Yucaipa City Council
December 11, 2023

GENERAL PLAN

AMENDMENT

CRAFTON SUITES

RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

MITIGATED NEGATIVE

DECLARATION (MND)

October 2023

City of Yucaipa
Development Services Department
34272 Yucaipa Boulevard
Yucaipa, CA 92399

Prepared by:

Ruth Villalobos & Associates, Inc

1 CITY OF YUCAIPA

INITIAL STUDY

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM

1. Project Title: Moss Family Foundation GPA – Case 21-191/GPA/LUCR

2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Yucaipa, 34272 Yucaipa Blvd., Yucaipa, CA 92399

3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Christian Farmer, (909) 797-2489 ext. 270

4. Project Location: Four (4) vacant parcels that total 5.12 acres at 12249 14th St, APNs: 0301-051-29, 30, 48, and 49.

5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Moss Family Foundation, 6345 Balboa Blvd. #I-310, Encino, CA 91316.

6. General Plan Designation: Designated RM-10M (Multiple Residential- 10,000 square foot minimum lot size)

7. Description of the Project: A Minor General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of a property from RM-10M (Multiple Residential, 10,000 square foot minimum) to RM-24 (High Density Multiple Residential, 24 dwelling units per acre), and a Land Use Compliance Review with a Density Bonus Agreement to build a three (3) story affordable housing Project that provides 10% of the total 144 units as low-income affordable.

8. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Single family residences to the west and south, and commercial to the east with commercial to the north.

9. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): A Development Agreement with the Yucaipa Valley Water District for sewer service, and water connection provided by Western Heights Water Company.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ............................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Environmental Review Process ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Detailed Project Description .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Project and Location Setting ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Prior Site History ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Minor General Plan Amendment ............................................................................................................................... 4 DETERMINATION: ..................................................................................................................................................... 9 Aesthetics .................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Agricultural Resources ................................................................................................................................................ 13 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................................................... 17 Cultural Resources ....................................................................................................................................................... 19 Energy ......................................................................................................................................................................... 21 Geology and Soils ........................................................................................................................................................ 22 Greenhouse Gas Emissions.......................................................................................................................................... 24 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................................................................................................... 25 Hydrology and Water Quality ..................................................................................................................................... 27 Land Use and Planning ................................................................................................................................................ 30 Mineral Resources ....................................................................................................................................................... 31 Noise ............................................................................................................................................................................ 32 Population and Housing ............................................................................................................................................... 34 Public Services ............................................................................................................................................................ 35 Recreation .................................................................................................................................................................... 36 Transportation/Traffic ................................................................................................................................................. 37 Tribal Resources .......................................................................................................................................................... 39 Utilities and Service Systems ...................................................................................................................................... 40 Wildfire........................................................................................................................................................................ 41 Mandatory Findings of Significance............................................................................................................................ 42

Appendices:

Appendix A - Air Quality, Global Climate Change, and Energy Impact Analysis Appendix B – Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix C – Cultural Resources Letter
Appendix D – Transportation and Traffic Analysis

3 INTRODUCTION

This section explains the background and purpose of this Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), which is the environmental review document prepared pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a Minor General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of a the City’s RM-10M (Multiple Residential, 10,000 square foot minimum) Land Use District to RM-24 (High Density Multiple Residential, 24 dwelling units per acre), and a Land Use Compliance Review with a Density Bonus Agreement to build a three (3) story affordable housing Project that provides 10% of the total 144 units as low-income affordable housing.

It establishes the context and scope for the MND, and outlines the process for reviewing the Draft MND and issuing the Final MND. The City of Yucaipa is the lead agency under CEQA. A “lead agency” is defined by Section 21067 of CEQA as “the public agency which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project which may have a significant effect upon the environment.”

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS

This IS and Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt a MND is being circulated for agency and public review and comment for 20 days beginning Friday, October 20, 2023. All written comments must be received by 5:30 p.m. Wednesday, November 8, 2023. Written comments or questions concerning this document should be directed to:

City of Yucaipa
ATTN: Christian Farmer
Assistant Planner
[email protected]
909-797-2489 Ext. 270
City of Yucaipa
34272 Yucaipa Boulevard
Yucaipa, CA 92399

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
4 DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Project and Location Setting

The proposed project site is located on 4 (four) vacant parcels that total 5.12 acres at 12249 14th street approximately 300 feet north of Avenue D (APNs 0301-051-29, 30, 48, and 49). The space is currently unoccupied by structures and has been graded and disturbed by development and previous agriculture activity. The land is regularly disced and has been graded flat. There are residential structures directly to the west, a commercial RV repair and storage facility to the east. The proposed projects would consist of one three (3) story 45,990 square foot (SF) apartment complex with 144 dwelling units (10% of which will be designated as low-income affordable housing). The complex will include 72 1-bedroom units, 58 2- bedroom units and 14 3-bedroom units. The project also consists of a gazebo, basketball court, BBQ pits, a community multipurpose room, an outdoor pool, covered parking structures, curb and gutter drainage, landscaping, retention wall, and a proposed water quality basin. A total of 219 parking spaces will be provided and the paved/parking areas will comprise 87,991 SF. Proposed landscaping will encompass an area of 89,972 SF.

This environmental document analyzes the Project that could be constructed should the GPA be adopted with the Density Bonus Agreement. For comparison, the existing land use designation of RM-10M that has a maximum density of 8.7 dwelling units per gross acre (du/gross acre) would allow up to 44 units on the

5.12 acre-site, excluding any Density Bonus Agreements or Accessory Dwelling Units, should the GPA not be approved. This GPA for the RM-24 designation would therefore result in a net increase of 100 units from the existing requirements. The Project also proposed an affordability provision that will be executed through a Density Bonus Agreement.

Prior Site History

The proposed project is located along 14th Street, which has historically used for agricultural and residential purposes. According to historic aerials, a residential dwelling with ancillary buildings is noted in the western end of the property at 12249 14th Street.

Minor General Plan Amendment

A Minor General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of a property from RM-10M (Multiple Residential, 10,000 square foot minimum) to RM-24 (High Density Multiple Residential, 24 dwelling units per acre), and a Land Use Compliance Review with a Density Bonus Agreement to build a three (3) story affordable housing Project that provides 10% of the total 144 units as low-income affordable housing.

Crafton Suites ProjectCrafton Suites Project
Regional Site Vicinity Map
Figure 1

Crafton Suites Project
Figure 2
Site Vicinity Map

Crafton Suites Project
Figure 3
Project Site Map

Crafton Suites Project
Site Plan
Figure 4

9 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

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

Aesthetics Greenhouse Gases Public Services
Agricultural Resources Hazards & Hazardous
Materials Recreation
Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality Transportation/Traffic Biological Resources Land Use/Planning Tribal Resources Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Utilities/Service Systems Energy Noise Wildfire
Geology/Soils Population/Housing Mandatory Findings of Significance

DETERMINATION:
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

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

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

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

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

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

__________________________________________________________________________________ Signature Date

__________________________________________________________________________________ Printed Name For

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
10 1) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

2) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

3) Must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

4) “Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, “Earlier Analysis,” may be cross-referenced).

5) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(d). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

(a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.

(b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.

(c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

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

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

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

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

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
11 AESTHETICS

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? X c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X

a) Policy PR-4.7, Scenic Resources, of the City’s 2016 General Plan states that the City will “Protect Yucaipa’s scenic resources, including scenic corridors along roads and views of the hillsides, prominent ridgelines, canyons, and other significant natural features, to the extent practical.” Resources identified in the General Plan include the City’s designated Scenic Corridors (Bryant Street, Yucaipa Boulevard, Wildwood Canyon Road, and Oak Glen Road) and the prominent hillsides, ridgelines, and open space areas that surround the City, including Crafton Hills and the San Bernardino National Forest. The Project site is relatively flat and not located adjacent to the City’s scenic corridors or any unique open space features such as a prominent hillside or ridgeline. The existing development pattern within the vicinity of the proposed Project site features a mixture of single and multi-family residence and commercial uses along Yucaipa Boulevard to the north. From the perspective of Avenue D facing northeast towards the Crafton Hills and to the east to the San Bernardino Mountains the view is largely obscured by existing residential structures trees and above ground power lines. As such, the proposed project’s height of development would not substantially obstruct any views or vistas and would not substantially impact scenic vistas.
b) According to Caltrans Scenic Highway Program, there are no official state designated scenic highways that exist within the City of Yucaipa. A portion of State Route 38 passes through the City of Yucaipa, and is an eligible state scenic highway that has not been officially designated; however, this roadway is located along the opposite side of the City. The City of Yucaipa has designated Bryant Street, Yucaipa Boulevard, Wildwood Canyon Road, and Oak Glen Road as scenic corridors within the City. The proposed Project is located south of Yucaipa Boulevard, and would not adversely affect views from or along this scenic corridor. Therefore, there would be no impacts to resources along a scenic highway as a result of the proposed Project.

c) The Project is located on a vacant site that is maintained periodically for weed abatement. The Project site is surrounded by commercial uses to the north and east and residential to the south and west. The site is located within an urbanized area of the City, within the Dunlap Industrial Corridor. The proposed Project Compliance with the Development Code will be verified through the Architectural Review Process for each building. The proposed multi-family residential structure and associated landscaping and architecture will be reviewed through the City’s formal Architectural Review process to ensure consistency with the applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. This will also include street-related landscape improvements that comply with Section 5.7 of the Yucaipa Citywide Design Guidelines pertaining to the frontage of 14th Street. Therefore, development of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact to visual quality.

d) Additional lighting will occur with the development of the Project in order to provide security within the interior of the Project. However, the amount of lighting will be similar to other residential developments in the surrounding area, and the Project will be required to comply with the City’s Development Code, which contains property development and general design standards that ensure new developments and expansions of existing developments will not have a negative impact

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
12 upon surrounding land uses. This includes the requirement that any lighting to be added to the Project shall be shielded to minimize light spillage to adjacent properties, and that light trespass shall not exceed .5 footcandles beyond the site’s property line. Therefore, impacts related to light and glare will be less than significant through compliance with the Development Code.

Photo of site showing site conditions in the center of the Project site from the northern area of the site looking south.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
13 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency to non-agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X

a-b) According to the State Dept. of Conservation Important Farmland Map, San Bernardino County 2012, the proposed Project site is designated as “urban and built-up land” and “Farmland of Local Importance”. It is not designated as containing any prime, unique, or important farmland, and the Project site is located on several parcels that are currently vacant and do not feature any current agricultural activities. As such, the proposed improvements to the Project site would not convert farmland to a non-agricultural use. The City of Yucaipa also utilizes a “one map system” in which the General Plan Land Use Designations and Zoning Categories are the same and combined onto one map. The Project site is currently designated and zoned RM-10M (Multiple Residential). The RM-10M Land Use District is not a zoning designation for agriculture uses.

In addition, there are no active Williamson Act contracts within the City of Yucaipa. The proposed development would be consistent with residential designation and zoning and would not conflict with zoning for an agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract.

c-d) No forest land or timberland is located within the Project site. Therefore, no impacts would occur.

e) As noted in items a-d above, the area is designated “urban and built up,” and no portions of the area are currently farmed nor subject to Williamson Act contracts. In addition, no portion of the area is located within a forest area. As such, the proposed Project would not affect these resources.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
14 AIR QUALITY

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

3. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? X b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? X
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
X
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? X

To support the analysis of the Project, an Air Quality, Global Climate Change, and Energy Impact Analysis, dated July 20th, 2022, was prepared by Yorke Engineering, LLC and is attached as Appendix A.

a) Air quality plans describe air pollution control strategies to be implemented by a city, county, or regional air district. The primary purpose of the air quality plans is to bring an area that does not attain federal and state air quality standards into compliance with those standards pursuant to the requirements of the Clean Air Act and California Clean Air Act. A consistency determination plays an important role in local agency project review by linking local planning and individual projects to the applicable air quality plan.

The proposed Project is within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin), and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is the agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the Basin. SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary (area and point), mobile, and indirect sources, and responded to this requirement by preparing the 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), an air quality management plan covering all portions of the Basin.

The regional emissions inventory for the South Coast Air Basin was compiled by SCAQMD, the San Bernardino Association of Governments (SANBAG), and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and is used for the AQMP. Regional population, housing, and employment projections are based, in part, on the City’s General Plan land use designations. The proposed GPA would result in a land use change from the city’s RM-10M (Multiple Residential, 10,000 square foot minimum) to RM-24 (High density Multiple Residential) Land Use Designation on approximately 5.12 acres comprised of four (4) existing parcels at 12249 14th street approximately 300 feet north of Avenue D.

The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that “New or amended General Plan Elements (including land use zoning and density amendments), Specific Plans, and significant Projects must be analyzed for consistency with the AQMP.” A proposed 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:

(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

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
15 Based on the air quality modeling analysis that has been completed (appendix A) neither the short-term construction nor the long-term operation of the proposed project will result in significant impacts based on SCAQMD regional and local thresholds of significance (see below in Table 1, Construction – Maximum Daily Emissions and Table 2, Operational – Maximum Daily Emissions). The proposed Project is not projected to contribute to the exceedance of any air pollutant concentration standards and is found to be consistent with the AQMP for the first criterion.

Furthermore, the proposed Project is not anticipated to substantially exceed the AQMP assumptions for the Project site and is consistent with the AQMP for the second criterion because the Project site currently has a residential General Plan designation, and the change of General Plan Land Use Designation from Multiple Residential (RM-10M) to High Density Multiple Residential (RM-24) will not substantially change the residential nature of the designation as both permit multiple family development. The proposed change would result in a net increase of 100 apartment dwelling units and would not result in a substantial change of the built-out projections for the City and would represent a fractional change to the entire South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). Based on the above, the proposed Project will not result in an inconsistency with the SCAQMD AQMP. Therefore, the Project will not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the 2016 AQMP, and a less than significant impact will occur.

b-c) The proposed Project consists of a Minor General Plan Amendment that would change the land use designation of a property from RM-10M (Multiple Residential, 10,000 square foot minimum) to RM-24 (High Density Multiple Residential, 24 dwelling units per acre), and a Land Use Compliance Review with a Density Bonus Agreement to build a three (3) story affordable housing Project that provides 10% of the total 144 units as low-income affordable. To quantify project-related impacts, the proposed Project was evaluated utilizing the CalEEMod version 2020.4 air quality modeling program for this MND, using very conservative parameters for its assessment and information that was provided by the applicant. The results are as follows:

Table 1: Construction - Maximum Daily Emissions

VOC NOx CO SO2 PM 10 PM 2.5
Year LB/Day
Peak
Overlap

16.6 33.1 24.4 0.1 21.5 11.6
SCAQMD
Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed? No No No No No No
VOC – Volatile Organic Compound; NOx – nitrous oxides; CO – Carbon monoxide; SO2 – sulfur dioxide; PM10 – particulate matter 10 microns; PM2.5 – particulate matter 2.5 microns

Table 2: Operational - Maximum Daily Emissions
Criteria
Pollutants
Unmitigated
(lbs/day)
Mitigated
(lbs/day)
Treshold
(lbs/day)
Significance
ROG (VOC) 41.8 4.0 55 LTS
NOx 7.2 4.2 55 LTS
CO 110.7 37.5 550 LTS
SOx 0.3 0.1 150 LTS
Total PM10 16.8 5.8 150 LTS
Total PM2.5 12.7 1.7 55 LTS

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
16 Construction related impacts would be reduced by the appropriate dust control measures implemented during each phase of development, as required by SCAQMD Rule 403 - Fugitive Dust. The requirements for Rule 403 include, but are not limited to, applying water in sufficient quantities to prevent the generation of visible dust plumes, applying soil binders to uncovered areas, reestablishing ground cover as quickly as possible, utilizing a wheel washing system to remove bulk material from tires and vehicle undercarriages before vehicles exit the lots, and maintaining effective cover over exposed areas.

Engineering Department specific Conditions of Approval for development proposals include provisions for Rule 403 that will apply during grading and building activities to minimize fugitive dust. Other SCAQMD rules would also apply, such as Rule 1113 for low VOC paints and materials. Operational impacts would be minimized by adherence to the Building Code and Title 24 requirements. As such, impacts would be less than significant.

d) The Project site is adjacent to residences, which are considered to be sensitive receptors by the City’s General Plan.

During site improvement construction activities that are associated with commercial development, there may be some level of odor and emissions exposure resulting from asphalt paving, grading, and related improvements. A Localized Significance Threshold (LST) analysis has been prepared to determine potential impacts to nearby sensitive receptors during construction of the proposed Project. However, the limited duration and area involved in construction activities would not result in significant levels of odors or other emissions affecting a substantial number of people, as there are a relatively limited number of residences in the direct vicinity of the site. As such, these impacts would be less than significant.

Table 4: Construction Localized Significance Thresholds Analysis

Maximum On-Site
Emissions
NO2 CO PM10 PM2.5
Pounds per Day
Construction
emissions 33.1 24.4 9.4 5.5
SCAQMD LST 270 2,075 14 9
LST exceeded? No No No No

Table 5: Operational Localized Significance Thresholds Analysis Maximum On-Site
Emissions
NO2 CO PM10 PM2.5
Pounds per Day
Operational
emissions 4.2 37.5 0.65 0.25
SCAQMD LST 270 2,075 4 3
LST exceeded? No No No No

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
17 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
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? X d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? X e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? X f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? X

a-d) This analysis is based on information and findings in the Biological Resources Assessment, September 2023, prepared by RVA(Appendix B). The project site is located within an urbanized area of the City of Yucaipa, surrounded by single- family residences and light commercial businesses. The site has been regularly disturbed by disking for fire and weed risk abatement. This has deprived the project site of habitat value and quality for native species. Species including candidate, sensitive, and special status, that have been documented in the regional vicinity of the project site both presently and historically were identified and investigated for their potential presence on the project site. During the field investigation of the project site, none of the species were found to occupy or glean foraging value from the site. Due to these considerations the proposed project does not expect any significant impacts on special-status species or habitat that could potentially support them.

The project site was found to be devoid of any riparian and or wetland areas. The project site was investigated for the presence of riparian and wetland indicators using both historic aerial photograph analysis and an investigative field survey.

The aerial photographs showed no signs of the site ever having any water features present. The oldest aerial photographs were taken in 1938 and showed the site developed and possibly being used for agriculture. The field survey also noted the absence of riparian indicator flora species, alluvial fans, bed and bank, and high watermarks. Due to these considerations the project does not expect any significant impacts on any riparian or wetland habitats.

The project site was analyzed for its value as a wildlife corridor using both desktop and field studies. The site was found to be devoid of habitat value because of continual disking disturbance. This disturbance limits the value for species to immigrate on or through the project site. The project site is directly encompassed by urban development on nearly all sides except to the north. The north boarder of the project site is however still disconnected from any quality open habitat with the existence of two major roads and urban development. The project site was also analyzed, for its value as a wildlife nursery site during the field survey especially for nesting bird habitat. The RVA biologist determined that the only suitable nesting habitat on the project site is located along the eastern border of the project site where there is an overgrown fence that separates the project site from the adjoining RV repair and sales business. As to the proximity of the suitable nesting

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
18 habitat in and or on the project site, the RVA biologist recommended a mitigation measure to do pre-construction nesting bird surveys if the project has ground disturbing activities taking place during the nesting bird season (September 15 – August 15). Due to these considerations, and the adherence to the mitigation measure BIO-1, the proposed Project is not expected to significantly impact wildlife movement, migration, or nesting.

e) The Project site does not feature any Coastal Live Oak Trees, which are protected by the City of Yucaipa pursuant to Chapter 5 of Division 9 of the Yucaipa Development Code. Therefore, there would be no impacts to this resource.

f) A Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) is a long-term agreement with USFWS designated to offset any harmful effects that a proposed activity might have on federally listed threatened and endangered species. The HCP allows development to proceed while providing a mechanism to conserve listed species and provide for incidental take. A “No Surprises” policy provides assurances to landowners participating in HCP efforts. The Natural Communities Conservation Planning Program (NCCP) of CDFW is an effort by the State of California and numerous private and public partners that takes a broad-based ecosystem approach to planning for the protection and perpetuation of biological diversity. An NCCP identifies and provides for the regional or area-wide protection of plants, animals, and their habitats, while allowing compatible and appropriate economic activity. The City of Yucaipa is not a part of any HCP or NCCP. As such, there would be no impacts to any applicable Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other plans for the site.

Mitigation Measures:

MM BIO-1: Any ground disturbing activities and vegetation clearing activities should occur outside of the active nesting bird season (i.e., February 1st–August 31), when feasible, to ensure compliance with the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC). If any ground disturbing activities were to take place during the active breeding bird season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey prior to ground disturbing activities to prevent impacts to nesting birds within 100 feet of the Project site. If nesting birds are discovered during pre-construction surveys, the qualified biologist will identify appropriate mitigation measures such as providing a work area buffer, prescribe a monitor for work, or postponing construction until after anticipated fledge date. Mitigation measures will be dependent on the nesting bird characteristics in relation to the Project observed during the pre-construction survey.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
19 CULTURAL RESOURCES

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5? X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resources pursuant to Section 15064.5? X
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X

This analysis is based on the Cultural Resource Letter dated July 26th 2022, was prepared by Andrea Urbas, AICP CEP CUD and is included as Appendix C.

a) The proposed Project is located on a site that had been previously disturbed with agricultural actives, grubbed, graded, and periodically disced. There are no buildings or structures at the Project site and as such there are no “historical resources” are known to exist within or adjacent to the Project area. Thus, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact related to a historical resource.

b) CEQA establishes that a project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a “historical resource” or a “tribal cultural resource” is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment (PRC §21084.1-2). “Substantial adverse change,” according to PRC §5020.1(q), “means demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of a historical resource would be impaired.” Although no “historical resources,” as defined by CEQA, have been identified within or adjacent to the project area, the area is sensitive for buried cultural deposits of prehistoric origin. Due to the sensitive nature of the project space, mitigation measures will need to be implemented to deter any potential destruction to cultural resources.

Mitigation Measures:

CR MM-1: Archaeological monitoring should be required during any grubbing, grading, trenching, excavations, and other earth-moving activities reaching below the depth of two feet. a. The monitoring program should consist of, at a minimum, the following:
i. All disturbances of native soils should be monitored by a qualified archaeologist. Whenever cultural materials more than 50 years of age are discovered, they need to be field-recorded and evaluated. The monitor should be prepared to quickly recover any artifacts as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays. If a substantial cultural deposit is encountered, however, the monitor must have the power to temporarily halt or divert construction activities in that area to allow for controlled removal.

