestrian and bicyclists. The Specific Plan recognizes the needs of bicycle users and aims to create a safe bicycle network. Thus, in light of the proposed enhancements and design guidelines promoting multi-modal circulation, the Project would not result in a conflict with, nor would it impact the existing bicycle circulation and bike lanes in the area. b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less Than Significant Impact
Senate Bill (SB) 743 Compliance
On December 28, 2018, the California Natural Resources Agency adopted revised CEQA Guidelines. Among the changes to the guidelines was the removal of vehicle delay and LOS from consideration for transportation impacts under CEQA. With the adopted guidelines, transportation impacts are to be evaluated based on a project’s effect on vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Lead agencies are allowed to continue using their current impact criteria, or to opt into the revised transportation guidelines. However, the new guidelines were to be used starting July 1, 2020, as required in CEQA section 15064.3.

Using the County of Orange screening tool, the entire Project area is shown to be located in a transit priority area (TPA). A TPA is defined as “an area within one-half mile of a major transit stop that is existing or planned, if the planned stop is scheduled to be completed within the planning horizon included in a Transportation Improvement Program.” A major transit stop is defined as “a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.” A TPA corridor is one with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.

If a project is in a TPA, it is assumed to have a less than significant transportation impact unless the project is inconsistent with the RTP for the area; has a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75; provides an excessive amount of parking; or reduces the number of affordable units.

The City indicated that although the bus lines on Katella Avenue and Beach Boulevard are considered high quality transit corridors, but the current bus schedules do not meet the thresholds. However, because this is a long-term project, future plans for transit should be considered when determining whether a project is located in a TPA. Therefore, the County of Orange screening tool was determined to be appropriate for evaluation, and the preliminary screening indicates that the Project would be exempt from a VMT analysis.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-133

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR At this stage of development, the FAR and parking are not determined. However, it is estimated that the FAR would be approximately 0.75 for the Project area, which meets the requirement for VMT exemption in a TPA. Therefore, it is assumed at this time that the Project would result in a less than significant impact on transportation. Future individual development projects within the study area would not necessarily be exempt if they conduct separate VMT screening, but that can be determined at the time of implementation. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses?
Less Than SignificantImpact. The Town Center Specific Plan is within an urban setting and can be accessed from multiple roadways in the area. There is already a circulation infrastructure in place, and the Specific Plan proposes further enhancement and improvements. Currently there are no hazardous situations or incompatibility of uses in place that would further get exacerbated by the proposed Project. Therefore, based on the above analyses, the proposed Project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature such as sharp curves or dangerous intersections. Additionally, the proposed Project would not result in incompatibility of land uses, as discussed in Section

4.11, Land Use and Planning. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less Than SignificantImpact. The Town Center Specific Plan is within an urban setting and can be accessed from multiple roadways in the area. A hierarchy of roadways facilitate circulation and reaching destination within the Project area. The Town Center Specific Plan proposes a number of circulation enhancement and improvements that would further access and connectivity. In addition to improvements specifically proposed for Beach Boulevard and Main Street, improvements are also proposed to four intersections, including Cerritos Avenue and a future street; and Dale Street and a future street.

With the existing infrastructure in place and the improvements/enhancements proposed, no potential impacts pertaining to inadequate emergency access are anticipated. The improvements would occur in compliance with City standards and would not impede access during an emergency. Additionally, during demolition and construction activities of future projects, provisions would be in place, including but not limited to, staging construction equipment on the site; avoiding blocking the roadways surrounding the Project site; and maintain fire/emergency access to the site in compliance with California Fire Code Chapter 33, Fire Safety as well as City of Stanton Fire Code (Chapter 17.08). Therefore, potential impacts pertaining to inadequate emergency access would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirements
RR TRAN‐1 To ensure impacts to the surrounding street system are kept at a minimum, a Construction Management Plan shall be developed for a future project, in coordination with the City of Stanton, prior to commencement of construction.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-134

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR The Construction Management Plan shall meet standards established in the current California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device (MUTCD) as well as City of Stanton requirements.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to Transportation; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no new significant impacts beyond the impacts analyzed in the GP EIR.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-135

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a 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:

1. 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

2. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in 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.
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The 2008 GP EIR did not include a Tribal Cultural Resources section.

Introduction
This section evaluates the Specific Plan Project’s potential to have adverse effects on Tribal Cultural Resources. The analysis in this section is based on the results of the archaeological record searches conducted by the SCCIC and requests for consultation with California Native American Tribes, conducted by the City of Stanton for the Project, as required by CEQA per Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) and Senate Bill 18 (SB 18).

Additionally, an inquiry was made to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) by Psomas to request a review of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) database regarding the possibility of Native American cultural resources and/or sacred places in the Project vicinity that are not documented on other databases. The NAHC completed its SLF search on April 6, 2021.

The results of the SLF check conducted through the NAHC was negative for Native American cultural resources and/or sacred places in the Project vicinity.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-136

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR The City of Stanton initiated consultation on August 23, 2021, by notifying the City’s consultation list of the Town Center Specific Plan Project as required by AB 52 and SB 18.

The City received two responses from interested tribal representatives:
 September 9, 2021, Shasta C. Gaughen, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, Pala Band of Mission Indians: A response was sent on behalf of Robert Smith, Tribal Chairman, which determined that the Project area is not within the boundaries of the recognized Pala Indian Reservation. The Project is also beyond the boundaries of the territory that the Tribe considers its Traditional Use Area (TUA). Therefore, the Tribe has declined AB 52 consultation at this time but does not waive their right to request consultation under other applicable laws in the future. At this time, the Tribe defers to the wishes of Tribes in closer proximity to the Project area.  September 27, 2021, Jamie LaBrake, Director of Sycuan Cultural Department, Sycuan Band of Kumeyaay Nation: A response was sent on behalf of Cody Martinez, Tribal Chairman, which determined that the Project is not within the boundaries of the recognized Sycuan Indian Reservation. However, it is within the boundaries of the territory that the Tribe considers its TUA. The Orange County area is home to the other Native American Tribes, including but not limited to the Tongva, Juaneno, Gabrieleno and Luiseno. The Kumeyaay also have ancestral ties to this area as well as a historical, cultural, and religious interest. The Tribe urges the City to contact the respective Tribes of this area.

AB 52 allows 30 days and SB 18 allows 90 days to request consultation. As of November 3, 2021, no tribes have requested consultation for either AB 52 or SB 18. Therefore, after a good faith effort on the part of the City, consultation between California Native American tribes and the City has concluded for the Project.
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence,to be significant pursuant to criteria setforth 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 With Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, the SCCIC record search identified 22 prior cultural resources studies within the one-mile search radius, one of which was identified within the Project area. The one study, OR-03337, included an Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment of the Proposed Peaker Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-137

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Project Location at Bare Substation. Additionally, the SCCIC did not identify any previously recorded cultural resource within the one-mile search radius of the Project site.

Furthermore, the results of the SLF check conducted through the NAHC was negative for sacred sites important to Native Americans.

However, as noted above, the Specific Plan area does not contain any known resources 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. Nevertheless, due to known prehistoric archaeological resources within the vicinity of the Project site, the City’s assessment recognizes the potential for intact tribal cultural resources below the surface.

As stated previously, the City of Stanton is comprised of extensive alluvial deposits resulting from erosion of sediments from the Santa Ana River. Alluvium sediments are typically comprised of a variety of materials including fine particles of silt and clay and larger particles of sand and gravel (Stanton 2008a). Although the native sediment has been disturbed, the Project may encounter cultural or tribal cultural resources during earth moving activities.

To mitigate this potential effect, the Project would implement MM TCR-1 during construction, grading, and earthwork activities. Thus, impacts to tribal cultural resources that may be 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), are considered less than significant with mitigation.

Compliance with RR CUL-1 (Section 4.5, Cultural Resources) and implementation of MM TCR-1 would ensure the Project would not have a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource determined by the Lead Agency or a California Native American tribe, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 and 5024.1. Thus, impacts are considered less than significant with mitigation.

Mitigation Measures
MM TCR‐1 In the event that tribal cultural resources are discovered at the Town Center Specific Plan area, the handling of the discovered resources shall occur, as described below. However, it is understood that all artifacts, with the exception of human remains and related grave goods or sacred/ceremonial objects, belong to the property owner. All resources discovered shall be inventoried and analyzed by the professional Archaeologist retained for the Project. If any resources of Native American origin are discovered, all activities in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 50-foot radius) shall stop, and the project Archaeologist shall notify the property owner and tribes identified by the NAHC as being affiliated with the area. A designated Native American observer from one of the tribes identified by the NAHC as being affiliated with the area shall be retained to help analyze the Native American resources for identification as everyday life and/or religious or sacred items, cultural affiliation, temporal placement, and function, as deemed possible. The significance of Native American resources shall be evaluated in accordance Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-138

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and shall consider the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the affiliated tribes. All items found in association with Native American human remains shall be considered grave goods or sacred in origin and subject to special handling.

Native American resources that are relocated/reburied at the Specific Plan area would be subject to a fully executed relocation/reburial agreement with the assisting Native American tribes or bands. This shall include measures and provisions to protect the reburial area from any future impacts.

Relocation/reburial shall not occur until all cataloging and basic recordation have been completed. Native American resources that cannot be avoided or relocated at the Project site shall be prepared in a manner for curation at an accredited curation facility in Orange County that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79 and makes the resources available to other archaeologists/researchers/tribes for further study. The Archaeologist shall deliver the Native American resources, including title, to the accredited curation facility within a reasonable amount of time, along with the fees necessary for permanent curation.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no significant impacts.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-139

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant environmental 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 wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
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 statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The analysis in the GP EIR indicated that implementation of the General Plan Update could result in increased demand for water supplies and infrastructure within the City; could result in increased demand for sewer services within the City; and could result in increased demand for solid waste services, electricity, and natural gas provided to the City. Cumulative impacts related to water, solid waste, electricity, and natural gas were considered less than significant, except for sewer services demand, which was considered potentially significant.

Supplemental Analysis
Water information in this section is based on the Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Analysis, and the West Orange Service Area 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP).

Wastewater information is based on information derived from the City’s December 2013 Sewer Master Plan. The section also contains information received from Golden State Water Company (GSWC) West Orange County and Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD).

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-140

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Water
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Water service to the Specific Plan area is provided by the GSWC, a private water purveyor. GSWC owns and operates the system, which serves cities within west Orange County. In order to meet demand, GSWC supplies its customers with imported water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) and groundwater from the Orange County basin. The City’s existing water distribution system serving the Specific Plan area is composed of different sized pipelines including 4-, 6-, 8-, 10-, 12-, and 16-inch diameter pipelines. Much of the area within the Specific Plan is served by looping 6- and 8-inch pipelines that may not be capable of providing the required fire flow, which in the previous study was assumed to be 2,500 gallons per minute (gpm) at 20 pounds per square inch (psi) residual pressure and may even be higher with products up to 5 stories.

As specific projects are proposed, coordination with the OCFA and GSWC would be required to ensure infrastructure would provide adequate capacity for conveyance of fire flow and water to serve the development. Hydraulic modeling would be required to ensure that recommended improvements are consistent with build-out of the Specific Plan using ultimate maximum day demands plus specific fire flow requirements placed throughout the Specific Plan area. Implementation of MM UTL-1 would ensure that adequate water infrastructure would be available to serve future development and potential impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level.

Wastewater Treatment
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The City of Stanton Public Works’ Sewer Maintenance Division maintains and operates the local public sanitary sewer collection system. The City’s wastewater collection system ultimately connects into Orange County Sanitation District (OC San) sewer system. OC San is a public agency that provides wastewater collection, treatment, and reuse/disposal services for approximately 2.6 million people in central and northwest Orange County. OC San has two operating facilities that treat wastewater from residential, commercial, and industrial sources. According to OC San, the 2021 estimated average daily flow of wastewater received from Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 1 (WWTP1) located in Fountain Valley was 117 million gallons per day (mgd) and 66 mgd from Wastewater Treatment Plant 2 (WWTP2) located in Huntington Beach, for a total of 183 mgd (OC San 2021). WWRP1 has a maximum permitted capacity of 208 mgd and treats an average flow of 117 mgd leaving a remaining available capacity of 91 mgd. WWTP 2 has a capacity of 168 mgd and treats an average flow of 66 mgd, which leaves an available capacity of 102 mgd. The proposed Project would result in a wastewater generation of approximately 0.598 mgd (Psomas 2021b). Given the existing capacities at WWTP 1 and WWTP 2, both facilities would be able to serve the future projects within the Specific Plan area.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-141

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR The City’s Sewer Master Plan’s (Master Plan) key findings and recommendations are generally applicable to the proposed Project. The Master Plan used the 2008 General Plan, which included the Town Center Mixed Use District and the buildout envisioned in the Specific Plan area and analyzed in the 2008 General Plan and associated EIR. However, the Project area and maximum densities allowed for the current Specific Plan buildout have increased, as defined in Section 3.0 Project Description. Therefore, identified capital improvements to address capacity deficiencies for the elimination of wastewater in the Master Plan could become more pronounced and additional pipeline segments with deficiencies not previously identified could arise within the Project area. The Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Analysis provides details as to locations within the Specific Plan that have been identified where required improvements may need to be upsized to handle the increased flows and other segments could become capacity constrained as well, requiring additional capital improvements. The intensity wastewater flow projections generating a total of 0.598 mgd for average dry weather flow should be utilized in the Project area, using appropriate peaking relationships (Psomas 2021b). As specific projects within the Specific Plan are proposed, the downstream sewer system should be analyzed, using the City’s sewer model, to determine impacts of not only the specific project proposed but if improvements are required, they should be analyzed to ensure improvements are sized consistent with build-out flows.

Future projects would be required to pay applicable sewerage connection fees and ensure that sufficient capacity or planned expansions of wastewater infrastructure would accommodate anticipated wastewater generation. Therefore, new development would not be permitted to exceed the capacity of wastewater conveyance systems or treatment facilities, since adequate capacity must be demonstrated in order to contribute flows to the system. Implementation of MM UTL-2 through MM UTL-4 would ensure that adequate wastewater infrastructure and treatment capacity would be available to serve future projects and impacts would be mitigated to less than significant level.

Natural Gas
Less Than Significant Impact. The Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) currently provides natural gas service to the City of Stanton, including the Specific Plan area (SoCalGas 2021). The service would be provided in accordance with SoCalGas’ policies and extension rules on file with the CPUC. Therefore, a significant impact related to the need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations related to natural gas would not occur.

Additionally, the applicants/developers would coordinate with SoCalGas on future projects in the Specific Plan area to ensure avoidance of any notable service disruptions during the extension of, relocation of, upgrade of, or connection to services. Impacts are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-142

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Telecommunications
Less Than Significant Impact. Spectrum, AT&T, and Frontier Communications provide telecommunications service to City with Spectrum and AT&T currently providing service to the Specific Plan area (Stanton 2021a). The service would be provided in accordance with the provider’s policies and extension rules on file with the CPUC. Therefore, a significant impact related to the need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations related to telecommunications would not occur. Additionally, the applicants/developers would coordinate with the Spectrum and/or AT&T, as applicable, on future projects in the Specific Plan area to ensure avoidance of any notable service disruptions during the extension of, relocation of, upgrade of, or connection to services. Impacts are considered less than significant, and mitigation is not required.

The Project would not require the construction or expansion of water or wastewater infrastructure and treatment facilities, storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less Than Significant Impact. GSWC West Orange County is located in the northwestern part of Orange County and provides domestic water service to the City, including the Specific Plan area. GSWC West Orange’s three primary water supplies are from groundwater sources derived from (1) the Central Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin (Basin or Orange County Groundwater Basin) managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD); (2) imported supplies from MWD through the Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC); and (3) recycled water from the City of Cerritos. GSWD has an extensive water infrastructure system that includes active wells, pipelines, pumps, reservoirs, and pump stations. Additionally, the West Orange Service Area 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) adopted on July 15, 2021, reports GSWD has four emergency connections with Artesia, Garden Grove, Buena Park, and Seal Beach in order to assist with outages that may be due to factors beyond hydrology or regulatory constraints. Reliable water supplies are available to meet GSWC’s customer demands in normal, single dry years, and five consecutive dry year conditions through 2045 (GSWC West Orange 2021).

The UWMP used the 2008 General Plan, which included the Town Center Mixed-Use district and the buildout envisioned for the Specific Plan area and analyzed in the 2008 General Plan and associated EIR. The proposed Project is estimated to create a water demand of approximately 703,339 gallons per day (gpd) or 788 acre-feet per year (afy). According to the UWMP, the GSWD service area water demand is projected to be 15,759 afy by 2045.

Assuming full build-out of the Specific Plan area would not occur for approximately 25 years, this demand would account for an increase of approximately 5.0 percent of the projected 2045 demand. The projected increase in demand from the proposed Project at this maximum intensity level would account for approximately 50 percent increase of the projected estimated demand in the UWMP over the 25-year span.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-143

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR The 2020 UWMP reported projected supply would equal demand through 2045 but did indicate GSWD has the ability to increase the water supply from the Orange County Groundwater Basin by 15 percent from its current pumping levels estimated at 70 percent of their supply to up to 85 percent. The projected increase from OCWD would provide added reliability to GSWD’s water supply. Therefore, only an estimated 15 percent of water supplies would be needed from other sources, primarily MWD through MWDOC. Additional operational flexibility and reliability is provided by the ability of GSWC to share its water supply with other GSWC Service Areas in the region.

The proposed Project would comply with Sections 4.303 and 4.304 of the CALGreen Code, which require indoor and outdoor water conservation measures such as low flush toilets, aerators on sinks and showerheads, other water-efficient appliances, and water-efficient automatic irrigation system controllers. Compliance with these regulations and programs is provided as RR UTL-1. With compliance with RR UTL-1 and all requirements in place, the potential impact pertaining to water supply for future projects during normal, dry, and multiple dry years would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. c) Resultin a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above in Checklist Response 4.19(b), wastewater flows from the Project site would go to OC San Wastewater Treatment Plant 1 (WWTP1) located in Fountain Valley, which has a capacity of 208 mgd, and in 2021 received estimated flows of 117 mgd. The sewer capacity calculated a total of 0.598 mgd for the proposed Project. Therefore, in light of the sewer capacity verified in the Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Analysis and existing available capacity at WWTP1, OC San would be able to accommodate all wastewater discharges to satisfy OC San’s estimated demands for wastewater treatment service. Impacts related to wastewater treatment capacity would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. d) Generate solid waste in excess of State and 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. With implementation of proposed Project, there would be solid waste generated during construction in addition to an overall increase in daily solid waste generation.

Orange County Waste & Recycling is the government agency that owns and operates the local Orange County landfills. OC Waste & Recycling operates three landfills in Orange County, which are listed below in Table 4-37, along with the actual average daily rate of disposal, the maximum daily permitted capacity, the remaining capacity, and the estimated closure date of each landfill.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-144

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR TABLE 4‐37

ORANGE COUNTY WASTE & RECYCLING LANDFILLS
Landfill Address/City
Disposal Rate
(tons per day) Remaining
Capacity
(million
cubic yards)
Estimated
Closure Date
Maximum
Permitted
Annual
Average
Disposal
Frank R. Bowerman 11002 Bee Canyon
Access Road, Irvine 11,500 7,896 164.68 2053
Prima Deshecha
32250 Avenida La
PataSan Juan
Capistrano
4,000 2,320 126.66 2102
Olinda Alpha 1942 North Valencia
Avenue, Brea 8,000 7,196 20.68 2036
Source: Halligan 2021, OC Waste and Recycling 2020
Solid Waste Generated During Construction
With implementation of the proposed Project, there would be solid waste generated during construction and an increase in daily solid waste generation during operation. Constructionand demolition activities associated with new development would generate solid waste.

Based on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA’s) new construction and demolition waste generation rate of 4.38 lbs/sf for residential uses (USEPA 1998), construction of the proposed 139 residential units would generate 608.8 lbs/sf of solid waste over the construction period. Projects requiring any building, construction, or demolition permits would be required to comply with the California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939), SB 1016, and the CALGreen Code. Diversion through reuse, recycling, and/or composting of construction and demolition materials at County-approved facilities or by a Franchised Waste Hauler can achieve compliance.

To meet these demands, the Stanton Municipal Code Section 6.04.100 requires applicants/developers to submit a Construction and Demolition Materials Management Plan (C&DMMP) for City approval (Stanton 2021a). The C&DMMP requires the construction/demolition projects comply with the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), which states all construction projects shall divert at least 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition wastes generated during project construction for recycle and/or salvage for reuse (RR UTL-2). In compliance with the City’s Municipal Code, construction and demolition waste would be made available for deconstruction, salvage, and recovery, whereby a diversion rate of 65 percent of the total estimated debris must be recycled using a County-approved facility or franchise waste hauler. The Frank R.

Bowerman Landfill is permitted for a maximum of 11,500 tons per day (tpd) and has an annual disposal rate of 7,896 tpd. The landfill has enough projected capacity to serve residences and businesses until approximately 2053. Therefore, the landfill could accommodate the short-term disposal of construction and demolition wastes from the proposed Project. Impacts would be temporary and less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-145

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Electricity
Less Than Significant Impact. Southern California Edison (SCE) currently provides electricity to the City of Stanton, including the Specific Plan area (SCE 2021). Electrical service to the Project area would be provided in accordance with SCE’s policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Therefore, no significant impacts related to the need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations related to electricity would occur. Additionally, the applicants/developers for future projects would coordinate with SCE to ensure avoidance of any notable service disruptions during the extension, relocation, upgrade, or connection to services for future projects in the Specific Plan area. Impacts are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Solid Waste Generated During Operation
According to the General Plan EIR, buildout of the General Plan would generate a total of approximately 31,200 tons/year or 2,600 tons per month. The General Plan EIR concluded that CR&R anticipated no impacts to solid waste services would result from buildout of the General Plan.