CR MM-2: On-site monitoring should be coordinated with the nearest Native American groups, such as the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians, who may wish to participate. ii. In the event that human remains are encountered during the course of any future development, California State Law (Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Section 5079.98 of the Public Resources Code) states that no further earth disturbance shall occur at the location of the find until the San Bernardino County Coroner has been notified. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). iii. Collected artifacts should be cleaned, identified, catalogued, analyzed, and prepared for curation at an appropriate repository with permanent retrievable storage that would allow for additional research in the future.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
20 iv. Site records that incorporate the findings of the monitoring program should be prepared and submitted to the SCCIC as a permanent record of the discovery. v. A report that documents the methods and results of the monitoring program, including an itemized inventory of recovered artifacts and a detailed artifact analysis, should be prepared upon completion of the fieldwork. The report should include an interpretation of the cultural activities represented by the archaeological remains and a discussion of the significance of all recovered cultural material. vi. The submittal of the report to the City of Yucaipa and the curation of the artifacts will signify completion of the monitoring program and the mitigation of impacts to cultural resources.

c) There are no known human remains on the site. A review of historic aerial photos and USGS Topographic maps within the Cultural Resources Letter Report for Four Contiguous Parcels (APN 0301-051-29, -30, -48, -49) prepared by Andrea Urbas, July 2022 (Appendix C) did not identify possible cemeteries in the area; therefore a low likelihood exists that human remains could be uncovered during ground-disturbing activities. However, there is always a possibility that unidentified human remains could be discovered during Project construction. Consistent with State law, if at any time during grading human remains are found, the Project is to be conditioned to halt work and contact made with the San Bernardino County Coroner’s Office. Standard Conditions of Approval are included pertaining to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5.

In addition, any discoveries of remains would also be assessed to determine if they are of Native American origin.

1. In the event that human remains are encountered during the course of any future development, California State Law (Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Section 5079.98 of the Public Resources Code) states that no further earth disturbance shall occur at the location of the find until the San Bernardino County Coroner has been notified.

If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD).

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
21 ENERGY

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

6. ENERGY. Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? X

To support the analysis of the Project, an Air Quality, Global Climate Change, and Energy Impact Analysis, dated July 20th, 2022, was prepared by Yorke Engineering, LLC and is attached as Appendix A.

a) Residential project energy consumption primarily comprises: 1) mobile source fuels used for construction, 2) area and mobile source fuels used for operation, and 3) residential building utilities (natural gas and electric power). As shown in the Air Quality, Global Climate Change, and Energy Impact Analysis (Appendix A), Tables 8 and 9, the projected fuel consumption for construction equipment would amount to approximately 62,620 gallons of fuel and for operations would amount to would be 101,060 gallons of fuel a year. Impacts of the proposed Project construction and operation would be de minimis, relative to statewide motor fuel consumption. Building operation and site maintenance would result in the consumption of electricity (provided by Southern California Edison) and natural gas (provided by Southern California Gas Company). The project operation would result in an estimated natural gas usage of approximately 1.92 million cubic feet per year (MMcf/year), and utilization of approximately 593 megawatt-hours per year (MWh/year) of electric power. In 2019, the residential sector of the County of San Bernardino consumed approximately 5,054 million kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity. and 275 million therms of gas. The electrical and natural gas consumption of the proposed apartment complex will be about 0.01% of the consumption of both of these for the residential sector of the County of San Bernardino. Thus, relative to statewide domestic energy consumption, impacts of the proposed project operation would be de minimis. It should be noted that the proposed Project would also introduce higher density housing along 14th Street, directly south of Yucaipa Boulevard. This intersection includes existing bus stops that would be accessible to future residents, which would provide greater opportunities to use transit services.

The proposed Project’s energy use will not be done in a wasteful and/or inefficient manner. Project construction will be performed by contractors with an economic incentive to minimize costs, one element of which is fuel conservation, which would benefit their profits. The residential project will be required by code (below) to minimize direct operational energy usage by means of thermal wall insulation, insulating double-pane windows, high-efficiency HVAC equipment, LED lighting, motion-detector light switches, Energy Star® appliances, and other modern energy-saving features. In addition, low-flow plumbing fixtures conserve both water and energy, as less electric power would be needed for water conveyance and treatment.

b) The project would not conflict with or obstruct any adopted energy conservation plans, state or local plans for renewable energy, or energy efficiency. The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Parts 6 and 11) are designed to reduce unnecessary energy consumption in newly constructed and existing buildings, such as residential and commercial structures. The Building Energy Efficiency Standards are applicable to the proposed project, which is designed for human habitation (page 11). The proposed project would be electric vehicle (EV) charging stations ready to reduce fuel consumption and rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) panels ready to provide on-site renewable energy generation as required. More specifically, four EV charging stations will be installed, and 135 spaces will be provided with a carport that has approximately 21,870 square feet of solar panels affixed to the roof. Both of these measures would also reduce the overall GHG emissions when installed. Thus, the proposed project would not conflict with Title 24 or obstruct its implementation on applicable land use development projects in California.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
22 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

X
(i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

X
(ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
X
(iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X (iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? X d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X

a) According to the City’s General Plan Map S-1 Geologic Hazard Overlay District, the site is not within the boundaries of a fault zone as defined within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Act. However Southern California is a seismically active area. As such, seismic ground shaking and ground rupture due to movement of a fault is a potential hazard in Yucaipa.

The Project will be required to comply with the Yucaipa Municipal Code and the Building Code, which is designed to mitigate earthquake hazards. The Uniform Building Code (UBC) has identified groundwater within 50 feet of the surface as a potential problem for seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. According to the Yucaipa General Plan, ground water can vary within the City from depths lower than 300 feet below surface elevation to as close as 40 feet. Due to the depth of groundwater outside of the Mill Creek Canyon area being deeper than 50 feet below surface, the potential for liquefaction near the subject area is considered minimal. The Project site is also located on and surrounded by relatively flat land and is therefore not susceptible to seismically induced landslides.

b) The Project site is not traversed by any identified drainage courses, USGS “blue line” drainage or other observed onsite (refer to Biological Resources Assessment, September 2023, prepared by RVA, Appendix B). The Project would be required to prepare and implement all National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements and appropriate BMPs (Best Management Practices) through a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). These plans are a standard condition for Projects over one (1) acre in size and are intended to minimize soil erosion and prevent the off-site discharge of pollutants. Compliance with these provisions would ensure less than significant impacts for any future residential Project. The City of Yucaipa also requires an acknowledgement from the Civil Engineer that prepares the WQMP that the proposed improvements, landscape plans, and grading plans are consistent with each other so that the proposed improvements operate as intended.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
23 c) See above items 6 (a) and (b). According to the City’s General Plan Map S-1 Geologic Hazard Overlay District, the Project site is not located within an area identified as Liquefaction Susceptibility or Landslide Susceptibility. Due to the depth of groundwater and the absence of landslide hazards per the City’s General Plan for where the proposed Project is located, the potential for liquefaction or landslide is minimal.

d) The area subject to the GPA is not identified as being within the City’s Geologic Hazard Overlay as shown on General Plan Exhibit S-1, and is not expected to be susceptible to landslides and related phenomenon. The site has been graded flat, and is not located adjacent to any unstable areas, such as steep hillsides. As such, the proposed Project would not impact a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, and would not cause such an area to become unstable as a result of the Project.

Therefore, there are no impacts related to expansive soil.

e) The proposed Project will connect to the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) sewer services and will not utilize any septic tanks. Therefore, there are no impacts related to soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.

f) Figure PR-6 (Cultural and Paleontological Resource Sensitivity Overlay Districts) of the General Plan does not identify that the Project site is located within a Paleontological Resource Sensitivity Area. Due to the existing, mostly flat topography of the site, significant earth moving activities to lower the pad elevations are not required to accommodate the development of the site. Based on the existing land use activities and overlay information from the General Plan, prior site disturbances, and limited construction to a depth of 5.5 feet that would require substantial excavation of the site, impacts are not expected to occur.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
24 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? X

To support the analysis of the Project, an Air Quality, Global Climate Change, and Energy Impact Analysis, dated July 20th 2022, was prepared by Yorke Engineering, LLC and is attached as Appendix A.

a) Constituent gases of the Earth’s atmosphere, called atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHG), play a critical role in the Earth’s radiation amount by trapping infrared radiation emitted from the Earth’s surface, which otherwise would have escaped to space. Prominent greenhouse gases contributing to this process include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), ozone, water vapor, nitrous oxide (N2O), and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). This phenomenon, known as the Greenhouse Effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate. Anthropogenic (caused or produced by humans) emissions of these greenhouse gases in excess of natural ambient concentrations are responsible for the enhancement of the Greenhouse Effect and have led to a trend of unnatural warming of the Earth’s natural climate, known as global warming or climate change.

To determine whether the Project's GHG emissions are significant, the Global Climate Change Analysis (Appendix A) utilized the SCAQMD draft screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year for all land uses. CalEEMod Version 2020.4.0 was used to calculate the GHG emissions from the proposed Project. Each source of GHG emissions is described in greater detail below.

Project’s total emissions are 1,184 MTCO2e per year. Operational reduction measures incorporate typical code-required water conservation features. Off-site traffic impacts are included in these emissions estimates, along with construction emissions amortized over 30 years. According to the thresholds of significance established above, a cumulative global climate change impact would occur if the GHG emissions created from the on-going operations of the proposed Project would exceed the SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year for residential land uses. Therefore, operation of the Project would not create a significant cumulative impact to global climate change. No mitigation is required.

b) The proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. The City adopted the City of Yucaipa Climate Action Plan (CAP) in September 2015. The CAP presents the greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories, identifies the effectiveness of California initiatives to reduce GHG emissions, and identifies local measures that were selected by the City to reduce GHG emissions under the City’s jurisdictional control to achieve the City’s identified GHG reduction target. The City of Yucaipa participated in the San Bernardino County Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan which presents the collective results of all local efforts to reduce GHG emissions consistent with statewide GHG targets expressed in Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the “Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006” and Senate Bill (SB) 375. At a net level of 1,184 MTCO2e per year, the Project's GHG emissions do not exceed the SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year for residential land uses and would be in compliance with the reduction goals of the City’s CAP. Furthermore, the Project will comply with applicable Green Building Standards and City of Yucaipa’s policies regarding sustainability (as dictated by the City's General Plan).

Therefore, impacts are less than significant.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
25 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project? a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? X b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code § 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? X e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? X

a-d) The proposed project includes the request for a GPA to permit a change of land use from RM-10M (multiple residential, 10,000 SF minimum) to RM-24 (High Density Multiple Residential, 24 dwelling units per acre), and a Land Use Compliance Review with a Density Bonus Agreement to build a three (3) story affordable housing Project that provides 10% of the total 144 units as low-income affordable.

It is not anticipated that a residential Project would directly involve the routine transport of hazardous materials; however, equipment used at the site during construction activities could utilize substances considered by regulatory bodies as hazardous, such as diesel fuel and gasoline from typical construction equipment and would therefore have the potential to discharge hazardous materials during construction. These types of materials are not acutely hazardous, and all storage, handling, use, and disposal of these materials are regulated by federal and state requirements, for which the Project construction activities would be required to strictly adhere to. These regulations include: the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act and Hazardous Materials Transportation Act; Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations (CalOSHA), and the state Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program. The amount of hazardous material discharge during construction is expected to be less than significant, and the Project would be required to comply with applicable laws, ordinances and procedures. Through compliance with the aforementioned laws and requirements, and also through the implementation of a SWPPP and the WQMP requirements to prevent the off-site discharge of pollutants during construction and operation of the Project, impacts would be less than significant.

During operation of the Project, potential hazardous materials would be limited to routine elements associated with residential development, including the use of yard fertilizers, house cleaners and solvents, and chlorine for the swimming pool amenity, which would not represent a significant hazard. Further, no hazardous materials will be transported to or from the site during Project construction or operation. The site is also not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
26 The proposed project is with ~0.3 miles of the Dunlap Elementary school but would not present a significant impact to the schoolyard due to the above stated precautions and handling procedures.

e) The Project site is not within two miles of a public or private airport. The nearest airport is Redlands Municipal Airport (REI), which is located four (4) miles northwest of the Project site. In addition, the Project is not within the Redlands Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. No impacts would occur with the Project.

f) The Project site is located between Yucaipa boulevard to the north and Avenue D to the south. The subject site is currently designated for multiple residential uses, and that upon facilitation of the GPA, development of the proposed high density multiple residential use would not impact access to users traveling along the public right-of-way.

g) The project area is outside of the special Fire Safety Review Area listed in the October 2008 VHFHSV (Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones) in Local Responsibility Area (LRA) as well as the City’s General Plan. However, risks to future development from fire hazards are addressed through adherence to the City’s Standard Conditions of Approval as required by the City Fire Department, which includes provisions for adequate fire access that are addressed through the Project’s internal circulation design, sprinkler water systems within habitable living spaces, and the placement of new fire hydrants at applicable intervals that meet the water flow requirements of the Fire Code.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
27 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? X b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: X
result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; X (ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite; X
(iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or X
(iv) impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? X

a) Three general sources of potential short-term, construction-related stormwater pollution associated with the proposed Project include: 1) the handling, storage, and disposal of construction materials containing pollutants; 2) the maintenance and operation of construction equipment; and 3) earthmoving activities which, when not controlled, may generate soil erosion via storm runoff or mechanical equipment. The proposed Project has the potential to release water pollutants during the construction and operation phases, which would have the potential to violate water quality standards. However, the project is required to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for operations and will continue compliance with existing regulations to address concerns regarding potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality. Impacts would be less than significant.

b) The proposed Project will receive potable water service from Western Heights Water Company (WHWC) provides potable water for the Project site. The WHWC is in a controlled overdraft condition as the water table has dropped due to prior years of drought. However, infrastructure improvements have been developed to increase their storage capabilities to meet the demand of future residents and businesses based on the City’s General Plan. This includes several recharge facilities developed by the City of Yucaipa that have increased the overall water storage and supply capacity for the entire water basin. As part of the Project application, the applicant obtained a letter from the WHWC noting that they would be able to accommodate the proposed development, and construction efforts would involve onsite improvements to connect to existing services. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant. Impacts would be less than significant.

c (i thru iv), e). The Project site is not located within a drainage course, nor a designated floodway and or 100- and 500-year floodplain, and no defined blue line stream is depicted on the Yucaipa, CA U.S.G.S. Map for the Project area. The project site is relatively flat, gently sloping northeast to southwest at 1.3% and does not feature any significant drainage features.

Onsite runoff upon completion of the project will be conveyed downslope following that northeast to southwest gentle grade into a curb and gutter into the proposed water quality basin and overflow basin.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
28 In compliance with stormwater discharges, the Project will be conditioned by the City to apply to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for coverage under the Construction General Permit (Order No. 99-08-DWQ) (CAS000002), which applies to all stormwater discharges from Projects where clearing, grading, and excavation result in soil disturbance of at least one acre or more. The Project’s area of disturbance encompasses approximately 5.12-acres. The Construction General Permit requires an applicant to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which would include a list of best management practices (BMPs) that would be implemented to prevent soil erosion and to contain the potential for discharge of construction-related pollutants that could contaminate nearby water resources. The SWPPP may include, but not be limited to, the following BMPs:

• Temporary Soil Stabilization: sandbag barriers, straw bale barriers, sediment traps, and fiber rolls; • Temporary Sediment Control: hydraulic mulch and geotextiles; • Wind Erosion Control: water of the construction site, straw mulch; • Tracking Control: staging/storage area and street sweeping; • Non-Stormwater Management: clear water diversion and dewatering; and, • Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control: vehicle and equipment cleaning, concrete waste management, and contaminated soil management.

The Project will also be conditioned to prepare and implement a WQMP that would include BMPs to be implemented during post construction operations in order to ensure compliance with RWQCB water quality standards. Examples of WQMP BMP protocol applicable to the Project would include the following:

• Education for Property Owners, Operators, Tenants, Occupants, or Employees; • Activity Restrictions;
• Irrigation System and Landscape Maintenance;
• Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots;
• Drainage Facility Inspection and Maintenance; and,
• Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan.

The WQMP will be an active plan to be implemented throughout the life of Project and will require routine inspections by a qualified water quality specialist to assure compliance with the Santa Ana RWQCB. This will assure that the Project’s impact with regard to violating any water quality standards will be reduced to less than significant.

d) The proposed Project site is not within a 100-year floodplain, based upon a review of the latest FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Map, 06071C8745H, revised August 28, 2008. As such, and upon facilitation of the proposed GPA, no future structures built under the High Density Multiple Residential land use designation for the Project site would be placed within a 100-year flood plain, nor would new structures impede or redirect flood flow.

Based on review of the 2016 General Plan and recent aerial photo maps, the proposed Project is not subject to the potential effects of a seiche, tsunami, or mudflows caused by such due to lack of upstream water bodies. The City of Yucaipa is located just east of the I-10 freeway and is over approximately 50 miles east of the Pacific Ocean with an average elevation of 640 feet above sea level. As such, the City is not under threat of a tsunami, otherwise known as a seismic sea wave.

Similarly, the potential for a seiche to occur is remote, given the limited number of large water bodies within Yucaipa and its sphere of influence. Therefore, no impact is expected.

e) As outlined in the response to threshold b) above, the proposed Project will be served by Western Heights Water Company and would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a sustainable groundwater management plan. The City is a municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) stormwater permittee and participates with 20 other municipal agencies in the San Bernardino Valley region to establish Best Management Practices (BMPs) for residents, businesses, students, and governments in preventing and reducing stormwater pollution. Keeping pollutants out of stormwater is an integral component of a sustainable groundwater management program. Under the MS4 permit, the City requires new development to design and implement WQMPs that meet the San Bernardino County Technical Guideline threshold. For the development

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
29 of the site, the applicant will be required to show implementation of the various structural and non-structural BMPs where applicable, and would, therefore, not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
30 LAND USE AND PLANNING

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

11. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? X

a) Dividing an established community typically involves creating a physical barrier that changes the connectivity between areas of the community. The development of the project area with a residential use development would not bisect any portion of the surrounding residential land designations and would be completely contained within the Project area parcels.

As such, the Project would not physically divide an established community.

b) The proposed GPA would change the City’s General Plan/Land Use Map to allow for High Density Multiple Residential (RM-24) development as opposed to the current designation allowing for Multiple Residential (RM-10M) development.

The proposed GPA is to allow for the development of a high density multiple-residential Project consisting of 144 apartment dwelling units on four (4) subject parcels. Improvements to the Project site are required to occur consistent with adopted development standards and good planning practices. Grading and building improvements would be undertaken consistent with appropriate City standards and drainage design criteria. No policies or plans exist for avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect that have not been taken into consideration.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
31 MINERAL RESOURCES

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

12. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? X

a-b) The City General Plan indicates the entire City is within an MRZ-3 (Mineral Resource Zone 3) classification, in which the significance of mineral deposit cannot be evaluated. No mining activities currently occur in the area, and no significant mineral resources are known to exist within the City of Yucaipa. Due to the size of the Project site and proximity to residential and other commercial uses, the site is unlikely to be considered a viable site for mineral extraction.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
32 NOISE

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

13. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? X b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? X c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
X

a-b) The Project site is adjacent to residential land uses to the west, which are considered noise sensitive land uses in the City General Plan. The General Plan and Municipal Code identify noise levels for various types of land uses, certain activities, and how noise levels are to be measured.

Project Construction Noise: Construction noise sources are regulated within the City of Yucaipa Municipal Code Section

87.0905(b) which limits construction activities to between the hours of 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM weekdays and Saturdays with no construction allowed on Sundays or Federal holidays. The City of Yucaipa does not include a numerical noise standard associated with construction noise.

During the construction phases for the Project, noise and vibration will be generated from typical activities associated with new building construction, which includes the use of grading equipment, hammers, nail guns, and other typical construction techniques. No unique construction techniques or pilings would be required as part of construction that might cause excessive ground-borne vibration. Section 87.0905(e) of the Municipal Code allows for “Temporary construction, repair, or demolition activities between 7am and 7pm, except Sundays and Federal holidays.” While construction activities will periodically raise noise levels above their current levels, the level of noise increase is not expected to be substantial and will only occur during the limited time associated with these activities as allowed in the Municipal Code. Adherence with the Municipal Code would result in less than significant construction impacts. Implementation of mitigation measures NOI-1 through NOI-7 will reduce construction noise to the greatest extent feasible.

c) The Project site is not within two miles of a public or private airport. The nearest airport is Redlands Municipal Airport (REI), which is located over five (5) miles north of the Project site. In addition, the Project is not within the Redlands Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. No impacts would occur with the Project.

Mitigation Measures:

NOI-1: During all Project site excavation and grading on-site, construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturer standards.

NOI-2: The contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the Project site.

NOI-3: Equipment shall be shut off and not left to idle when not in use.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
33 NOI-4: The contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction- related noise/vibration sources and sensitive receptors nearest the Project site during all Project construction.

NOI-5: Jackhammers, pneumatic equipment and all other portable stationary noise sources shall be shielded and noise shall be directed away from sensitive receptors.

NOI-6: The Project proponent shall mandate that the construction contractor prohibit the use of music or sound amplification on the Project site during construction.

NOI-7: The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
34 POPULATION AND HOUSING

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

14. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? X b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X

a) The proposed Project site is located within an area of the city generally developed with commercial and residential uses and involves the construction of residential developments for 144 units and amenities. The proposed Project would result in a net total of 100 dwelling units, or a population increase of approximately 290, based on Yucaipa’s average household size of 2.9 persons. Yucaipa is expected to grow in population by 33 percent between 2020 and 2040, about 10 percent per decade. (Yucaipa General Plan 2021-2029 Housing Element). The proposed Project’s population increase is expected to be within the average 10 percent of growth per decade. The proposed Project would result in additional attainable housing opportunities that will help the City meet its Regional Housing Needs Assessment requirements. In addition, the proposed Project would be located in close proximity to Yucaipa Boulevard, which features existing infrastructure, including transit stops, and no substantial infrastructure extensions are required. As such, impacts are expected to be less than significant.

b) The proposed Project would not result in the demolition of any residences nor displace any housing that would necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, the project would have no negative impact in displacement of people or necessitating replacement housing elsewhere.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
35 PUBLIC SERVICES

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

15. PUBLIC SERVICES. 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:
a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X

a) The City of Yucaipa is currently served by the California Department of Forestry (CAL FIRE). The Project site is accessible from an existing improved street and new on-site streets will be designed consistent with City Engineering and Fire Department standards and would not require unique or altered fire protection services. As a standard condition of approval, developers are required to pay development impact fees for fire facilities to offset the Project’s incremental need for fire protection services. The proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on fire protection services and would not affect fire department service ratios or response times, nor would it require the construction of any new fire facilities.

b) The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department currently serves the Project site and surrounding area. As a standard condition of approval, the Project would be required to pay development impact fees for police protection based upon the size of the Project site. The proposed Project would therefore have a less than significant impact. Additionally, the Conditions of Approval includes requirements for security cameras onsite, as well as adequate lighting, which would support general provisions of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) for the general operation of the site.

c) The Yucaipa-Calimesa School District would serve future residents of the Project. As a standard condition of approval, developers are required to pay development impact fees to the District for school facilities, prior to issuance of building permits. Under State law, impacts to school facilities are addressed by the State of California through specific procedures, such as development impact fees and the issuance of bonds.

d) The proposed Project will involve new residential development and, therefore, potentially increase the number of potential park users or affect existing park facilities. The City of Yucaipa has adopted development impact fees to off- set the potential impact of new users caused by new development. Any future residences will be required to pay these development impact fees. In addition, the proposed Project will provide recreation amenities including a pool, gazebo, basketball court, gazebo, BBQ pits, and a community multi-purpose room to serve the residents of the development.

e) The proposed Project would not require new or altered public facilities or services. The City requires future development to pay development impact fees for a variety of public facilities, including drainage improvements, traffic, and civic center facilities. In addition, the Project will complete street improvements and onsite drainage improvements to meet state and local requirements, and impacts have been addressed as part of this MND. Other necessary improvements, such as water and sewer facilities, would be provided by other agencies that have the ability to require necessary facilities to be installed by the developer and/or require payment of fees to provide for that service.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
36 RECREATION

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

16. RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? X
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment X

a-b) See response to 15d. The Project includes open space and recreation facilities as part of the development, which is provided for use by the residents. The property owner of the apartment complex would assume maintenance responsibilities for the proposed recreation facilities as an ongoing condition of approval.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
37 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

17. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? X b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? X d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X

To support the analysis of the Project, a Transportation and Traffic Analyst, dated July 11, 2022, was prepared by the Gandini Group and is included in Appendix D.

a) The proposed GPA would change the land use designation from Multiple Residential (RM-10M) to High Density Multiple Residential (RM-24). The Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared on July 11th, 2022, by Ganddini Group Inc, documents the existing traffic conditions and the number of trips anticipated by development of Project. The analysis found that the proposed 144-unit apartment Project would result in approximately 971 daily trips, including 58 trips during the AM peak hour and 73 trips during the PM peak hour. The City’s Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines specifies that a transportation impact study with level of service (LOS) analysis should be based on one or more of the following criteria:

• When the project AM or PM peak hour trip generation is 100 or more trips. • Projects that will add 51 or more trips during either the AM or PM peak hour to any intersection. • When determined by the City Engineer that existing or proposed traffic conditions in the project vicinity have unique characteristics that warrant evaluation.

The proposed project is forecast to generate fewer than 100 peak hour trips. The full access driveway provides access to the north and south of the project driveway such that there is less than 51 peak hour trips at any one intersection. The project trip distribution patterns were developed using engineering judgment based on review of existing traffic data, surrounding land uses, and the local and regional roadway facilities in the project vicinity. Project trips are expected to distribute from the site approximately 60% north to Yucaipa Boulevard and approximately 40% south along 14th Street. Based on the greater of AM or PM peak hour trip generation, the project would not add 51 or more trips at any intersection (73 PM peak hour trips x 60% = 44 trips).

As the project will construct all on-site and off-site improvements in accordance with City’s design standards, the project would not create any new safety or operational concerns. Therefore, the proposed Project does not warrant preparation of a transportation impact study with Level of Service analysis based on the City-established screening criteria.

b) The Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) screening assessment has been prepared in accordance with City TIA Guidelines, which were developed based on guidance from the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (State of California, December 2018) (“OPR Technical Advisory”). In general terms, VMT quantifies the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project or region. The OPR Technical Advisory provides technical considerations regarding methodologies and thresholds with a focus on office, residential, and retail developments as these projects tend to have the greatest influence on VMT.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
38 The City TIA Guidelines identify screening criteria for certain types of projects that typically reduce VMT and may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact. The project need only satisfy one of the following screening criteria:
• Projects located within a Transit Priority Area (TPA) o Projects located within a one-half mile radius of major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor. • Projects located within a low VMT area
o Site location can be verified with the web-based or map-based VMT Screening Tool • Project Type Screening
o Local Serving land use
o Community institutions
o Supportive/affordable housing
o Projects with trip generate less than net new 400 daily vehicles trips

Based on the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) VMT Screening Tool, the Project is located within a Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) where the baseline year (2022) VMT per service population is 15.6 and the City baseline is equal to 19.8. Therefore, the proposed Project satisfiess the City-established screening criteria for projects located in low VMT areas. Thus, the proposed Project is presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact. In addition, the proposed Project would result in higher density residential development within 667 feet from existing transit stops along Yucaipa Boulevard, which would help to reduce individual passenger vehicle trips for the future residents.

c) The Project would not result in the modification of existing adjacent roadways in such way that would increase hazards to the roadway’s geometric design. Shown in the proposed project plans, the Project will be required to provide street improvements along its frontage and will also provide two ingress/egress driveways on 14th street. Engineering development standards would be incorporated into the design of these improvements to include traffic signage and stop controlled signage to ensure the safety of automobile traffic entering and leaving the Project. To ensure incorporation of safety improvements these roadways, the Project will be conditioned to pay Development Impact Fees for traffic to fund the improvements to 14th Street and for future improvements to the localized area. These fees are the City's equivalent of the "fair share” contribution to a local fund to upgrade the area's transportation infrastructure.

d) The proposed Project is located adjacent to existing paved 14th street. Onsite driveways and parking would be designed to be consistent with the City’s Engineering and Fire Department standards, and include adequate driveway widths, and adequate ingress and egress width for fire and first responder vehicles.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
39 TRIBAL RESOURCES

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

18. TRIBAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
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:

(i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or X
(ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code § 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

X

a) The proposed Project is located on a site that had been previously disturbed with agricultural activities that have been removed, grubbed, graded, and periodically disced. Due to these disturbances the project is in a low sensitivity area. The cultural report does not identify any resources or features that may be considered eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or the National Register of Historical Resources (NRHP). As a result, no adverse change to the significance of a historical resource is expected to occur.

i. Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, public lead agencies, and Project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. In accordance with SB 18 requirements, the City sent a letter to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) requesting for a list of all Native American Tribal Agency contacts in having a known cultural relational history with the Project area region. The City sent invitation letters to representatives of the Native American contacts provided by the NAHC formally inviting tribes to consult with the City on the GPA. The intent of the consultations is to provide an opportunity for interested Native American contacts to work together with the city during the Project planning process to identify and protect tribal cultural resources. A Response letter was received on June 30th 2022, by the Quechan Indian Tribe indicating they have no comments and defer to the more local Tribes and by the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation that noted no concerns for the GPA but would be interested in consulting on further developments. However, due to mitigation measures CR-1 and 2 consulting tribal governments shall be contacted to opt into the monitoring program as described above.
ii. As outlined above in i), a response letter was received on June 30th 2022, by the Quechan Indian Tribe indicating they have no comments and defer to the more local Tribes, and another response from the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation that noted they had no concerns for the GPA but would be interested in consulting on future development. As such, no specific mitigation measures have been identified, and the Project would be subject to the City’s standard Condition of Approval related to stopping site preparation work should there be any inadvertent discovery of resources.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
40 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? X c) Result in a determination by the waste water treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments X d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X

a-c) Western Heights Water Company (WHWC) provides potable water, and the Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD) provides wastewater treatment facilities for the Project site. The WHWC is in a controlled overdraft condition as the water table has dropped due to prior years of drought. However, infrastructure improvements have been developed to increase their storage capabilities to meet the demand of future residents and businesses based on the City’s General Plan. This includes several recharge facilities developed by the City of Yucaipa. As part of the Project application, the applicant obtained a letter from the two utility providers noting that they would be able to accommodate the proposed development, and construction efforts would involve onsite improvements to connect to existing services. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
d) Solid waste services in the City of Yucaipa are provided by Burrtec and disposed of within the San Timoteo Sanitary Landfill. According to information from the CalRecycle website, operated by the State of California, this landfill has an average annual receiving capacity of 500,000 to 730,999 tons per year, and has a remaining capacity of over 21.4 million cubic yards until the year 2039. Information on the CalRecycle website provides solid waste characterization databases by types of use, referenced from various environmental documents. As such, the change in waste generated would be nominal relative to existing conditions and impacts would be less than significant. e) Per Title 8, Chapter 8.28 of the Municipal Code, all properties within the City are required to subscribe to refuse collection and handling services. The program is designed to collect trash, recyclables, green waste, and organic waste and to assist the City in meeting mandated AB 939 diversion goals established by the State of California. Solid waste collection and recycling services pursuant to Chapter 8.28 are a mandatory requirement for all new development in the City of Yucaipa.

The Project will continue to be served by the City-approved waste disposal service, which is currently served by a contract through Burrtec Wastes Industries, Inc. for waste collection. With the Project’s adherence to Chapter 8.28 guidelines, Project impacts in regard to compliance with federal, state and local management regulations will be reduced to less than significant.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
41 WILDFIRE

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
20: Wildfire: Would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? X
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? X

a) The project site is located between 13th and 14th Street which are both existing 2-way local collector paved roadways, and that development of the site would not impact access to users traveling along both public right-of-way streets. Figure S-5 of the Yucaipa General Plan designates 14th Street as a local evacuation route. Therefore, the Project will not impair implementation of an adopted emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan.

b-d) According to CAL FIRE, half of the City of Yucaipa is designated as a very high fire severity zone (VHFZ). The proposed Project site is located outside of the VHFZ but is adjacent to it to the north. The Project would be subject to the standard Fire Department conditions of approval to reduce fire related risks, and the Project design includes several different points of access. In addition, the City has also adopted the most recent version of the California Building and Fire Codes, which includes sections on fire-resistant construction material requirements based on building use and occupancy. The construction requirements are a function of building size, purpose, type, materials, location, proximity to other structures, and the type of fire suppression systems installed. Through these standard requirements, impacts from fire-related hazards would be less than significant.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
42 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

Issues and Supporting Information Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

19. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)?
X
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X

a) The proposed Project will not result in significant impacts that have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. The Project site does not feature any critical natural habitat, and would cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal. In addition, no significant cultural resources were identified onsite, and the Project would therefore not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.

b) The proposed Project would change the land use from multiple family residential to high density multiple-family residential and would allow for a multi-family residential use consisting of 144 one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartment units.

Given the analysis contained herein related to the potential development that could occur, the cumulative effects of this Project are not expected to result in significant impacts with the suggested mitigation measures provided. The evaluation of the proposed Project utilized a variety of topical sections, including: agriculture, biology, cultural, air quality, geology/soils, greenhouse gases, hydrology, land use, noise, land use, mineral resources, population and housing, recreation, traffic, utilities and services. The analysis of the Project did not identify potential significant or cumulative impacts that could not be mitigated to a level that is less than significant.

c) Future development as part of the Project will involve site improvements that are to be constructed consistent with existing City regulations, standards, and processes, and those of other agencies. The topical issues discussed within this document did not identify the potential for adverse effects due, in part, to the incorporation of mitigation measures and standard Conditions of Approval that apply to the development, which address potential impacts or adverse effects on human beings.

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
43 SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES:

1. City of Yucaipa General Plan, 2016. Accessed October 2023. https://yucaipa.org/yucaipa-general-plan/

2. City of Yucaipa General Plan EIR, 2016. Accessed October 2023. https://yucaipa.org/yucaipa-general-plan/

3. Yucaipa General Plan 2021-2029 Housing Element, 2021. Accessed October 2023. https://yucaipa.org/wp- content/uploads/dev_svcs/housingelement/Yucaipa_HousingElement_August2021-LM.pdf

4. Yucaipa General Plan Maps and Plan Vision. Accessed October 2023. https://yucaipa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=6be07e1d187d44e3a9cb9cb62df90dc5

5. City of Yucaipa Development Code (as amended). Accessed October 2023. https://qcode.us/codes/yucaipa/

6. Caltrans Web Site for Scenic Highways. Accessed October 2023. www.dot.ca.gov .

7. California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Accessed October 2023. www.dtsc.ca.gov .

8. Cal Fire Mapping. Accessed October 2023. www.fire.ca.gov .

9. Cal Fire. Yucaipa VHFHSZ in Local Responsibility Area (LRA) map for Fire Zonings. Accessed October 2023. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5953/yucaipa.pdf

10. CalRecycle. n.d. SWIS Facility Detail, San Timoteo Landfill. Accessed October 2023. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/Site/DataExport .

11. Department of Homeland Security, FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Accessed October 2023. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home

12. State Water Resources Control Board. Accessed October 2023. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/

13. US Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Mapper. Accessed October 2023. https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/

14. Yucaipa Valley Water District. Accessed October 2023. https://www.yvwd.us/

15. Surface-Water and Ground-Water Quality in the Yucaipa Area, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California, 1996–98.

Accessed October 2023. https://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri004269/pdf/wrir004269.pdf

16. Western Heights Water Company. Accessed October 2023. https://westernheightswater.org/

17. Yucaipa, CA U.S.G.S. Map

18. CA Important Farmland: 2012. Accessed October 2023. https://gis.data.ca.gov/maps/6bef423a57584fb1817023d0ce7a4619/about

19. South Mesa Water Company Service Plan. Accessed October 2023. https://southmesawater.com/service-area/

20. USGS Maps and Topos. Accessed October 2023. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#4/42.00/-107.53

21. Historic Aerial Photographs. Accessed October 2023. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer

22. Resolution 2017-18 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to form the Yucaipa Sub-Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency (YGSA). Accessed October 2023. http://www.yucaipa.org/wp-content/uploads/oversight_board/resolutions/2017_05.pdf

City of Yucaipa
Crafton Suites Residential Project MND
44 23. San Bernardino Transportation Analysis Model. Accessed October 2023. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/san-bernardino- transportation-analysis-model/

24. San Bernardino Geologic Hazard Maps. Accessed October 2023. https://lus.sbcounty.gov/planning-home/zoning-and-overlay- maps/geologic-hazard-maps/

25. List of Hazardous Material Sites via EnviroStar. Accessed October 2023. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/

LOS ANGELES/ORANGE COUNTY/RIVERSIDE/VENTURA/FRESNO/OAKLAND/BAKERSFIELD 31726 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 218 ▼ San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 ▼ Tel: (949) 248-8490 ▼ Fax: (949) 248-8499

May 10, 2022
Mr. Jeff Kreidel
Assistant Planner
Premium Land Development
35109 Avenue C
Yucaipa, CA 92399
Work: (909) 570-9990
Cell: (909) 545-4877
E-mail: [email protected]

Cc: Mr. Craig Heaps
E-mail: [email protected]

Subject: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Study for a 144-Unit Apartment Development in Yucaipa, CA

Dear Mr. Kreidel:

Yorke Engineering, LLC (Yorke) is pleased to provide this Air Quality (AQ), Greenhouse Gas (GHG), and Energy Impacts Letter Report. This report includes CalEEMod emissions estimates, criteria pollutant, localized significance level (LST), GHG, and Energy analyses for the proposed 120-unit apartment development in the City of Yucaipa, California (City). These evaluations will support a CEQA Categorical Exemption, Initial Study (IS), Negative Declaration (ND), or a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), as applicable.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Premium Land Development is proposing to develop a 144-unit apartment complex in the City of Yucaipa, CA which is within the jurisdiction of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The “Crafton Cottages” at 12205-12233 14 th Street will comprise 60 one-bedroom units, 48 two bedroom units, and 12 three-bedroom units. A total of 217 parking spaces will be provided. The vacant 5.1-acre project site is a merger of four contiguous parcels (APNs 0301- 051-29, 0301-051-30, 0301-051-48, and 0301-051-49). Building footprints will total 44,193 square feet, paved parking areas 87,991 square feet, and landscaping 89,972 square feet. A swimming pool will also be provided, and storm water runoff will be collected in a permeable detention pond. The nearest sensitive receptors are single family homes approximately 25 meters northwest and south of the project site.

DATA SOURCES AND ASSUMPTIONS
The following lists sources of information used in developing the emission estimates for the proposed Project using the California Emissions Estimator Model ® (CalEEMod). Not all CalEEMod defaults are listed, but some defaults which have a particularly important impact on the project are listed.
 The Applicant defined:

Premium Land Development
144-Unit Apartment Development – 12205-12233 14th Steet, Yucaipa, CA 92399 May 10, 2022

 Basic project design features including size of building features, parking spaces, and landscaping and pool areas, and number of units, etc.;  Low VOC paints will be used in compliance with SCAQMD rules;  During construction, any exposed soil will be watered a minimum of three times a day, as required by the SCAQMD;
 Low-flow faucets, toilets, showers, and irrigation will be installed consistent with modern building codes; and
 CalEEMod defaults were used for:
 Construction equipment count, load factor, and fleet average age;  Architectural coating areas;
 Population (residents);
 Residential land use operational vehicle fleet mixes; and  Average vehicle trip distances.

LIST OF TABLES
The project analyses and results are summarized in the following tables:
 Table 1: Land Use Data for CalEEMod Input
 Table 2: SCAQMD CEQA Thresholds of Significance
 Table 3: Construction Emissions Summary and Significance Evaluation  Table 4: Operational Emissions Summary and Significance Evaluation  Table 5: Construction Localized Significance Threshold Evaluation  Table 6: Operational Localized Significance Threshold Evaluation  Table 7: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Summary and Significance Evaluation  Table 8: Construction Mobile Source Energy Use – CalEEMod Basis  Table 9: Operational Area and Mobile Source Energy Use – CalEEMod Basis  Table 10: Operational Utility Energy Use – CalEEMod Basis

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ANALYSES
In order to evaluate the potential for Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas impacts of a proposed project, quantitative significance criteria established by the local air quality agency, such as the SCAQMD, may be relied upon to make significance determinations based on mass emissions of criteria pollutants and GHGs, as presented in this report. As shown below, approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to air quality or greenhouse gases.

Project Emissions Estimation
The construction and operation analysis were performed using CalEEMod version 2020.4.0, the official statewide land use computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for estimating

Premium Land Development
144-Unit Apartment Development – 12205-12233 14th Steet, Yucaipa, CA 92399 May 10, 2022

potential criteria pollutant and GHG emissions associated with both construction and operations of land use projects under CEQA. The model quantifies direct emissions from construction and operations (including vehicle use), as well as indirect emissions, such as GHG emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use. The mobile source emission factors used in the model – published by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) – include the Pavley standards and Low Carbon Fuel standards. The model also identifies project design features, regulatory measures, and mitigation measures to reduce criteria pollutant and GHG emissions along with calculating the benefits achieved from the selected measures.

CalEEMod was developed by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in collaboration with the SCAQMD, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and other California air districts. Default land use data (e.g., emission factors, trip lengths, meteorology, source inventory, etc.) were provided by the various California air districts to account for local requirements and conditions. As the official assessment methodology for land use projects in California, CalEEMod is relied upon herein for construction and operational emissions quantification, which forms the basis for the impact analysis.

Based on information received from the Applicant, land use data for CalEEMod input is presented in Table 1. The SCAQMD quantitative significance thresholds shown in Table 2 were used to evaluate project emissions impacts (SCAQMD 2019).

Table 1: Land Use Data for CalEEMod Input
Project Element Land Use
Type
Land Use
Subtype
Unit
Amount Size Metric
Lot
Acreage
(footprint)
Square
Feet (est.) Population
Apartments Residential Apartments Mid
Rise 144 Dwelling
Units 1.01 44,193 412
Parking Lot Parking Parking Lot 87.99 1,000 sq. ft. 2.02 87,991 0 Landscape and Pool Parking Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces 89.97 1,000 sq. ft. 2.07 89,972 0
Project Site 5.10 222,156 412
Source: Applicant 2021, CalEEMod version 2020.4.0
Notes:

Electric utility: Southern California Edison
Climate Zone 10
Population 412 is CalEEMod Default for 144 Dwelling Units

Premium Land Development
144-Unit Apartment Development – 12205-12233 14th Steet, Yucaipa, CA 92399 May 10, 2022

Table 2: SCAQMD CEQA Thresholds of Significance
Pollutant Project Construction Project Operation
ROG (VOC) 75 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
NOX 100 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
CO 550 lbs/day 550 lbs/day
SOX 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day
PM10 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day
PM2.5 55 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
24-hour PM2.5 Increment 10.4 µg/m3 2.5 µg/m3
24-hour PM10 Increment 10.4 µg/m3 2.5 µg/m3
Annual PM10 Increment 1.0 µg/m3 annual average
1-hour NO2 Increment 0.18 ppm (state)
Annual NO2 Increment 0.03 ppm (state) & 0.0534 ppm (federal) 1-hour SO2 Increment 0.25 ppm (state) & 0.075 ppm (federal – 99th percentile) 24-hour SO2 Increment 0.04 ppm (state)
24-hour Sulfate Increment 25 ug/m3 (state)
1-hour CO Increment 20 ppm (state) & 35 ppm (federal)
8-hour CO Increment 9.0 ppm (state/federal)
Toxic Air Contaminants
(including carcinogens and non-
carcinogens)
Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk ≥10 in 1 million
Cancer Burden >0.5 excess cancer cases (in areas ≥1 in 1 million) Chronic & Acute Hazard Index ≥1.0 (project increment)
Odor Project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to Rule 402 Greenhouse Gases 10,000 MT/yr CO2e for industrial facilities 3,000 MT/yr CO2e for land use projects (draft proposal) Source: SCAQMD 2019, 2008b

Criteria Pollutants from Project Construction
A project’s construction phase produces many types of emissions, but PM 10 (including PM2.5) in fugitive dust and diesel engine exhaust are the pollutants of greatest concern. Fugitive dust emissions can result from a variety of construction activities, including excavation, grading, demolition, vehicle travel on paved and unpaved surfaces, and vehicle exhaust. Construction- related emissions can cause substantial increases in localized concentrations of PM10, as well as affecting PM10 compliance with ambient air quality standards on a regional basis. Particulate emissions from construction activities can lead to adverse health effects as well as nuisance concerns such as reduced visibility and soiling of exposed surfaces. The use of diesel-powered construction equipment emits ozone precursors oxides of nitrogen (NO x) and reactive organic gases (ROG), and diesel particulate matter (DPM), the latter being a composite of toxic air contaminants (TACs) containing a variety of hazardous substances. Large construction projects using multiple large earthmoving equipment are evaluated to determine if operations may exceed the District’s daily threshold for NOx emissions and could temporarily expose area residents to hazardous levels of DPM. Use of architectural coatings and other materials associated with

Premium Land Development
144-Unit Apartment Development – 12205-12233 14th Steet, Yucaipa, CA 92399 May 10, 2022

finishing buildings may also emit ROG and TACs. CEQA significance thresholds address the impacts of construction activity emissions on local and regional air quality. Thresholds are also provided for other potential impacts related to project construction, such as odors and TACs.