This Subsequent IS/MND analyzes the potential impacts of the additional 139 multi-family dwelling units only. The existing General Plan for the City of Stanton allows for a total of 1,399 multi-family units within the Town Center Specific Plan area. Since 2008, 4 units have been built, resulting in a remaining capacity of 1,395 multi-family units. The Town Center Specific Plan would allow for an additional 139 units, increasing the remaining capacity to 1,534 multi-family units. The estimated long-term solid waste generation associated with the said growth is presented in Table 4-38 below.

TABLE 4‐38

ESTIMATED SOLID WASTE GENERATION
Land Use Size Waste Generation Factor1
Proposed Project Waste
Generation
(lbs/day)
Residential 139 units 12.23 lbs/household/day 1,700
lbs: pounds; sf: square feet; CalRecycle: California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery 1 Based on estimated waste generation factors from CalRecycle 2022.

As shown in Table 4-38 above, the proposed Project at the maximum buildout is estimated to generate approximately 1,700 pounds of solid waste per day prior to required waste diversion requirements as discussed below under Threshold 4.19(e). Maximum buildout is estimated to occur over 30 years. Based on correspondence with OCWR, the Orange County solid waste landfill system would have the ability to serve the proposed Project with solid waste landfill capacity (OCWR 2022). The County of Orange maintains 15-years of countywide solid waste landfill capacity, as required by AB 939. Therefore, the proposed Project would be served by a landfill with available capacity to accept the anticipated solid waste volume, and impacts would be less than significant. In addition, compliance with the Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-146

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR City’s requirements for waste diversion, as discussed below under Threshold 4.19(e), would reduce the amount of solid waste diverted to the receiving landfill. No mitigation is required. e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact. State, County, and local agencies with regulatory authority related to solid waste for the Project include CalRecycle, OC Waste & Recycling (County of Orange), and the City of Stanton. Regulations specifically applicable to the proposed Project include the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), Section 4.408 of the CALGreen Code, and Senate Bill (SB) 1383.

AB 939, which requires every County and City in the State to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element to its Solid Waste Management Plan, identifies how each jurisdiction will meet the State’s mandatory waste diversion goal of 50 percent by and after the year 2000.

According to CalRecycle, the City of Stanton has disposal rate targets of 6.7 pounds/person/day. In 2019, the City had disposal rates of 6.6 pounds/person/day (CalRecycle 2021). Consistent with State requirements, the City of Stanton is consistently diverting more than 50 percent of its waste stream.

The California Solid Waste Re-use and Recycling Access Act of 1991 (California Public Resources Code, Sections 42900–42911) directs the California Integrated Waste Management Board to draft a “model ordinance” for the disposal of construction waste associated with development projects. Section 4.408 of the current 2019 CALGreen Code requires preparation of a construction waste management plan that outlines ways in which the contractor would recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition debris (DGS 2021). During the construction phase, the proposed Project would comply with the current CALGreen Code through the recycling and reuse of at least 65 percent of the non-hazardous construction and demolition debris from the Project site (RR UTL-2). On October 6, 2011, Governor Brown signed AB 341, establishing a State policy goal that no less than 75 percent of solid waste generated to be source reduced, recycled, or composted by 2020. The bill also mandates local jurisdictions to implement commercial recycling by July 1, 2012, for businesses and public entities generating four cubic yards or more of trash and multi-family residential dwellings with five or more units. Solid waste storage and collection for the future Projects would comply with Section 20.305.090 Solid Waste/Recyclable Materials Storage and Section 6.04.05 Collection of the Municipal Code. The proposed residences would have regular waste collection services; be provided with recycling bins for residential solid waste, recyclables, and organics recycling to promote residential recycling; and be encouraged to participate in the City’s solid waste diversion programs. Additionally, SB 1383 sets methane reduction targets for California. The bill seeks to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants (SLCP) by reducing organic waste disposal to 50 percent by 2020 and 75 percent by 2025. Recognizing that organic waste in landfills emits 20 percent of the State’s methane, which is 84 times more potent than carbon dioxide, this bill simply requires placing organic waste into an organics recycling cart instead of a trash cart. This act helps divert organic waste from the landfills and reduce the emissions. Per this bill, many California residents and businesses have already began recycling organic waste beginning January 1, 2022.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-147

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR As discussed in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this Subsequent IS/MND, hazardous wastes generated during demolition and construction activities would be disposed of in accordance with existing regulations. Similarly, hazardous material use during construction and occupancy of the future projects, including maintenance activities, would be conducted in compliance with applicable regulations. No conflict with statutes and regulations related to solid waste is anticipated, thus no impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirements
RR UTL‐1 The future projects shall be designed and constructed with water-efficient fixtures and systems, as required by the CALGreen Code.

RR UTL‐2 The future projects contractors shall recycle, reuse, and/or salvage at least 65 percent of demolition and construction debris, in accordance with Section

4.408 of the CALGreen Code.

Mitigation Measures
MM UTL‐1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for any future development project, the Project Applicant shall prepare a hydraulic analysis to ensure that proposed improvements are consistent with build-out of the Specific Plan using ultimate maximum day demands plus specific fire flow requirements placed throughout the Project area. The hydraulic analysis shall be submitted to the City Public Works Department for review and approval.

MM UTL‐2 Prior to issuance of a wastewater permit for any future development project, the Project Applicant shall pay applicable connection and/or user fees to City of Stanton Public Works Department.

MM UTL‐3 Prior to issuance of a building permit for any future development project, the Project Applicant shall prepare a sewer study to determine the adequacy of the sewer systems for review and approval by the City Public Works Department.

MM UTL‐4 Prior to issuance of a building permit for any future development project, the Project Applicant shall provide evidence that the Orange County Sanitation District has sufficient wastewater transmission and treatment plant capacity to accept sewage flows from buildings for which building permits are being requested.

Conclusion
The significant impacts pertaining to water and wastewater treatment are less than significant with mitigation.

The additional 139 units have no new significant impacts related to dry utilities beyond the impacts analyzed in the GP EIR.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-148

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

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

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
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?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The 2008 GP EIR did not include a Wildfire section.

Supplemental Analysis
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. The proposed Project is not within a designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) as defined by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention (CalFire 2022). As stated in Checklist Response 4.9(f), Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the City has an emergency plan, termed an “Emergency Operations Plan,” prepared in accordance with the State Office of Emergency Services guidelines for multi-hazard functional planning (Stanton 2012). However, the City does not have designated emergency evacuation corridors, but has identified routes to be used for an evacuation, depending on the location of the incident. These routes may include roadways within the Specific Plan boundaries such as Beach Boulevard, Katella Avenue, and Cerritos Avenue.

As indicated in Checklist Response 4.9(f), any development within the Specific Plan area would be required to coordinate with the City and OCFA regarding emergency access.

Applicable OCFA regulations, evacuation plans and procedures would be required to be incorporated into building and site design. With compliance with applicable OCFA regulations, the future projects’ impacts pertaining to emergency access would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Additionally, because Checklist Response thresholds 4.20(a) through 4.20(d) apply only to those projects that are “located in or near Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-149

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones”, no impacts related to these thresholds would occur, and no mitigation is required. b) Due to the slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No Impact. As indicated in Checklist Response 4.9(g), Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the Project site is in a highly urbanized area of the City, and there are no large, undeveloped areas and/or steep slopes within the Specific Plan area that would exacerbate fire risks such that would expose the Project and its occupants to wildfire related hazards. Additionally, as indicated above, the site and the surrounding areas are not located in designated VHFHSZ, as identified by CALFIRE. Rather, the site is within a Non-VHFHSZ area. Therefore, the Project is not expected to exacerbate wildfire risks and create pollutants associated with wildfire or uncontrolled spread of wildfire. Additionally, because Checklist Response thresholds 4.20(a)through 4.20(d) apply only to those projects that are “located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones”, no impacts related to these thresholds would occur, and no mitigation is required. c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
No Impact. As previously discussed in Checklist Response 4.20(a)., above, the proposed Project is not within a designated VHFHSZ as defined by CALFIRE. As discussed previously, the site is located in a highly urbanized area. All proposed structures would be constructed to meet current building and fire codes in coordination with the City and OCFA. Additionally, installation and maintenance of infrastructure, including roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, and other utilities would not exacerbate fire risk, as they would be conducted in compliance with City requirements and specification. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing environmental impacts. Additionally, because Checklist Response thresholds 4.20(a) through 4.20(d) apply only to those projects that are “located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones”, no impacts related to these thresholds would occur, and no mitigation is required. d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post‐fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
No Impact. As previously discussed in Checklist Response 4.20(a), the proposed Project is not within a designated VHFHSZ, as defined by CALFIRE. Further, as discussed in Checklist Response 4.7(a), Geology and Soils, the Project is in a highly urbanized area that is in a generally flat topographical area away from downslope or landslide areas. Additionally, as discussed in Checklist Response 4.10c (ii-iii), Hydrology and Water Quality, the future projects would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-150

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR which would result in flooding on- or offsite. Therefore, implementation of 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.

Additionally, because Checklist Response thresholds 4.20(a) through 4.20(d) apply only to those projects that are “located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones”, no impacts related to these thresholds would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Requirements
No regulatory requirements have been identified.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to Wildfire; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
The additional 139 units have no significant impacts.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-151

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of 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?
2008 General Plan Update EIR
The issues identified in the above threshold questions were analyzed in various sections of the GP EIR. The summaries of the findings are included in Section 4.1 through 4.20 of this IS/MND.

Supplemental Analysis
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self‐sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Potentially Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. There are no sensitive biological resources, habitats, or species on the Project site that would be affected by the Project. As indicated in Section 8.4, Biological Resources, of this Subsequent IS/MND, given the current developed condition and the presence of trees and vegetation within the Specific Plan area, migratory birds may nest on the trees on-site. However, MM BIO-1 would avoid impacts to active bird nests during possible demolition, site clearing, and construction activities that may occur during the nesting season. Therefore, while impacts to migratory birds may occur during the construction phase, they would be mitigated to less than significant with implementation of MM BIO-1.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-152

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR There are no historic resources on the Project site that would be impacted by the proposed Project. Additionally, implementation of MM CUL-1 would prevent or reduce impacts on buried archaeological resources and tribal cultural resources during necessary subsurface excavations activities for construction of the future projects. Implementation of MM GEO-2 would also mitigate potential impacts on paleontological resources if grading and/or ground disturbing activities encounter unknown paleontological resources. Implementation of MM TCR-1 would ensure the Project would not have a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, and it would reduce the potential impacts to less than significant level. With implementation of these mitigation measures, the Project’s potential impacts on cultural resources and tribal cultural resources would be less than significant.

Therefore, the Project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment; substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; 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.

Potential impacts 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. As identified in the preceding analyses, all Project-level impacts have been determined to be less than significant with or without compliance with regulatory requirements or mitigated to a level considered less than significant with incorporation of mitigation measures. While the Project would contribute to potential environmental effects related to Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise, Population and Housing, Tribal Cultural Resources, and Utilities and Service Systems, these impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, since mitigation measures would be implemented to avoid or reduce potential Project-specific impacts associated with these environmental issues. As discussed in Section 8.3, Air Quality, and Section 8.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this Subsequent IS/MND, the Project’s Air Quality and GHG Emissions impacts would be less than significant, and the impacts would not be considered cumulatively considerable.

No new development or redevelopment is planned adjacent to the site that would occur concurrently with Project construction. Development projects would be subject to environmental review by the City, pursuant to CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City’s requirements, to determine if they would lead to cumulative environmental effects as part of the appropriate CEQA analysis for each project. Since the proposed Project would not have significant impacts after mitigation, the impacts of the Project are not expected to result in cumulatively considerable impacts when added to the impacts of other projects planned or proposed in the vicinity of the site. Cumulative impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-153

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the environmental analyses above, with compliance with applicable regulatory requirements and/or the implementation of mitigation measures, the Project would have less than significant impacts on humans, as it relates to the following environmental issue areas: Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Air Quality, Energy, GHG Emissions, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, and Wildfire.

The proposed Project’s impacts on the following issue areas would be significant and would require the implementation of mitigation measures: Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise, Population and Housing, Tribal Cultural Resources, and Utilities and Service Systems. All impacts would be avoided or reduced to less than significant levels after mitigation.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of mitigation measures. All impacts would be less than significant after mitigation.

Conclusion
The potentially significant impacts, as identified in this Subsequent IS/MND, are less than significant with mitigation.

Environmental Checklist
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 4-154

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR This page intentionally left blank

STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 5-1

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR

5.0 REFERENCES
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2018. Maps of State and Federal Area Designations.

Sacramento, CA: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/maps-state-andfederal-area-designations California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2021. Seismic Hazards Mapping Act.

Sacramento, CA: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/hazards/seismic-hazardsmapping-act ———2016. Office of Mine Reclamation. Sacramento, CA:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dmr/
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2021 (September 13). NCCP Plan Summary – County of Orange (Central/Coastal) NCCP/HCP. Sacramento, CA: CDFW. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Planning/NCCP/Plans/Orange-Coastal.

California Department of Finance (DOF). 2021. E5 County/State Population Housing Estimates. Sacramento, CA:
https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fdof.ca.gov% 2Fwpcontent%2Fuploads%2FForecasting%2FDemographics%2FDocuments%2FE5_2022_InternetVersion.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK ———2010. E-4 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2001-2010, with 2000 & 2010 Census Counts. Sacramento, CA:
https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fdof.ca.gov% 2Fwpcontent%2Fuploads%2FForecasting%2FDemographics%2FDocuments%2FE4_200 0-2010_Report_Final_EOC_000.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire). 2022. Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) Maps. Sacramento, CA: CalFire
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/community-wildfire-preparedness-andmitigation/wildland-hazards-building-codes/fire-hazard-severity-zones-maps/ California Department of General Services (DGS). 2021. CALGreen Codes. Sacramento, CA:
https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/CALGreen#codes
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2021. 2021 Recycling Program Rates. Sacramento, CA:
https://calrecycle.ca.gov/bevcontainer/notices/2020-2/2021progrates/ Construction Vibration Guidance Manual-2020 Update. Sacramento, CA: https://dot.ca.gov/- /media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tcvgmapr2020-a11y.pdf References
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 5-2

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM). (2021). CalGEM Well Finder.

Sacramento, CA: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/calgem/Pages/WellFinder.aspx California Geological Survey (CGS). 2021. California Geological Survey. Sacramento, CA:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/
———2015a. The California Mineral Resources Program. Sacramento, CA:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/mrp
———2015b. The California Seismic Hazards Program. Sacramento, CA:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/sh/program
———2015c. California Tsunami Maps and Data. Sacramento, CA:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps
Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program (FMMP). 2021. Orange County Important Farmland Data Availability. Sacramento, CA:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Orange.aspx Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. (September). Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. Sacramento, CA:
https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/researchinnovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-ftareport-no-0123_0.pdf Google Earth. 2021. City of Stanton. https://www.google.com/intl/ALL/earth/ Golden State Water Company (GSWC). 2021. Information For Contractors and Consultants.

Bell Gardens, CA: https://www.gswater.com/information-contractors-consultants Golden State Water Company (GWESC) West Orange County. 2021. 2022 Report on Public Goals- West Orange County System. Bell Gardens, CA:
https://www.gswater.com/sites/main/files/fileattachments/2022_west_oc_phg_report.pdf?1656456933 Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB) Los Alamitos. 2016. AIRPORT ENVIRONS LAND USE PLAN for JOINT FORCES TRAINING BASE LOS ALAMITOS. Costa Mesa, CA:
https://files.hudexchange.info/reports/published/ESD_900000010007349_101820 24_900000010091496_1571443222489.pdf
Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). 2021a. 2020 Statistical Annual Report. Irvine, CA:
https://ocfa.org/Uploads/Transparency/OCFA%20Annual%20Report%202020.pdf ———2021b. Orange County Fire Authority Standards of Cover. Irvine, CA:
https://ocfa.org/Uploads/Orange%20County%20Fire%20Authority%20SOC_FINA L.pdf
References
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 5-3

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR Orange County Public Libraries. 2021. Orange County Public Libraries. Santa Ana, CA:
https://www.ocpl.org/
Orange County Sheriff’s Department (OCSD). 2021a. Patrol Areas. Santa Ana, CA:
https://ocsheriff.gov/patrol-areas
———2021b. Stanton Police Services, Santa Ana, CA: https://ocsheriff.gov/patrolareas/stanton ———2021c. Orange County Sherriff’s Policies. Santa Ana, CA: https://ocsheriff.gov/aboutocsheriff/policies Orange County (OC) Waste and Recycling. 2020. Landfills. Oraneg County, CA:
https://www.oclandfills.com/landfills
Orange County Water District (OCWD). 2018. Groundwater and Location maps. Fountain Valley, CAL https://www.ocwd.com/what-we-do/groundwatermanagement/groundwater-location-maps/ Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2020a. 2020‐2045 RTP/SCS (CONNECT SOCAL) TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY DETERMINATION. Los Angeles, CA: https://scag.ca.gov/post/2020-2045-rtpscs-connect-socal-transportationconformity-determination ———2020b Current Context‐ Demographic and Growth Forecast. Los Angeles, CA:
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/fileattachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics-and-growthforecast.pdf?1606001579 Southern California Air Quality Management District. (SCAQMD). 2022. SCAQMD Rule Book.

Diamond Bar, CA: http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/rules/scaqmdrule-book ———2016. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. Diamond Bar, CA:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-qualitymanagement-plans/2016-air-quality-management-plan/final-2016- aqmp/final2016aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=15
Southern California Edison (SCE). 2021. SCE Regulatory Information. Rosemead, CA:
https://www.sce.com/regulatory
Southern California Gas (SoCalGas). 2021. Southern California Gas. Gardena, CA:
https://www.socalgas.com/
Stanton, City of. 2021a. Stanton, California Municipal Code. Seattle, WA: for the City. Quality Code Publishing for the City
https://library.qcode.us/lib/stanton_ca/pub/municipal_code References
STANTON TOWN CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT 5-4

SUBSEQUENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO GENERAL PLAN EIR ———2021b. Stanton Parks and Facilities. Stanton, CA:
https://www.stantonca.gov/departments/community_services/parksfacilities.php ———2008a (September 23) City of Stanton General Plan. Stanton, CA.:
https://cms9files.revize.com/stantonca/Document_center/Department/Communit y%20Development/Adopted%20General%20Plan.pdf
———2008b Final Program Environmental Impact Report, City of Stanton 2008 General Plan Update. Stanton, CA: https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2008041050/2 United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1998. Construction and Demolition Debris: Material‐Specific Data. Washington, DC: https://www.epa.gov/facts-andfigures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/construction-and-demolition-debrismaterial Appendix A
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling Data

Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 1 / 44
Town Center Specific Plan v2 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

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2024) - Unmitigated

3.3. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated

3.5. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 2 / 44

3.9. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.11. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated

3.13. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 3 / 44

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

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

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 4 / 44

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

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 5 / 44

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 6 / 44

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

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
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 7 / 44

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Town Center Specific Plan v2
Construction Start Date 1/2/2024
Operational Year 2024
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Plan/community
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 1.80
Precipitation (days) 6.20
Location 33.810976189975065, -117.98933825611476
County Orange
City Stanton
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5822
EDFZ 7
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.20

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
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 8 / 44
Condo/Townhouse 139 Dwelling Unit 8.69 147,340 18,921 — 414 — Parking Lot 521 Space 4.69 0.00 0.00 — — —

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

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 49.2 12.1 19.4 0.03 0.50 1.44 1.94 0.46 0.34 0.80 4,285 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 3.71 36.0 33.8 0.07 1.60 6.33 7.47 1.47 2.68 4.15 9,961 Average Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 3.19 12.2 15.2 0.02 0.50 1.49 1.99 0.46 0.41 0.86 3,568 Annual (Max) — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.58 2.23 2.77 < 0.005 0.09 0.27 0.36 0.08 0.07 0.16 591

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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily - Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
2024 1.58 12.1 19.4 0.03 0.50 1.44 1.94 0.46 0.34 0.80 4,285 Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 9 / 44
2025 49.2 11.3 18.9 0.03 0.44 1.44 1.87 0.40 0.34 0.74 4,249 Daily - Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
2024 3.71 36.0 33.8 0.07 1.60 6.33 7.47 1.47 2.68 4.15 9,961 2025 1.49 11.4 18.1 0.03 0.44 1.44 1.87 0.40 0.34 0.74 4,179 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 1.41 12.2 15.2 0.02 0.50 1.49 1.99 0.46 0.41 0.86 3,568 2025 3.19 3.64 5.84 0.01 0.14 0.43 0.57 0.13 0.10 0.23 1,290 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 0.26 2.23 2.77 < 0.005 0.09 0.27 0.36 0.08 0.07 0.16 591 2025 0.58 0.66 1.07 < 0.005 0.03 0.08 0.10 0.02 0.02 0.04 214