The SCAQMD’s approach to CEQA analyses of fugitive dust impacts is to require implementation of effective and comprehensive dust control measures rather than to require detailed quantification of emissions. PM10 emitted during construction can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions, and other factors, making quantification difficult. Despite this variability in emissions, experience has shown that there are several feasible control measures that can be reasonably implemented to significantly reduce fugitive dust emissions from construction. For larger projects, the SCAQMD has determined that compliance with an approved fugitive dust control plan comprising Best Management Practices (BMPs), primarily through frequent water application, constitutes sufficient control to reduce PM10 impacts to a level considered less than significant.

Criteria Pollutants from Project Operation
The term “project operations” refers to the full range of activities that can or may generate criteria pollutant, GHG, and TAC emissions when the project is functioning in its intended use. For projects, such as office parks, shopping centers, apartment buildings, residential subdivisions, and other indirect sources, motor vehicles traveling to and from the project represents the primary source of air pollutant emissions. For industrial projects and some commercial projects, equipment operation and manufacturing processes, i.e., permitted stationary sources, can be of greatest concern from an emissions standpoint. CEQA significance thresholds address the impacts of operational emission sources on local and regional air quality. Thresholds are also provided for other potential impacts related to project operations, such as odors.

Results of Criteria Emissions Analyses
Table 3 shows unmitigated and mitigated criteria construction emissions and evaluates mitigated emissions against SCAQMD significance thresholds.

Table 4 shows unmitigated and mitigated criteria operational emissions and evaluates mitigated emissions against SCAQMD significance thresholds.

As shown in Tables 3 and 4, mass emissions of criteria pollutants from construction and operation are below applicable SCAQMD significance thresholds.

PROJECTED IMPACT: Less Than Significant (LTS)

Premium Land Development
144-Unit Apartment Development – 12205-12233 14th Steet, Yucaipa, CA 92399 May 10, 2022

Table 3: Construction Emissions Summary and Significance Evaluation Criteria Pollutants Unmitigated (lbs/day) Mitigated (lbs/day) Threshold (lbs/day) Significance ROG (VOC) 16.6 16.6 75 LTS
NOX 33.1 33.1 100 LTS
CO 24.4 24.4 550 LTS
SOX 0.1 0.1 150 LTS
Total PM10 21.5 9.4 150 LTS
Total PM2.5 11.6 5.5 55 LTS
Sources: SCAQMD 2019, CalEEMod version 2020.4.0
Notes:
lbs/day are winter or summer maxima for planned land use Total PM10 / PM2.5 comprises fugitive dust plus engine exhaust LTS - Less Than Significant

Table 4: Operational Emissions Summary and Significance Evaluation Criteria Pollutants Unmitigated (lbs/day) Mitigated (lbs/day) Threshold (lbs/day) Significance ROG (VOC) 41.8 4.0 55 LTS
NOX 7.2 4.2 55 LTS
CO 110.7 37.5 550 LTS
SOX 0.3 0.1 150 LTS
Total PM10 16.8 5.8 150 LTS
Total PM2.5 12.7 1.7 55 LTS
Sources: SCAQMD 2019, CalEEMod version 2020.4.0
Notes:
lbs/day are winter or summer maxima for planned land use LTS - Less Than Significant

Localized Significance Threshold Analysis
The SCAQMD’s Localized Significance Threshold (LST) methodology (2008a) was used to analyze the neighborhood scale impacts of NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 associated with project- specific mass emissions. Introduced in 2003, the LST methodology was revised in 2008 to include the PM2.5 significance threshold methodology and update the LST mass rate lookup tables for the new 1-hour NO2 standard.

For determining localized air quality impacts from small projects in a defined geographic source- receptor area (SRA), the LST methodology provides mass emission rate lookup tables for 1-acre, 2-acre, and 5-acre parcels by SRA. The tabulated LSTs represent the maximum mass emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of state or national ambient air quality standards (CAAQS or NAAQS) for the above pollutants and were developed based on ambient concentrations of these pollutants for each SRA in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAQMD 2008a).

Premium Land Development
144-Unit Apartment Development – 12205-12233 14th Steet, Yucaipa, CA 92399 May 10, 2022

For most land use projects, the highest daily emission rates occur during the site preparation and grading phases of construction; where applicable, these maximum daily emissions are used in the LST analysis.

Since land use operational emissions – mainly from associated traffic – are dispersed over a wide area, localized impacts from project operation are substantially lower than during project construction. However, an Operational LST analysis was also performed. Localized mobile source emissions for project operation were calculated for a one mile radius of the project site.

The proposed Project site is 5.1 acres in source-receptor area Zone 35 – East San Bernardino Valley. The 5-acre screening lookup tables were used to evaluate NO x, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 impacts on nearby receptors. The nearest receptor is approximately 25 meters away from the site.

Therefore, the impact evaluation was performed using the closest distance within SCAQMD LST tables of 25 meters for construction and operations. (SCAQMD 2008a) Results of Localized Significance Threshold Analysis
The LST results provided in Tables 5 and 6 show that on-site emissions from construction and operations would meet the LST passing criteria at the nearest receptors (25 meters). Thus, impacts would be less than significant.

PROJECTED IMPACT: Less Than Significant (LTS)

Table 5: Construction Localized Significance Threshold Evaluation Criteria Pollutants Mitigated
(lbs/day)
Threshold
(lbs/day)
Percent of
Threshold Result
NOX 33.1 270 12% Pass
CO 24.4 2,075 1% Pass
PM10 9.4 14 67% Pass
PM2.5 5.5 9 61% Pass
Sources: SCAQMD 2008a, CalEEMod version 2020.4.0
Notes:

Source-receptor area - East San Bernardino Valley- Zone 35 5-acre area, 25 meters to receptor

Table 6: Operational Localized Significance Threshold Evaluation Criteria Pollutants Mitigated
(lbs/day)
Threshold
(lbs/day)
Percent of
Threshold Result
NOX 4.2 270 2% Pass
CO 37.5 2,075 2% Pass
PM10 0.65 4 16% Pass
PM2.5 0.25 3 8% Pass
Sources: SCAQMD 2008a, CalEEMod version 2020.4.0
Notes:

Source-receptor area - East San Bernardino Valley- Zone 35 5-acre area, 25 meters to receptor
Localized mobile source emissions are calculated for a one mile radius of the project site.

Premium Land Development
144-Unit Apartment Development – 12205-12233 14th Steet, Yucaipa, CA 92399 May 10, 2022

Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Construction and Operation Greenhouse gases – primarily carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous (N2O) oxide, collectively reported as carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) – are directly emitted from stationary source combustion of natural gas in equipment such as water heaters, boilers, process heaters, and furnaces. GHGs are also emitted from mobile sources such as on-road vehicles and off-road construction equipment burning fuels such as gasoline, diesel, biodiesel, propane, or natural gas (compressed or liquefied). Indirect GHG emissions result from electric power generated elsewhere (i.e., power plants) used to operate process equipment, lighting, and utilities at a facility. Also, included in GHG quantification is electric power used to pump the water supply (e.g., aqueducts, wells, pipelines) and disposal and decomposition of municipal waste in landfills. (CARB 2017) California's Building Energy Efficiency Standards are updated on an approximately three-year cycle. The 2019 standards improved upon the 2016 standards for new construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential, commercial, and industrial buildings. The 2019 standards went into effect on January 1, 2020 (CEC 2019).

Since the Title 24 standards require energy conservation features in new construction (e.g., high- efficiency lighting, high-efficiency heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems, thermal insulation, double-glazed windows, water conserving plumbing fixtures, etc.), they indirectly regulate and reduce GHG emissions.

Using CalEEMod, direct onsite and offsite GHG emissions were estimated for construction and operation, and indirect offsite GHG emissions were estimated to account for electric power used by the proposed Project, water conveyance, and solid waste disposal.

Results of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analyses
The SCAQMD officially adopted an industrial facility mass emissions threshold of 10,000 metric tons (MT) CO2e per year (SCAQMD 2019) and has proposed a residential/commercial mass emissions threshold of 3,000 metric tons (MT) CO 2e per year (SCAQMD 2008b).

Table 7 shows unmitigated and mitigated GHG emissions and evaluates mitigated emissions against SCAQMD significance thresholds. Operational reduction measures incorporate typical code-required water conservation features. Off-site traffic impacts are included in these emissions estimates, along with construction emissions amortized over 30 years.

PROJECTED IMPACT: Less Than Significant (LTS)
Table 7: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Summary and Significance Evaluation Greenhouse Gases Unmitigated (MT/yr) Mitigated (MT/yr) Threshold (MT/yr) Significance
CO2 1,196 1,141 — —
CH4 1.21 1.11 — —
N2O 0.06 0.05 — —
CO2e 1,243 1,184 3,000 LTS
Sources: SCAQMD 2008b, CalEEMod version 2020.4.0
Notes:

Comprises annual operational emissions plus construction emissions amortized over 30 years LTS - Less Than Significant

Premium Land Development
144-Unit Apartment Development – 12205-12233 14th Steet, Yucaipa, CA 92399 May 10, 2022

ENERGY IMPACT ANALYSIS
Residential project energy consumption primarily comprises 1) mobile source fuels (i.e., diesel, gasoline) used for construction, 2) area and mobile source fuels used for operation (e.g., residents and deliveries), and 3) building utilities (natural gas and electric power).

Project Construction Fuel Consumption
The fuel consumption from the mobiles sources used for construction was calculated from the results of the CalEEMod modeling procedure. CalEEMod calculates mass emissions of GHGs, including CO2, from offroad and onroad mobile sources associated with project construction. For construction, CalEEMod aggregates mobile source CO 2 emissions into four broad categories (typical fuel types assumed):
 Offroad equipment [diesel (Tiers 1-4)];
 Hauling [heavy-heavy duty diesel trucks (HHDT)];
 Vendor [medium-heavy and heavy-heavy duty diesel trucks (MHDT, HHDT)]; and  Worker [light duty gasoline automobiles and trucks (LDA, LDT1, LDT2)].

For each category, diesel and gasoline fuel consumption can be estimated (back-calculated) using 2020 Climate Registry (40 CFR 98 Subpart C) emission factors for those fuels:
 Diesel Fuel Oil No. 2: 10.21 kg CO2 per gallon [22.51 lbs CO2 per gallon]; and  Motor Gasoline: 8.78 kg CO2 per gallon [19.36 lbs CO2 per gallon].

Using the CalEEMod annual emissions results (MT CO2) for each of the four mobile source categories (offroad, hauling, vendor, worker) and the corresponding CO 2 emission factors, Table 8 shows estimated fuel consumption during project construction. As shown in Table 8, based on CalEEMod, project construction could consume approximately 62,620 gallons of liquid fuels.

Table 8: Construction Mobile Source Energy Use – CalEEMod Basis Mobile
Sources Types Fuels MT
CO2
CO2 Emission Factor
(kg/gal)
Fuel Consumption
(gallons)
Off-Road Tiers 1-4 Diesel 332 10.21 32,500
Hauling HHDT Diesel 0 10.21 0
Vendor MHDT, HHDT Diesel 93 10.21 9,070
Worker LDA, LDT1, LDT2 Gasoline 185 8.78 21,050
Totals 609 ― 62,620
Sources: CalEEMod version 2020.4.0, TCR 2020, 40 CFR 98 Subpart C

Premium Land Development
144-Unit Apartment Development – 12205-12233 14th Steet, Yucaipa, CA 92399 May 10, 2022

Project Operation Fuel Consumption
Similar to construction, CalEEMod calculates mass emissions of CO 2 from area and mobile sources associated with project operation. For operation, CalEEMod aggregates area and mobile source CO2 emissions into three broad categories (typical fuel types assumed):
 Utility equipment [gasoline];
 Heavy Mobile [light-heavy, medium-heavy and heavy-heavy duty diesel trucks (LHDT, MHDT, HHDT)]; and
 Light Mobile [light and medium duty gasoline automobiles and trucks (LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MDV)].

For each category, diesel and gasoline fuel consumption can be estimated (back-calculated) using 2020 Climate Registry (40 CFR 98 Subpart C) emission factors for those fuels. Consistent with CalEEMod, residential land use operational vehicle fleet mixes comprise approximately 95% gasoline and 5% diesel fuel usage.

Using the CalEEMod annual emissions results (MT CO 2) for the area and mobile source categories and the corresponding CO2 emission factors, Table 9 shows estimated fuel consumption during project operation. As shown in Table 9, based on CalEEMod, project operation could consume approximately 101,060 gallons of liquid fuels annually.

Table 9: Operational Area and Mobile Source Energy Use – CalEEMod Basis Sources Types Fuels MT
CO2/year
CO2 Emission
Factor (kg/gal)
Fuel Consumption
(gallons/year)
Area Utility Equipment Gasoline 32 8.78 3,620
Heavy Mobile LHDT, MHDT, HHDT Diesel 43 10.21 4,220
Light Mobile LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MDV Gasoline 818 8.78 93,220 Totals 893 ― 101,060
Sources: CalEEMod version 2020.4.0, TCR 2020, 40 CFR 98 Subpart C Project Operation Utilities Consumption
Based on CalEEMod for the defined land use, Table 10 shows estimated natural gas and electric power usage for the proposed project.

As shown in Table 10, project operation would result in natural gas usage of approximately 1.92 million cubic feet per year (MMcf/year), and utilization of approximately 593 megawatt-hours per year (MWh/year) of electric power.

Table 10: Operational Utility Energy Use – CalEEMod Basis Component Type Quantity Units
Utilities Natural Gas 1.92 MMcf/year
Utilities Electric Power 593 MWh/year
Source: CalEEMod version 2020.4.0

Premium Land Development
144-Unit Apartment Development – 12205-12233 14th Steet, Yucaipa, CA 92399 May 10, 2022

Analysis of Energy Significance Criteria
Impacts to energy resources would be considered significant if any of the following criteria are met. Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? No. The proposed energy use will not be done in a wasteful and/or inefficient manner.

Project construction will be performed by contractors with an economic incentive to minimize costs, one element of which is fuel conservation, which would benefit profits.

The residential project will be required by code (below) to minimize direct operational energy usage by means of thermal wall insulation, insulating double-pane windows, high- efficiency HVAC equipment, LED lighting, motion-detector light switches, Energy Star® appliances, and other modern energy-saving features. In addition, low-flow plumbing fixtures conserve both water and energy, as less electric power would be needed for water conveyance and treatment.
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? No. The project would not conflict with or obstruct any adopted energy conservation plans, state or local plans for renewable energy, or energy efficiency. The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Parts 6 and 11) are designed to reduce unnecessary energy consumption in newly constructed and existing buildings, such as residential and commercial structures. The Building Energy Efficiency Standards are applicable to the proposed project, which is designed for human habitation (CEC 2019). The proposed project would be electric vehicle (EV) charging stations ready to reduce fuel consumption and rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) panels ready to provide on-site renewable energy generation as required. Both of these measures would also reduce the overall GHG emissions when installed. Thus, the proposed project would not conflict with Title 24 or obstruct its implementation on applicable land use development projects in California.

PROJECTED IMPACT: Less Than Significant (LTS)

Premium Land Development
144-Unit Apartment Development – 12205-12233 14th Steet, Yucaipa, CA 92399 May 10, 2022

CLOSING
Thank you very much for the opportunity to be of assistance to Premium Land Development.

Should you have any questions, please contact me at (949) 324-9041 (mobile) or Bradford Boyes at (805) 217-4947 (mobile).

Sincerely,

Tina Darjazanie | Long Beach Office
Senior Engineer
Yorke Engineering, LLC
[email protected]

cc: Bradford Boyes, Yorke Engineering, LLC

Enclosures/Attachments:

1. CalEEMod Outputs

Premium Land Development
144-Unit Apartment Development – 12205-12233 14th Steet, Yucaipa, CA 92399 May 10, 2022

AIR QUALITY AND GHG REFERENCES
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan.

Website ( https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scopingplan.htm ) accessed May 6, 2022.

California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2016. Solid Waste Cleanup Program Weights and Volumes for Project Estimates. Website ( https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/swfacilities/cdi/Tools/Calculations ) accessed May 6, 2022.

California Emissions Estimation Model® (CalEEMod). 2021. Version 2020.4.0. Website ( http://www.caleemod.com/) accessed May 6, 2022.

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2019. Building Energy Efficiency Program. Website ( https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency- standards) accessed May 6, 2022.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2019. Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Website ( http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air- quality-significance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2) accessed May 6, 2022.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2008a. Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. Website ( http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/final-lst-methodology- document.pdf?sfvrsn=2) accessed May 6, 2022.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2008b. Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans. Website ( http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa- significance-thresholds/ghgboardsynopsis.pdf?sfvrsn=2) accessed May 6, 2022.

ATTACHMENT 1 – CALEEMOD OUTPUTS

Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa
San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - site specific data
Construction Phase -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - BMPs
Area Mitigation -
Energy Mitigation -
Water Mitigation -

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 89.97 1000sqft 2.07 89,972.00 0 Parking Lot 87.99 1000sqft 2.02 87,991.00 0
Apartments Mid Rise 144.00 Dwelling Unit 1.01 44,193.00 412

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
10 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 32

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2024Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
390.98 0.033CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingCheck False True CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 1 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblConstDustMitigation CleanPavedRoadPercentReduction 0 75 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 89,970.00 89,972.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 87,990.00 87,991.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 144,000.00 44,193.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.79 1.01
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 2 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2022 0.2166 1.7135 1.9807 4.3500e-
003

0.3361 0.0794 0.4155 0.1296 0.0744 0.2040 0.0000 390.3311 390.3311 0.0596 0.0123 395.4750 2023 0.2728 0.8014 1.1229 2.4400e-
003

0.0984 0.0358 0.1341 0.0264 0.0336 0.0600 0.0000 218.9531 218.9531 0.0321 6.6400e- 003
221.7366
Maximum 0.2728 1.7135 1.9807 4.3500e-
003

0.3361 0.0794 0.4155 0.1296 0.0744 0.2040 0.0000 390.3311 390.3311 0.0596 0.0123 395.4750 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2022 0.2166 1.7135 1.9807 4.3500e-
003

0.1269 0.0794 0.2063 0.0519 0.0744 0.1262 0.0000 390.3308 390.3308 0.0596 0.0123 395.4747 2023 0.2728 0.8014 1.1229 2.4400e-
003

0.0358 0.0358 0.0716 0.0111 0.0336 0.0446 0.0000 218.9529 218.9529 0.0321 6.6400e- 003
221.7365
Maximum 0.2728 1.7135 1.9807 4.3500e-
003

0.1269 0.0794 0.2063 0.0519 0.0744 0.1262 0.0000 390.3308 390.3308 0.0596 0.0123 395.4747 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 3 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

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

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 62.55 0.00 49.44 59.67 0.00 35.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 4-28-2022 7-27-2022 0.7715 0.7715
2 7-28-2022 10-27-2022 0.6778 0.6778
3 10-28-2022 1-27-2023 0.6615 0.6615
4 1-28-2023 4-27-2023 0.6005 0.6005
5 4-28-2023 7-27-2023 0.2919 0.2919
Highest 0.7715 0.7715

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.7040 0.0545 2.4021 2.4100e-
003

0.1457 0.1457 0.1457 0.1457 15.2956 31.8230 47.1185 0.0480 1.0400e- 003

48.6267
Energy 0.0112 0.0954 0.0406 6.1000e-
004

7.7200e-
003

7.7200e-
003

7.7200e-
003

7.7200e-
003

0.0000 217.1096 217.1096 0.0111 3.1200e-
003
218.3163
Mobile 0.3878 0.6234 4.0794 9.1600e-
003

0.9595 7.3600e-
003

0.9669 0.2563 6.8800e-
003

0.2632 0.0000 861.5255 861.5255 0.0484 0.0428 875.4948
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 13.4461 0.0000 13.4461 0.7946 0.0000 33.3122 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.9765 33.3196 36.2961 0.3085 7.5600e- 003

46.2621
Total 1.1030 0.7733 6.5221 0.0122 0.9595 0.1608 1.1203 0.2563 0.1603 0.4166 31.7182 1,143.777 7 1,175.495
9 1.2107 0.0545 1,222.012
1 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 4 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.2323 0.0171 1.4867 8.0000e-
005

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

0.0000 2.4302 2.4302 2.3400e-
003

0.0000 2.4887
Energy 0.0108 0.0927 0.0394 5.9000e-
004

7.4900e-
003

7.4900e-
003

7.4900e-
003

7.4900e-
003

0.0000 212.4708 212.4708 0.0109 3.0400e-
003
213.6509
Mobile 0.3878 0.6234 4.0794 9.1600e-
003

0.9595 7.3600e-
003

0.9669 0.2563 6.8800e-
003

0.2632 0.0000 861.5255 861.5255 0.0484 0.0428 875.4948
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 13.4461 0.0000 13.4461 0.7946 0.0000 33.3122 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.3812 28.2756 30.6568 0.2470 6.0600e- 003

38.6380
Total 0.6310 0.7331 5.6055 9.8300e-
003

0.9595 0.0231 0.9826 0.2563 0.0226 0.2789 15.8274 1,104.702 0 1,120.529
4 1.1033 0.0519 1,163.584
5 Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 4/28/2022 5/11/2022 5 10 2 Grading Grading 5/12/2022 6/8/2022 5 20
3 Building Construction Building Construction 6/9/2022 4/26/2023 5 230 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

42.79 5.19 14.05 19.29 0.00 85.64 12.29 0.00 85.90 33.06 50.10 3.42 4.68 8.87 4.80 4.78 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 5 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4 Paving Paving 4/27/2023 5/24/2023 5 20
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 5/25/2023 6/21/2023 5 20 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Residential Indoor: 89,491; Residential Outdoor: 29,830; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 10,678 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 15
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 20
Acres of Paving: 4.09
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 6 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0983 0.0000 0.0983 0.0505 0.0000 0.0505 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0159 0.1654 0.0985 1.9000e-
004

8.0600e-
003

8.0600e-
003

7.4200e-
003

7.4200e-
003

0.0000 16.7197 16.7197 5.4100e-
003

0.0000 16.8549
Total 0.0159 0.1654 0.0985 1.9000e-
004

0.0983 8.0600e-
003

0.1064 0.0505 7.4200e-
003

0.0579 0.0000 16.7197 16.7197 5.4100e-
003

0.0000 16.8549
Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Clean Paved Roads
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 178.00 45.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 36.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 7 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.4000e-
004

2.7000e-
004

3.1900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

9.9000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

9.9000e-
004

2.6000e-
004

0.0000 2.7000e-
004

0.0000 0.7916 0.7916 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.7989
Total 3.4000e-
004

2.7000e-
004

3.1900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

9.9000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

9.9000e-
004

2.6000e-
004

0.0000 2.7000e-
004

0.0000 0.7916 0.7916 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.7989
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0383 0.0000 0.0383 0.0197 0.0000 0.0197 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0159 0.1654 0.0985 1.9000e-
004

8.0600e-
003

8.0600e-
003

7.4200e-
003

7.4200e-
003

0.0000 16.7197 16.7197 5.4100e-
003

0.0000 16.8549
Total 0.0159 0.1654 0.0985 1.9000e-
004

0.0383 8.0600e-
003

0.0464 0.0197 7.4200e-
003

0.0271 0.0000 16.7197 16.7197 5.4100e-
003

0.0000 16.8549
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 8 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.4000e-
004

2.7000e-
004

3.1900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

3.5000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

3.5000e-
004

1.0000e-
004

0.0000 1.1000e-
004

0.0000 0.7916 0.7916 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.7989
Total 3.4000e-
004

2.7000e-
004

3.1900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

3.5000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

3.5000e-
004

1.0000e-
004

0.0000 1.1000e-
004

0.0000 0.7916 0.7916 2.0000e-
005

2.0000e-
005

0.7989
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0708 0.0000 0.0708 0.0343 0.0000 0.0343 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0195 0.2086 0.1527 3.0000e-
004

9.4100e-
003

9.4100e-
003

8.6600e-
003

8.6600e-
003

0.0000 26.0548 26.0548 8.4300e-
003

0.0000 26.2654
Total 0.0195 0.2086 0.1527 3.0000e-
004

0.0708 9.4100e-
003

0.0802 0.0343 8.6600e-
003

0.0429 0.0000 26.0548 26.0548 8.4300e-
003

0.0000 26.2654
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 9 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.7000e-
004

4.4000e-
004

5.3200e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6400e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6500e-
003

4.4000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.4000e-
004

0.0000 1.3193 1.3193 4.0000e-
005

4.0000e-
005

1.3315
Total 5.7000e-
004

4.4000e-
004

5.3200e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6400e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6500e-
003

4.4000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.4000e-
004

0.0000 1.3193 1.3193 4.0000e-
005

4.0000e-
005

1.3315
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0276 0.0000 0.0276 0.0134 0.0000 0.0134 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0195 0.2086 0.1527 3.0000e-
004

9.4100e-
003

9.4100e-
003

8.6600e-
003

8.6600e-
003

0.0000 26.0547 26.0547 8.4300e-
003

0.0000 26.2654
Total 0.0195 0.2086 0.1527 3.0000e-
004

0.0276 9.4100e-
003

0.0370 0.0134 8.6600e-
003

0.0220 0.0000 26.0547 26.0547 8.4300e-
003

0.0000 26.2654
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 10 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.7000e-
004

4.4000e-
004

5.3200e-
003

1.0000e-
005

5.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

5.8000e-
004

1.7000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

1.8000e-
004

0.0000 1.3193 1.3193 4.0000e-
005

4.0000e-
005

1.3315
Total 5.7000e-
004

4.4000e-
004

5.3200e-
003

1.0000e-
005

5.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

5.8000e-
004

1.7000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

1.8000e-
004

0.0000 1.3193 1.3193 4.0000e-
005

4.0000e-
005

1.3315
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1254 1.1478 1.2027 1.9800e-
003

0.0595 0.0595 0.0559 0.0559 0.0000 170.3181 170.3181 0.0408 0.0000 171.3381 Total 0.1254 1.1478 1.2027 1.9800e-
003

0.0595 0.0595 0.0559 0.0559 0.0000 170.3181 170.3181 0.0408 0.0000 171.3381 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 11 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 5.6400e-
003

0.1524 0.0540 6.2000e-
004

0.0209 1.7300e-
003

0.0226 6.0200e-
003

1.6500e-
003

7.6700e-
003

0.0000 60.0589 60.0589 1.6200e-
003

8.8900e-
003

62.7499
Worker 0.0493 0.0387 0.4642 1.2500e-
003

0.1435 7.7000e-
004

0.1442 0.0381 7.1000e-
004

0.0388 0.0000 115.0688 115.0688 3.2800e-
003

3.3100e-
003
116.1362
Total 0.0550 0.1911 0.5183 1.8700e-
003

0.1643 2.5000e-
003

0.1668 0.0441 2.3600e-
003

0.0465 0.0000 175.1277 175.1277 4.9000e-
003

0.0122 178.8861
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1254 1.1478 1.2027 1.9800e-
003

0.0595 0.0595 0.0559 0.0559 0.0000 170.3179 170.3179 0.0408 0.0000 171.3379 Total 0.1254 1.1478 1.2027 1.9800e-
003

0.0595 0.0595 0.0559 0.0559 0.0000 170.3179 170.3179 0.0408 0.0000 171.3379 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 12 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 5.6400e-
003

0.1524 0.0540 6.2000e-
004

9.7900e-
003

1.7300e-
003

0.0115 3.3000e-
003

1.6500e-
003

4.9500e-
003

0.0000 60.0589 60.0589 1.6200e-
003

8.8900e-
003

62.7499
Worker 0.0493 0.0387 0.4642 1.2500e-
003

0.0502 7.7000e-
004

0.0510 0.0152 7.1000e-
004

0.0159 0.0000 115.0688 115.0688 3.2800e-
003

3.3100e-
003
116.1362
Total 0.0550 0.1911 0.5183 1.8700e-
003

0.0600 2.5000e-
003

0.0625 0.0185 2.3600e-
003

0.0209 0.0000 175.1277 175.1277 4.9000e-
003

0.0122 178.8861
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0653 0.5970 0.6741 1.1200e-
003

0.0290 0.0290 0.0273 0.0273 0.0000 96.1990 96.1990 0.0229 0.0000 96.7711 Total 0.0653 0.5970 0.6741 1.1200e-
003

0.0290 0.0290 0.0273 0.0273 0.0000 96.1990 96.1990 0.0229 0.0000 96.7711 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 13 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 2.1100e-
003

0.0689 0.0279 3.3000e-
004

0.0118 4.9000e-
004

0.0123 3.4000e-
003

4.7000e-
004

3.8700e-
003

0.0000 32.5474 32.5474 8.5000e-
004

4.8100e-
003

34.0019
Worker 0.0257 0.0192 0.2404 6.8000e-
004

0.0810 4.1000e-
004

0.0814 0.0215 3.8000e-
004

0.0219 0.0000 63.2592 63.2592 1.6600e-
003

1.7200e-
003

63.8122
Total 0.0279 0.0881 0.2683 1.0100e-
003

0.0928 9.0000e-
004

0.0937 0.0249 8.5000e-
004

0.0258 0.0000 95.8066 95.8066 2.5100e-
003

6.5300e-
003

97.8141
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0653 0.5970 0.6741 1.1200e-
003

0.0290 0.0290 0.0273 0.0273 0.0000 96.1989 96.1989 0.0229 0.0000 96.7710 Total 0.0653 0.5970 0.6741 1.1200e-
003

0.0290 0.0290 0.0273 0.0273 0.0000 96.1989 96.1989 0.0229 0.0000 96.7710 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 14 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 2.1100e-
003

0.0689 0.0279 3.3000e-
004

5.5300e-
003

4.9000e-
004

6.0200e-
003

1.8700e-
003

4.7000e-
004

2.3400e-
003

0.0000 32.5474 32.5474 8.5000e-
004

4.8100e-
003

34.0019
Worker 0.0257 0.0192 0.2404 6.8000e-
004

0.0283 4.1000e-
004

0.0288 8.5900e-
003

3.8000e-
004

8.9600e-
003

0.0000 63.2592 63.2592 1.6600e-
003

1.7200e-
003

63.8122
Total 0.0279 0.0881 0.2683 1.0100e-
003

0.0339 9.0000e-
004

0.0348 0.0105 8.5000e-
004

0.0113 0.0000 95.8066 95.8066 2.5100e-
003

6.5300e-
003

97.8141
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0103 0.1019 0.1458 2.3000e-
004

5.1000e-
003

5.1000e-
003

4.6900e-
003

4.6900e-
003

0.0000 20.0269 20.0269 6.4800e-
003

0.0000 20.1888
Paving 2.6500e-
003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0130 0.1019 0.1458 2.3000e-
004

5.1000e-
003

5.1000e-
003

4.6900e-
003

4.6900e-
003

0.0000 20.0269 20.0269 6.4800e-
003

0.0000 20.1888
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 15 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.2000e-
004

3.9000e-
004

4.8800e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6400e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6500e-
003

4.4000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.4000e-
004

0.0000 1.2845 1.2845 3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

1.2958
Total 5.2000e-
004

3.9000e-
004

4.8800e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6400e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.6500e-
003

4.4000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.4000e-
004

0.0000 1.2845 1.2845 3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

1.2958
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0103 0.1019 0.1458 2.3000e-
004

5.1000e-
003

5.1000e-
003

4.6900e-
003

4.6900e-
003

0.0000 20.0268 20.0268 6.4800e-
003

0.0000 20.1888
Paving 2.6500e-
003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0130 0.1019 0.1458 2.3000e-
004

5.1000e-
003

5.1000e-
003

4.6900e-
003

4.6900e-
003

0.0000 20.0268 20.0268 6.4800e-
003

0.0000 20.1888
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 16 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.2000e-
004

3.9000e-
004

4.8800e-
003

1.0000e-
005

5.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

5.8000e-
004

1.7000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

1.8000e-
004

0.0000 1.2845 1.2845 3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

1.2958
Total 5.2000e-
004

3.9000e-
004

4.8800e-
003

1.0000e-
005

5.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

5.8000e-
004

1.7000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

1.8000e-
004

0.0000 1.2845 1.2845 3.0000e-
005

3.0000e-
005

1.2958
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.1630 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.9200e-
003

0.0130 0.0181 3.0000e-
005

7.1000e-
004

7.1000e-
004

7.1000e-
004

7.1000e-
004

0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 1.5000e-
004

0.0000 2.5571
Total 0.1649 0.0130 0.0181 3.0000e-
005

7.1000e-
004

7.1000e-
004

7.1000e-
004

7.1000e-
004

0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 1.5000e-
004

0.0000 2.5571
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 17 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.2500e-
003

9.4000e-
004

0.0117 3.0000e-
005

3.9500e-
003

2.0000e-
005

3.9700e-
003

1.0500e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.0700e-
003

0.0000 3.0829 3.0829 8.0000e-
005

8.0000e-
005

3.1098
Total 1.2500e-
003

9.4000e-
004

0.0117 3.0000e-
005

3.9500e-
003

2.0000e-
005

3.9700e-
003

1.0500e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.0700e-
003

0.0000 3.0829 3.0829 8.0000e-
005

8.0000e-
005

3.1098
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.1630 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.9200e-
003

0.0130 0.0181 3.0000e-
005

7.1000e-
004

7.1000e-
004

7.1000e-
004

7.1000e-
004

0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 1.5000e-
004

0.0000 2.5571
Total 0.1649 0.0130 0.0181 3.0000e-
005

7.1000e-
004

7.1000e-
004

7.1000e-
004

7.1000e-
004

0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 1.5000e-
004

0.0000 2.5571
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 18 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.2500e-
003

9.4000e-
004

0.0117 3.0000e-
005

1.3800e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.4000e-
003

4.2000e-
004

2.0000e-
005

4.4000e-
004

0.0000 3.0829 3.0829 8.0000e-
005

8.0000e-
005

3.1098
Total 1.2500e-
003

9.4000e-
004

0.0117 3.0000e-
005

1.3800e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.4000e-
003

4.2000e-
004

2.0000e-
005

4.4000e-
004

0.0000 3.0829 3.0829 8.0000e-
005

8.0000e-
005

3.1098
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 19 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.3878 0.6234 4.0794 9.1600e-
003

0.9595 7.3600e-
003

0.9669 0.2563 6.8800e-
003

0.2632 0.0000 861.5255 861.5255 0.0484 0.0428 875.4948
Unmitigated 0.3878 0.6234 4.0794 9.1600e-
003

0.9595 7.3600e-
003

0.9669 0.2563 6.8800e-
003

0.2632 0.0000 861.5255 861.5255 0.0484 0.0428 875.4948

4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Mid Rise 783.36 707.04 588.96 2,544,704 2,544,704 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 783.36 707.04 588.96 2,544,704 2,544,704
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Parking Lot 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Apartments Mid Rise 0.540566 0.056059 0.172680 0.136494 0.026304 0.007104 0.011680 0.017449 0.000554 0.000251 0.025076 0.000954 0.004830 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.540566 0.056059 0.172680 0.136494 0.026304 0.007104 0.011680 0.017449 0.000554 0.000251 0.025076 0.000954 0.004830 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 20 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Parking Lot 0.540566 0.056059 0.172680 0.136494 0.026304 0.007104 0.011680 0.017449 0.000554 0.000251 0.025076 0.000954 0.004830

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 105.1616 105.1616 8.8800e- 003

1.0800e-
003
105.7041
Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 106.5915 106.5915 9.0000e- 003

1.0900e-
003
107.1414
NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.0108 0.0927 0.0394 5.9000e-
004

7.4900e-
003

7.4900e-
003

7.4900e-
003

7.4900e-
003

0.0000 107.3091 107.3091 2.0600e-
003

1.9700e-
003
107.9468
NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0112 0.0954 0.0406 6.1000e-
004

7.7200e-
003

7.7200e-
003

7.7200e-
003

7.7200e-
003

0.0000 110.5182 110.5182 2.1200e-
003

2.0300e-
003
111.1749

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Exceed Title 24
Install High Efficiency Lighting
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 21 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

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

2.07103e
+006

0.0112 0.0954 0.0406 6.1000e-
004

7.7200e-
003

7.7200e-
003

7.7200e-
003

7.7200e-
003

0.0000 110.5182 110.5182 2.1200e-
003

2.0300e-
003
111.1749
Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0112 0.0954 0.0406 6.1000e-
004

7.7200e-
003

7.7200e-
003

7.7200e-
003

7.7200e-
003

0.0000 110.5182 110.5182 2.1200e-
003

2.0300e-
003
111.1749
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 22 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

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

2.0109e
+006

0.0108 0.0927 0.0394 5.9000e-
004

7.4900e-
003

7.4900e-
003

7.4900e-
003

7.4900e-
003

0.0000 107.3091 107.3091 2.0600e-
003

1.9700e-
003
107.9468
Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0108 0.0927 0.0394 5.9000e-
004

7.4900e-
003

7.4900e-
003

7.4900e-
003

7.4900e-
003

0.0000 107.3091 107.3091 2.0600e-
003

1.9700e-
003
107.9468
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 23 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
570241 101.1298 8.5400e-
003

1.0300e-
003
101.6515
Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 30796.8 5.4617 4.6000e-
004

6.0000e-
005

5.4899
Total 106.5915 9.0000e-
003

1.0900e-
003
107.1414
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 24 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Exterior
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior
No Hearths Installed

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
563719 99.9730 8.4400e-
003

1.0200e-
003
100.4888
Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 29257 5.1886 4.4000e-
004

5.0000e-
005

5.2154
Total 105.1616 8.8800e-
003

1.0700e-
003
105.7042
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 25 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.2323 0.0171 1.4867 8.0000e-
005

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

0.0000 2.4302 2.4302 2.3400e-
003

0.0000 2.4887
Unmitigated 0.7040 0.0545 2.4021 2.4100e-
003

0.1457 0.1457 0.1457 0.1457 15.2956 31.8230 47.1185 0.0480 1.0400e- 003

48.6267

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

0.0163 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.1712 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 0.4717 0.0374 0.9154 2.3400e-
003

0.1375 0.1375 0.1375 0.1375 15.2956 29.3928 44.6883 0.0456 1.0400e- 003

46.1381
Landscaping 0.0448 0.0171 1.4867 8.0000e-
005

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

0.0000 2.4302 2.4302 2.3400e-
003

0.0000 2.4887
Total 0.7040 0.0545 2.4021 2.4200e-
003

0.1457 0.1457 0.1457 0.1457 15.2956 31.8230 47.1185 0.0480 1.0400e- 003

48.6267
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 26 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet
Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet
Install Low Flow Toilet
Install Low Flow Shower
Use Water Efficient Irrigation System

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

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

0.0163 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.1712 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 0.0448 0.0171 1.4867 8.0000e-
005

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

0.0000 2.4302 2.4302 2.3400e-
003

0.0000 2.4887
Total 0.2323 0.0171 1.4867 8.0000e-
005

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

8.2400e-
003

0.0000 2.4302 2.4302 2.3400e-
003

0.0000 2.4887
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 27 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 30.6568 0.2470 6.0600e-
003

38.6380
Unmitigated 36.2961 0.3085 7.5600e-
003

46.2621

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

9.38218 /

5.91485

36.2961 0.3085 7.5600e-
003

46.2621
Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 36.2961 0.3085 7.5600e-
003

46.2621
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 28 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

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

7.50574 /

5.55405

30.6568 0.2470 6.0600e-
003

38.6380
Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 30.6568 0.2470 6.0600e-
003

38.6380
Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 29 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 13.4461 0.7946 0.0000 33.3122
Unmitigated 13.4461 0.7946 0.0000 33.3122
Category/Year

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise

66.24 13.4461 0.7946 0.0000 33.3122
Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 13.4461 0.7946 0.0000 33.3122
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 30 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise

66.24 13.4461 0.7946 0.0000 33.3122
Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 13.4461 0.7946 0.0000 33.3122
Mitigated

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

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 31 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.0 Vegetation
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:15 AMPage 32 of 32 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa
San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - site specific data
Construction Phase -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - BMPs
Area Mitigation -
Energy Mitigation -
Water Mitigation -

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 89.97 1000sqft 2.07 89,972.00 0 Parking Lot 87.99 1000sqft 2.02 87,991.00 0
Apartments Mid Rise 144.00 Dwelling Unit 1.01 44,193.00 412

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
10 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 32

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2024Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
390.98 0.033CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingCheck False True CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 1 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblConstDustMitigation CleanPavedRoadPercentReduction 0 75 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 89,970.00 89,972.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 87,990.00 87,991.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 144,000.00 44,193.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.79 1.01
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 2 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 3.2464 33.1318 24.4195 0.0537 19.8582 1.6136 21.4718 10.1558 1.4845 11.6404 0.0000 5,322.874 3 5,322.874
3 1.1971 0.1797 5,393.552
9 2023 16.6334 16.3833 23.6189 0.0528 2.2779 0.7214 2.9994 0.6107 0.6788 1.2895 0.0000 5,237.411 7 5,237.411
7 0.7176 0.1703 5,305.007
0 Maximum 16.6334 33.1318 24.4195 0.0537 19.8582 1.6136 21.4718 10.1558 1.4845 11.6404 0.0000 5,322.874 3 5,322.874
3 1.1971 0.1797 5,393.552
9 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 3.2464 33.1318 24.4195 0.0537 7.7362 1.6136 9.3499 3.9611 1.4845 5.4457 0.0000 5,322.874 3 5,322.874
3 1.1971 0.1797 5,393.552
9 2023 16.6334 16.3833 23.6189 0.0528 0.8267 0.7214 1.5481 0.2545 0.6788 0.9333 0.0000 5,237.411 7 5,237.411
7 0.7176 0.1703 5,305.007
0 Maximum 16.6334 33.1318 24.4195 0.0537 7.7362 1.6136 9.3499 3.9611 1.4845 5.4457 0.0000 5,322.874 3 5,322.874
3 1.1971 0.1797 5,393.552
9 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 3 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

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

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 61.32 0.00 55.47 60.85 0.00 50.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 4 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 39.1193 3.1248 85.1248 0.1875 11.0658 11.0658 11.0658 11.0658 1,348.836 3 2,613.430
5 3,962.266
7 4.0431 0.0916 4,090.626
4 Energy 0.0612 0.5229 0.2225 3.3400e-
003

0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 667.5367 667.5367 0.0128 0.0122 671.5035 Mobile 2.5897 3.3252 25.3558 0.0563 5.6524 0.0426 5.6949 1.5075 0.0398 1.5473 5,836.065 2 5,836.065
2 0.2985 0.2626 5,921.784
4 Total 41.7702 6.9728 110.7031 0.2471 5.6524 11.1506 16.8030 1.5075 11.1479 12.6554 1,348.836 3 9,117.032
4 10,465.86
86 4.3544 0.3664 10,683.91
42 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 1.3861 0.1370 11.8933 6.3000e-
004

0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0000 21.4305 21.4305 0.0206 0.0000 21.9461 Energy 0.0594 0.5077 0.2161 3.2400e-
003

0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 648.1537 648.1537 0.0124 0.0119 652.0054 Mobile 2.5897 3.3252 25.3558 0.0563 5.6524 0.0426 5.6949 1.5075 0.0398 1.5473 5,836.065 2 5,836.065
2 0.2985 0.2626 5,921.784
4 Total 4.0353 3.9699 37.4652 0.0602 5.6524 0.1495 5.8018 1.5075 0.1468 1.6543 0.0000 6,505.649 4 6,505.649
4 0.3315 0.2745 6,595.735
9 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 5 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 4/28/2022 5/11/2022 5 10 2 Grading Grading 5/12/2022 6/8/2022 5 20
3 Building Construction Building Construction 6/9/2022 4/26/2023 5 230 4 Paving Paving 4/27/2023 5/24/2023 5 20
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 5/25/2023 6/21/2023 5 20 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

90.34 43.07 66.16 75.65 0.00 98.66 65.47 0.00 98.68 86.93 100.00 28.64 37.84 92.39 25.08 38.26 Residential Indoor: 89,491; Residential Outdoor: 29,830; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 10,678 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 15
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 20
Acres of Paving: 4.09
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 6 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Clean Paved Roads
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 178.00 45.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 36.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 7 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.6570 0.0000 19.6570 10.1025 0.0000 10.1025 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 1.6126 1.6126 1.4836 1.4836 3,686.061 9 3,686.061
9 1.1922 3,715.865
5 Total 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 19.6570 1.6126 21.2696 10.1025 1.4836 11.5860 3,686.061 9 3,686.061
9 1.1922 3,715.865
5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0762 0.0483 0.7415 1.8600e-
003