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. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 7.97 2.68 35.9 0.06 0.10 5.36 5.47 0.10 1.36 1.46 7,755 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 7.21 2.79 26.5 0.06 0.10 5.36 5.46 0.10 1.36 1.45 7,471 Average Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 7.34 2.68 30.0 0.05 0.10 4.85 4.95 0.10 1.23 1.32 7,062 Annual (Max) — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.34 0.49 5.47 0.01 0.02 0.89 0.90 0.02 0.22 0.24 1,169

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 10 / 44
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.76 1.76 27.7 0.05 0.03 5.36 5.40 0.03 1.36 1.39 5,602 Area 4.16 0.08 7.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 21.2 Energy 0.05 0.84 0.36 0.01 0.07 — 0.07 0.07 — 0.07 1,859 Water — — — — — — — — — — 78.5
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 194
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — 1.06
Total 7.97 2.68 35.9 0.06 0.10 5.36 5.47 0.10 1.36 1.46 7,755 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.73 1.95 26.2 0.05 0.03 5.36 5.40 0.03 1.36 1.39 5,340 Area 3.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.05 0.84 0.36 0.01 0.07 — 0.07 0.07 — 0.07 1,859 Water — — — — — — — — — — 78.5
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 194
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — 1.06
Total 7.21 2.79 26.5 0.06 0.10 5.36 5.46 0.10 1.36 1.45 7,471 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.36 1.79 24.2 0.05 0.03 4.85 4.88 0.03 1.23 1.25 4,915 Area 3.93 0.05 5.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 14.5 Energy 0.05 0.84 0.36 0.01 0.07 — 0.07 0.07 — 0.07 1,859 Water — — — — — — — — — — 78.5
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 194
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — 1.06
Total 7.34 2.68 30.0 0.05 0.10 4.85 4.95 0.10 1.23 1.32 7,062 Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 11 / 44
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.61 0.33 4.42 0.01 0.01 0.89 0.89 < 0.005 0.22 0.23 814 Area 0.72 0.01 0.98 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 2.40 Energy 0.01 0.15 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 308 Water — — — — — — — — — — 13.0
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 32.1
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — 0.17
Total 1.34 0.49 5.47 0.01 0.02 0.89 0.90 0.02 0.22 0.24 1,169

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.62 24.9 21.7 0.03 1.06 — 1.06 0.98 — 0.98 3,437
Demolition — — — — — 4.60 4.60 — 0.70 0.70 —
Onsite truck 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

0.14 1.36 1.19 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.05 — 0.05 188
Demolition — — — — — 0.25 0.25 — 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 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 12 / 44
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.25 0.22 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 31.2
Demolition — — — — — 0.05 0.05 — 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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.07 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 196 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.12 7.74 3.29 0.04 0.07 1.54 1.61 0.07 0.43 0.51 6,328 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.9 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.01 0.43 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 347 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.80 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.08 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 57.4

3.3. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 13 / 44
Off-Road
Equipment

3.65 36.0 32.9 0.05 1.60— 1.60 1.47— 1.47 5,314
Dust From
Material
Movement
————— 5.11 5.11— 2.63 2.63—
Onsite truck 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

0.10 0.99 0.90 < 0.005 0.04— 0.04 0.04— 0.04 146
Dust From
Material
Movement
————— 0.14 0.14— 0.07 0.07—
Onsite truck 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 0.18 0.16 < 0.005 0.01— 0.01 0.01— 0.01 24.1
Dust From
Material
Movement
————— 0.03 0.03— 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 Offsite———————————
Daily, Summer
(Max)
———————————
Daily, Winter
(Max)
———————————
Worker 0.06 0.08 0.91 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.05 0.05 228 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily———————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.35 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 14 / 44
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.05 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

3.52 34.3 30.2 0.06 1.45 — 1.45 1.33 — 1.33 6,621
Dust From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 2.39 2.39 — 0.95 0.95 —
Onsite truck 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

0.29 2.82 2.48 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.11 — 0.11 544
Dust From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.20 0.20 — 0.08 0.08 —
Onsite truck 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 0.51 0.45 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 90.1
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 15 / 44
Dust From — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.01 0.01 —
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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.09 1.04 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 261 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 21.8 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.61 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.20 11.2 13.1 0.02 0.50 — 0.50 0.46 — 0.46 2,406
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 16 / 44
Onsite truck 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

1.20 11.2 13.1 0.02 0.50— 0.50 0.46— 0.46 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 Average Daily———————————
Off-Road
Equipment

0.65 6.10 7.14 0.01 0.27— 0.27 0.25— 0.25 1,309
Onsite truck 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

0.12 1.11 1.30 < 0.005 0.05— 0.05 0.05— 0.05 217
Onsite truck 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 0.37 0.39 6.02 0.00 0.00 1.31 1.31 0.00 0.31 0.31 1,377 Vendor 0.01 0.51 0.26 < 0.005 0.01 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 503 Hauling 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 0.37 0.44 5.19 0.00 0.00 1.31 1.31 0.00 0.31 0.31 1,306 Vendor 0.01 0.53 0.26 < 0.005 0.01 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 502 Hauling 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 0.20 0.24 2.96 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.71 0.00 0.17 0.17 721 Vendor 0.01 0.29 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 273 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual———————————
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 17 / 44
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 119 Vendor < 0.005 0.05 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 45.2 Hauling 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 (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 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 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 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 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.32 2.92 3.65 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.11 — 0.11 673
Onsite truck 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

0.06 0.53 0.67 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 111
Onsite truck 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 0.36 0.35 5.60 0.00 0.00 1.31 1.31 0.00 0.31 0.31 1,348 Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 18 / 44
Vendor 0.01 0.49 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 495 Hauling 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 0.35 0.39 4.85 0.00 0.00 1.31 1.31 0.00 0.31 0.31 1,279 Vendor 0.01 0.51 0.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 494 Hauling 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 0.10 0.11 1.42 0.00 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.09 0.09 363 Vendor < 0.005 0.14 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 138 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.02 60.2 Vendor < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 22.9 Hauling 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 (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.80 7.45 9.98 0.01 0.35 — 0.35 0.32 — 0.32 1,517
Paving 0.61 — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 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 — — — — — — — — — — —
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 19 / 44
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.41 0.55 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 83.1
Paving 0.03 — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 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 0.07 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 13.8 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 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 202 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.7 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.77 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.13. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 20 / 44
Onsite———————————
Daily, Summer
(Max)
———————————
Off-Road
Equipment

0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03— 0.03 0.03— 0.03 134
Architectural
Coatings

49.0——————————
Onsite truck 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 0.05 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005— < 0.005 < 0.005— < 0.005 7.34 Architectural
Coatings

2.68——————————
Onsite truck 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 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005— < 0.005 < 0.005— < 0.005 1.22 Architectural
Coatings

0.49——————————
Onsite truck 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 0.07 1.12 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 270 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, Winter
(Max)
———————————
Average Daily———————————
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 21 / 44
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 14.2 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.36 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use

3.76 1.76 27.7 0.05 0.03 5.36 5.40 0.03 1.36 1.39 5,602 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 3.76 1.76 27.7 0.05 0.03 5.36 5.40 0.03 1.36 1.39 5,602 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use

3.73 1.95 26.2 0.05 0.03 5.36 5.40 0.03 1.36 1.39 5,340 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 3.73 1.95 26.2 0.05 0.03 5.36 5.40 0.03 1.36 1.39 5,340 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 22 / 44
Condo/Townho 0.61 0.33 4.42 0.01 0.01 0.89 0.89 < 0.005 0.22 0.23 814 use
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.61 0.33 4.42 0.01 0.01 0.89 0.89 < 0.005 0.22 0.23 814

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use
— — — — — — — — — — 613
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — 172
Total — — — — — — — — — — 785
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use
— — — — — — — — — — 613
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — 172
Total — — — — — — — — — — 785
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use
— — — — — — — — — — 102
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — 28.5
Total — — — — — — — — — — 130

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) Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 23 / 44
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use

0.05 0.84 0.36 0.01 0.07 — 0.07 0.07 — 0.07 1,073
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 Total 0.05 0.84 0.36 0.01 0.07 — 0.07 0.07 — 0.07 1,073 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use

0.05 0.84 0.36 0.01 0.07 — 0.07 0.07 — 0.07 1,073
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 Total 0.05 0.84 0.36 0.01 0.07 — 0.07 0.07 — 0.07 1,073 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use

0.01 0.15 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 178
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 Total 0.01 0.15 0.07 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 178

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 Consumer
Products

3.17 — — — — — — — — — —
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 24 / 44
Architectural 0.27 — — — — — — — — — —
Coatings
Landscape
Equipment

0.72 0.08 7.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 21.2 Total 4.16 0.08 7.86 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 21.2 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 Consumer
Products

3.17 — — — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings

0.27 — — — — — — — — — —
Total 3.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 Consumer
Products

0.58 — — — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings

0.05 — — — — — — — — — —
Landscape
Equipment

0.09 0.01 0.98 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 2.40 Total 0.72 0.01 0.98 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 2.40

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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 25 / 44
Condo/Townho — — — — — — — — — — 78.5
use
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 78.5
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use
— — — — — — — — — — 78.5
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 78.5
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use
— — — — — — — — — — 13.0
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 13.0

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 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use
— — — — — — — — — — 194
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 194
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 26 / 44
Condo/Townho — — — — — — — — — — 194
use
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 194
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use
— — — — — — — — — — 32.1
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 32.1

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use
— — — — — — — — — — 1.06
Total — — — — — — — — — — 1.06
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use
— — — — — — — — — — 1.06
Total — — — — — — — — — — 1.06
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Condo/Townho
use
— — — — — — — — — — 0.17
Total — — — — — — — — — — 0.17
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 27 / 44

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 28 / 44

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T 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) Vegetation ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 29 / 44

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 30 / 44
Sequestered — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 1/2/2024 1/30/2024 5.00 20.0 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/31/2024 2/14/2024 5.00 10.0 — Grading Grading 2/15/2024 3/28/2024 5.00 30.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 3/29/2024 5/23/2025 5.00 300 — Paving Paving 5/24/2025 6/21/2025 5.00 20.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 6/22/2025 7/20/2025 5.00 20.0 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 31 / 44

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor 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 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
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 Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 423 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
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 Pavers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48

5.3. Construction Vehicles
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 32 / 44

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 85.0 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 20.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 100 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 14.9 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 33 / 44
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 20.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

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

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 298,364 99,455 0.00 0.00 12,255

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Building Square Footage)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 147,675 —
Site Preparation — — 15.0 0.00 —
Grading — — 90.0 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.69

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 34 / 44
Water Exposed Area 3 74% 74%
Water Demolished Area 2 36% 36%

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Condo/Townhouse — 0%
Parking Lot 4.69 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2024 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2025 0.00 532 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 Condo/Townhouse 937 1,042 894 345,179 6,881 7,651 6,564 2,535,148 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 35 / 44
Condo/Townhouse —
Wood Fireplaces 7
Gas Fireplaces 118
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 14
Conventional Wood Stoves 0
Catalytic Wood Stoves 7
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 7
Pellet Wood Stoves 0

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)
298363.5 99,455 0.00 0.00 12,255

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Condo/Townhouse 638,311 349 0.0330 0.0040 3,340,220
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 36 / 44
Parking Lot 178,925 349 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) Condo/Townhouse 5,216,065 299,723
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Condo/Townhouse 103 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Condo/Townhouse Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Condo/Townhouse Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 37 / 44

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

5.16. Stationary Sources

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

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

5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

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

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 38 / 44

5.18.2. Sequestration

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

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

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

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 8.94 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 3.65 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from 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 1 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 39 / 44
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 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 1 1 1 2
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
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
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 40 / 44

7. Health and Equity Details

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

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 40.0
AQ-PM 70.1
AQ-DPM 87.4
Drinking Water 66.5
Lead Risk Housing 77.1
Pesticides 47.7
Toxic Releases 90.5
Traffic 80.9
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 58.2
Groundwater 56.1
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 95.4
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 63.7
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 46.7
Cardio-vascular 46.9
Low Birth Weights 51.8
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 88.5
Housing 90.2
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 41 / 44
Linguistic 84.2
Poverty 86.9
Unemployment 68.4

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

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 13.38380598
Employed 55.33170794
Median HI 14.32054408
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 19.73566021
High school enrollment 6.313358142
Preschool enrollment 39.79212113
Transportation —
Auto Access 22.93083537
Active commuting 69.98588477
Social —
2-parent households 43.56473759
Voting 4.362889773
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 13.15282946
Park access 22.85384319
Retail density 76.50455537
Supermarket access 83.69049147
Tree canopy 14.47452842
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 42 / 44
Housing —
Homeownership 7.737713332
Housing habitability 5.684588733
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 26.34415501 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 21.75028872
Uncrowded housing 2.155780829
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 5.068651354
Arthritis 85.3
Asthma ER Admissions 57.7
High Blood Pressure 79.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 96.0
Asthma 10.9
Coronary Heart Disease 74.7
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 29.1
Diagnosed Diabetes 41.8
Life Expectancy at Birth 52.6
Cognitively Disabled 29.3
Physically Disabled 85.5
Heart Attack ER Admissions 70.0
Mental Health Not Good 8.9
Chronic Kidney Disease 55.3
Obesity 30.3
Pedestrian Injuries 93.5
Physical Health Not Good 17.6
Stroke 51.7
Health Risk Behaviors —
Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 43 / 44
Binge Drinking 47.1
Current Smoker 7.2
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 10.8
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 11.1
Elderly 64.7
English Speaking 3.3
Foreign-born 95.8
Outdoor Workers 7.7
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 11.2
Traffic Density 76.7
Traffic Access 87.4
Other Indices —
Hardship 97.4
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 23.2

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 92.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 12.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) Yes Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) Yes Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No Town Center Specific Plan v2 Detailed Report, 11/13/2023 44 / 44
a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

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

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

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

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Operations: Fleet Mix Adjusted for residential uses.

Operations: Hearths No fireplaces or wood stoves.

Energy Use Summary
Construction Phase (gallons/construction period) Gasoline Diesel Construction Vehicles 12,380 13,842
Worker Trips 24,856 59
Vendor Trips 2,355 24
Haul Trucks 6 5,157
Total 39,598 19,082
Operations Phase (gallons/year) Gasoline Diesel
Natural Gas
(kBTU/yr) Electricity (kWh/yr)
Condo/Townhouse 73,776 1,065 3,340,220 638,311
Parking 0 0 0 178,925
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
All Land Uses 73,776 1,065 3,340,220 817,236
Operations Onroad Energy Use
Year 2035
Vehicle Types MPG by Fuel Type Population by Fuel Type
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Gasoline Diesel Electricity Natural Gas Plug-in Hybrid Gasoline Diesel Electricity Natural Gas Plug-in Hybrid Total LDA 34.8 48.9 0.4 0.000 28.1 5,021,678 4,936 579,806 0 221,898 5,828,318 LDT1 29.0 28.4 0.4 0.000 27.9 444,187 4 7,366 0 5,730 457,287 LDT2 28.8 37.5 0.4 0.000 27.8 3,023,244 11,068 86,280 0 65,951 3,186,543 LHDT1 15.9 21.3 0.6 0.000 0.0 182,355 122,837 67,356 0 0 372,548 LHDT2 13.9 18.2 0.6 0.000 0.0 26,619 57,945 17,706 0 0 102,270 MCY 42.4 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 289,776 0 0 0 0 289,776
MDV 23.6 28.1 0.4 0.000 27.4 1,775,279 20,372 81,572 0 40,892 1,918,114 MH 4.9 10.1 0.0 0.000 0.0 22,774 13,331 0 0 0 36,105
MHDT 5.7 9.5 1.0 8.4 0.0 17,822 116,806 37,699 2,069 0 174,396 HHDT 4.9 7.1 1.8 6.6 0.0 23 118,585 16,578 12,558 0 147,743 OBUS 5.6 7.7 1.1 9.6 0.0 3,710 3,401 719 637 0 8,466
SBUS 9.3 7.8 1.2 4.4 0.0 2,894 1,823 1,339 4,079 0 10,135 UBUS 9.1 0.0 2.1 3.4 0.0 708 0 3,324 2,179 0 6,211
10811067.6 471108.1 899744.0 21521.8 334471.5 12537913.1 Trips/Day Trips/day Trips/day Trips/day Total VMT/day VMT/day VMT/day Trip Length Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Weekly Weekday Saturday Sunday Condo/Townhouse 936.86 1041.805 893.77 6619.875 6,900 7,672 6,582 7.36 Parking 0 0 0 0 -
0 0 0 0 -
0 0 0 0 -
0 0 0 0 -
0 0 0 0 -
Total 937 1,042 894
Fleet Mix
Land Use HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Total Condo/Townhouse 0% 58% 7% 19% 1% 0% 3% 12% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100.0% Vehicle Trips
Weekday Trips HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Total Condo/Townhouse 0 539 65 175 10 0 27 116 3 0 1 1 0 937
Total 0 539 65 175 10 0 27 116 3 0 1 1 0 937
Saturday Trips HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Total Condo/Townhouse 0 599 72 195 11 0 30 129 4 0 1 1 0 1,042 Parking 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 0 599 72 195 11 0 30 129 4 0 1 1 0 1,042
Sunday Trips HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Total Condo/Townhouse 0 514 62 167 9 0 26 110 3 0 1 1 0 894
Parking 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 0 514 62 167 9 0 26 110 3 0 1 1 0 894
Gallons of Fuel
Gasoline HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Total Condo/Townhouse 0 36,058 5,884 15,623 819 0 1,740 12,286 1,152 0 140 62 13 73,776 Parking 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 36,058 5,884 15,623 819 0 1,740 12,286 1,152 0 140 62 13 73,776 Total Gallons Gasoline Diesel HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Total Condo/Townhouse 0 25 0 44 412 0 0 118 326 0 93 47 0 1,065 Parking 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 25 0 44 412 0 0 118 326 0 93 47 0 1,065 Total Gallons Diesel Electricity HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Total Condo/Townhouse 0 375,669 7,340 33,265 8,576 0 0 34,459 0 0 143 232 260 459,945 Parking 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 375,669 7,340 33,265 8,576 0 0 34,459 0 0 143 232 260 459,945 Total Electricity (kWh) Natural Gas HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Total Condo/Townhouse 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 186 104 304
Parking 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 186 104 304 Total Natural Gas
Utilities
NaturalGas Use Electricity Use
Land Use kBTU/yr kWh/yr
Condo/Townhouse 3,340,220 638,311
Parking - 178,925
0 - -
0 - -
0 - -
0 - -
Total 3,340,220 817,236
Offroad Construction Equipment Energy Use
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per DayHorsepower Load Factor Horsepower Category Num Days Year Fuel Consumption Rate
(gal/hour) Fuel Type
Total Fuel Consumption
(gal/construction period)
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws Diesel Average 1 8 33 0.73 100 20 2023 4.7 Gasoline 551 Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3 8 36 0.38 175 20 2023 2.9 Diesel 526 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2 8 367 0.4 300 20 2023 4.5 Diesel 572 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3 8 367 0.4 300 10 2023 4.5 Diesel 429 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Diesel Average 4 8 84 0.37 100 10 2023 1.6 Diesel 189 Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2 8 36 0.38 175 30 2023 2.9 Diesel 526 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1 8 148 0.41 175 30 2023 3.2 Diesel 310 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1 8 367 0.4 300 30 2023 4.5 Diesel 429 Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 2 8 423 0.48 300 30 2023 5.5 Diesel 1,277 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Diesel Average 2 8 84 0.37 100 30 2023 1.6 Diesel 283 Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1 7 367 0.29 300 300 2023 3.3 Diesel 1,996 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3 8 82 0.2 100 300 2023 2.0 Diesel 2,887 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1 8 14 0.74 100 300 2023 5.2 Gasoline 9,226 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Diesel Average 3 7 84 0.37 100 300 2023 1.6 Diesel 3,712 Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1 8 46 0.45 50 300 2023 2.4 Gasoline 2,604 Paving Pavers Diesel Average 2 8 81 0.42 100 20 2023 1.7 Diesel 233 Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2 8 89 0.36 100 20 2023 1.6 Diesel 189 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2 8 36 0.38 100 20 2023 1.7 Diesel 206 Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1 6 37 0.48 100 20 2023 1.3 Diesel 76 Total Gasoline 12,380
Total Diesel 13,842
26,221
Onroad Construction Energy Use
Year 2023
Vehicle Types MPG by Fuel Type Population by Fuel Type
Gasoline Diesel Electricity Natural Gas Plug-in Hybrid Gasoline Diesel Electricity Natural Gas Plug-in Hybrid Total LDA 28.7 40.8 0.4 0.000 28.1 5,515,654 16,111 246,801 0 140,112 5,918,678 LDT1 24.0 23.3 0.4 0.000 27.9 513,619 205 1,026 0 477 515,327 LDT2 23.3 31.2 0.4 0.000 27.9 2,500,702 7,985 11,486 0 17,633 2,537,807 LHDT1 13.3 20.4 0.0 0.000 0.0 205,990 103,286 0 0 0 309,276 LHDT2 11.7 17.1 0.0 0.000 0.0 32,385 45,218 0 0 0 77,603 MCY 41.3 0.0 0.0 0.000 0.0 243,653 0 0 0 0 243,653
MDV 19.0 23.3 0.4 0.000 27.6 1,610,955 20,194 12,363 0 10,364 1,653,876 MH 4.9 10.1 0.0 0.000 0.0 31,496 12,114 0 0 0 43,610
MHDT 5.1 8.9 1.0 8.3 0.0 26,074 115,152 61 1,438 0 142,725 HHDT 3.9 6.0 1.8 5.9 0.0 80 97,908 78 9,873 0 107,939
OBUS 5.0 7.0 0.0 8.8 0.0 5,593 3,000 0 472 0 9,065
SBUS 8.9 7.3 1.2 4.2 0.0 2,806 3,532 4 3,125 0 9,467
UBUS 6.8 6.7 2.1 3.1 0.0 894 15 80 5,074 0 6,063
10,689,901 424,720 271,900 19,983 168,586 11,575,089
Daily Trips Gasoline Consumption Diesel Consumption
Phase Name Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vendor Haul Worker Vendor Haul Demolition 15 0 85 18.5 10.2 20
Site Preparation 18 0 0 18.5 10.2 20
Grading 20 0 0 18.5 10.2 20
Building Construction 100 15 0 18.5 10.2 20
Paving 15 0 0 18.5 10.2 20
Architectural Coating 20 0 0 18.5 10.2 20
Total Trips
Demolition 300 0 1700 18.5 10.2 20 235 0 6 1 0 5,157
Site Preparation 180 0 0 18.5 10.2 20 141 0 0 0 0 0
Grading 600 0 0 18.5 10.2 20 469 0 0 1 0 0
Building Construction 30000 4500 0 18.5 10.2 20 23,464 2,355 0 56 24 0 Paving 300 0 0 18.5 10.2 20 235 0 0 1 0 0
Architectural Coating 400 0 0 18.5 10.2 20 313 0 0 1 0 0 Total 24,856 2,355 6 59 24 5,157
Appendix B
EDR Radius Map™ Report with GeoCheck®

FORM-LBE-KKT
The EDR Radius Map™ Report with GeoCheck®
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
City of Stanton Town Center Specific Plan Project
Katella Avenue/Cerritos Avenue
Stanton, CA 90680
Inquiry Number: 6680025.2s
September 27, 2021

SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary ES1
Overview Map 2
Detail Map 3
Map Findings Summary 4
Map Findings 9
Orphan Summary 3516
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1

GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary A-2
Physical Setting SSURGO Soil Map A-6
Physical Setting Source Map A-15
Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-17
Physical Setting Source Records Searched PSGR-1
TC6680025.2s Page 1
Thank you for your business.

Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,

ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.

Copyright 2020 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.

EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).

The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-13), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E 2247-16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process (E 1528-14) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.

TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION

ADDRESS

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680

COORDINATES
Latitude (North): 33.8065660 - 33˚ 48’ 23.63’’
Longitude (West): 117.9910190 - 117˚ 59’ 27.66’’
Universal Tranverse Mercator: Zone 11
UTM X (Meters): 408270.8
UTM Y (Meters): 3740956.2
Elevation: 68 ft. above sea level

USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property Map: 5641294 ANAHEIM, CA
Version Date: 2012
West Map: 5633745 LOS ALAMITOS, CA
Version Date: 2012

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
Portions of Photo from: 20140513
Source: USDA
6680025.2s Page 2
B39 ABLE DEGASSING INC D 10572 CHESTNUT AVE U HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E38 ADVANCED PLUS INC 10521 DALE ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

A37 CITY COLLISION CENTE 8250 CERRITOS AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

E36 8440 CERRITOS BLVD, CDL Higher 1 ft.

E35 STANTON GRINDING 10529 DALE AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

F34 1X BOYDS WHEELS 8402 CERRITOS AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E33 EZ FLOW 10561 DALE STREET HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

B32 BEN JAPANESE CAR 8042 CERRITOS SUITE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

B31 PARK’S BODY SHOP INC 10522 CHESTNUT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E30 BEACH CITY GRINDING 10553 DALE AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E29 STANTON GRINDING 10529 DALE AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E28 ASSEMLY HOUSE 10555 DALE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

D27 NEWCOMB SPRING OF CA 8380 CERRITOS AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

A26 TO AUTO WORKS INVEST 8250 CERRITOS AVE. FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

A25 OC BODY TECH INC. DB 8250 CERRITOS AVE. RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

B24 ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE 10540 BEACH BLVD RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

B23 ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE 10540 BEACH BLVD FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

B22 HENRYS TIRES 8042 CERRITOS AVE ST RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

B21 ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE 10540 BEACH BLVD HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft. 20 10545 COURT STREET CHMIRS Higher 1 ft.

B19 STERLING PAVING CO I 10552 CHESTNUT AVE HIST UST Higher 1 ft.

B18 OC MOBILE MOTORSPORT 8042 CERRITOS UNIT G CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS Higher 1 ft.

B17 GARDNER TRACTOR SERV 10552 CHESTNUT AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

B16 GARDNER TRACTOR SERV 10552 CHESTNUT AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

B15 1X STERLING PAVING C 10552 CHESTNUT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

B14 1X STERLING PAVING C 10552 CHESTMIT AVENU HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

B13 GARDNER TRACTOR SERV 10552 CHESTNUT AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

D12 BANONE INVESTMENTS D 8310 CERRITOS AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

C11 SL&K INC DBA MATTSON 10529 BEACH BLVD HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

C10 DEL TACO, LLC 10529 BEACH BLVD HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

B9 M.T. WALKER 10541 CHESTNUT AVE SWEEPS UST, HIST UST Higher 1 ft.

B8 M T WALKER 10541 CHESTNUT HIST UST Higher 1 ft.

B7 M. T. WALKER CO. 10541 CHESTNUT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

B6 M T WALKER 10541 CHESTNUT HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

A5 INDIGEN ARMOR INC 10541 ASHDALE ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

A4 HOT RODS BY BOYD 10541 ASH DALE AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

A3 ELF, INCORPORATED 10541 ASH DALE AVENU HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

A2 SPECIALTY PRODUCTS 10541 ASH DALE AVENU RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO, HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

A1 SPECIALTY PRODUCTS C 10541 ASHDALE AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 3
A78 STANTON HILLS INC. D 8250 CERRITOS AVE. FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft. 77 THOMAS STURGON 10511 FLOWER HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

I76 JJ’S BURGERS, CHIEN- 10600 BEACH BLVD EMI Higher 1 ft.

E75 DOMEN LAWNMOWER 8470 CERRITOS AVE ST FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

E74 JERRY TRIPPY 8440 CERRITOS BLVD U HAZNET Higher 1 ft.

B73 CIRCLE K CONVENIENCE 10480 BEACH BLVD EDR Hist Auto Higher 1 ft.

A72 MAHOODS AUTOBODY 10540 FERN ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E71 T G T MANUFACTURING 8470 CERRITOS AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

B70 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS COM 10502 BEACH BLVD HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

D69 NEWCOMB SPRING OF CA 8380 CERRITOS AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

H68 SAME SUPPLY COMPANY 8260 CERRITOS AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E67 ADVANCED AUTO CENTER 8470 CERRITOS AVE #K ECHO Higher 1 ft.

A66 TO AUTO WORKS INVEST 8250 CERRITOS AVE. RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

G65 CUSTOM PIPE & COUPLI 10560 FERN AVE RCRA-LQG, CERS HAZ WASTE, ECHO, HAZNET, NPDES,... Higher 1 ft.

G64 CUSTOM PIPE & COUPLI 10560 FERN AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

G63 CUSTOM PIPE & FABRIC 10560 FERN AVE FINDS Higher 1 ft.

E62 HOLLANDER GLASS INC. 10579 DALE AVE. RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

D61 INVISION INC DBA NEW 8310 CERRITOS AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E60 HOLLANDER GLASS 10579 DALE AVENUE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

E59 HOLLANDER GLASS 10579 DALE AVENUE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

E58 HOLLANDER GLASS INC. 10579 DALE AVE. HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E57 A PLUS LABEL 10561 DALE AVE FINDS Higher 1 ft.

A56 MASTER MECHANICS AND 10540 ASHDALE ST FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

E55 DOMEN LAWNMOWER 8470 CERRITOS AVE ST RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

A54 OC BODY TECH INC. DB 8250 CERRITOS AVE. FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

E53 ADVANCED AUTO CENTER 8470 CERRITOS AVE #K FINDS Higher 1 ft.

A52 MASTER MECHANICS & M 10540 ASHDALE ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

A51 TO AUTO WORKS INVEST 8250 CERRITOS AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E50 1X HOLLANDER GLASS C 10579 DALE ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E49 RKDM ENVIRO-ENERGY S 10535 DALE AVE CERS Higher 1 ft.

E48 C&D ELECTRONICS 10555 DALE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

F47 SANITOR CORPORATION 8400 CERRITOS AVE CERS Higher 1 ft.

E46 CNC SYSTEM 10535 DALE ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E45 DOMEN LAWNMOWER 8470 CERRITOS AVE ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E44 QUALITY CYLINDER HEA 8470 CERRITOS AVE UN RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

B43 ABLE DEGASSING INC D 10572 CHESTNUT AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

B42 ABLE DEGASSING INC D 10572 CHESTNUT AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

B41 ABLE ENVIRONMENTAL S 10572 CHESTNUT ST HWT Higher 1 ft.

B40 AC SPRAGGING ENGINEE 10572 CHESTNUT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 4
A117 CITY COLLISION CENTE 8250 CERRITOS AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

J116 ABCO MFG CO 8062 MAIN ST CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

I115 7 DAY TIRE & AUTO RP 8052 MAIN HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

A114 TS COSMETIC LABS, IN 10540 ASHDALE ST CERS Higher 1 ft.

E113 C J GRINDING INC 10543 DALE AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

A112 CITY COLLISION CENTE 8250 CERRITOS AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

B111 HENRYS TIRES 8042 CERRITOS AVE ST FINDS Higher 1 ft.

D110 YSG AUTO BODY REPAIR 8310 CERRITOS AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

F109 BOYDS WHEELS INC 8402 CERRITOS AVENUE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E108 RKDM ENVIRO -ENERGY 10555 DALE AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

F107 K & J WIRE PRODUCTS 8400 CERRITOS HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

I106 H.V. LAWMASTER & COM 7940 MAIN ST RGA LUST Higher 1 ft.

I105 1X H V LAWMASTER AND 7940 MAIN STREET HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

I104 H V LAWMASTER CO INC 7940 MAIN LUST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Higher 1 ft.

I103 H V LAWMASTER CO INC 7940 MAIN RGA LUST Higher 1 ft.

I102 H. V. LAWMASTER & CO 7940 MAIN STREET EMI Higher 1 ft.

I101 H.V. LAWMASTER & COM 7940 MAIN STREET RGA LUST Higher 1 ft.

I100 H V LAWMASTER CO INC 7940 MAIN FINDS Higher 1 ft.

I99 H V LAWMASTER CO INC 7940 MAIN ST RGA LUST Higher 1 ft.

I98 EXPRESS SCREEN PRESS 7940 MAIN ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

J97 AUTOMOTIVE & PAINT S 8116 MAIN STREET RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

J96 AUTOMOTIVE & PAINT S 8116 MAIN STREET HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

J95 AUTOMOTIVE & PAINT S 8116 MAIN STREET FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

B94 PRO CARE AUTOMOTIVE 8042 CERRITOS AVE UN FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

E93 NEWCOMP SYSTEMS INC 10521 DALE ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

A92 MASTER MECHANICS AND 10540 ASHDALE ST RCRA-SQG Higher 1 ft.

E91 A+ LABEL 10561 DALE AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

A90 EZNAILS, INC 10540 ASHDALE ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

A89 STANTON HILLS INC. D 8250 CERRITOS AVE. RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

B88 L AUTO BODY 8042 CERRITOS STE E HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

C87 CITY OF STANTON 7932 CERRITOS AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E86 ALFA LAVAL 10559 DALE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

F85 SANITOR CORPORATION 8400 CERRITOS AVE FINDS Higher 1 ft.

E84 QUALITY CYLINDER HEA 8470 CERRITOS AVE UN HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

I83 USS CAL BUILDERS 8051 MAIN ST ICIS, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

I82 USS CAL BUILDERS 8051 MAIN ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

I81 USS CAL BUILDERS 8051 MAIN ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

I80 USS CAL BUILDERS 8051 MAIN ST CERS Higher 1 ft.

J79 D&L INVESTMENTS 10611 COURT AVENUE U HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 5
O156 STRUCTURAL STEEL FAB 10641 SYCAMORE AV NPDES, CERS Higher 1 ft.

D155 GOOD KNIGHT REPAIR, 8310 CERRITOS AVE HAZNET Higher 1 ft.

E154 C J GRINDING INC 10543 DALE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

N153 10641 FERN AVE CDL Higher 1 ft.

B152 PARKS BODY SHOP 10522 CHESTNUT AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

L151 COMMERCIAL RESTAURAN 8341 STANDUSTRIAL ST RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

L150 COMMERCIAL RESTAURAN 8341 STANDUSTRIAL ST FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

B149 HENRY’S TIRES 8042 CERRITOS AVE UN HAULERS, CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS Higher 1 ft.

E148 C J GRINDING INC 10543 DALE AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

H147 GOLDEN STATE WATER C 10521 FERN AV CERS Higher 1 ft.

M146 ALL METALS PROCESSIN 8371 STANDUSTRIAL ST EMI, CERS Higher 1 ft.

M145 ALL METALS PROCESSIN 8371/8401 STANDUSTRI Orange Co. Industrial Site Higher 1 ft.

M144 ALL METALS PROCESSIN 8401 STANDUSTRIAL ST SEMS-ARCHIVE, RCRA-LQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

M143 ALL METALS PROCESSIN 8401 STANDUSTRIAL ST CHMIRS, HAZNET, NPDES, CIWQS, CERS, NON-CASE INFO,...Higher 1 ft.

M142 ALL METALS PROCESSIN 8401 STANDUSTRIAL AV ENVIROSTOR Higher 1 ft.

M141 ALL METALS PROCESSIN 8401 STANDUSTRIAL ST CERS HAZ WASTE, HIST UST, TRIS, EMI, HAZNET, WDS,... Higher 1 ft.

E140 DIGITAL LABEL SOLUTI 10561 DALE AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

I139 FORMER SARANICK STAT 10632 BEACH BLVD ECHO Higher 1 ft.

E138 A PLUS LABELS 10527 DALE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

I137 BEACH MINI MART 10632 BEACH BLVD SWEEPS UST Higher 1 ft.

I136 SANTA ANA REGIONAL W 10632 BEACH BLVD LUST, Cortese, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

I135 BEACH MINI MART 10632 BEACH BLVD UST Higher 1 ft.

I134 FORMER SARANICK STAT 10632 BEACH BLVD FINDS Higher 1 ft.

I133 BEACH MINI MART 10632 BEACH BLVD EDR Hist Auto Higher 1 ft.

I132 SARANICK STATION 10632 BEACH RGA LUST Higher 1 ft.

E131 HOLLANDER INDUSTRIAL 10521-10579 DALE AVE CPS-SLIC Higher 1 ft.

I130 SARANICK STATION 10632 BEACH FINDS Higher 1 ft.

I129 SARANICK STATION 10632 BEACH BLVD RGA LUST Higher 1 ft.

I128 FORMER SARANICK STAT 10632 BEACH BLVD RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

L127 GARYS VW 8301 STANDUSTRIAL RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

A126 TO AUTO WORKS INVEST 8250 CERRITOS AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

E125 ADVANCED AUTO CENTER 8470 CERRITOS AVE #K RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

E124 BULLET GRINDING 10529 DALE ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E123 QUALITY CYLINDER HEA 8470 CERRITOS AVE UN FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

B122 PRO CARE AUTOMOTIVE 8042 CERRITOS AVE UN RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

K121 RANDOTTI CO, R.J. SM 7862 MAIN ST EMI Lower 1 ft.

I120 OSCARS AUTO CENTER 8046 MAIN ST UST Higher 1 ft.

I119 1X OSCAR’S AUTO CENT 8046 MAIN ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

I118 OSCARS AUTO CENTER 8046 MAIN ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 6
Q195 BD LOOPS INC 8161 MONROE AVE NPDES, CERS Lower 1 ft.

P194 1X MILLS, ROBERT 10652 FLOWER ST HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

M193 M & G CUSTOM POLISHI 8356 STANDUSTRIAL RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

T192 PURRFECT AUTO SERVIC 10711 BEACH BLVD HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Q191 A & S CEMENT CONTRAC 8140 MONROE AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

Q190 A & S CEMENT CONTRAC 8140 MONROE AV CERS Higher 1 ft.

Q189 A & S CEMENT CONTRAC 8140 MONROE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

M188 MAHOOD’S CUSTOM AUTO 8354 STANDUSTRIAL ST EMI Higher 1 ft.

S187 T.A. PUMP SALES AND 10770 BEACH BLVD RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

Q186 FLEMMING TRACTOR SER 8170 MONROE AVE UST Higher 1 ft.

Q185 FLEMMING TRACTOR SER 8170 MONROE ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Q184 K & G READY MIX INC 8237 MONROE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

M183 HOT WAX DISTRIBUTORS 8362 STANDUSTRIAL ST RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

R182 TTS ENGINEERING 10681 CHESTNUT AVENU RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

Q181 FREEDMAN INDUSTRIAL 8192 MONROE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

L180 FOX ELECTRIC MOTOR R 8307 STANDUSTRIAL RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO, HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E179 HOLLANDER GLASS INC. 10521 DALE AVE CHMIRS, CERS Higher 1 ft.

L178 CMM & INC 8305 STANDUSTRIAL ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

L177 IN-FLIGHT PRODUCT 8321 STANDUSTRIAL ST NPDES, CIWQS, CERS Higher 1 ft.

L176 IN-FLIGHT PRODUCT 8321 STANDUSTRIAL ST FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

P175 DPF MEDIC INC. 10645 BEACH BLVD FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

P174 DPF MEDIC INC. 10645 BEACH BLVD HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

P173 DPF MEDIC INC. 10645 BEACH BLVD RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

P172 STANTON RADIATOR INC 10645 BEACH BLVD RCRA-SQG, CERS HAZ WASTE, FINDS, ECHO, HAZNET,... Higher 1 ft.

M171 CHOP IT KUSTOM FIT 8351 STANDUSTRIAL ST NPDES Higher 1 ft.

M170 CARMET CO 8351 STANDUSTRIAL HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

M169 CHOP IT KUSTOM FIT 8351 STANDUSTRIAL ST FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

M168 SECURITY PAINTING 8361 STANDUSTRIAL RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

M167 1X C’S PRECISION SHE 8361 STANDUSTRIAL ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

D166 NEWCOMB SPRING OF CA 8380 CERRITOS AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

M165 H & D MOLDING COMPAN 8357 STANDUSTRIAL ST CERS Higher 1 ft.

E164 STANTON GRINDING 10529 DALE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

D163 J&M COLLISION CENTER 8310 CERRITOS AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

M162 ALL METALS PROCESSIN 8461 STANDUSTRIAL ST CERS Higher 1 ft.

M161 S & D LEASING 8459 STANDUSTRIAL AV EMI Higher 1 ft.

M160 PRO-COAT FINISHING 8459 STANDUSTRIAL AV HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

E159 T G T MANUFACTURING 8470 CERRITOS AVE UN HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

B158 HENRYS TIRES 8042 CERRITOS AVE ST ECHO Higher 1 ft.

O157 STRUCTURAL STEEL FAB 10641 SYCAMORE AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 7
AB234 1X RON’S PLUMBING 10671 FLOWER ST HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

L233 OCCS INC 10680 FERN AVE ECHO Higher 1 ft.

AA232 CITY OF STANTON CORP 8100 PACIFIC AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

V231 ZIONS FIRST NATIONAL 8097 PACIFIC STREET ECHO Higher 1 ft.

Q230 BAXTER GRIFFIN 8210 MONROE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Q229 BAXTER GRIFFIN 8210 MONROE AVENUE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Q228 BAXTER GRIFFIN 8210 MONROE AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Q227 BAXTER-GRIFFIN CO., 8210 MONROE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

Q226 BAXTER GRIFFIN CO 8210 MONROE AVE UST Lower 1 ft.

Z225 BARRE PEAKER 10670 DALE AVE. ECHO Higher 1 ft.

Q224 BAXTER GRIFFIN 8210 MONROE FINDS Lower 1 ft.

Q223 BAXTER GRIFFIN 8210 MONROE LUST, SWEEPS UST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Lower 1 ft.

V222 LIBERTY CABINETS 8097 PACIFIC ST EMI Higher 1 ft.

M221 CSD ENTERPRISES INC 8358 STANDUSTRIAL AV HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

J220 COTTER TREE SERVICE 10662 COURT STREET HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

L219 COUCH & PHILLIPPI 10680 FERN AVENUE RGA LUST Higher 1 ft.

M218 W C ENGINE & TRANS 8352 STANDUSTRIAL RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

R217 COMMERCIAL RESTAURAN 10692 CHESTNUT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Y216 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER 10761 COURT AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

Q215 1X WILSON, BUDDY 8231 MONROE ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

L214 COUCH & PHILIPPI INC 10680 FERN AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

L213 OCCS INC 10680 FERN AVENUE LUST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, NPDES, CIWQS, CERS Higher 1 ft.

M212 CHUCK CURREY 8358 STANDUSTRIAL ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

S211 GET SMART SCAFFOLD C 8072 MONROE AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

L210 COUCH & PHILIPPI INC 10680 FERN AVE. EMI Higher 1 ft.

Q209 K & G READY MIX INC 8237 MONROE AVE ECHO Higher 1 ft.

W208 ARAI AUTO SERVICE 8100 MONROE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

X207 AUTOWORKS 8281 MONROE ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

W206 ARAI AUTO SERVICE 8100 MONROE AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

W205 TASHIMA AUTO BODY IN 8100-8101 MONROE AV EMI Higher 1 ft.