0.2012 1.0600e-
003

0.2023 0.0534 9.7000e-
004

0.0543 188.9222 188.9222 4.9100e-
003

4.7000e-
003
190.4461
Total 0.0762 0.0483 0.7415 1.8600e-
003

0.2012 1.0600e-
003

0.2023 0.0534 9.7000e-
004

0.0543 188.9222 188.9222 4.9100e-
003

4.7000e-
003
190.4461
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 8 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.6662 0.0000 7.6662 3.9400 0.0000 3.9400 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 1.6126 1.6126 1.4836 1.4836 0.0000 3,686.061 9 3,686.061
9 1.1922 3,715.865
5 Total 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 7.6662 1.6126 9.2788 3.9400 1.4836 5.4235 0.0000 3,686.061 9 3,686.061
9 1.1922 3,715.865
5 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0762 0.0483 0.7415 1.8600e-
003

0.0700 1.0600e-
003

0.0711 0.0212 9.7000e-
004

0.0221 188.9222 188.9222 4.9100e-
003

4.7000e-
003
190.4461
Total 0.0762 0.0483 0.7415 1.8600e-
003

0.0700 1.0600e-
003

0.0711 0.0212 9.7000e-
004

0.0221 188.9222 188.9222 4.9100e-
003

4.7000e-
003
190.4461
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 9 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.0826 0.0000 7.0826 3.4247 0.0000 3.4247 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 0.9409 0.9409 0.8656 0.8656 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Total 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 7.0826 0.9409 8.0234 3.4247 0.8656 4.2903 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0635 0.0402 0.6179 1.5500e-
003

0.1677 8.8000e-
004

0.1685 0.0445 8.1000e-
004

0.0453 157.4352 157.4352 4.0900e-
003

3.9200e-
003
158.7050
Total 0.0635 0.0402 0.6179 1.5500e-
003

0.1677 8.8000e-
004

0.1685 0.0445 8.1000e-
004

0.0453 157.4352 157.4352 4.0900e-
003

3.9200e-
003
158.7050
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 10 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 2.7622 0.0000 2.7622 1.3357 0.0000 1.3357 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 0.9409 0.9409 0.8656 0.8656 0.0000 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Total 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 2.7622 0.9409 3.7031 1.3357 0.8656 2.2012 0.0000 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0635 0.0402 0.6179 1.5500e-
003

0.0583 8.8000e-
004

0.0592 0.0176 8.1000e-
004

0.0184 157.4352 157.4352 4.0900e-
003

3.9200e-
003
158.7050
Total 0.0635 0.0402 0.6179 1.5500e-
003

0.0583 8.8000e-
004

0.0592 0.0176 8.1000e-
004

0.0184 157.4352 157.4352 4.0900e-
003

3.9200e-
003
158.7050
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 11 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0784 1.9706 0.7232 8.4000e-
003

0.2883 0.0235 0.3118 0.0830 0.0224 0.1055 900.3098 900.3098 0.0243 0.1332 940.6208 Worker 0.7539 0.4775 7.3329 0.0184 1.9896 0.0105 2.0001 0.5277 9.6200e- 003

0.5373 1,868.230
9 1,868.230
9 0.0486 0.0465 1,883.299
9 Total 0.8323 2.4480 8.0561 0.0268 2.2779 0.0339 2.3118 0.6107 0.0321 0.6427 2,768.540 7 2,768.540
7 0.0729 0.1797 2,823.920
7 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 12 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0784 1.9706 0.7232 8.4000e-
003

0.1344 0.0235 0.1578 0.0452 0.0224 0.0677 900.3098 900.3098 0.0243 0.1332 940.6208 Worker 0.7539 0.4775 7.3329 0.0184 0.6923 0.0105 0.7028 0.2092 9.6200e- 003

0.2189 1,868.230
9 1,868.230
9 0.0486 0.0465 1,883.299
9 Total 0.8323 2.4480 8.0561 0.0268 0.8267 0.0339 0.8606 0.2545 0.0321 0.2865 2,768.540 7 2,768.540
7 0.0729 0.1797 2,823.920
7 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 13 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0527 1.5784 0.6623 8.0500e-
003

0.2883 0.0119 0.3002 0.0830 0.0114 0.0944 863.6318 863.6318 0.0226 0.1275 902.2015 Worker 0.6960 0.4200 6.7126 0.0178 1.9896 9.8300e-
003

1.9995 0.5277 9.0500e-
003

0.5367 1,818.570
0 1,818.570
0 0.0434 0.0428 1,832.399
5 Total 0.7487 1.9984 7.3749 0.0258 2.2779 0.0217 2.2996 0.6107 0.0204 0.6311 2,682.201 8 2,682.201
8 0.0660 0.1703 2,734.601
0 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 14 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0527 1.5784 0.6623 8.0500e-
003

0.1344 0.0119 0.1462 0.0452 0.0114 0.0566 863.6318 863.6318 0.0226 0.1275 902.2015 Worker 0.6960 0.4200 6.7126 0.0178 0.6923 9.8300e-
003

0.7022 0.2092 9.0500e-
003

0.2183 1,818.570
0 1,818.570
0 0.0434 0.0428 1,832.399
5 Total 0.7487 1.9984 7.3749 0.0258 0.8267 0.0217 0.8484 0.2545 0.0204 0.2749 2,682.201 8 2,682.201
8 0.0660 0.1703 2,734.601
0 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 15 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.2646 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.2974 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0587 0.0354 0.5657 1.5000e-
003

0.1677 8.3000e-
004

0.1685 0.0445 7.6000e-
004

0.0452 153.2503 153.2503 3.6600e-
003

3.6000e-
003
154.4157
Total 0.0587 0.0354 0.5657 1.5000e-
003

0.1677 8.3000e-
004

0.1685 0.0445 7.6000e-
004

0.0452 153.2503 153.2503 3.6600e-
003

3.6000e-
003
154.4157
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 16 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.2646 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.2974 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0587 0.0354 0.5657 1.5000e-
003

0.0583 8.3000e-
004

0.0592 0.0176 7.6000e-
004

0.0184 153.2503 153.2503 3.6600e-
003

3.6000e-
003
154.4157
Total 0.0587 0.0354 0.5657 1.5000e-
003

0.0583 8.3000e-
004

0.0592 0.0176 7.6000e-
004

0.0184 153.2503 153.2503 3.6600e-
003

3.6000e-
003
154.4157
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 17 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 16.3010 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e-
003

0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 16.4926 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e-
003

0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1408 0.0849 1.3576 3.5900e-
003

0.4024 1.9900e-
003

0.4044 0.1067 1.8300e-
003

0.1086 367.8007 367.8007 8.7900e-
003

8.6500e-
003
370.5977
Total 0.1408 0.0849 1.3576 3.5900e-
003

0.4024 1.9900e-
003

0.4044 0.1067 1.8300e-
003

0.1086 367.8007 367.8007 8.7900e-
003

8.6500e-
003
370.5977
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 18 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 16.3010 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e-
003

0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 16.4926 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e-
003

0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1408 0.0849 1.3576 3.5900e-
003

0.1400 1.9900e-
003

0.1420 0.0423 1.8300e-
003

0.0442 367.8007 367.8007 8.7900e-
003

8.6500e-
003
370.5977
Total 0.1408 0.0849 1.3576 3.5900e-
003

0.1400 1.9900e-
003

0.1420 0.0423 1.8300e-
003

0.0442 367.8007 367.8007 8.7900e-
003

8.6500e-
003
370.5977
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 19 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 2.5897 3.3252 25.3558 0.0563 5.6524 0.0426 5.6949 1.5075 0.0398 1.5473 5,836.065 2 5,836.065
2 0.2985 0.2626 5,921.784
4 Unmitigated 2.5897 3.3252 25.3558 0.0563 5.6524 0.0426 5.6949 1.5075 0.0398 1.5473 5,836.065 2 5,836.065
2 0.2985 0.2626 5,921.784
4 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Mid Rise 783.36 707.04 588.96 2,544,704 2,544,704 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 783.36 707.04 588.96 2,544,704 2,544,704
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Parking Lot 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 20 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Apartments Mid Rise 0.540566 0.056059 0.172680 0.136494 0.026304 0.007104 0.011680 0.017449 0.000554 0.000251 0.025076 0.000954 0.004830 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.540566 0.056059 0.172680 0.136494 0.026304 0.007104 0.011680 0.017449 0.000554 0.000251 0.025076 0.000954 0.004830 Parking Lot 0.540566 0.056059 0.172680 0.136494 0.026304 0.007104 0.011680 0.017449 0.000554 0.000251 0.025076 0.000954 0.004830

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

0.0594 0.5077 0.2161 3.2400e-
003

0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 648.1537 648.1537 0.0124 0.0119 652.0054 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0612 0.5229 0.2225 3.3400e-
003

0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 667.5367 667.5367 0.0128 0.0122 671.5035

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Exceed Title 24
Install High Efficiency Lighting
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 21 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Apartments Mid
Rise
5674.06 0.0612 0.5229 0.2225 3.3400e-
003

0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 667.5367 667.5367 0.0128 0.0122 671.5035 Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0612 0.5229 0.2225 3.3400e-
003

0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 667.5367 667.5367 0.0128 0.0122 671.5035 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 22 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Exterior
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior
No Hearths Installed

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

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

5.50931 0.0594 0.5077 0.2161 3.2400e-
003

0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 648.1537 648.1537 0.0124 0.0119 652.0054 Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0594 0.5077 0.2161 3.2400e-
003

0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 648.1537 648.1537 0.0124 0.0119 652.0054 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 23 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 1.3861 0.1370 11.8933 6.3000e-
004

0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0000 21.4305 21.4305 0.0206 0.0000 21.9461 Unmitigated 39.1193 3.1248 85.1248 0.1875 11.0658 11.0658 11.0658 11.0658 1,348.836 3 2,613.430
5 3,962.266
7 4.0431 0.0916 4,090.626
4 6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

0.0893 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.9381 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 37.7332 2.9878 73.2315 0.1868 10.9999 10.9999 10.9999 10.9999 1,348.836 3 2,592.000
0 3,940.836
3 4.0225 0.0916 4,068.680
2 Landscaping 0.3587 0.1370 11.8933 6.3000e-
004

0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 21.4305 21.4305 0.0206 21.9461 Total 39.1193 3.1248 85.1248 0.1875 11.0658 11.0658 11.0658 11.0658 1,348.836 3 2,613.430
5 3,962.266
7 4.0431 0.0916 4,090.626
4 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 24 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet
Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet
Install Low Flow Toilet
Install Low Flow Shower
Use Water Efficient Irrigation System

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

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

0.0893 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.9381 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 0.3587 0.1370 11.8933 6.3000e-
004

0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 21.4305 21.4305 0.0206 21.9461 Total 1.3861 0.1370 11.8933 6.3000e-
004

0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0000 21.4305 21.4305 0.0206 0.0000 21.9461 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 25 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.0 Vegetation

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail

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

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:17 AMPage 26 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa
San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - site specific data
Construction Phase -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - BMPs
Area Mitigation -
Energy Mitigation -
Water Mitigation -

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 89.97 1000sqft 2.07 89,972.00 0 Parking Lot 87.99 1000sqft 2.02 87,991.00 0
Apartments Mid Rise 144.00 Dwelling Unit 1.01 44,193.00 412

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
10 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 32

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2024Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
390.98 0.033CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingCheck False True CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 1 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblConstDustMitigation CleanPavedRoadPercentReduction 0 75 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 89,970.00 89,972.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 87,990.00 87,991.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 144,000.00 44,193.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.79 1.01
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 2 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 3.2434 33.1343 23.1355 0.0520 19.8582 1.6136 21.4718 10.1558 1.4845 11.6404 0.0000 5,147.684 8 5,147.684
8 1.1971 0.1815 5,218.875
3 2023 16.6282 16.4937 22.4515 0.0511 2.2779 0.7215 2.9994 0.6107 0.6789 1.2895 0.0000 5,068.514 3 5,068.514
3 0.7176 0.1721 5,136.634
2 Maximum 16.6282 33.1343 23.1355 0.0520 19.8582 1.6136 21.4718 10.1558 1.4845 11.6404 0.0000 5,147.684 8 5,147.684
8 1.1971 0.1815 5,218.875
3 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 3.2434 33.1343 23.1355 0.0520 7.7362 1.6136 9.3499 3.9611 1.4845 5.4457 0.0000 5,147.684 8 5,147.684
8 1.1971 0.1815 5,218.875
3 2023 16.6282 16.4937 22.4515 0.0511 0.8267 0.7215 1.5482 0.2545 0.6789 0.9333 0.0000 5,068.514 3 5,068.514
3 0.7176 0.1721 5,136.634
2 Maximum 16.6282 33.1343 23.1355 0.0520 7.7362 1.6136 9.3499 3.9611 1.4845 5.4457 0.0000 5,147.684 8 5,147.684
8 1.1971 0.1815 5,218.875
3 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 3 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

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

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 61.32 0.00 55.47 60.85 0.00 50.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 4 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 39.1193 3.1248 85.1248 0.1875 11.0658 11.0658 11.0658 11.0658 1,348.836 3 2,613.430
5 3,962.266
7 4.0431 0.0916 4,090.626
4 Energy 0.0612 0.5229 0.2225 3.3400e-
003

0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 667.5367 667.5367 0.0128 0.0122 671.5035 Mobile 2.2582 3.5317 22.6347 0.0522 5.6524 0.0426 5.6949 1.5075 0.0399 1.5474 5,414.865 9 5,414.865
9 0.3054 0.2691 5,502.697
2 Total 41.4387 7.1794 107.9820 0.2430 5.6524 11.1507 16.8030 1.5075 11.1479 12.6555 1,348.836 3 8,695.833
1 10,044.66
93 4.3613 0.3729 10,264.82
71 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 1.3861 0.1370 11.8933 6.3000e-
004

0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0000 21.4305 21.4305 0.0206 0.0000 21.9461 Energy 0.0594 0.5077 0.2161 3.2400e-
003

0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 648.1537 648.1537 0.0124 0.0119 652.0054 Mobile 2.2582 3.5317 22.6347 0.0522 5.6524 0.0426 5.6949 1.5075 0.0399 1.5474 5,414.865 9 5,414.865
9 0.3054 0.2691 5,502.697
2 Total 3.7037 4.1764 34.7441 0.0561 5.6524 0.1495 5.8019 1.5075 0.1468 1.6543 0.0000 6,084.450 1 6,084.450
1 0.3384 0.2810 6,176.648
7 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 5 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 4/28/2022 5/11/2022 5 10 2 Grading Grading 5/12/2022 6/8/2022 5 20
3 Building Construction Building Construction 6/9/2022 4/26/2023 5 230 4 Paving Paving 4/27/2023 5/24/2023 5 20
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 5/25/2023 6/21/2023 5 20 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

91.06 41.83 67.82 76.92 0.00 98.66 65.47 0.00 98.68 86.93 100.00 30.03 39.43 92.24 24.65 39.83 Residential Indoor: 89,491; Residential Outdoor: 29,830; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 10,678 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 15
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 20
Acres of Paving: 4.09
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 6 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Clean Paved Roads
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 178.00 45.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 36.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 7 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.6570 0.0000 19.6570 10.1025 0.0000 10.1025 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 1.6126 1.6126 1.4836 1.4836 3,686.061 9 3,686.061
9 1.1922 3,715.865
5 Total 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 19.6570 1.6126 21.2696 10.1025 1.4836 11.5860 3,686.061 9 3,686.061
9 1.1922 3,715.865
5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0732 0.0508 0.6091 1.6800e-
003

0.2012 1.0600e-
003

0.2023 0.0534 9.7000e-
004

0.0543 171.1060 171.1060 4.9000e-
003

4.8500e-
003
172.6750
Total 0.0732 0.0508 0.6091 1.6800e-
003

0.2012 1.0600e-
003

0.2023 0.0534 9.7000e-
004

0.0543 171.1060 171.1060 4.9000e-
003

4.8500e-
003
172.6750
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 8 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.6662 0.0000 7.6662 3.9400 0.0000 3.9400 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 1.6126 1.6126 1.4836 1.4836 0.0000 3,686.061 9 3,686.061
9 1.1922 3,715.865
5 Total 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 7.6662 1.6126 9.2788 3.9400 1.4836 5.4235 0.0000 3,686.061 9 3,686.061
9 1.1922 3,715.865
5 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0732 0.0508 0.6091 1.6800e-
003

0.0700 1.0600e-
003

0.0711 0.0212 9.7000e-
004

0.0221 171.1060 171.1060 4.9000e-
003

4.8500e-
003
172.6750
Total 0.0732 0.0508 0.6091 1.6800e-
003

0.0700 1.0600e-
003

0.0711 0.0212 9.7000e-
004

0.0221 171.1060 171.1060 4.9000e-
003

4.8500e-
003
172.6750
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 9 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.0826 0.0000 7.0826 3.4247 0.0000 3.4247 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 0.9409 0.9409 0.8656 0.8656 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Total 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 7.0826 0.9409 8.0234 3.4247 0.8656 4.2903 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0610 0.0423 0.5076 1.4000e-
003

0.1677 8.8000e-
004

0.1685 0.0445 8.1000e-
004

0.0453 142.5884 142.5884 4.0800e-
003

4.0400e-
003
143.8959
Total 0.0610 0.0423 0.5076 1.4000e-
003

0.1677 8.8000e-
004

0.1685 0.0445 8.1000e-
004

0.0453 142.5884 142.5884 4.0800e-
003

4.0400e-
003
143.8959
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 10 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 2.7622 0.0000 2.7622 1.3357 0.0000 1.3357 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 0.9409 0.9409 0.8656 0.8656 0.0000 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Total 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 2.7622 0.9409 3.7031 1.3357 0.8656 2.2012 0.0000 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0610 0.0423 0.5076 1.4000e-
003

0.0583 8.8000e-
004

0.0592 0.0176 8.1000e-
004

0.0184 142.5884 142.5884 4.0800e-
003

4.0400e-
003
143.8959
Total 0.0610 0.0423 0.5076 1.4000e-
003

0.0583 8.8000e-
004

0.0592 0.0176 8.1000e-
004

0.0184 142.5884 142.5884 4.0800e-
003

4.0400e-
003
143.8959
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 11 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0754 2.0687 0.7486 8.4100e-
003

0.2883 0.0235 0.3118 0.0830 0.0225 0.1055 901.3028 901.3028 0.0242 0.1335 941.6790 Worker 0.7242 0.5022 6.0235 0.0166 1.9896 0.0105 2.0001 0.5277 9.6200e- 003

0.5373 1,692.048
5 1,692.048
5 0.0485 0.0480 1,707.564
0 Total 0.7996 2.5709 6.7721 0.0250 2.2779 0.0340 2.3119 0.6107 0.0321 0.6428 2,593.351 3 2,593.351
3 0.0726 0.1815 2,649.243
1 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 12 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0754 2.0687 0.7486 8.4100e-
003

0.1344 0.0235 0.1579 0.0452 0.0225 0.0677 901.3028 901.3028 0.0242 0.1335 941.6790 Worker 0.7242 0.5022 6.0235 0.0166 0.6923 0.0105 0.7028 0.2092 9.6200e- 003

0.2189 1,692.048
5 1,692.048
5 0.0485 0.0480 1,707.564
0 Total 0.7996 2.5709 6.7721 0.0250 0.8267 0.0340 0.8607 0.2545 0.0321 0.2866 2,593.351 3 2,593.351
3 0.0726 0.1815 2,649.243
1 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 13 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0490 1.6672 0.6828 8.0700e-
003

0.2883 0.0119 0.3002 0.0830 0.0114 0.0944 865.7262 865.7262 0.0224 0.1279 904.4094 Worker 0.6705 0.4416 5.5248 0.0161 1.9896 9.8300e-
003

1.9995 0.5277 9.0500e-
003

0.5367 1,647.578
2 1,647.578
2 0.0435 0.0441 1,661.818
7 Total 0.7195 2.1088 6.2075 0.0242 2.2779 0.0217 2.2997 0.6107 0.0204 0.6311 2,513.304 4 2,513.304
4 0.0659 0.1721 2,566.228
1 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 14 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0490 1.6672 0.6828 8.0700e-
003

0.1344 0.0119 0.1463 0.0452 0.0114 0.0566 865.7262 865.7262 0.0224 0.1279 904.4094 Worker 0.6705 0.4416 5.5248 0.0161 0.6923 9.8300e-
003

0.7022 0.2092 9.0500e-
003

0.2183 1,647.578
2 1,647.578
2 0.0435 0.0441 1,661.818
7 Total 0.7195 2.1088 6.2075 0.0242 0.8267 0.0217 0.8484 0.2545 0.0204 0.2749 2,513.304 4 2,513.304
4 0.0659 0.1721 2,566.228
1 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 15 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.2646 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.2974 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0565 0.0372 0.4656 1.3600e-
003

0.1677 8.3000e-
004

0.1685 0.0445 7.6000e-
004

0.0452 138.8409 138.8409 3.6600e-
003

3.7200e-
003
140.0409
Total 0.0565 0.0372 0.4656 1.3600e-
003

0.1677 8.3000e-
004

0.1685 0.0445 7.6000e-
004

0.0452 138.8409 138.8409 3.6600e-
003

3.7200e-
003
140.0409
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 16 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.2646 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.2974 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0565 0.0372 0.4656 1.3600e-
003

0.0583 8.3000e-
004

0.0592 0.0176 7.6000e-
004

0.0184 138.8409 138.8409 3.6600e-
003

3.7200e-
003
140.0409
Total 0.0565 0.0372 0.4656 1.3600e-
003

0.0583 8.3000e-
004

0.0592 0.0176 7.6000e-
004

0.0184 138.8409 138.8409 3.6600e-
003

3.7200e-
003
140.0409
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 17 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 16.3010 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e-
003

0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 16.4926 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e-
003

0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1356 0.0893 1.1174 3.2600e-
003

0.4024 1.9900e-
003

0.4044 0.1067 1.8300e-
003

0.1086 333.2181 333.2181 8.8000e-
003

8.9300e-
003
336.0982
Total 0.1356 0.0893 1.1174 3.2600e-
003

0.4024 1.9900e-
003

0.4044 0.1067 1.8300e-
003

0.1086 333.2181 333.2181 8.8000e-
003

8.9300e-
003
336.0982
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 18 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 16.3010 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e-
003

0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 16.4926 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e-
003

0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.1356 0.0893 1.1174 3.2600e-
003

0.1400 1.9900e-
003

0.1420 0.0423 1.8300e-
003

0.0442 333.2181 333.2181 8.8000e-
003

8.9300e-
003
336.0982
Total 0.1356 0.0893 1.1174 3.2600e-
003

0.1400 1.9900e-
003

0.1420 0.0423 1.8300e-
003

0.0442 333.2181 333.2181 8.8000e-
003

8.9300e-
003
336.0982
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 19 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 2.2582 3.5317 22.6347 0.0522 5.6524 0.0426 5.6949 1.5075 0.0399 1.5474 5,414.865 9 5,414.865
9 0.3054 0.2691 5,502.697
2 Unmitigated 2.2582 3.5317 22.6347 0.0522 5.6524 0.0426 5.6949 1.5075 0.0399 1.5474 5,414.865 9 5,414.865
9 0.3054 0.2691 5,502.697
2 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Mid Rise 783.36 707.04 588.96 2,544,704 2,544,704 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 783.36 707.04 588.96 2,544,704 2,544,704
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Parking Lot 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 20 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Apartments Mid Rise 0.540566 0.056059 0.172680 0.136494 0.026304 0.007104 0.011680 0.017449 0.000554 0.000251 0.025076 0.000954 0.004830 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.540566 0.056059 0.172680 0.136494 0.026304 0.007104 0.011680 0.017449 0.000554 0.000251 0.025076 0.000954 0.004830 Parking Lot 0.540566 0.056059 0.172680 0.136494 0.026304 0.007104 0.011680 0.017449 0.000554 0.000251 0.025076 0.000954 0.004830

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

0.0594 0.5077 0.2161 3.2400e-
003

0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 648.1537 648.1537 0.0124 0.0119 652.0054 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0612 0.5229 0.2225 3.3400e-
003

0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 667.5367 667.5367 0.0128 0.0122 671.5035

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Exceed Title 24
Install High Efficiency Lighting
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 21 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Apartments Mid
Rise
5674.06 0.0612 0.5229 0.2225 3.3400e-
003

0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 667.5367 667.5367 0.0128 0.0122 671.5035 Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0612 0.5229 0.2225 3.3400e-
003

0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 0.0423 667.5367 667.5367 0.0128 0.0122 671.5035 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 22 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Exterior
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior
No Hearths Installed

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

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

5.50931 0.0594 0.5077 0.2161 3.2400e-
003

0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 648.1537 648.1537 0.0124 0.0119 652.0054 Other Non-
Asphalt Surfaces
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0594 0.5077 0.2161 3.2400e-
003

0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 0.0411 648.1537 648.1537 0.0124 0.0119 652.0054 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 23 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 1.3861 0.1370 11.8933 6.3000e-
004

0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0000 21.4305 21.4305 0.0206 0.0000 21.9461 Unmitigated 39.1193 3.1248 85.1248 0.1875 11.0658 11.0658 11.0658 11.0658 1,348.836 3 2,613.430
5 3,962.266
7 4.0431 0.0916 4,090.626
4 6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

0.0893 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.9381 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 37.7332 2.9878 73.2315 0.1868 10.9999 10.9999 10.9999 10.9999 1,348.836 3 2,592.000
0 3,940.836
3 4.0225 0.0916 4,068.680
2 Landscaping 0.3587 0.1370 11.8933 6.3000e-
004

0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 21.4305 21.4305 0.0206 21.9461 Total 39.1193 3.1248 85.1248 0.1875 11.0658 11.0658 11.0658 11.0658 1,348.836 3 2,613.430
5 3,962.266
7 4.0431 0.0916 4,090.626
4 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 24 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet
Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet
Install Low Flow Toilet
Install Low Flow Shower
Use Water Efficient Irrigation System

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

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

0.0893 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.9381 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 0.3587 0.1370 11.8933 6.3000e-
004

0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 21.4305 21.4305 0.0206 21.9461 Total 1.3861 0.1370 11.8933 6.3000e-
004

0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0659 0.0000 21.4305 21.4305 0.0206 0.0000 21.9461 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 25 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.0 Vegetation

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail

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

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 5/6/2022 8:18 AMPage 26 of 26 Premium Land Development- 12205-12233 14th Yucaipa - San Bernardino-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

i

Biological Resources Assessment
Crafton Suites Apartment Project
2205, 12233, 12241 14th Street Yucaipa, CA 92399
(EAST OF 14TH STREET OF YUCAIPA BOULEVARD, AND NORTH OF “D” STREET, IN THE

CITY OF YUCAIPA,) SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
(APN: 0301-051-29, -30, -48, -49)

Applicant:

Moss Family Foundation
6345 Balboa Blvd., #I-310
Encino, CA 91316

Prepared By:

RVA
3602 Inland Empire Boulevard, Suite C310
Ontario, California 91764
(909) 245-1128

September 2023

ii

Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................................... ii INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 Site Description ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 METHODS ................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Literature Review ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 Jurisdictional Areas ................................................................................................................................................... 2 Biological Survey and Field Investigation ................................................................................................................ 3 RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Soils and Topography................................................................................................................................................ 3 Table A: Mapped Soils Classification ...................................................................................................................... 3 Vegetation and Land Cover ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Table B: Acreage of Vegetation / Land Cover Classifications ................................................................................. 4 Table C: Flora and Fauna Compendium ................................................................................................................... 5 Wetlands and Other Jurisdictional Waters ................................................................................................................ 7 Wildlife ..................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Avian Species ....................................................................................................................................................... 7 Invertebrates.......................................................................................................................................................... 7 Mammalian Species .............................................................................................................................................. 7 Special-Status Species ............................................................................................................................................... 7 Table D: Potentially Occurring Sensitive Biological Resources .............................................................................. 9 IMPACT FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................................ 15 Vegetation and Habitat Impacts .............................................................................................................................. 15 Threatened and Endangered Species ....................................................................................................................... 15 Non-listed Special Status Species ........................................................................................................................... 15 Nesting Birds ........................................................................................................................................................... 16 Wildlife Movement ................................................................................................................................................. 16 CONCLUSIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................... 16 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................................... 17 APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................................................ 17 SITE PHOTOS ................................................................................................................................................................ 17

1 INTRODUCTION

This Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) is for the Crafton Suites Apartment Project (project) on Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APN) 0301-051-29, -30, -48, -49 in Yucaipa, San Bernardino, California. The combined total area of this project site is 5.1 acres. The proposed project is the construction of a three story Multi-Family Apartment development consisting of one hundred and forty-four (144) dwelling units, landscaping / recreational areas, and two hundred and nineteen (219) parking spaces.

Site Description
The project site consists of 5.1 acres, east of 14th street, south of Yucaipa boulevard, and north of D avenue, in Yucaipa, California depicted on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Yucaipa, California 7.5- minute series topographic quadrangle (USGS 1976) (Refer to Figures 1, 2, &3). The approximate middle of the project site is located at: Latitude: 34.031267° Longitude: -117.094010°. The project site consists of a currently vacant lot, that is disked regularly for weed and fire risk abatement. The site has a mostly flat topography, with elevations ranging between approximately 638 feet (ft) and 643ft above mean sea level (amsl). The project site is bordered by a vacant lot to the north, an RV Sales and Repair business to the east, and single-family residences to the west and south. The parcels that make up the project site are currently zoned for Multiple Residential RM-10M. The project includes the construction of a three (3) story Multi- Family Apartment development, requiring a General Plan Amendment (GPA to High Density Multiple Residential RM-24 (Exhibit A). The total square footage (sf) and percentage use of the project site are broken down as follows: Multi-Family Apartment building of 44,193sf (19.8%), landscaped area of 89,972sf (40.49%), and parking area of 87,991sf (39.71%).

Exhibit A

2 METHODS

Literature Review
RVA biologists conducted a literature review and records search on September 12, 2023, to identify the existence and potential occurrence of sensitive or special-status plant and animal species within the project site’s vicinity. Federally and State designated sensitive species were also included in the literature review.

The electronic database records reviewed included the following:
• CDFW’s California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB – RareFind 5) is an internet database that provides spatial data of sensitive plant and animal species as well as sensitive vegetation communities that occur in California. Records from the Yucaipa USGS quadrangle were obtained from this database to aid the field survey.
• CNPS’ Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California is an online database which uses four (4) specific categories or “lists” to aid in the conservation of rare or endangered botanical resources. Plants that are categorized as California Rare Plant Ranks (CRPR) 1A, 1B, 2A, or 2B are presumed “threatened” or “endangered” per CESA and the CFGC). Therefore, all potential impacts to these species must be evaluated pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15125( c ) and 15380. Plants with CRPR 3 (limited information), CRPR 4 (limited records), or that are considered “Locally Significant” may be analyzed under the CEQA if there is sufficient information for potential significant impacts. Records from the Yucaipa USGS quadrangle surrounding the Project site were obtained from this database to supplement the field survey. • USFWS’ Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) Powered by ECOS – the Environmental Conservation Online System is a database which provides a spatial analysis for the potential of a proposed, candidate, threatened, and/or endangered species to occur on or near a specified area. IPaC also provides data on current critical habitats, national wildlife refuges, jurisdictional wetlands, and migratory birds that could potentially be impacted by activities from a proposed project. RVA used an unofficially generated IPaC Trust Resource Report for the Project site to assist with the field survey.
• United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey is an online database which lists archived soil surveys. These soil surveys can be utilized for general farm, local, and wider area planning. In addition, a review of the local geological conditions and historical aerial photographs were conducted to assess the ecological changes the area has undergone.

Jurisdictional Areas
Additionally, aerial photography was reviewed prior to conducting the habitat assessment. The aerials were used to locate and inspect any potential natural drainage features and water bodies that may be considered riparian/riverine habitat and/or fall under the jurisdiction of the USACE, or CDFW as waters of the US or waters of the State. In general, surface drainage features indicated as blue line streams on U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) maps and CDFW maps that are observed or expected to exhibit evidence of flow are considered potential riparian/riverine habitat and are also subject to State and Federal regulatory authorities.

The desktop review of the project site using blue line stream maps and historical aerial photography revealed no evidence of any hydrological features occurring in or through the project site. The field survey of the project site also found that there was no evidence of hydrological features on or through the project site. This finding will be further discussed under the Existing Conditions section of this report below.

Biological Survey and Field Investigation
RVA staff biologist Zachary Jenson completed a site/habitat assessment of the Project site on September 19, 2023. A visual walking reconnaissance of the project area with a 500-foot radius buffer was completed and all biological resources observed in this area were recorded. The site was walked by transects that were approximately ten (10) meters apart as well as, a sweep of the full perimeter. A mobile phone camera with geolocation tagging enabled was utilized to photograph the current existing site conditions (Figure 6). Areas not accessible by foot (i.e., areas within the 500-foot buffer that extended beyond fence lines) were surveyed visually via binoculars. The biologists recorded all observations of plant and animal species, site conditions, land cover, and potential suitable habitat for sensitive or special status species. The weather conditions at the beginning of the survey (6:30am) were clear and cool without precipitation at 54° Fahrenheit (F), 86% humidity, and a four (4) mile per hour (Mph) wind in an eastward direction. The weather conditions at the end of the survey (8:00am) were clear and sunny without precipitation at 57°F, 91% humidity, and no wind.

RESULTS

Existing Conditions
The present condition of the project site is entirely disturbed, stemming from prior periods of human use and disturbance, existing now as a maintained vacant lot. A review of historical aerial photography (1938- Present) of the project site revealed that the entirety of the project site was disturbed prior to the taking of the 1938 aerial photos. Parcels APN: 0301-0510-29 and -30, once may have been used as an agricultural field, parcel APN: 0301-0510-48 had a single-family residency on the property that is no longer present on the site, and parcel APN: 0301-0510-49 looks to have been a backyard for parcel APN: 0301-05-126 which is not a part of the project site. The historical aerial photos also revealed the parcels making up the project site are regularly disturbed by disking. The disking disturbance manages the growth of prevalent invasive non-native plant species. The non-native plant species make up around ninety-nine percent (99%) of the total vegetive land cover on the site which purposes a high fire risk. Disking has served as the method of choice to stay compliant with the local ordinances for weed and fire abatement. As a consequence of this long-term disruption, the project site has been degraded to the extent where the habitat value on site is little to none. The habitat value is further diminished by the urban development that encapsulates the site.

Soils and Topography
The topography of the project site is mostly flat with an elevation that ranges from approximately 638ft to 643ft amsl. The soil of the project site was found to comprise of one soil classification, Greenfield sandy loam GtC, consisting of two (2) to nine (9) percent slopes (Figure 4). This soil is not considered hydric and has a drainage class of “well drained” (USDA 2023). This is consistent with the field survey’s findings of existing soils that are well drained, friable at the surface due to disking but becomes highly compacted below, indicative of an environment that has been subject to long-term major disturbance. These findings are displayed below in (Table A).

Table A: Mapped Soils Classification
Soil Slope Drainage Class Runoff Class Frequency of
Flooding
Frequency of
Ponding
Hydric Soil
Rating
Greenfield Sandy
Loam 0 to 9 Percent Well Drained Low None None No
Source: United States Department of Agriculture (2023).

4 Vegetation and Land Cover
The entirety of the project site has been disturbed by regular disking for fire and weed abatement purposes and is occupied almost exclusively by non-native species. (Figure 5) shows a map of the vegetative-cover and landcover that was observed onsite. This is further, substantiated by the site photographs in (Figure 6). (Table B) below displays the current acreages of vegetation cover and land cover by category on the project site. The RVA biologist observed one vegetation/land cover type during the in-field site assessment of the project site area revealed a total of twenty-five (25) unique plant species (Table C). Of these twenty-five (25) plants species, twenty-two (22) were non-native species and three (3) were native. Of the species observed, eighty-eight percent (88%) were non-native, and twelve percent (12%) were native. However, the actual vegetative cover of the project site was made up of approximately ninety-nine percent (99%) non-native species. This is consistent with areas that have been subjected to constant major disruption and habitat degradation that come to be occupied almost exclusively by second succession non-native species.

The findings concluded upon by RVA biologists are also shown below in (Table B).

Table B: Acreage of Vegetation / Land Cover Classifications Vegetation / Land Cover Type Project Acreage Percentage of The Site Ruderal / Disturbed 5.1 99.9%
Totals 5.1 100%

• Ruderal/Disturbed: The areas classified as ruderal/disturbed consist of successional grasslands and highly disturbed habitats where herbaceous pioneer plants are well adapted to colonize disturbed harsh environments.

Species observed on site that are indicative of the ruderal/disturbed habitat include: grass and herbaceous species.

5 Table C: Flora and Fauna Compendium
Type Common Name Scientific Name

Flora:

Native Species
Dicots
Alkali Mallow
Prostrate Pigweed
Sacred Thorn Apple
Malvella leprosa
Amaranthus blitoides
Datura weightii
Monocots
None Observed. None Observed.

Non-Native Species
Dicots

Annual Stinging Nettle
Black Mustard
Cheeseweed Mallow
China Berry Tree
Field Bindweed
Firethorn
Flax-leaved Horseweed
Goosefoot
Hairy Cat's Ear
Johnsongrass
Lamb's Quarters
Pink Trumpet Vine
Prickly Lettuce
Puncturevine
Redstem Stork's Bill
Rough Pigweed
Russian Thistle
Tree of Heaven
White Horehound

Urtica urens
Brassica nigra
Malva parviflora
Melia azedarach
Convolvulus arvensis
Pyracantha Spp.

Erigeron bonariensis
Chenopodium chenopodioides
Hypochaeris radicata
Sorghum halepense
Chenopodium album
Podranea ricasoliana
Lactuca serriola
Tribulus terrestris
Erodium cicutarium
Amaranthus retroflexus
Salsola tragus
Ailanthus altissima
Marrubium vulgare

Monocots
Crabgrass
Mexican Fan Palm
Wild Oat
Digitaria sanguinalis
Washingtonia robusta
Avena sativa

6 Type Common Name Scientific Name

Fauna:

Avian Species
American Crow
Anna's Hummingbird
Bewick's Wren
Black Phoebe
California Scrub-Jay
California Towhee
Common Raven
House Finch
Killdeer
Mourning Dove
Red-shouldered Hawk
Rock Pigeon
Say's Phoebe

Corvus brachyrhynchos
Calypte anna
Thryomanes bewickii
Sayornis nigricans
Aphelocoma californica
Melozone crissalis
Corvus corax
Haemorhous mexicanus
Charadrius vociferus
Zenaida macroura
Buteo lineatus
Columba livia
Sayornis saya

Invertebrate Species
Ladybug Coccinella septempunctata
Mammalian Species
Botta’s Pocket Gopher Thomomys bottae

• This list documents plant and animal species observed during the site assessment conducted on September 19, 2023. Species not included in this list may have been inadvertently omitted due to variations in their activity patterns, growing seasons, or limited observation time.

7 Wetlands and Other Jurisdictional Waters
When the RVA biologist conducted a desktop survey of the project site on September 12th, 2023, no hydrological features were observed. The desktop survey of the project site included refencing USGS blue line stream maps as well as historical aerial imagery of the site to see if the area currently or historically had hydrological significance. The blue line stream maps provided evidence that there were no hydrological features on or near the project site. The closest blue line stream feature was found to be nearly a half mile (.42 mile) away to the north of the project site. The closest feature terminates at the point that is closest to the project site and furthermore, is cut off from the project site by two major roadways (Chapman Heights Blvd. and Yucaipa Blvd.). This non-observation was further compelled by the review of historical aerial photographs that revealed no hydrological features were present on or around the project site. The non- observation was further bolstered during the field survey conducted by RVA biologists who did not observe any biotic or abiotic evidence of wetlands/riparian zones. The biologist noted that of the plant species identified on the project site none were wetland/riparian indicator species. The biologist also noted that no geological features indicative of wetlands/riparian zones were observed; including: alluvial flows, sand and gravel beds, rills, and evidence of high-water marks.

Wildlife
A total of fifteen wildlife species were observed during the field survey conducted by the RVA biologist.

None of the species that were observed were listed on the state of federal level. (Table C) above lists all wildlife species that were observed by the RVA biologist during the field survey.

Avian Species
A total of thirteen (13) avian species were observed in and around the project site during the field survey.

These species include: American Crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), Anna's Hummingbird (Calypte anna), Bewick's Wren (Thryomanes bewickii), Black Phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), California Scrub-Jay (Aphelocoma californica), California Towhee (Melozone crissalis), Common Raven (Corvus corax), House Finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), Mourning Dove (Zenaida macroura), Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus), Rock Pigeon (Columba livia), Say's Phoebe (Sayornis saya). Many of these avian species were observed as flyovers or seen outside of the project site but within the five- hundred (500) ft. biological observation buffer area. The RVA biologist who conducted the field study noted that the vegetation that is on the project area offers very limited foraging and nesting potential for most avian species. The areas surrounding the project site are devoid of tall trees and telephone poles that offer perches for raptor species.

Invertebrates
Only one (1) invertebrate species was observed in the project site area during the field survey. This species was a Ladybug (Coccinella septempunctata).

Mammalian Species
Only one (1) mammalian species was observed in the project site area during the field survey. This species was Botta’s Pocket Gopher (Thomomys bottae), a species that thrives in disturbed environments where non- native plant species, with large tap roots such as: Cheeseweed Mallow, Pigweed, and Russian thistle, provide abundant food sources.

Special-Status Species
No special-status plants or wildlife species were observed during the field survey conducted by the RVA biologists. The desktop survey of the project site revealed no documented occurrences of special-status species on or near the project site within a mile radius. Table D: below lists special status species known in

8 the Yucaipa, California 7.5-minute series topographic quadrangle this information was found using California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) RareFind CNDDB software. The table also conveys each species’ listing status on the Federal and State level, the habitat where the species is found, and the probability for occurrence on the project site. None of the species that were identified by the RareFind system on Table D, were observed during the field survey of the site. It is not expected that any of these species would occur on the project site due to the site’s level of anthropogenic disturbance and habitat degradation.

9 Table D: Potentially Occurring Sensitive Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name Federal/State Listing Global Rank/
State Rank
CA Rare Plant
Rank Habitats Observed
On Site? Potential to Occur
Reptiles
Anniella stebbinsi
Southern California
legless lizard
None/None G3/S3 N/A
Broadleaved upland forest,
Chaparral, Coastal dunes,
Coastal scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species
is considered ABSENT.

Arizona elegans
occidentalis
California glossy snake
None/None G5T2/S2 N/A
barren desert, grassland,
chaparral, and coastal sage
scrub, grasslands,
shrubland, sandhills, and
rocky washes.

Species
Not
Observed.

The site may provide a
suitable habitat for this
species. Occurrence
potential is LOW to
MODERATE.

Aspidoscelis hyperythra
Orange-throated whiptail None/None G5/S2S3 N/A Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, & Coastal scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

The site may provide a
suitable habitat for this
species. Occurrence
potential is LOW to
MODERATE.

Aspidoscelis tigris
stejnegeri
Coastal whiptail
None/None G5T5/S3 N/A Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, & Coastal scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

The site may provide a
suitable habitat for this
species. Occurrence
potential is LOW to
MODERATE.

Diadophis punctatus
modestus
San Bernardino ringneck
snake
None/None G5T2T3/S2? N/A
Moist habitats, Meadows,
Rocky hillsides, Gardens,
Farmland, Grassland,
Chaparral, Mixed coniferous
forests, Woodlands.

Species
Not
Observed.

The site may provide a
suitable habitat for this
species. Occurrence
potential is LOW to
MODERATE.

Phrynosoma blainvillii
Coast horned lizard None/None G4/S4 N/A
Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal bluff
scrub, Coastal scrub, Desert
wash, Pinon & juniper
woodlands, Riparian scrub,
Riparian woodland, Valley
Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species
is considered ABSENT.

10 Scientific Name
Common Name Federal/State Listing Global Rank/
State Rank
CA Rare Plant
Rank Habitats Observed
On Site? Potential to Occur
& foothill grassland.

Salvadora hexalepis
virgultea
Coast patch-nosed snake
None/None G5T4/S3 N/A Coastal scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

The site may provide a
suitable habitat for this
species. Occurrence
potential is LOW to
MODERATE.

Thamnophis hammondii
Two-striped gartersnake None/None G4/S3S4 N/A
Marsh & swamp, Riparian
scrub, Riparian woodland, &
Wetland.

Species
Not
Observed.

The site may provide a
suitable habitat for this
species. Occurrence
potential is LOW to
MODERATE.