W204 ARAI AUTO SERVICE 8100 MONROE AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

W203 TASHIMA AUTO BODY IN 8100,8101 MONROE AV EMI Higher 1 ft.

S202 GET SMART SCAFFOLD C 8072 MONROE AVE. EMI Higher 1 ft.

V201 10698 COURT STREET 10698 COURT STREET US CDL Higher 1 ft.

U200 VALOV SERVICES INC 8230 PACIFIC ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

L199 COUCH & PHILIPPI INC 10680 FERN ST EMI, CERS Higher 1 ft.

L198 COUCH AND PHILLIPI 10680 FERN AVE RGA LUST Higher 1 ft.

K197 CITY OF STANTON - PU 7871 PACIFIC ST HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

R196 CONVENIENCE TOWING & 10732 CHESTNUT AVE UST Higher 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 8
W273 A-1 ACCURATE AUTOMOT 10831 COURT ST HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

L272 OCCS INC 10680 FERN AVE FINDS Higher 1 ft.

L271 COUCH & PHILIPPI INC 10680 FERN ST FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

V270 J V & D V MFG INC 10681 COURT ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Q269 BEST DEAL INC 8171 MONROE AVE CIWQS Lower 1 ft.

K268 STANTON FIRE DEPT 7871 PACIFIC ST UST Lower 1 ft.

W267 A-1 ACCURATE AUTOMOT 10831 COURT AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS Higher 1 ft.

W266 TASHIMA AUTO BODY, I 8101 MONROE STREET HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Q265 FREEDMAN INDUSTRIAL 8192 MONROE AVE ECHO Higher 1 ft.

R264 1X AKIN, RON 10732 CHESTNUT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

X263 SOLAG DISPOSAL 8270 MONROE LUST, HIST CORTESE, CERS Lower 1 ft.

X262 1X GARDEN GROVE COME 8270 MONROE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

M261 HOT WAX DISTRIBUTORS 8362 STANDUSTRIAL ST RCRA-VSQG Higher 1 ft.

X260 SOLAG DISPOSAL 8270 MONROE FINDS Lower 1 ft.

X259 SOLAG DISPOSAL 8270 MONROE STREET RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

X258 MIKES RV SERVICE AND 8270 MONROE AVE FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

X257 SOLAG DISPOSAL 8270 MONROE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Q256 FREEDMAN INDUSTRIAL 8192 MONROE AVE FINDS Higher 1 ft.

X255 MIKES RV SERVICE AND 8270 MONROE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

X254 SOLAG DISPOSAL 8270 MONROE LUST, HIST UST, Cortese Lower 1 ft.

X253 MICHAEL SHAW 8270 MONROE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

X252 ORANGE COUNTY EXPRES 8270 MONROE AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

X251 SOLAG DISPOSAL 8270 MONROE AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

X250 SOLAG DISPOSAL 8270 MONROE ST RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Z249 SCE - BARRE PEAKER G 10670 DALE AVENUE AST Higher 1 ft.

AA248 STANTON CITY CORPORA 8152 8200 PACIFIC AV NPDES Higher 1 ft.

L247 ORANGE COUNTY CHEMIC 10680 FERN AVE HAZNET, NPDES, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

T246 PURRFECT AUTO SERVIC 10711 BEACH BLVD # 3 UST Higher 1 ft.

Z245 10670 DALE ST AST Higher 1 ft.

Y244 PEMCO ENGINEERS INC 10762 CHESTNUT HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

M243 M & G CUSTOM POLISHI 8356 STANDUSTRIAL ST NPDES Higher 1 ft.

U242 VALOV SERVICES INC 8230 PACIFIC ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

L241 RAVEN TOOL 8322 STANDUSTRIAL HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

U240 ABLE DEGASSING INC 8230 PACIFIC ST RCRA NonGen / NLR, HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

K239 CITY OF STANTON 10652 ROSE ST HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AA238 VALOV SERVICES 8239 PACIFIC ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

L237 COUCH AND PHILLIPI 10680 FERN RGA LUST Higher 1 ft.

X236 STANTON TRUCK & HEAV 8281 MONORE ST RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

Q235 FAILSAFE FIBERGLASS 8230 MONROE AVE STE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 9
L312 COUCH & PHILIPPI INC 10680 FERN AVE UST Higher 1 ft.

Z311 SO CAL EDISON CO 10670 DALE AVE FINDS Higher 1 ft.

Q310 PARTS OBSOLETE 8171 MONROE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

Q309 K G READY MIX INC 8241 MONROE AVE NPDES, CIWQS, CERS Higher 1 ft.

U308 BOBS TOWING 8230 PACIFIC ST UST Higher 1 ft.

AA307 CITY OF STANTON CORP 8100 PACIFIC AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

M306 FORMER QUICKSAND FAC 8358 STANDUSTRIAL ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

AA305 STANTON CITY CORPORA 8152 8200 PACIFIC AV CIWQS Higher 1 ft.

U304 ZIBA INVESTMENT CORP 8230 PACIFIC ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Q303 K & G READY MIX INC 8237 MONROE AVE FINDS Higher 1 ft.

AA302 CITY OF STANTON PUBL 8100 PACIFIC ST RGA LF Higher 1 ft.

R301 TQ AUTO SERVICE & RE 10661 CHESTNUT AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

Y300 PEMCO ENGINEERS INC 10762 CHESTNUT HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

R299 LUMINAR CORP 10692 CHESTNUT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

R298 TQ AUTO SERVICE & RE 10661 CHESTNUT AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

L297 ORANGE COUNTY CHEMIC 10680 FERN AVE ECHO Higher 1 ft.

W296 WESTERN AV. PROP-CAL 8151 HIST CORTESE Lower 1 ft.

W295 WESTERN AV. P. -CAL 8150 HIST CORTESE Lower 1 ft.

V294 CON M TRUCKING INC 10681 COURT AVE CIWQS Higher 1 ft.

W293 B B C KLEAN 10841 COURT ST HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

L292 FAT JACK ENTERPRISES 8322 STANDUSTRIAL UN RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

Q291 HARPER’S BACKHOE 8141 ELECTRIC AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Q290 HARPER’S BACKHOE SER 8141 ELECTRIC AVE FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

Q289 HARPER’S BACKHOE 8141 ELECTRIC AVENUE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Q288 HARPER’S BACKHOE SER 8141 ELECTRIC AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

M287 STANTON INDUSTRIAL C 8452 STANDUSTRIAL ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

K286 CITY FIRE STATION 7871 PACIFIC AVE HIST UST Lower 1 ft.

M285 VINYARD SYSTEMS MFG 8422 STANDUSTRIAL ST NPDES, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Q284 FREEDMAN INDUSTRIAL 8192 MONROE AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

W283 BERNARDO CONCRETE IN 10841 COURT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

W282 INLINE CONSTRUCTION 10841 COURT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AA281 CITY OF STANTON CORP 8100 PACIFIC ST SWF/LF, CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS TANKS, CERS Higher 1 ft.

U280 8230 PACIFIC ST. CHMIRS Higher 1 ft.

Q279 K G READY MIX INC 8241 MONROE AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

M278 HOT WAX DISTRUBUTORS 8362 STANDUSTRIAL ST FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

Q277 K&G READY MIX, INC. 8237 MONROE AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

T276 CON M TRUCKING INC 10700 FLOWER AVE CIWQS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

W275 A-1 ACCURATE AUTOMOT 10831 COURT ST RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

W274 A-1 ACCURATE AUTOMOT 10831 COURT ST FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 10
S351 DV TRAILERS 8072 MONROE AVENUE CERS HAZ WASTE, EMI, NPDES, CIWQS, CERS Higher 1 ft.

AC350 CALIFORNIA COMFORT V 8130 ELECTRIC RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AC349 RENEW ENTERPRISES 8130 ELECTRIC AVENUE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

AC348 CALIFORNIA COMFORT V 8130 ELECTRIC FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AB347 RONS PLUMBING 10671 FLOWER AVE UST Lower 1 ft.

AC346 CALIFORNIA COMFORT V 8130 ELECTRIC AVE LUST, Cortese, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

R345 PARTS UNLIMITED 10731 CHESTNUT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

AC344 W. AVE. PROP. CAL CO 8130 ELECTRIC AVENUE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AC343 3562 ORANGE COUNTY E 8130 ELECTRIC AVE FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AC342 CALIFORNIA COMFORT V 8130 ELECTRIC AVENUE UST Lower 1 ft.

Q341 BD LOOPS INC 8161 MONROE AVE CIWQS Lower 1 ft.

W340 G & G AUTO 8100 ELECTRIC AV HIST UST, EMI Lower 1 ft.

W339 8100 ELECTRIC AVE. ERNS Lower 1 ft.

Q338 BD LOOPS INC 8161 MONROE AVE FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

W337 1X CITY OF STOCKTON 8100 ELECTRIC AVENUE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

W336 WESTERN AVENUE PROPE 8100 ELECTRIC AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

W335 DRESSER DICHEM-STANT 8100 ELECTRIC AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

W334 G & G AUTO 8100 ELECTRIC AVE RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

Z333 BARRE GENERATING STA 10670 DALE AVE. FINDS Higher 1 ft.

W332 DRESSER DICHEM-STANT 8100 ELECTRIC AVE SEMS-ARCHIVE, RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

M331 VINYARD SYSTEMS MFG 8422 STANDUSTRIAL ST FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

W330 DICHEM DRESSER / CAL 8100 ELECTRIC AVENUE ENVIROSTOR, CHMIRS, HIST CORTESE Lower 1 ft.

U329 VALVO SERVICES INC 8230 PACIFIC ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Z328 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 10670 DALE AVE RCRA-LQG Higher 1 ft.

R327 10731 CHESTNUT AVE ERNS Higher 1 ft.

W326 TASHIMA AUTO BODY, I 8101 MONROE STREET HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Q325 3DIESEL INC 8151 ELECTRIC AVE ECHO Lower 1 ft.

Q324 WESTERN AV.PROP-CALI 8151 ELECTRIC AVENUE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Q323 3DIESEL INC 8151 ELECTRIC AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

Q322 CALIFORNIA SHIPPING 8151 ELECTRIC RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Q321 CALIFORNIA SHIPPING 8151 ELECTRIC FINDS Lower 1 ft.

Q320 CALIFORNIA SHIPPING 8151 ELECTRIC AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Q319 CALIFORNIA SHIPPING 8151 ELECTRIC AVE LUST, UST, Orange Co. Industrial Site, Cortese,... Lower 1 ft.

Q318 CALIFORNIA SHIPPING 8151 ELECTRIC AVENUE UST Lower 1 ft.

Q317 DI-CHEM/DRESSER 8100 8130 8150 8151 DRYCLEANERS Lower 1 ft.

Q316 WESTERN AV.PROP-CALI 8151 ELECTRIC AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Q315 3563 ORANGE COUNTY E 8151 ELECTRIC AVE FINDS Lower 1 ft.

Q314 FREEDMAN INDUSTRIAL 8192 MONROE AVE NPDES, WDS, CIWQS, CERS Higher 1 ft.

Q313 1X WESTERN AVE PROP. 8151 ELECTRIC AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 11
AD390 HARPER EQUIPMENT REN 8231 ELECTRIC AVE FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AD389 HARPERS BACKHOE SERV 8231 ELECTRIC AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

M388 M&G CUSTOM POLISHING 8356 STANDUSTRIAL AV NPDES, CIWQS, CERS Higher 1 ft.

AD387 HARPER’S BACKHOE SER 8231 ELECTRIC AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AD386 HARPERS BACKHOE SERV 8231 ELECTRIC FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AD385 HARPERS BACKHOE SERV 8231 ELECTRIC AVE LUST, UST, SWEEPS UST, CERS Lower 1 ft.

AC384 WESTERN AV.P.-CAL CO 8150 ELECTRIC AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AC383 CALIFORNIA COMFORT V 8150 ELECTRIC AVENUE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AC382 WESTERN AV.P.-CAL CO 8150 ELECTRIC AVENUE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

M381 QUICKSAND 8358 STANDUSTRIAL ST ENVIROSTOR, VCP Higher 1 ft.

AC380 BOYD’S WHEELS 8181 ELECTRIC AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AC379 WESTERN AVENUE PROPE 8181 ELECTRIC FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AC378 LEISURE WORLD UNION 8181 ELECTRIC AVE HAZNET, CIWQS, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AC377 CHARBONNEAUS TRACTOR 8181 ELECTRIC AVE UST Lower 1 ft.

AC376 WESTERN AVENUE PROPE 8181 ELECTRIC LUST, Cortese, WDS, CERS Lower 1 ft.

AC375 WESTERN AVE. PROP.-V 8181 ELECTRIC AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AC374 WESTERN AVENUE PROPE 8181 ELECTRIC AVENUE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AC373 WESTERN AVENUE PROPE 8181 ELECTRIC AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AC372 WESTERN AVENUE PROPE 8181 ELECTRIC RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

N371 TOM MATSUI 10681 FERN AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

AC370 WESTERN AVE. PROP.-V 8181 ELECTRIC AVENUE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Q369 PHIL SMITH PAINTING 8161 MONROE ST HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

O368 COTTERS TREE SERVICE 10662 COURT AVE SWEEPS UST Higher 1 ft.

T367 ALL TUNE AND LUBE 10711 BEACH HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

T366 PURRFECT AUTO SERVIC 10711 BEACH BLVD HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

S365 T/A PUMP SALES AND S 10770 BEACH BLVD CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

S364 1X GET SMART SCAFFOL 8072 MONROE AVE. HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

R363 JUNK IS MONEY INC DB 10731 CHESTNUT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

S362 DV TRAILERS 8072 MONROE AVENUE CERS Higher 1 ft.

R361 1X SMALL BUSINESS AS 10732 CHESTNUT STREE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

W360 SSO MEDICAL WASTE MA 8101 MONROE AVE HAZNET, HWT, MWMP, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

M359 VINEYARD SYSTEMS MAN 8422 STANDUSTRIAL NPDES, CIWQS, CERS Higher 1 ft.

M358 M & G CUSTOM POLISHI 8356 STANDUSTRIAL FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

Q357 G M INDUSTRIES, D R 8141 MONROE AVE EMI Lower 1 ft.

AC356 1X BJ TITAN SVCS 8171 ELECTRIC ST HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AC355 1X WESTERN AVENUE PR 8130 ELECTRIC AVENUE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AC354 WESTERN AVENUES PROP 8130 ELECTRIC AVE UST Lower 1 ft.

AC353 RENEW ENTERPRISES 8130 ELECTRIC AVENUE FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AC352 CALIFORNIA COMFORT V 8130 ELECTRIC AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 12
K429 SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAI 7800 PACIFIC ST UST Lower 1 ft.

S428 A 1 ACCURATE AUTOMOT 10782 BEACH BLVD RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

T427 PURRFECT AUTO SERVIC 10711 BEACH BLVD CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

M426 FORMER QUICKSAND FAC 8358 STANDUSTRIAL ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

V425 ZIONS FIRST NATIONAL 8097 PACIFIC STREET RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

L424 ORANGE COUNTY CHEMIC 10680 FERN AVE FINDS Higher 1 ft.

S423 T.A. PUMP SALES AND 10770 BEACH BLVD FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

K422 CITY FIRE STATION 7871 PACIFIC ST HIST UST Lower 1 ft.

V421 LIBERTY CABINETS INC 8097 PACIFIC ST FINDS Higher 1 ft.

P420 ROBERT MILLS LANDSCA 10652 FLOWER AVE UST Lower 1 ft.

M419 QUICKSAND 8358 STANDUSTRIAL AV FINDS Higher 1 ft.

AA418 CITY OF STANTON CORP 8100 PACIFIC AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

AC417 MOBILE FLEET LUB 8170 ELECTRIC RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO, HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

V416 FORMER LIBERTY CABIN 8091 PACIFIC ST Orange Co. Industrial Site Higher 1 ft.

X415 8251 MONROE STE #1, CHMIRS Higher 1 ft.

L414 COUCH & PHILLIPPI 10680 FERN AVE RGA LUST Higher 1 ft.

AA413 CITY OF STANTON DEPT 8100 PACIFIC HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Z412 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 10670 DALE AVE RCRA-LQG Higher 1 ft.

M411 QUICK SAND SANDBLAST 8358 STANDUSTRIAL EMI Higher 1 ft.

R410 10731 CHESTNUT AVENU CHMIRS Higher 1 ft.

R409 PARTS UNLIMITED 10731 CHESTNUT AVE NPDES, CIWQS Higher 1 ft.

Z408 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 10670 DALE AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

AD407 BILL MILLER 8191 ELECTRIC AVENUE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

W406 SSO MEDICAL WASTE MA 8101 MONROE AVE RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

U405 ABLE DEGASSING INC 8230 PACIFIC ST FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

M404 CHARLES CURREY 8358 STANDUSTRIAL ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Q403 FREEDMAN INDUSTRIAL 8211 MONROE AVE CERS Lower 1 ft.

Q402 BUDDY WILSON -PROPER 8231 MONROE AVE UST Higher 1 ft.

V401 ZIONS FIRST NATIONAL 8097 PACIFIC STREET FINDS Higher 1 ft.

Y400 10761 COURT AVE AST Higher 1 ft.

L399 OCCS INC. 10680 FERN AVE. SSTS Higher 1 ft.

Y398 PEMCO ENGINEERING 10762 CHESTNUT ST HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Z397 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 10670 DALE AVENUE FINDS Higher 1 ft.

AD396 HARPER EQUIPMENT REN 8231 ELECTRIC AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

AD395 HARPERS BACKHOE SERV 8231 ELECTRIC RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AD394 HARPER’S BACKHOE SER 8231 ELECTRIC AVENUE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AD393 1X HARPER’S BACKHOE 8231 ELECTRIC AVE. HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AD392 HARPERS BACKHOE SERV 8231 ELECTRIC LUST, AST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE Lower 1 ft.

AD391 HARPER EQUIPMENT REN 8231 ELECTRIC AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS TANKS, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 13
AJ468 UNITED ELECTRICAL EN 8032 CHESTER RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AG467 ABEL CONCRETE 8251 KATELLA AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AI466 KATELLA PLYWOOD AND 8121 KATELLA AVE FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AH465 ELF ELECTRONICS 8210 W KATELLA STE I HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AH464 GERMAN CAR SVC 8210 KATTELA UNIT I RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AG463 ABEL CONCRETE 8251 KATELLA RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AF462 MARTINIC ENGINEERING 10932 CHESTNUT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

R461 THOROUGHBRED OFFSHOR 10732 CHESTNUT AV EMI Higher 1 ft.

M460 MAHOOD’S AUTO BODY 8354 STANDUSTRIAL RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

Y459 PEMCO ENGINEERS INC 10762 CHESTNUT RCRA NonGen / NLR, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

R458 PARTS UNLIMITED 10731 CHESTNUT HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Q457 CUL A QUIP 8237 MONROE AVE UST Higher 1 ft.

Y456 CR ENGLAND & SONS IN 8090 PACIFIC AVE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

AE455 CHEMMARK OF LONG BEA 8210 ELECTRIC AVENUE FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AE454 CHEMMARK OF LONG BEA 8210 ELECTRIC AVENUE ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AE453 CHEM-MARK OF LONG BE 8210 ELECTRIC AV NPDES, CERS Lower 1 ft.

AE452 CHEMMARK OF LONG BEA 8210 ELECTRIC AVE SSTS Lower 1 ft.

AD451 JOHNSON & TURNER PAI 8241 ELECTRIC AVE LUST, UST, CERS HAZ WASTE, HIST UST, RCRA NonGen /... Lower 1 ft.

AD450 JOHNSON TURNER 8241 ELECTRIC AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AD449 JOHNSON & TURNER 8241 ELECTRIC RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AD448 JOHNSON AND TURNER 8241 ELECTRIC AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AD447 1X JOHNSON & TURNER 8241 ELECTRIC AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AD446 JOHNSON AND TURNER 8241 ELECTRIC AVENUE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

Y445 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER 10761 COURT AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS TANKS, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

T444 CON M TRUCKING - FLO 10700 FLOWER ST WDS Higher 1 ft.

M443 HOT WAX DISTRUBUTORS 8362 STANDUSTRIAL ST NPDES Higher 1 ft.

M442 VINEYARD SYSTEMS MAN 8422 STANDUSTRIAL FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

N441 SPARKS AUTOMOTIVE 10682 SYCAMORE HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

Y440 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER 10761 COURT AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1 ft.

R439 TTS ENGINEERING 10681 CHESTNUT AVENU FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

K438 FIRE STATION 46 7871 PACIFIC STREET CIWQS Lower 1 ft.

Z437 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 10670 DALE AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, EMI, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

R436 PARTS UNLIMITED 10731 CHESTNUT RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO, WIP Higher 1 ft.

R435 1X RON AKIN 10692 CHESTNUT HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

P434 GRUMPY’S HOG SHOP 10687 BEACH BLVD HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

R433 TQ AUTO SERVICE & RE 10661 CHESTNUT AVE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

M432 MAHOOD’S AUTO BODY 8354 STANDUSTRIAL HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1 ft.

S431 DV TRAILERS 8072 MONROE AVENUE FINDS, ECHO Higher 1 ft.

T430 STANTON METAL PRODUC 7931 PACIFIC ST UST Higher 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 14
AJ507 G & M OIL #50 10961 BEACH RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AF506 MARTINIC ENGINEERING 10932 CHESTNUT AVE FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AH505 CARIBIA INC 8200 KATELLA AVE, SU ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AG504 ABEL CONCRETE 8251 KATELLA AVE LUST, UST, Cortese, CERS Lower 1 ft.

AH503 NONE 8151 KATELLA AVENUE HIST UST, EMI, CERS Lower 1 ft.

AJ502 G AND M OIL SS #50 10961 BEACH BOULEVAR RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AF501 ORCO BLOCK & HARDSCA 8042 KATELLA AVE FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AF500 MARTINIC ENGINEERING 10932 CHESTNUT AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AG499 ABEL CONCRETE 8251 KATELLA FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AH498 EWLES MATERIALS 8182 KATELLA HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AF497 VERIZON WIRELESS: PL 8042 KATELLA AVE FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AD496 DESIGN FORM INC 8250 ELECTRIC AVE. FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AJ495 G AND M SS #50 10961 BEACH BOULEVAR RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AI494 KATELLA PLYWOOD AND 8121 KATELLA AVE ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AH493 TED R JENKINS 8182 KATELLA HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AJ492 1X JACK GEBELIN 8032 CHESTER STREET HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AJ491 12059 ORANGE COUNTY 10961 BEACH BLVD FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AJ490 G M OIL #50 10961 BEACH BLVD RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AF489 ORCO BLOCK CO INC 8042 KATELLA AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

AJ488 UNITED ELECTRICAL EN 8032 CHESTER AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AH487 JOHN B. EWLES INC 8182 KATELLA AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, EMI, CERS Lower 1 ft.

AJ486 G&M OIL CO 50 10961 SO BEACH BLVD HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AG485 ABEL CONCRETE 8251 KATELLA AVENUE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AF484 JOHNS FORKLIFT 10900 CHESTNUT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AF483 J&E FORKLIFT SERVICE 10900 CHESTNUT AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AJ482 G&M OIL CO 50 10961 SO BEACH BLVD RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

AJ481 JACK GEBELIN/UNITED 8032 CHESTER STREET HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AH480 EWLES MATERIALS 8182 KATELLA RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

AF479 ORCO BLOCK CO INC 8042 KATELLA AVE FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AF478 MALCO TOOL & MACHINE 10931 COURT ST RCRA NonGen / NLR, HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AG477 ABEL CONCRETE/FORMER 8251 KATELLA AVE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AF476 ORCO BLOCK & HARDSCA 8042 KATELLA AVE UST Lower 1 ft.

AF475 ORCO BLOCK COMPANY I 8042 KATELLA AVE UST, SWEEPS UST Lower 1 ft.

AH474 INTERNATIONAL AUTO T 8151 KATELLA AVE FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AI473 KATELLA PLYWOOD & LU 8121 KATELLA AVE UST, SWEEPS UST, CERS Lower 1 ft.

AI472 KATELLA PLYWOOD AND 8121 KATELLA AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

AF471 INTRO 10931 COURT ST HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AJ470 UNITED ELECTRICAL EN 8032 CHESTER FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AJ469 TARGET STATION #32 10961 BEACH BLVD # 3 UST Lower 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 15
AH546 EWLES MATERIALS STAN 8182 KATELLA AVE FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AJ545 G AND M OIL SS #50 10961 BEACH BLVD RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AJ544 UNITED ELECTRIC 8032 CHESTER AVE LUST, UST, Cortese, CERS Lower 1 ft.

AJ543 TARGET STATION #32 10961 S BEACH BLVD SWEEPS UST Lower 1 ft.

AJ542 G & M OIL CO LLC 10961 BEACH BLVD EDR Hist Auto Lower 1 ft.

AF541 ORCO BLOCK CO INC 8042 KATELLA AVE RCRA-SQG, HIST UST, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AI540 KATELLA PLYWOOD & LU 8121 KATELLA HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AH539 CARIBIA INC 8200 KATELLA AVE, SU FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AH538 CARIBIA INC 8200 KATELLA AVE STE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AH537 EWLES MATERIALS-STAN 8182 KATELLA AVE NPDES, WDS, CIWQS, CERS Lower 1 ft.

AF536 ORCO BLOCK CO INC 8042 KATELLA AVE EMI, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AJ535 G & M OIL CO 10961 SOUTH BEACH BL HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AF534 1X P M MART 8011 KATELLA AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AG533 ROSETTA REHDER 8251 KATELLA AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AI532 8121 KATELLA CHMIRS Lower 1 ft.

AJ531 G & M OIL #50 10961 BEACH BLVD LUST Lower 1 ft.

AH530 EWLES MATERIALS 8182 KATELLA FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AF529 ORCO BLOCK & HARDSCA 8042 KATELLA AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS TANKS, NPDES, CIWQS, CERS Lower 1 ft.

AH528 CARIBIA INC 8200 KATELLA AVE, SU RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

AI527 KATELLA PLYWOOD AND 8121 KATELLA AVE HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AH526 1X DEAN HILL 8151 KATELLA HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AH525 GOLDEN TOUCH AUTO BO 8151 KATELLA AVE FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AF524 JUAN P SANCHEZ 10951 COURT AVE PEST LIC Lower 1 ft.

AF523 ORCO BLOCK COMPANY-S 8042 KATELLA HAZNET, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AJ522 G & M OIL # 50 10961 BEACH BLVD # 5 UST Lower 1 ft.

AD521 DESIGN FORM 8250 ELECTRIC AVE NPDES, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AF520 MALCO TOOL & MACHINE 10931 COURT ST FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AJ519 G&M OIL CO. 10961 BEACH BLVD FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AF518 ORCO BLOCK COMPANY - 8042 KATELLA AVE HIST UST, WDS Lower 1 ft.

AF517 MARTINIC ENGINEERING 10932 CHESTNUT AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

AH516 INTERNATIONAL AUTO T 8151 KATELLA AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1 ft.

AJ515 UNITED ELECTRICAL EN 8032 CHESTER STREET RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AH514 ABEL CONCRETE 8151 KATELLA AVENUE RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AH513 JOHN B. EWLES INC 8182 KATELLA AVE FINDS Lower 1 ft.

AH512 INTERNATIONAL AUTO T 8151 KATELLA AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AF511 ORCO BLOCK COMPANY S 8042 KATELLA AVE AST Lower 1 ft.

AE510 FIELD TIME TARGET AN 8230 ELECTRIC AVE RCRA-LQG, FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

AJ509 G&M OIL CO. #50 10961 BEACH BLVD LUST, CERS HAZ WASTE, HIST UST, CERS TANKS,... Lower 1 ft.

AJ508 G&M OIL CO 50 10961 SO BEACH BLVD FINDS, ECHO Lower 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 16
AN585 SIGNS & SERVICES CO 10980 BOATMAN AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Lower 318, 0.060, SE AQ584 ORANGE COUNTY BOAT R 8351 MONROE AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 311, 0.059, ESE AQ583 MAGNOLIA DRAPERY CLE 8368 C MONROE ST RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO, HAZNET, HWTS Higher 293, 0.055, ESE AO582 GRAPHICS WEST 8349 KATELLA RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Lower 288, 0.055, SE AP581 RELIABLE CLEANERS EN 11182 BEACH BLVD EDR Hist Cleaner Lower 285, 0.054, SSW AS580 CAL TRANS 8122 KATELLA SWF/LF, LUST, HIST UST, Cortese, CERS Lower 284, 0.054, South AS579 CALTRANS D12 STANTON 8122 KATELLA AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HWTS Lower 284, 0.054, South AS578 CAL TRANS STANTON MT 8122 KATELLA AVE RCRA-SQG, UST Lower 284, 0.054, South AR577 ABLE DEGASSING INC D 10741 DALE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 279, 0.053, East AN576 EINHORN INDUSTRIES L 10960 BOATMAN AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 271, 0.051, ESE AN575 CHEMICAL WASTE MANAG 10960 BOATMAN WY RCRA NonGen / NLR, FINDS, ECHO Lower 271, 0.051, ESE AQ574 KERN PRODUCTS 8341 MONROE AVE LUST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Higher 251, 0.048, ESE AP573 ELEANOR PERRIER 11151 BEACH BLVD UST, SWEEPS UST Lower 243, 0.046, SSW AP572 AMERICAN CAMPER SHEL 11151 BEACH LUST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Lower 243, 0.046, SSW AO571 FORD WHOLESALE COMPA 8302 KATELLA AVE CERS TANKS, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Lower 226, 0.043, SE AO570 FORD WHOLESALE CO IN 8302 KATELLA AVE UST Lower 226, 0.043, SE AN569 MAACO AUTO PAINTING 10981 BOATMAN AVE RCRA-SQG, CERS HAZ WASTE, FINDS, ECHO, EMI,... Lower 189, 0.036, SE AM568 DALE CLEANERS 10428 DALE ST DRYCLEANERS Higher 173, 0.033, NE AM567 DALE CLEANERS 10428 DALE AVE RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 173, 0.033, NE AM566 DALE CLEANERS 10428 DALE AV EDR Hist Cleaner Higher 173, 0.033, NE Z565 STANTON ENERGY RELIA 10711 DALE AVENUE RCRA-SQG Higher 172, 0.033, East Z564 W POWER, LLC 10711 DALE AVE. RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 172, 0.033, East Z563 STANTON ENERGY RELIA 10711 DALE AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS TANKS, NPDES, CIWQS, CERS,... Higher 172, 0.033, East AL562 7-ELEVEN STORE 24559 10499 BEACH STREET SWEEPS UST, HIST UST Higher 128, 0.024, NNW AL561 7-ELEVEN STORE 2112- 10499 BEACH BLVD RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 128, 0.024, NNW AL560 KOZAK RAY 10499 BEACH BLVD EDR Hist Auto Higher 128, 0.024, NNW AL559 7-ELEVEN STORE #2455 10499 BEACH BLVD LUST, HIST UST, Cortese, CERS Higher 128, 0.024, NNW AL558 7-ELEVEN 10499 BEACH UST Higher 128, 0.024, NNW
AL557 7-ELEVEN STATION #24 10499 BEACH BLVD LUST Higher 128, 0.024, NNW AL556 7 - ELEVEN FOOD STOR 10499 BEACH BLVD UST Higher 128, 0.024, NNW 555 TONY TRAN 10840 ROSE ST RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 102, 0.019, WSW AK554 SCHRADER STEPHAN 11001 BEACH BLVD EDR Hist Auto Lower 88, 0.017, SSW AK553 BRIGHT NOW DENTAL A 11001 BEACH BLVD RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 88, 0.017, SSW 552 HOMMERS UNION SERVIC 11002 BEACH EDR Hist Auto Lower 49, 0.009, SSW C551 ESTHER SY DMD 10468 BEACH BLVD RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 19, 0.004, NNW AF550 UNITED ELECTRICAL EN 8032 HIST CORTESE Lower 1 ft.

AE549 FIELD TIME TARGET AN 8230 ELECTRIC AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, EMI, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Lower 1 ft.

AJ548 G & M OIL #50 10961 BEACH BLVD RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

AJ547 UNITED ELECTRICAL EN 8032 CHESTER ST RGA LUST Lower 1 ft.

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 17
AV624 JAZZ AUTO BODY & PAI 8420 KATELLA AVE STE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 719, 0.136, SE AV623 SOUTHSIDE AUTOMOTIVE 8418 KATELLA AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 714, 0.135, SE AV622 PATS LAWNMOWER AND S 8414 KATELLA AVE RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 699, 0.132, SE AV621 PATS LAWNMOWER & SAW 8414 KATELLA AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 699, 0.132, SE AV620 DARCO CONSTRUCTION 8402 KATELLA AVE CERS TANKS, CERS Higher 658, 0.125, SE AV619 DARCO CONSTRUCTION 8402 KATELLA RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 658, 0.125, SE AV618 DARLING DENVER D INC 8402 KATELLA AVE EDR Hist Auto Higher 658, 0.125, SE 617 BEE LINE ASPHALT CO 10821 DALE STREET HIST UST Higher 631, 0.120, ESE AU616 HOT ROD & HOGS 8400 MONROE AVE #4 CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 614, 0.116, ESE AU615 B GERMAN LOPEZ REMOD 8400 MONROE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 614, 0.116, ESE AU614 T & H MACHINING INC 8400 MONROE AVE STE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 614, 0.116, ESE AU613 BENITO LOPEZ 8400 MONROE AVE. RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 614, 0.116, ESE AX612 LKQ PICK YOUR PART 8188 KATELLA AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 598, 0.113, SSE AX611 8188 KATELLA AVE AST Higher 598, 0.113, SSE
AX610 ADMORE AUTO DISMANT 8188 KATELLA AST, CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS TANKS, NPDES, WDS,... Higher 598, 0.113, SSE AT609 COUNTY OF ORANGE/STA 7850 KATELLA AVE. RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 588, 0.111, SW AW608 MARWIN CONSTRUCTION 10755 OAK ST RCRA-SQG, LUST, FINDS, ECHO, Cortese, HAZNET, HIST... Lower 528, 0.100, West AW607 MARWIN CONSTRUCTION 10755 OAK ST HIST UST Lower 528, 0.100, West AR606 BEE LINE ASPHALT CO 10821 DALE AVE UST, HIST UST Higher 524, 0.099, East AR605 BEE LINE ASPHALT & C 10821 DALE LUST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Higher 524, 0.099, East AV604 EDS MACHINE SVC 8376 KATELLA AVE RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 513, 0.097, SE AU603 AERO MARINE SERVICE 8391 MONROE AVE EDR Hist Auto Higher 513, 0.097, East AQ602 HOT RODS BY BOYD INC 8372 MONROE RCRA NonGen / NLR, FINDS, ECHO, EMI, HAZNET, HWTS Higher 497, 0.094, ESE AO601 GOLDEN RECYCLE COMPA 8372 KATELLA AVENUE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 493, 0.093, SE AQ600 MAGNOLIA DRAPERIES 8368 MONROE AVE EDR Hist Cleaner Higher 468, 0.089, ESE AQ599 MAGNOLIA DRAPERY CLE 8368 MONROE ST DRYCLEANERS Higher 468, 0.089, ESE AQ598 MAGNOLIA DRAPERY CLE 8368 MONROE AVE DRYCLEANERS Higher 468, 0.089, ESE AQ597 EXOTIC CHEM CO INC 8371 MONROE AVE RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 461, 0.087, ESE 596 WILLIAM GAVINO 10601 TAMARACK WAY RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 445, 0.084, WNW AQ595 REBECCA VALE 8362 MONROE AVE. RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 439, 0.083, ESE AQ594 CBS BUG SHOP #2 8362 MONROE AVE RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 439, 0.083, ESE AO593 GOLDEN RECYCLE CO 8352 KATELLA AVE SWRCY, NPDES, CIWQS, CERS Lower 401, 0.076, SE AO592 GOLDEN RECYLCE COMPA 8352 KATELLA AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 401, 0.076, SE AT591 FOOD 4 LESS # 518 7910 KATELLA AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Lower 398, 0.075, SW AT590 FOOD 4 LESS # 518 7910 KATELLA AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 398, 0.075, SW AO589 PENHALL EQUIPMENT 8351 KATELLA AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 393, 0.074, SE AO588 PENHALL DIAMOND PROD 8351 KATELLA AVE RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Lower 393, 0.074, SE AQ587 HI TECH TREATMENT CO 8355 MONROE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR, FINDS, ECHO, HAZNET, HWTS Higher 370, 0.070, ESE AN586 SIGNS AND SERVICES 10980 BOATMAN AVE RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Lower 318, 0.060, SE

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 18
BH663 PYTHON INJECTION 8625 CENTRAL AVE NO RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1136, 0.215, ESE BH662 K2 AUTOMOBILE SERVIC 8625 CENTRAL AVE STE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1136, 0.215, ESE BC661 MELSMITH ELECTRIC IN 10950 DALE ST CERS TANKS, CERS Higher 1078, 0.204, ESE BC660 ROBINSON AND PREZIGO 10950 DALE LUST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Higher 1078, 0.204, ESE BC659 ROBISON-PREZIOSO 10950 DALE STREET RCRA-LQG Higher 1078, 0.204, ESE BC658 FIRESTONE BUILDING M 10961 DALE RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO, HAZNET, HWTS Higher 1068, 0.202, ESE BC657 RESOURCE BUILDING MA 10961 DALE AVE LUST, Cortese, CERS Higher 1068, 0.202, ESE BC656 FIRESTONE BUILDING M 10961 DALE ST SWEEPS UST Higher 1068, 0.202, ESE 655 HAT-PHI DONG 7881 JOEL AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1055, 0.200, SSW BG654 CAMERON WELDING SUPP 11061 DALE ST LUST, HIST UST, Cortese, NPDES, CERS Higher 1050, 0.199, SE BF653 MAGAY HANNA 7652 CERRITOS AVE UST Lower 1046, 0.198, WNW BE652 UNOCAL COP #7462 8472 KATELLA AVE LUST, Cortese, CERS Higher 1035, 0.196, SE BE651 G&M OIL CO. #156 8472 KATELLA AVE UST Higher 1035, 0.196, SE BE650 BETHELL SHELL 8472 KATELLA HIST UST Higher 1035, 0.196, SE BE649 G & M OIL CO #156 8472 KATELLA AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1035, 0.196, SE BE648 G&M OIL CO. #156 8472 KATELLA AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS TANKS, CHMIRS, CERS Higher 1035, 0.196, SE BE647 SHELL STN 007 8472 KATELLA HIST UST Higher 1035, 0.196, SE BE646 UNOCAL #7462 8472 KATELLA AVE LUST, SWEEPS UST Higher 1035, 0.196, SE BF645 SAHADA-MIYAKE FARMS 7651 CERRITOS AVE HIST UST Lower 1033, 0.196, WNW BE644 STANTON WHOLESALE TI 10971 DALE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1031, 0.195, ESE BE643 STANTON WHOLESALE TI 10971 DALE AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS Higher 1031, 0.195, ESE BC642 DC AUTOMOTIVE ELECTR 8541 CENTRAL AVE STE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1016, 0.192, ESE BE641 UNOCAL #7462 8472 HIST CORTESE Higher 998, 0.189, SE BD640 HARUO HAYASHI 10390 LANDERS WAY RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 990, 0.188, NW BC639 ALLEC TRUCKING 10881 DALE AVE UST Higher 950, 0.180, ESE BB638 KATELLA HOSPITAL 7770 SWEEPS UST, HIST CORTESE Lower 913, 0.173, SW BB637 SUNCREST HOSPITAL OF 7770 KATELLA AVE UST Lower 913, 0.173, SW BB636 KATELLA HOSPITAL 7770 KATELLA LUST, Cortese, CERS Lower 913, 0.173, SW AY635 COAST TO COAST CAR R 8447 KATELLA AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 880, 0.167, ESE AY634 CRUZ TIRES & AUTO RE 8447 KATELLA AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 880, 0.167, ESE 633 CHEVRON STATION SW88 11250 BEACH BLVD RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Lower 868, 0.164, South BA632 BARRE SUBSTATION 8662 CERRITOS AVE. RCRA-LQG Higher 794, 0.150, ENE BA631 SCE BARRE SUBSTATION 8662 CERRITOS AVE LUST, SWEEPS UST, HIST UST, CERS TANKS, Cortese,... Higher 794, 0.150, ENE AZ630 CITY OF STANTON 11100 CEDAR LUST, HIST UST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Lower 759, 0.144, SW AZ629 ORANGE COUNTY SHERIF 11100 CEDAR STREET UST Lower 759, 0.144, SW AZ628 STANTON POLICE DEPAR 11100 CEDAR ST HIST UST Lower 759, 0.144, SW AV627 AUTOMOTIVE RPR CO 8443 KATTELA RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 733, 0.139, SE AY626 NANCY ROHRS & MARK L 10961 DALE AVE UST Higher 730, 0.138, ESE 625 KARINA BARRON 8622 LULLABY LN RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 727, 0.138, ENE

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 19
BM702 INSTA - TUNE 11462 BEACH LUST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Lower 1832, 0.347, South 701 VISTA PAINT STORE 8615 KATELLA AVE LUST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Higher 1477, 0.280, ESE BL700 PENN PIPE & SUPPLY C 11121 DALE LUST, SWEEPS UST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Higher 1445, 0.274, SE BL699 CAMERON WELDING COMP 11061 HIST CORTESE Higher 1422, 0.269, SE BI698 555 AUTO CENTER 8555 KATELLA LUST, Cortese, EMI, HIST CORTESE, CERS Higher 1385, 0.262, ESE BI697 555 AUTO CENTER 8555 N KATELLA AVE LUST Higher 1385, 0.262, ESE BK696 GEOVANY SANDOVAL 10441 DRAKE WAY RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1316, 0.249, WNW BK695 GEOVANI SANDOVAL 10441 DRAKE WAY RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1316, 0.249, WNW BH694 ADVANCED DISPLAY SYS 8614 CENTRAL AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1300, 0.246, ESE BH693 ADVANCED DISPLAY SYS 8614 CENTRAL AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1300, 0.246, ESE 692 STONE 10818 MITCHELLE DRIV RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1272, 0.241, West BJ691 GREGS AUTO 10241 BEACH BLVD RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1269, 0.240, NNW BJ690 CHASE LEASE REMARKET 10241 BEACH BLVD RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1269, 0.240, NNW BF689 CAROL BISHOP 10440 DRAKE WAY RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1250, 0.237, WNW BG688 PENN PIPE & SUPPLY 11121 DALE AVE UST Higher 1240, 0.235, SE BH687 NEWPORT INDUSTRIAL G 8610 CENTRAL AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1238, 0.234, ESE BH686 NEWPORT INDUSTRIAL G 8610 CENTRAL AVE HIST UST, HAZNET, NPDES, CIWQS, HWTS Higher 1238, 0.234, ESE BE685 ARCO PM MART 8511 KATELLA LUST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Higher 1230, 0.233, ESE BE684 AUTO MAT 8 8511 KATELLA AVE HIST UST Higher 1230, 0.233, ESE BE683 MAT AUTO CENTER 8519 KATELLA RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO Higher 1209, 0.229, ESE BE682 M A T 8519 KATELLA AVE UST, SWEEPS UST Higher 1209, 0.229, ESE BD681 AMANDA LEE 10390 MILLS WAY RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1203, 0.228, NW BH680 C&F WIRE PRODUCTS DI 8536 CENTRAL AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1168, 0.221, ESE BH679 C&F WIRE PRODUCTS DI 8536 CENTRAL AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1168, 0.221, ESE BI678 NEW YOUNG’S AUTOBODY 10960 DALE AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1167, 0.221, ESE BJ677 B & J AUTO REPAIR 10281 BEACH BLVD CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1160, 0.220, NNW BJ676 B & J AUTO REPAIR 10281 BEACH BLVD RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1160, 0.220, NNW 675 PLAZA CLEANERS 11372 BEACH BLVD DRYCLEANERS Lower 1150, 0.218, South 674 CHAMELEON TRUCKING I 26 GREENBRIER CT RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 1150, 0.218, SW BI673 MEL SMITH ELECTRIC I 8520 CENTRAL AVE UST, AST, SWEEPS UST Higher 1148, 0.217, ESE BI672 SAME AS ABOVE 8520 CENTRAL AV HIST UST Higher 1148, 0.217, ESE BE671 P M MART 8505 KATELLA AVE SWEEPS UST Higher 1146, 0.217, ESE BE670 AUTO MAT 8505 LUST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Higher 1146, 0.217, ESE BE669 UNITED #015 8505 KATELLA AVE CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS TANKS, CERS Higher 1146, 0.217, ESE BE668 APRO LLC DBA UNITED 8505 KATELLA AVE RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 1146, 0.217, ESE BE667 AUTOMAT STATION 8505 KATELLA AVE. UST Higher 1146, 0.217, ESE BE666 AUTOMAT OIL 8505 KATELLA UST Higher 1146, 0.217, ESE BE665 P M MART 8505 KATELLA AVE LUST, UST Higher 1146, 0.217, ESE BH664 PYTHON INJECTION INC 8625 CENTRAL AVE NO CERS HAZ WASTE, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 1136, 0.215, ESE

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS 6680025.2s Page 20
726 LINFINITY MICROELECT 11652 MARKON ST RCRA-LQG, ENVIROSTOR, LUST, CPS-SLIC, CHMIRS,... Lower 5266, 0.997, SW 725 LOS ANGELES DEFENSE AREA BOUNDED BY KNOT ENVIROSTOR Lower 4852, 0.919, SW 724 BASIC ELECTRONICS, I 11762 WESTERN AVENUE ENVIROSTOR Lower 4037, 0.765, SSW 723 PERKIN-ELMER, APLID 7421 ORANGEWOOD AV ENVIROSTOR, EMI, CERS Lower 3341, 0.633, SW 722 CALSCIENCE ENVIRONME 7440 LINCOLN WAY ENVIROSTOR Lower 2990, 0.566, SW BR721 CHALLENGE MARKETING 10502 S MAGNOLIA AVE LUST, SWEEPS UST, HIST UST, CA FID UST Higher 2628, 0.498, ENE BP720 C R AND R RECYCLING 11262 WESTERN SWRCY, HIST UST, EMI Lower 2608, 0.494, SW BR719 CHALLENGE MARKETING 10502 HIST CORTESE Higher 2602, 0.493, ENE BQ718 CHEVRON STATION #923 2792 W BALL RD LUST, SWEEPS UST, CA FID UST Higher 2590, 0.491, NNE BQ717 CHEVRON #9-2378 2792 LUST, HIST CORTESE Higher 2590, 0.491, NNE BQ716 92378 2792 W BALL RD LUST, HIST UST, Cortese, CERS Higher 2590, 0.491, NNE BQ715 THRIFTY OIL #360 2800 BALL RD LUST Higher 2534, 0.480, NNE BQ714 TESORO REFINING & MA 2800 W BALL RD LUST, HIST UST, Cortese, HAZNET, CERS, HWTS Higher 2534, 0.480, NNE BO713 WORLD OIL STATION #7 1201 S BEACH BLVD LUST, Cortese, CERS Higher 2518, 0.477, NNW BO712 WORLD OIL #72 1201 BEACH BLVD LUST Higher 2518, 0.477, NNW 711 MODERN ALLOYS INC 11172 WESTERN AVE RCRA-SQG, LUST, UST, CERS HAZ WASTE, SWEEPS UST,...Lower 2489, 0.471, SW BP710 CR R INC 11292 WESTERN AVE SWF/LF, LUST, HAULERS, CERS HAZ WASTE, SWEEPS UST,... Lower 2452, 0.464, SW BP709 CR AND R INC 11292 WESTERN AVE RCRA-SQG, LUST, FINDS, ECHO, WDS Lower 2452, 0.464, SW BO708 PICK YOUR PART AUTO 1235 BEACH BLVD. S. LUST, Cortese Higher 2311, 0.438, NNW 707 RUSS YOUNG 7542 INDUSTRIAL LUST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Lower 2173, 0.412, WSW BN706 SN&MLAJ, INC. 7470 CERRITOS AVE LUST, CERS HAZ WASTE, CERS TANKS, CERS Lower 2056, 0.389, WNW BN705 ARCO 7470 CERRITOS LUST, SWEEPS UST, HIST UST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE,... Lower 2056, 0.389, WNW BM704 THRIFTY OIL #361 11500 BEACH BLVD LUST, SWEEPS UST, Cortese, HIST CORTESE, CERS Lower 2047, 0.388, South 703 TOSCO - 76 #5635 7501 KATELLA AVE LUST, Cortese, CERS Lower 2035, 0.385, WSW

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:

KATELLA AVENUE/CERRITOS AVENUE
STANTON, CA 90680
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 21

TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.

DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the following databases:

STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL National Priority List
Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites
NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions
Federal CERCLIS list
FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing SEMS Superfund Enterprise Management System
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries LUCIS Land Use Control Information System
US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROLS Institutional Controls Sites List
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
RESPONSE State Response Sites
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land State and tribal registered storage tank lists
FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 22
INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS Considered Brownfieds Sites Listing

ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
WMUDS/SWAT Waste Management Unit Database
INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations ODI Open Dump Inventory
IHS OPEN DUMPS Open Dumps on Indian Land
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL Delisted National Clandestine Laboratory Register HIST Cal-Sites Historical Calsites Database
SCH School Property Evaluation Program
Toxic Pits Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites
PFAS PFAS Contamination Site Location Listing
Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks
CA FID UST Facility Inventory Database
Local Land Records
LIENS Environmental Liens Listing
LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information
DEED Deed Restriction Listing
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
LDS Land Disposal Sites Listing
MCS Military Cleanup Sites Listing
SPILLS 90 SPILLS 90 data from FirstSearch
Other Ascertainable Records
FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites
DOD Department of Defense Sites
SCRD DRYCLEANERS State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 23
US FIN ASSUR Financial Assurance Information

EPA WATCH LIST EPA WATCH LIST
2020 COR ACTION 2020 Corrective Action Program List
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
ROD Records Of Decision
RMP Risk Management Plans
PRP Potentially Responsible Parties
PADS PCB Activity Database System
FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System
COAL ASH DOE Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data
COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database
RADINFO Radiation Information Database
HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data
CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations
FUSRAP Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
LEAD SMELTERS Lead Smelter Sites
US AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem US MINES Mines Master Index File
ABANDONED MINES Abandoned Mines
DOCKET HWC Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing
UXO Unexploded Ordnance Sites
FUELS PROGRAM EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing
CA BOND EXP. PLAN Bond Expenditure Plan
CUPA Listings CUPA Resources List
ENF Enforcement Action Listing
Financial Assurance Financial Assurance Information Listing

ICE ICE
HWP EnviroStor Permitted Facilities Listing
MINES Mines Site Location Listing
Notify 65 Proposition 65 Records
UIC UIC Listing

UIC GEO UIC GEO (GEOTRACKER)
WASTEWATER PITS Oil Wastewater Pits Listing

MILITARY PRIV SITES MILITARY PRIV SITES (GEOTRACKER)

PROJECT PROJECT (GEOTRACKER)
WDR Waste Discharge Requirements Listing

OTHER OIL GAS OTHER OIL & GAS (GEOTRACKER)

PROD WATER PONDS PROD WATER PONDS (GEOTRACKER)

SAMPLING POINT SAMPLING POINT (GEOTRACKER)
WELL STIM PROJ Well Stimulation Project (GEOTRACKER)
MINES MRDS Mineral Resources Data System
HWTS Hazardous Waste Tracking System

EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 24
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were identified in the following databases.

Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property.

Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed data on individual sites can be reviewed.

Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases.

Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.

STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
SEMS-ARCHIVE: SEMS-ARCHIVE (Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive) tracks sites that have no further interest under the Federal Superfund Program based on available information. The list was formerly known as the CERCLIS-NFRAP, renamed to SEMS ARCHIVE by the EPA in 2015. EPA may perform a minimal level of assessment work at a site while it is archived if site conditions change and/or new information becomes available. Archived sites have been removed and archived from the inventory of SEMS sites. Archived status indicates that, to the best of EPA’s knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list the site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. The decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that. based upon available information, the location is not judged to be potential NPL site.

A review of the SEMS-ARCHIVE list, as provided by EDR, and dated 07/29/2021 has revealed that there are 2 SEMS-ARCHIVE sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ ALL METALS PROCESSIN 8401 STANDUSTRIAL ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) M144 930 Site ID: 0900052
EPA Id: CAD009675067
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ DRESSER DICHEM-STANT 8100 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) W332 1593 Site ID: 0900946
EPA Id: CAD000632984
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-LQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 25
dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.

A review of the RCRA-LQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/22/2021 has revealed that there are 7 RCRA-LQG sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CUSTOM PIPE & COUPLI 10560 FERN AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) G65 222 EPA ID:: CAD981380140
ALL METALS PROCESSIN 8401 STANDUSTRIAL ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) M144 930 EPA ID:: CAD009675067
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 10670 DALE AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Z328 1585 EPA ID:: CAL000317813
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 10670 DALE AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Z412 1774 EPA ID:: CAP000273664
BARRE SUBSTATION 8662 CERRITOS AVE. ENE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.150 mi.) BA632 2837 EPA ID:: CAD981694060
ROBISON-PREZIOSO 10950 DALE STREET ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.204 mi.) BC659 2942 EPA ID:: CAD982324642
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ FIELD TIME TARGET AN 8230 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AE510 2183 EPA ID:: CAR000235747
RCRA-SQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month.

A review of the RCRA-SQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/22/2021 has revealed that there are 36 RCRA-SQG sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ SPECIALTY PRODUCTS 10541 ASH DALE AVENU 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) A2 10 EPA ID:: CAD982513962
MASTER MECHANICS AND 10540 ASHDALE ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) A92 452 EPA ID:: CAR000174037
GARYS VW 8301 STANDUSTRIAL 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) L127 626 EPA ID:: CAD981441694
SECURITY PAINTING 8361 STANDUSTRIAL 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) M168 1108 EPA ID:: CAD983585688
STANTON RADIATOR INC 10645 BEACH BLVD 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) P172 1114 EPA ID:: CAD982040107
FOX ELECTRIC MOTOR R 8307 STANDUSTRIAL 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) L180 1161 EPA ID:: CAD983595877
W C ENGINE & TRANS 8352 STANDUSTRIAL 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) M218 1273

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 26
EPA ID:: CAD981443930
STANTON TRUCK & HEAV 8281 MONORE ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) X236 1306 EPA ID:: CAD038048385
FAT JACK ENTERPRISES 8322 STANDUSTRIAL UN 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) L292 1481 EPA ID:: CAD982047797
SSO MEDICAL WASTE MA 8101 MONROE AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) W406 1761 EPA ID:: CAR000268276
A 1 ACCURATE AUTOMOT 10782 BEACH BLVD 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) S428 1802 EPA ID:: CAD981440910
PARTS UNLIMITED 10731 CHESTNUT 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) R436 1829 EPA ID:: CAD982048217
MAHOOD’S AUTO BODY 8354 STANDUSTRIAL 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) M460 1960 EPA ID:: CAD980891428
STANTON ENERGY RELIA 10711 DALE AVENUE E 0 - 1/8 (0.033 mi.) Z565 2438 EPA ID:: CAR000292565
DALE CLEANERS 10428 DALE AVE NE 0 - 1/8 (0.033 mi.) AM567 2441 EPA ID:: CAD981973142
MAGNOLIA DRAPERY CLE 8368 C MONROE ST ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.055 mi.) AQ583 2532 EPA ID:: CAD981651383
CBS BUG SHOP #2 8362 MONROE AVE ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.083 mi.) AQ594 2675 EPA ID:: CAD982049876
EXOTIC CHEM CO INC 8371 MONROE AVE ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.087 mi.) AQ597 2683 EPA ID:: CAD052419884
EDS MACHINE SVC 8376 KATELLA AVE SE 0 - 1/8 (0.097 mi.) AV604 2702 EPA ID:: CAD982049975
PATS LAWNMOWER AND S 8414 KATELLA AVE SE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.132 mi.) AV622 2808 EPA ID:: CAD982050239
AUTOMOTIVE RPR CO 8443 KATTELA SE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.139 mi.) AV627 2819 EPA ID:: CAD981682917
FIRESTONE BUILDING M 10961 DALE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.202 mi.) BC658 2937 EPA ID:: CAD981684590
PYTHON INJECTION 8625 CENTRAL AVE NO ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.215 mi.) BH663 2954 EPA ID:: CAR000015388
MAT AUTO CENTER 8519 KATELLA ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.229 mi.) BE683 3072 EPA ID:: CAD982034712
GREGS AUTO 10241 BEACH BLVD NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.240 mi.) BJ691 3092 EPA ID:: CAD982047870
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ G & G AUTO 8100 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) W334 1598 EPA ID:: CAD981443872
MOBILE FLEET LUB 8170 ELECTRIC 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AC417 1782 EPA ID:: CAD981658925
GERMAN CAR SVC 8210 KATTELA UNIT I 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AH464 1965 EPA ID:: CAD981682974
ORCO BLOCK CO INC 8042 KATELLA AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AF541 2368

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 27
EPA ID:: CAD981444847
MAACO AUTO PAINTING 10981 BOATMAN AVE SE 0 - 1/8 (0.036 mi.) AN569 2445 EPA ID:: CAD981685746
CAL TRANS STANTON MT 8122 KATELLA AVE S 0 - 1/8 (0.054 mi.) AS578 2513 EPA ID:: CAD982520678
GRAPHICS WEST 8349 KATELLA SE 0 - 1/8 (0.055 mi.) AO582 2529 EPA ID:: CAD981443815
SIGNS AND SERVICES 10980 BOATMAN AVE SE 0 - 1/8 (0.060 mi.) AN586 2618 EPA ID:: CAD982488629
PENHALL DIAMOND PROD 8351 KATELLA AVE SE 0 - 1/8 (0.074 mi.) AO588 2625 EPA ID:: CAD981969090
MARWIN CONSTRUCTION 10755 OAK ST W 0 - 1/8 (0.100 mi.) AW608 2710 EPA ID:: CAD983642372
CHEVRON STATION SW88 11250 BEACH BLVD S 1/8 - 1/4 (0.164 mi.) 633 2839 EPA ID:: CAD983671736
RCRA-VSQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Very small quantity generators (VSQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.

A review of the RCRA-VSQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/22/2021 has revealed that there is 1 RCRA-VSQG site within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ HOT WAX DISTRIBUTORS 8362 STANDUSTRIAL ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) M261 1398 Federal ERNS list
ERNS: The Emergency Response Notification System records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA.

A review of the ERNS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/14/2021 has revealed that there are 2 ERNS sites within approximately 0.001 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ Not reported 10731 CHESTNUT AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) R327 1581 NRC Report #: 1216887
Incident Date Time: 2018-06-30 07:00:00
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ Not reported 8100 ELECTRIC AVE. 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) W339 1606 NRC Report #: 949692
Incident Date Time: 2010-07-19 17:30:00

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 28
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
ENVIROSTOR: The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s (SMBRP’s) EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites.

A review of the ENVIROSTOR list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/23/2021 has revealed that there are 8 ENVIROSTOR sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ ALL METALS PROCESSIN 8401 STANDUSTRIAL AV 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) M142 801 Facility Id: 30340041
Facility Id: 71002315
Status: Refer: Other Agency
Status: Active
QUICKSAND 8358 STANDUSTRIAL ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) M381 1716 Facility Id: 70000085
Status: Active
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ DICHEM DRESSER / CAL 8100 ELECTRIC AVENUE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) W330 1589 Facility Id: 30280009
Status: Refer: Other Agency
CALSCIENCE ENVIRONME 7440 LINCOLN WAY SW 1/2 - 1 (0.566 mi.) 722 3392 Facility Id: 71003810
Status: Inactive - Needs Evaluation
PERKIN-ELMER, APLID 7421 ORANGEWOOD AV SW 1/2 - 1 (0.633 mi.) 723 3393 Facility Id: 71002690
Status: Inactive - Needs Evaluation
BASIC ELECTRONICS, I 11762 WESTERN AVENUE SSW 1/2 - 1 (0.765 mi.) 724 3397 Facility Id: 71002748
Status: No Further Action
LOS ANGELES DEFENSE AREA BOUNDED BY KNOT SW 1/2 - 1 (0.919 mi.) 725 3398 Facility Id: 80000285
Status: Inactive - Needs Evaluation
LINFINITY MICROELECT 11652 MARKON ST SW 1/2 - 1 (0.997 mi.) 726 3399 Facility Id: 71002419
Status: No Further Action

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 29
State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists SWF/LF: The Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal facilities or landfills in a particular state. The data come from the Integrated Waste Management Board’s Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) database.

A review of the SWF/LF list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 3 SWF/LF sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CITY OF STANTON CORP 8100 PACIFIC ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AA281 1445 Database: SWF/LF (SWIS), Date of Government Version: 05/10/2021 Facility ID: 30-AB-0402
Operational Status: Active
Regulation Status: Notification
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CAL TRANS 8122 KATELLA S 0 - 1/8 (0.054 mi.) AS580 2521 Database: SWF/LF (SWIS), Date of Government Version: 05/10/2021 Facility ID: 30-AB-0454
Operational Status: Active
Regulation Status: Notification
CR R INC 11292 WESTERN AVE SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.464 mi.) BP710 3240 Database: LOS ANGELES CO. LF, Date of Government Version: 04/12/2021 Site ID: 458
Status: Active
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Sites included in GeoTracker. GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater.

A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 56 LUST sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ H V LAWMASTER CO INC 7940 MAIN 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) I104 486 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 85UT129
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900138
Global ID: T0605900138
SANTA ANA REGIONAL W 10632 BEACH BLVD 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) I136 634 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 30
Status: Open - Site Assessment
Facility Id: 01UT024
Facility Status: Preliminary site assessment underway
Global Id: T0605978528
Global ID: T0605978528
OCCS INC 10680 FERN AVENUE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) L213 1247 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 89UT022
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900900
Global ID: T0605900900
7-ELEVEN STATION #24 10499 BEACH BLVD NNW 0 - 1/8 (0.024 mi.) AL557 2403 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Facility Status: Pollution Characterization
Global ID: T0605996673
7-ELEVEN STORE #2455 10499 BEACH BLVD NNW 0 - 1/8 (0.024 mi.) AL559 2405 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 02UT004
Global Id: T0605996673
KERN PRODUCTS 8341 MONROE AVE ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.048 mi.) AQ574 2503 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900427
Global ID: T0605900427
BEE LINE ASPHALT & C 10821 DALE E 0 - 1/8 (0.099 mi.) AR605 2705 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 90UT270
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605901298
Global ID: T0605901298
SCE BARRE SUBSTATION 8662 CERRITOS AVE ENE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.150 mi.) BA631 2827 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 85UT099
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605964393
Global ID: T0605964393
UNOCAL #7462 8472 KATELLA AVE SE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.196 mi.) BE646 2874 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Facility Status: Remedial action (cleanup) Underway
Global ID: T0605901960
UNOCAL COP #7462 8472 KATELLA AVE SE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.196 mi.) BE652 2905 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 31
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 96UT033
Global Id: T0605901960
CAMERON WELDING SUPP 11061 DALE ST SE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.199 mi.) BG654 2915 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 88UT158
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900835
Global ID: T0605900835
RESOURCE BUILDING MA 10961 DALE AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.202 mi.) BC657 2930 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 96UT006
Facility Status: Post remedial action monitoring
Global Id: T0605901931
Global ID: T0605901931
ROBINSON AND PREZIGO 10950 DALE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.204 mi.) BC660 2944 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 87UT207
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900684
Global ID: T0605900684
P M MART 8505 KATELLA AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.217 mi.) BE665 2981 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Facility Status: Pollution Characterization
Global ID: T0605940476
AUTO MAT 8505 ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.217 mi.) BE670 3010
Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 97UT008
Global Id: T0605940476
ARCO PM MART 8511 KATELLA ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.233 mi.) BE685 3076 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 86UT213
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900244
Global ID: T0605900244
555 AUTO CENTER 8555 N KATELLA AVE ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.262 mi.) BI697 3130 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Facility Id: 87UT137
555 AUTO CENTER 8555 KATELLA ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.262 mi.) BI698 3130 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 32
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900364
Global ID: T0605900364
PENN PIPE & SUPPLY C 11121 DALE SE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.274 mi.) BL700 3134 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 92UT001
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605901480
Global ID: T0605901480
VISTA PAINT STORE 8615 KATELLA AVE ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.280 mi.) 701 3138 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 87UT107
Facility Status: Post remedial action monitoring
Global Id: T0605900541
Global ID: T0605900541
PICK YOUR PART AUTO 1235 BEACH BLVD. S. NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.438 mi.) BO708 3229 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Status: Preliminary site assessment workplan submitted Global Id: T0605905177
Global ID: T0605905177
WORLD OIL #72 1201 BEACH BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.477 mi.) BO712 3351 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Facility Status: Case Closed
Global ID: T0605900465
WORLD OIL STATION #7 1201 S BEACH BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.477 mi.) BO713 3353 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 86UT045
Global Id: T0605900465
TESORO REFINING & MA 2800 W BALL RD NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.480 mi.) BQ714 3358 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Global Id: T0605901193
THRIFTY OIL #360 2800 BALL RD NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.480 mi.) BQ715 3373 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Facility Status: Preliminary site assessment underway
Global ID: T0605901193
92378 2792 W BALL RD NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.491 mi.) BQ716 3374 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Global Id: T0605901240
CHEVRON #9-2378 2792 NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.491 mi.) BQ717 3378 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 33
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global ID: T0605901240
CHEVRON STATION #923 2792 W BALL RD NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.491 mi.) BQ718 3380 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Facility Id: 91UT033
Facility Id: 90UT217
CHALLENGE MARKETING 10502 S MAGNOLIA AVE ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.498 mi.) BR721 3389 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Facility Id: 92UT029
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ BAXTER GRIFFIN 8210 MONROE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Q223 1284 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 94UT027
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605901747
Global ID: T0605901747
SOLAG DISPOSAL 8270 MONROE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) X254 1390 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Facility Status: Case Closed
Global ID: T0605901465
SOLAG DISPOSAL 8270 MONROE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) X263 1402 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 91UT140
Global Id: T0605901465
CALIFORNIA SHIPPING 8151 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Q319 1554 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 90UT184
Facility Status: Pollution Characterization
Global Id: T0605901225
Global ID: T0605901225
CALIFORNIA COMFORT V 8130 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AC346 1616 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 90UT081
Facility Status: Pollution Characterization
Global Id: T0605901119
Global ID: T0605901119
WESTERN AVENUE PROPE 8181 ELECTRIC 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AC376 1703 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 34
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 89UT140
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900705
Global ID: T0605900705
HARPERS BACKHOE SERV 8231 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AD385 1727 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 93UT023
Global Id: T0605901696
HARPERS BACKHOE SERV 8231 ELECTRIC 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AD392 1745 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Facility Status: Case Closed
Global ID: T0605901696
JOHNSON & TURNER PAI 8241 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AD451 1889 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 89UT111
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900986
Global ID: T0605900986
ABEL CONCRETE 8251 KATELLA AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AG504 2147 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 96UT046
Facility Status: Preliminary site assessment underway
Global Id: T0605902009
Global ID: T0605902009
G&M OIL CO. #50 10961 BEACH BLVD 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AJ509 2154 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Open - Site Assessment
Facility Id: 96UT036
Global Id: T0605901965
G & M OIL #50 10961 BEACH BLVD 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AJ531 2306 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Facility Status: Pollution Characterization
Global ID: T0605901965
UNITED ELECTRIC 8032 CHESTER AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AJ544 2373 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 87UT255
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900587
Global ID: T0605900587
AMERICAN CAMPER SHEL 11151 BEACH SSW 0 - 1/8 (0.046 mi.) AP572 2498 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 35
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 93UT061
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605901690
Global ID: T0605901690
CAL TRANS 8122 KATELLA S 0 - 1/8 (0.054 mi.) AS580 2521 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 92UT024
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605921871
Global ID: T0605921871
MARWIN CONSTRUCTION 10755 OAK ST W 0 - 1/8 (0.100 mi.) AW608 2710 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 87UT228
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900555
Global ID: T0605900555
CITY OF STANTON 11100 CEDAR SW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.144 mi.) AZ630 2823 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 89UT145
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900803
Global ID: T0605900803
KATELLA HOSPITAL 7770 KATELLA SW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.173 mi.) BB636 2858 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 98UT020
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605902150
Global ID: T0605902150
INSTA - TUNE 11462 BEACH S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.347 mi.) BM702 3142 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 91UT056
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605901390
Global ID: T0605901390
TOSCO - 76 #5635 7501 KATELLA AVE WSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.385 mi.) 703 3146 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 36
Status: Open - Remediation
Facility Id: 91UT022
Facility Status: Remediation Plan
Global Id: T0605901383
Global ID: T0605901383
THRIFTY OIL #361 11500 BEACH BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.388 mi.) BM704 3160 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Open - Remediation
Facility Id: 87UT071
Facility Status: Remedial action (cleanup) Underway
Global Id: T0605900511
Global ID: T0605900511
ARCO 7470 CERRITOS WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.389 mi.) BN705 3171 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 89UT070
Facility Id: 99UT060
Facility Id: 87UT100
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605965997
Global Id: T0605929011
Global Id: T0605900939
Global ID: T0605900939
SN&MLAJ, INC. 7470 CERRITOS AVE WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.389 mi.) BN706 3192 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Facility Status: Pollution Characterization
Global ID: T0605929011
RUSS YOUNG 7542 INDUSTRIAL WSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.412 mi.) 707 3226 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 86UT050
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605900258
Global ID: T0605900258
CR AND R INC 11292 WESTERN AVE SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.464 mi.) BP709 3235 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Facility Status: Pollution Characterization
Global ID: T0605999023
CR R INC 11292 WESTERN AVE SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.464 mi.) BP710 3240 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 00UT005
Global Id: T0605999023
MODERN ALLOYS INC 11172 WESTERN AVE SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.471 mi.) 711 3298 Database: ORANGE CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 03/01/2021 Database: LUST REG 8, Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 37
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 97UT053
Facility Id: 93UT002
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605902115
Global Id: T0605901639
Global ID: T0605901639
CPS-SLIC: Cleanup Program Sites (CPS; also known as Site Cleanups [SC] and formerly known as Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups [SLIC] sites) included in GeoTracker. GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater.

A review of the CPS-SLIC list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there is 1 CPS-SLIC site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ HOLLANDER INDUSTRIAL 10521-10579 DALE AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) E131 632 Database: CPS-SLIC, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021 Facility Status: Open - Site Assessment
Global Id: T10000014957
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
UST: The Underground Storage Tank database contains registered USTs. USTs are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board’s Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database.

A review of the UST list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 47 UST sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ OSCARS AUTO CENTER 8046 MAIN ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) I120 614 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 3019
BEACH MINI MART 10632 BEACH BLVD 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) I135 634 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 6682
FLEMMING TRACTOR SER 8170 MONROE AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Q186 1178 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 19841
CONVENIENCE TOWING & 10732 CHESTNUT AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) R196 1208 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 8906
PURRFECT AUTO SERVIC 10711 BEACH BLVD # 3 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) T246 1330 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 19477
Facility Id: 15718
BOBS TOWING 8230 PACIFIC ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) U308 1518 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 38
Facility Id: 6675
COUCH & PHILIPPI INC 10680 FERN AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) L312 1541 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 1556
BUDDY WILSON -PROPER 8231 MONROE AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Q402 1757 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 11866
STANTON METAL PRODUC 7931 PACIFIC ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) T430 1805 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 10620
CUL A QUIP 8237 MONROE AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Q457 1955 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 7636
7 - ELEVEN FOOD STOR 10499 BEACH BLVD NNW 0 - 1/8 (0.024 mi.) AL556 2403 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 4572
7-ELEVEN 10499 BEACH NNW 0 - 1/8 (0.024 mi.) AL558 2405 Database: ORANGE CO. UST, Date of Government Version: 04/29/2021 Facility Id: FA24077
BEE LINE ASPHALT CO 10821 DALE AVE E 0 - 1/8 (0.099 mi.) AR606 2709 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 5247
NANCY ROHRS & MARK L 10961 DALE AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.138 mi.) AY626 2819 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 6678
ALLEC TRUCKING 10881 DALE AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.180 mi.) BC639 2863 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 11487
G&M OIL CO. #156 8472 KATELLA AVE SE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.196 mi.) BE651 2904 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Database: ORANGE CO. UST, Date of Government Version: 04/29/2021 Facility Id: FA0050738
Facility Id: FA0050738
Facility Id: 4578
P M MART 8505 KATELLA AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.217 mi.) BE665 2981 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Database: ORANGE CO. UST, Date of Government Version: 04/29/2021 Facility Id: FA0024165
Facility Id: 5246
AUTOMAT OIL 8505 KATELLA ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.217 mi.) BE666 2983 Database: ORANGE CO. UST, Date of Government Version: 04/29/2021 Facility Id: FA24165
AUTOMAT STATION 8505 KATELLA AVE. ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.217 mi.) BE667 2983 Database: UST CLOSURE, Date of Government Version: 05/20/2021 MEL SMITH ELECTRIC I 8520 CENTRAL AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.217 mi.) BI673 3023 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 4573
M A T 8519 KATELLA AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.229 mi.) BE682 3072 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 39
Facility Id: 9203
PENN PIPE & SUPPLY 11121 DALE AVE SE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.235 mi.) BG688 3086 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 6684
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ BAXTER GRIFFIN CO 8210 MONROE AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Q226 1288 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 6676
STANTON FIRE DEPT 7871 PACIFIC ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) K268 1419 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 11495
CALIFORNIA SHIPPING 8151 ELECTRIC AVENUE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Q318 1554 Database: UST CLOSURE, Date of Government Version: 05/20/2021 CALIFORNIA SHIPPING 8151 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Q319 1554 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 5971
CALIFORNIA COMFORT V 8130 ELECTRIC AVENUE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AC342 1614 Database: UST CLOSURE, Date of Government Version: 05/20/2021 RONS PLUMBING 10671 FLOWER AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AB347 1626 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 8855
WESTERN AVENUES PROP 8130 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AC354 1636 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 5017
CHARBONNEAUS TRACTOR 8181 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AC377 1707 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 7726
HARPERS BACKHOE SERV 8231 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AD385 1727 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 7068
ROBERT MILLS LANDSCA 10652 FLOWER AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) P420 1788 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 12012
SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAI 7800 PACIFIC ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) K429 1805 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 11503
JOHNSON & TURNER PAI 8241 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AD451 1889 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 1161
TARGET STATION #32 10961 BEACH BLVD # 3 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AJ469 1972 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 5045
KATELLA PLYWOOD & LU 8121 KATELLA AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AI473 1981 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 8114
ORCO BLOCK COMPANY I 8042 KATELLA AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AF475 1988 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Database: ORANGE CO. UST, Date of Government Version: 04/29/2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 40
Facility Id: FA24109
Facility Id: FA0024109
ORCO BLOCK & HARDSCA 8042 KATELLA AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AF476 1988 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: FA0024109
ABEL CONCRETE 8251 KATELLA AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AG504 2147 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 17742
G & M OIL # 50 10961 BEACH BLVD # 5 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AJ522 2242 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Database: ORANGE CO. UST, Date of Government Version: 04/29/2021 Facility Id: FA0024680
Facility Id: FA24680
Facility Id: FA0024680
Facility Id: 16865
Facility Id: 7356
UNITED ELECTRIC 8032 CHESTER AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AJ544 2373 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 8854
FORD WHOLESALE CO IN 8302 KATELLA AVE SE 0 - 1/8 (0.043 mi.) AO570 2476 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Database: ORANGE CO. UST, Date of Government Version: 04/29/2021 Facility Id: FA24303
Facility Id: FA0024303
Facility Id: FA0024303
ELEANOR PERRIER 11151 BEACH BLVD SSW 0 - 1/8 (0.046 mi.) AP573 2502 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 8852
CAL TRANS STANTON MT 8122 KATELLA AVE S 0 - 1/8 (0.054 mi.) AS578 2513 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 7070
ORANGE COUNTY SHERIF 11100 CEDAR STREET SW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.144 mi.) AZ629 2823 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Database: ORANGE CO. UST, Date of Government Version: 04/29/2021 Facility Id: FA0024940
Facility Id: 9094
SUNCREST HOSPITAL OF 7770 KATELLA AVE SW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.173 mi.) BB637 2861 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 7167
MAGAY HANNA 7652 CERRITOS AVE WNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.198 mi.) BF653 2915 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 06/03/2021
Facility Id: 11484
AST: A listing of aboveground storage tank petroleum storage tank locations.

A review of the AST list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 8 AST sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ Not reported 10670 DALE ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Z245 1330 Database: AST, Date of Government Version: 07/06/2016

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 41
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ SCE - BARRE PEAKER G 10670 DALE AVENUE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Z249 1371 Database: AST, Date of Government Version: 07/06/2016
Not reported 10761 COURT AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Y400 1756 Database: AST, Date of Government Version: 07/06/2016
ADMORE AUTO DISMANT 8188 KATELLA SSE 0 - 1/8 (0.113 mi.) AX610 2720 Database: AST, Date of Government Version: 07/06/2016
Not reported 8188 KATELLA AVE SSE 0 - 1/8 (0.113 mi.) AX611 2748 Database: AST, Date of Government Version: 07/06/2016
MEL SMITH ELECTRIC I 8520 CENTRAL AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.217 mi.) BI673 3023 Database: AST, Date of Government Version: 07/06/2016
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ HARPERS BACKHOE SERV 8231 ELECTRIC 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AD392 1745 Database: AST, Date of Government Version: 07/06/2016
ORCO BLOCK COMPANY S 8042 KATELLA AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AF511 2188 Database: AST, Date of Government Version: 07/06/2016
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
VCP: Contains low threat level properties with either confirmed or unconfirmed releases and the project proponents have request that DTSC oversee investigation and/or cleanup activities and have agreed to provide coverage for DTSC’s costs.

A review of the VCP list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/23/2021 has revealed that there is 1 VCP site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ QUICKSAND 8358 STANDUSTRIAL ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) M381 1716 Status: Active
Facility Id: 70000085

ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
SWRCY: A listing of recycling facilities in California.

A review of the SWRCY list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/04/2021 has revealed that there are 2 SWRCY sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ GOLDEN RECYCLE CO 8352 KATELLA AVE SE 0 - 1/8 (0.076 mi.) AO593 2667 Cert Id: RC256064.001
C R AND R RECYCLING 11262 WESTERN SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.494 mi.) BP720 3382

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 42
Cert Id: RC0697
HAULERS: A listing of registered waste tire haulers.

A review of the HAULERS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 11/23/2020 has revealed that there is 1 HAULERS site within approximately 0.001 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ HENRY’S TIRES 8042 CERRITOS AVE UN 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) B149 1019 Facility ID: 1791912
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
CDL: A listing of drug lab locations. Listing of a location in this database does not indicate that any illegal drug lab materials were or were not present there, and does not constitute a determination that the location either requires or does not require additional cleanup work.

A review of the CDL list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2019 has revealed that there are 2 CDL sites within approximately 0.001 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ Not reported 8440 CERRITOS BLVD, 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) E36 157 Facility Id: 1995-09-064
Not reported 10641 FERN AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) N153 1043 Facility Id: 1999-10-088
CERS HAZ WASTE: List of sites in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal which fall under the Hazardous Chemical Management, Hazardous Waste Onsite Treatment, Household Hazardous Waste Collection, Hazardous Waste Generator, and RCRA LQ HW Generator programs.

A review of the CERS HAZ WASTE list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/19/2021 has revealed that there are 44 CERS HAZ WASTE sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ GARDNER TRACTOR SERV 10552 CHESTNUT AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) B16 67 OC MOBILE MOTORSPORT 8042 CERRITOS UNIT G 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) B18 78 CUSTOM PIPE & COUPLI 10560 FERN AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) G65 222 CITY COLLISION CENTE 8250 CERRITOS AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) A112 535 ABCO MFG CO 8062 MAIN ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) J116 601
ALL METALS PROCESSIN 8401 STANDUSTRIAL ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) M141 661 HENRY’S TIRES 8042 CERRITOS AVE UN 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) B149 1019 PARKS BODY SHOP 10522 CHESTNUT AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) B152 1029 NEWCOMB SPRING OF CA 8380 CERRITOS AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) D166 1087 STANTON RADIATOR INC 10645 BEACH BLVD 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) P172 1114 A-1 ACCURATE AUTOMOT 10831 COURT AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) W267 1411 K&G READY MIX, INC. 8237 MONROE AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Q277 1432 CITY OF STANTON CORP 8100 PACIFIC ST 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AA281 1445 TQ AUTO SERVICE & RE 10661 CHESTNUT AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) R298 1489 DV TRAILERS 8072 MONROE AVENUE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) S351 1630

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 43
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ T/A PUMP SALES AND S 10770 BEACH BLVD 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) S365 1659 PURRFECT AUTO SERVIC 10711 BEACH BLVD 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) T427 1794 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 10670 DALE AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Z437 1832 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER 10761 COURT AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Y445 1873 STANTON ENERGY RELIA 10711 DALE AVE E 0 - 1/8 (0.033 mi.) Z563 2423 ORANGE COUNTY BOAT R 8351 MONROE AVE ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.059 mi.) AQ584 2537 ADMORE AUTO DISMANT 8188 KATELLA SSE 0 - 1/8 (0.113 mi.) AX610 2720 HOT ROD & HOGS 8400 MONROE AVE #4 ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.116 mi.) AU616 2759 COAST TO COAST CAR R 8447 KATELLA AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.167 mi.) AY635 2845 STANTON WHOLESALE TI 10971 DALE AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.195 mi.) BE643 2869 G&M OIL CO. #156 8472 KATELLA AVE SE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.196 mi.) BE648 2877 PYTHON INJECTION INC 8625 CENTRAL AVE NO ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.215 mi.) BH664 2957 UNITED #015 8505 KATELLA AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.217 mi.) BE669 2986 B & J AUTO REPAIR 10281 BEACH BLVD NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.220 mi.) BJ677 3030 C&F WIRE PRODUCTS DI 8536 CENTRAL AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.221 mi.) BH680 3041 ADVANCED DISPLAY SYS 8614 CENTRAL AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.246 mi.) BH693 3097 Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ ORANGE COUNTY EXPRES 8270 MONROE AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) X252 1373 HARPER EQUIPMENT REN 8231 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AD391 1733 JOHNSON & TURNER PAI 8241 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AD451 1889 JOHN B. EWLES INC 8182 KATELLA AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AH487 2047 MARTINIC ENGINEERING 10932 CHESTNUT AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AF500 2063 G&M OIL CO. #50 10961 BEACH BLVD 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AJ509 2154 INTERNATIONAL AUTO T 8151 KATELLA AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AH512 2189 ORCO BLOCK & HARDSCA 8042 KATELLA AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AF529 2258 FIELD TIME TARGET AN 8230 ELECTRIC AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) AE549 2379 MAACO AUTO PAINTING 10981 BOATMAN AVE SE 0 - 1/8 (0.036 mi.) AN569 2445 CALTRANS D12 STANTON 8122 KATELLA AVE S 0 - 1/8 (0.054 mi.) AS579 2516 SIGNS & SERVICES CO 10980 BOATMAN AVE SE 0 - 1/8 (0.060 mi.) AN585 2547 FOOD 4 LESS # 518 7910 KATELLA AVE SW 0 - 1/8 (0.075 mi.) AT591 2633 US CDL: A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example, contacting local law enforcement and local health departments.

A review of the US CDL list, as provided by EDR, and dated 05/18/2021 has revealed that there is 1 US CDL site within approximately 0.001 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ 10698 COURT STREET 10698 COURT STREET 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) V201 1217

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6680025.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 44
Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks
SWEEPS UST: Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System. This underground storage tank listing was updated and maintained by a company contacted by the SWRCB in the early 1990’s. The listing is no longer updated or maintained. The local agency is the contact for more information on a site on the SWEEPS list.

A review of the SWEEPS UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/01/1994 has revealed that there are 17 SWEEPS UST sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ M.T. WALKER 10541 CHESTNUT AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) B9 42 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 4154
BEACH MINI MART 10632 BEACH BLVD 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) I137 649 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 6682
COTTERS TREE SERVICE 10662 COURT AVE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) O368 1691 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 6680
7-ELEVEN STORE 24559 10499 BEACH STREET NNW 0 - 1/8 (0.024 mi.) AL562 2421 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 4572
SCE BARRE SUBSTATION 8662 CERRITOS AVE ENE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.150 mi.) BA631 2827 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 4956
UNOCAL #7462 8472 KATELLA AVE SE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.196 mi.) BE646 2874 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 4578
FIRESTONE BUILDING M 10961 DALE ST ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.202 mi.) BC656 2929 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 6678
P M MART 8505 KATELLA AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.217 mi.) BE671 3021 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 5246
MEL SMITH ELECTRIC I 8520 CENTRAL AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.217 mi.) BI673 3023 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 4573
M A T 8519 KATELLA AVE ESE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.229 mi.) BE682 3072 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 9203
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ BAXTER GRIFFIN 8210 MONROE 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) Q223 1284