Amphibians
Rana muscosa
Southern mountain
Yellow-legged frog
Endangered/Endangered G1/S2 N/A Aquatic.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species
is considered
ABSENT.

Spea hammondii
Western spadefoot None/None G2G3/S3S4 N/A
Cismontane woodland,
Coastal scrub, Valley &
foothill grassland, Vernal
pool, Wetland.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species
is considered
ABSENT.

Mammals
Chaetodipus fallax fallax
Northwestern San Diego
pocket mouse
None/None G5T3T4/
S3S4 N/A Chaparral & Coastal scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

The site may provide a
suitable habitat for this
species. Occurrence
potential is LOW to
MODERATE.

Dipodomys merriami
parvus
San Bernardino kangaroo
rat
Endangered/
Candidate Endangered G5T1/S1 N/A Coastal scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Lasiurus xanthinus
Western yellow bat None/None G4G5/S3 N/A Desert wash. Species Not
The site may provide a
suitable habitat for this

11 Scientific Name
Common Name Federal/State Listing Global Rank/
State Rank
CA Rare Plant
Rank Habitats Observed
On Site? Potential to Occur
Observed. species. Occurrence
potential is LOW to
MODERATE.

Leptonycteris yerbabuenae
Lesser long-nosed bat Delisted/None G3/S1 N/A
Mojavean desert scrub,
Sonoran Desert scrub, Upper
Sonoran scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Neotoma lepida intermedia
San Diego desert woodrat None/None G5T3T4/
S3S4 N/A Coastal scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

The site may provide a
suitable habitat for this
species. Occurrence
potential is LOW to
MODERATE.

Plants/Vegetation
Abronia villosa var. aurita
Chaparral sand-verbena None/None G5T2?/S2 1B.1 Chaparral, Coastal scrub, & Desert dunes.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species
is considered ABSENT.

Calochortus
plummerae
Plummer’s mariposa-lily
None/None G4/S4 4.2
Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal scrub,
Lower montane coniferous
forest, Valley & foothill
grassland.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Chorizanthe parryi
var. parryi
Parry’s spineflower
None/None G3T2/S2 1B.1
Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal scrub,
Valley & foothill grassland.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Chorizanthe xanti var.
leucotheca
White-bracted
spineflower
None/None G4T3/S3 1B.2
Coastal scrub, Mojavean
desert scrub, Pinon &
juniper woodlands.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Dodecahema
leptoceras
Slender-horned
spineflower
Endangered/Endangered G1/S1 1B.1 Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

12 Scientific Name
Common Name Federal/State Listing Global Rank/
State Rank
CA Rare Plant
Rank Habitats Observed
On Site? Potential to Occur
Eryngium densifolium
ssp. sanctorum
Santa Ana River
woollystar
Endangered/
Endangered G4T1/S1 1B.1 Chaparral, Coastal scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Imperata brevifolia
California satintail None/None G3/S3 2B.1
Chaparral, Coastal scrub,
Meadow & seep, Mojavean
desert scrub, Riparian scrub,
Wetland.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Lepidium virginicum var.
robinsonii
Robinson's pepper-
grass
None/None G5T3/S3 4.3 Chaparral, Coastal scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Monardella
macrantha ssp. hallii
Hall’s monardella
None/None G5T3/S3 1B.3
Broadleaved upland forest,
Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Lower montane
coniferous forest, Valley &
foothill grassland.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Sidalcea hickmanii
ssp. parishii
Parish’s
checkerbloom
None/Rare G3T1/S1 1B.2
Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Lower montane
coniferous forest.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Sidalcea neomexicana
Salt spring
checkerbloom
None/None G4/S2 2B.2
Alkali playa, Chaparral,
Coastal scrub, Lower
montane coniferous forest,
Mojavean desert scrub,
Wetland.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Streptanthus
campestris
Southern jewelflower
None/None G3/S3 1B.3
Chaparral, Lower montane
coniferous forest, Pinon &
juniper woodlands.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Fish
Oncorhynchus mykiss
irideus
Endangered/Candidate
Endangered G5T1Q/S1 N/A Aquatic, South coast flowing
waters.

Species
Not
No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is

13 Scientific Name
Common Name Federal/State Listing Global Rank/
State Rank
CA Rare Plant
Rank Habitats Observed
On Site? Potential to Occur
Steelhead trout Observed. considered ABSENT.

Rhinichthys osculus ssp.

Santa Ana speckled dace None/None G5T1/S1 N/A Aquatic, South coast flowing waters.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species is
considered ABSENT.

Insects
Bombus crotchii
Crotch bumble bee
None/Candidate
Endangered G2/S2 N/A
Open grasslands, Chaparral,
Desert margins incl. Joshua
tree and creosote scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

The site may provide a
suitable habitat for this
species. Occurrence
potential is Low to
MODERATE.

Diplectrona californica
California diplectronan
caddisfly
None/None G1G2/S1 N/A Aquatic.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species
is considered ABSENT.

Birds
Aimophila ruficeps
canescens
Southern California
rufous- crowned sparrow
None/None G5T3/S3 N/A Chaparral, Coastal scrub.

Species
Not
Observed.

The site may provide a
suitable habitat for this
species. Occurrence
potential is LOW to
MODERATE.

Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk None/Threatened G5/S4 N/A
Great Basin grassland,
Riparian forest, Riparian
woodland, Valley & foothill
grassland.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species
is considered
ABSENT.

Elanus leucurus
White-tailed kite None/None G5/S3S4 N/A
Cismontane woodland,
Marsh & swamp, Riparian
woodland, Valley & foothill
grassland, Wetland.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species
is considered
ABSENT.

Empidonax traillii estimus
Southwestern willow
flycatcher
Endangered/Endangered G5T2/S3 N/A Riparian woodland.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species
is considered
ABSENT.

14 Scientific Name
Common Name Federal/State Listing Global Rank/
State Rank
CA Rare Plant
Rank Habitats Observed
On Site? Potential to Occur
Vireo bellii pusillus
Least Bell's vireo
Endangered/
Endangered G5T2/S3 N/A Riparian forest, Riparian
scrub, Riparian woodland.

Species
Not
Observed.

No suitable habitat
occurs on site. Species
is considered
ABSENT.

Status: Federal Endangered (FE), Federal Threatened (FT), Federal Candidate (FC), Federal Proposed (FP, FPE, FPT), Federal Delisted (FD), California Endangered (CE), California Threatened (CT,) California Species of Special Concern (SSC), California Fully Protected Species (CFP), California Special Plant (CSP), California Special Animal (CSA), NCCP Identified Species (IS), NCCP Target Species (TS), NCCP Conditionally Covered Species (CCS), S1= Critically Imperiled, S2 = Imperiled, S3 = Vulnerable, S4 = Apparently Secure, SH = Historical Records.

CNPS Designations:
1B = Rare threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere 2B = Rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but not elsewhere 3= Not very endangered in California
4= Plants of Limited Distribution –Watch List

15 IMPACT FINDINGS

Vegetation and Habitat Impacts
The proposed project would have no impacts, direct or indirect, to any native habitats or sensitive natural communities. Permanent direct impacts would only affect areas that consist of ruderal vegetation, comprised of non-native species.

Threatened and Endangered Species
The federal Endangered Species Act under section 7(a)(2) “a federal agency that permits, licenses, funds, or otherwise authorizes a project activity must consult with the USFWS to ensure that its actions would not jeopardize the continued existence of any listed threatened or endangered species or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. The USFWS designates as threatened or endangered species that are at risk of extinction and may also adopt recovery plans that identify specific areas that are essential to the conservation of a listed species.”

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) administers CESA that prohibits the “take” of plant and animal species identified as either threatened or endangered in the state of California laid out in the Fish and Game Code sections 2050 to 2097. “Take” is defined as to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.

Sections 2091 and 2081 of CESA allow the CDFW to authorize exceptions to the prohibition of “take” of State-listed threatened or endangered plant and animal species for purposes such as public and private development. The CDFW requires formal consultation to ensure that a proposed project’s actions would not jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or destroy or adversely. affect listed species’ habitats.

“Table D” substantiates that no special-status wildlife species are expected occupy space within the project site or be adversely affected by the development. This is due to the lack of high value habitat occurring on the project site due to a history of long term, and extensive disturbance. Furthermore, no USFWS designated critical habitat is present on or near the project site. Due to the combination of all these considerations the project does not expect any “take” of or permanent effects to Federal or State listed species or Federally designated critical habitat.

Non-listed Special Status Species
Non-listed special status species are species that have been limited by range and or suitable habitat yet have not been given a listing status on either the federal or state level. These species are vulnerable to further habitat loss and anthropogenic encroachment into these limited historical ranges. The following is a list of all the Non-listed special status species that have been identified with the potential to occur within the general vicinity of the project site: Southern California Legless Lizard (Anniella stebbinsi), California Glossy Snake (Arizona elegans occidentalis), Orange-throated Whiptail Lizard (Aspidoscelis hyperythra), Coastal Whiptail Snake (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri), San Bernardino Ringneck Snake (Diadophis punctatus modestus), Coast Horned Lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii), Coast Patch-nosed Snake (Salvadora hexalepis virgultea), Two-striped Gartersnake (Thamnophis hammondii), Western spadefoot (Spea hammondii), Northwestern San Diego Pocket Mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax), Western Yellow Bat (Lasiurus xanthinus), San Diego Desert Woodrat (Neotoma lepida intermedia), Southern California Rufous-crowned Sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps canescens), and White-tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus). None of these species are anticipated to occur on the project site, or to be affected by the development of the project site due to the level of anthropogenic disturbance and low habitat quality that defines the current state of the site. Due to the considerations of the habitat needs of the potential species and the existing conditions on the project site the Project does not expect to encounter or impact any of these non-listed

16 special status species.

Burrowing owl is a species of special consideration that has specified survey protocols. This species has the tendency to take up and occupy habitat that consists of agricultural fields, grasslands, rangeland, as well as developed or ornamental areas. This species is known for occupying abandoned California ground Squirrel burrows that have entrances that have diameters that are greater than or equal to four (4) inches (in). The burrowing owl was considered during both the desktop and field surveys of the project site. The RVA biologist determined that the probability of burrowing owl occupying or taking up occupancy on the project site to be very low. This is due to the geography of the site as well as the habitat that is present on the site (dominance of non-native vegetation). Due to the disturbed nature of the existing conditions of the site, lack of California Ground Squirrel burrows, lack of prey species, and large presence of predatory raptor species. No instances of burrowing owls were observed during the field survey.

Nesting Birds
The project site was found to be nearly devoid of any quality nesting habitat during the field survey conducted by the RVA biologist. The site does not have vegetative species conducive to providing the shelter that is often chosen by most avian species to nest in. The one area on site that has a higher probability of supporting the nesting activity of avian species is that provided by the vine covered fence that separates the project site from the RV Repair and Sales business to the east of the project site. See the below Conclusions and Recommendations section for the mitigation proposed for the protection of nesting bird species during the CDFW determined nesting season.

Wildlife Movement
The project site was found to be nearly devoid of any habitat value for supporting the movements of wildlife species. This finding was noted by RVA biologists during both the desktop and field surveys of the project site. The project site is nearly encapsulated by urban development consisting of businesses, single-family residences, and heavily trafficked roadways. All of these developments have encompassed the projected project site cutting it off from open wildlife preservations to the north. Furthermore, all species that occupy space on or adjacent to the project site have adapted to “new” urban pressures and still choose to inhabit these areas under heavy anthropogenic disruption.

CONCLUSIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS

The proposed Project area is not located within any critical habitat. The special-status plant species identified in the CNDDB and CNPS literature searches were absent from the proposed Project site during the field survey or are not expected to occur due to lack of suitable habitat. No nesting birds or special- status wildlife species were observed during the habitat assessment.

Based on the preceding discussion, implementation of the Project would not result in impacts to any native or sensitive habitats and is not anticipated to result in significant impacts to any special-status species or migratory birds. However, there is potential suitable nesting bird habitat consisting of on- and off-site ornamental vines that grow on the fence along the east side of the project site. This fence separates the project site from the RV Repair and Sales business.

To ensure potential impacts to biological resources are minimized or avoided, the following minimization and avoidance measures are recommended:

17 Mitigation Measure (MM) BIO-1: Any ground disturbing activities and vegetation clearing activities should occur outside of the active nesting bird season (i.e., February 1st–August 31), when feasible, to ensure compliance with the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC). If any ground disturbing activities were to take place during the active breeding bird season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey prior to ground disturbing activities to prevent impacts to nesting birds within 100 feet of the Project site. If nesting birds are discovered during pre-construction surveys, the qualified biologist will identify appropriate mitigation measures such as providing a work area buffer, prescribe a monitor for work, or postponing construction until after anticipated fledge date. Mitigation measures will be dependent on the nesting bird characteristics in relation to the Project observed during the pre-construction survey.

REFERENCES

• California Department of Fish and Wildlife. RareFind 5, California Natural Diversity Data Base, California. Data Base report on threatened, endangered, rare, or otherwise sensitive species and communities for the Yucaipa 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle. Website:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB
• California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2021. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v8-03 0.39). Website http://www.rareplants.cnps.org . • Dunn, J.L. and Alderfer, J. 2008. National Geographic Field Guide to the Birds of Western North American. National Geographic Partners., Washington, District of Columbia. • ESRI ArcGIS Pro desktop application.
• Google Earth Pro desktop application.
• Hickman, J.C., ed. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. University of California Press.
• Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Design Handbook for Low Impact Development Best Management Practices. 2011. Website http://content.rcflood.org/downloads/NPDES/Documents/LIDManual/LID_BMP_Design_Handb ook.pdf
• Sibley, D.A. 2016. The Sibley Field Guide to Birds of Western North America: Second Edition.

Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, New York.
• United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2019. Web Soil Survey. Website:
http://websoil
• survey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2021. Wetlands Mapper. Website: https://www.fws.gov/ wetlands/data/mapper.html

APPENDIX

SITE PHOTOS

Photo 1: Showing site conditions of the western edge of the project from the southwest corner of the project site. *14th street is shown. (Looking North) Photo 2: Showing site conditions in the center of the project from the middle of the southern edge of the project site. (Looking North)

Photo 3: Showing site conditions along the southern edge of the project from the southeast corner of the project site. (Looking West) Photo 4: Showing site conditions in the center of the project from the middle of the eastern edge of the project site. (Looking West)

Crafton Suites Site Photos
Site Photos 2023

Photo 5: Showing site conditions along the northern edge of the project from the northeast corner of the project site. (Looking West) Photo 6: Showing site conditions along the eastern edge of the project from the northeast corner of the project site. (Looking South)
Photo 7: Showing site conditions in the center of the project from the middle of the northern edge of the project site. (Looking South) Photo 8: Showing site conditions along the northwestern edge of the project from the northwestern corner of the project site. (Looking South) Crafton Suites Site Photos
Site Photos 2023

Photo 9: Showing site conditions in the appendage of the project from the northeast corner of the appendage of the project site. (Looking West) Photo 10: Showing site conditions in the appendage of the project from the southeast corner of the appendage of the project site. (Looking West)

Photo 11: Showing site conditions in the center of the site from the southwest corner of the appendage of the project site. (Looking East) Photo 12: Showing site conditions in the center of the project from the middle of the western edge of the project site. (Looking East) Crafton Suites Site Photos
Site Photos 2023

CULTURAL RESOURCES LETTER REPORT FOR FOUR CONTIGUOUS PARCELS (APN 0301-051-29, -30, -48, -49)

5.10 ACRES OF UNDEVELOPED LAND

LOCATED AT
2205, 12233, 12241, 12249 14TH ST YUCAIPA, CA 92399
(EAST OF 14TH STREET, SOUTH OF YUCAIPA BOULEVARD, AND NORTH OF “D”

STREET, IN THE CITY OF YUCAIPA,) SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
by
Andréa Urbas, Assoc. AIA, AICP CEP CUD
36CFR61-qualified: architecture, historic architecture, architectural history + history 1752 E Lugonia Ave, #117-4
Redlands, CA 92374
Tel: (909) 528-6925
[email protected]
for
Mr. Travis Heaps
Premium Land Development
108 Orange Street, #5
Redlands, CA 92373
July 26, 2022

Author: Andréa Urbas, Assoc. AIA, AICP CEP CUD
1752 E Lugonia Ave, #117-4
Redlands, CA 92374
Tel: (909) 528-6925
[email protected]
Report Date: July, 2022
Report Title: DRAFT: Cultural Resources Letter Report for 5.1 Acres of Undeveloped Land in the City of
Yucaipa, San Bernardino County
Prepared for: Mr. Travis Heaps
Premium Land Development
108 Orange Street, #5
Redlands, CA 92373
USGS Quadrangle: Yucaipa 7.5', California (2018)
Latitude
Longtitude
Study Area:

34.03137234° 1' 53" North
-117.094176 -117° 5' 39" West

5.10-acres: APN 0301-051-29, -30, -48, -49

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. IIError! Bookmark not defined.

II.Historic Background Research and Findings
A. USGS Historical Topographic Maps .........................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

B. Historic Aerial Research………………………………………………………………
C. CRM TECH Report / Cultural Resources Records Search South Central Coastal Information Center………………………………………………………………………..

III. Native American Cultural Resources .....................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

A. CRM TECH Communications with NAHC………………………………………….

B. CRM TECH Tribal Communications and Request for Consultation………………...

IV.Recommendations…………………………………………………………………………..Error! Bookmark not defined.

APPENDIX A: Historical USGS Topographic Maps
2018 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
2015 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
2012 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
1996 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
1988 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
1980 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
1973 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
1967 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
1954 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
1901 (Redlands 15-minute)
1899 (Redlands 15-minute)
APPENDIX B: Historical Aerials
2016
2012
2009
2006
2002
1995
1989
1985
1978
1975
1967
1961
1959
1953
1949
1938
APPENDIX C: Historical Resources Within 1-Mile of Project Location Radius Map
Sites Uncovered
APPENDIX D: References
Nearby Site CRM Reports
EDR Data References

Introduction
At the request of Premium Land Development, Andréa Urbas reviewed the both the cultural resources studies prepared for nearby projects, including the April 29, 2022 CRM Tech (Historical/Archeological Resources Survey Report for Avenue D Senior Housing Project [APNs 0301-101-18, 0301-111-24, -25, and -26]) located 0.191 miles (1,009 feet) away, and the June 2019, Archaeological Associates Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of TTM 20263 (APN 0318-201- 59)located 1.22 miles (6,441 feet,) from the current project. Additionally, data files were ordered and obtained from EDR. That data validated that no known resources are located on the project site.

The purpose of this study is to identify potential cultural resources within or adjacent to the project area, and to determine whether such resources meet the official definition of “historical resources” or “tribal cultural resources,” as provided in the California Public Resources Code, in particular CEQA. According to PRC §5020.1(j), “‘historical resource’ includes, but is not limited to, any object, building, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which is historically or archaeologically significant, or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California.” More specifically, CEQA guidelines state that the term “historical resources” applies to any such resources listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, included in a local register of historical resources, or determined to be historically significant by the lead agency (Title 14 CCR §15064.5(a)(1)-(3)). CEQA guidelines mandate that “generally a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be ‘historically significant’ if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources” (Title 14 CCR §15064.5(a)(3)). A resource may be so listed if it meets any of the following Criteria:
(1) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.
(2) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. (3) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values. (4) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. (PRC §5024.1(c)).

Figure 1. Regional location of project area

Figure 2. Project Location and Study area
Figure 2. Project Location and Study area

Figure 2. Project Location and Study area
Figure 2. Project Location and Study area

□
Proposed Project; Case No.
21-191/GPA/CUP
Nearby Project; Case No.
22-002/GPA/CUP
Nearby Project; Case No.
22-028/TTM 20537
Figure 3. Project Location Relationship to Referenced CRM TECH Study and Archaeological Associates’ project site

Figure 3. Project Location Relationship to Referenced CRM TECH Study and Archaeological Associates’ project site Historic Background Research and Findings
Historical sources suggest that the project area is relatively low in sensitivity for cultural resources from the historic period, including Historical USGS Topographic Quadrangle Maps (2018 Yucaipa 7.5-minute , 2015 Yucaipa 7.5-minute, 2012 Yucaipa 7.5-minute, 1996 Yucaipa

7.5-minute, 1988 Yucaipa 7.5-minute, 1980 Yucaipa 7.5-minute, 1973 Yucaipa 7.5-minute, 1967 Yucaipa 7.5-minute, 1954 Yucaipa 7.5-minute,1901 Redlands 15-minute, 1899 Redlands 15- minute) (Appendix A), and Historic Aerials (2016, 2012, 2009, 2006, 2002, 1995, 1989, 1985, 1978, 1975, 1967, 1961, 1959, 1953, 1949, 1938) (Appendix B), and EDR’s Historical Resources

Within 1-Mile of Project Location (Appendix C). The only known historic site is the Yucaipa Adobe CA Landmark # 528 (32183 Kentucky Street,) and its associated ranch Landmark # 620.

According to historic aerials, a dwelling with ancillary buildings or structures is noted at the western end of the property, with agricultural land to its east and northeast. A single permit was identified in 2004 (October 15,)with an address of 12249 14th St (Permit Type: Residential Description: Permit Description: Work Class: Proposed Use: Permit Number: 10/15/2004 Status:

Valuation: $0.00 Contractor Company: Contractor Name: American Wrecking, Inc/ Ramirez, Albert). It is assumed that this was actually a demolition permit, as these buildings and structures no longer appear by 2006. This was confirmed by visual observation in 2022. There are no buildings or structures extant at the project location. As there are no existing buildings or structures at the project site, none require evaluation, and as such no “historical resources” are known to exist within or adjacent to the project area.

The CRM Tech report indicated that South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) records identified 20 previous studies on various tracts of land and linear features (Fig. 5), half of which focused on the prehistoric Serrano village of Yukaipa’t (Site 36-001000/CA-SBR-1000), located along the Oak Glen Creek roughly a half-mile to the southeast of that project site, and covering an area measuring 300 by 200 meters (1,000 by 650 feet). That records search indicated that site numbers 1064840 and 1064839 were located to the immediate northwest of the current project.

Native American Cultural Resources
On March 1, 2022, CRM TECH submitted a written request to the State of California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a records search in the Commission’s Sacred Lands File for the nearby project, as well as contacted the two nearest Native American groups of Serrano heritage, namely the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians, for further information. NAHC reported the presence of unspecified Native American cultural resource(s) in the general vicinity. Communications by CRM Tech with the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation, noted that due to the relatively close proximity of the project location to Yukaipa’t and other known Native American sites consultation with the City of Yucaipa and the project proponent during the CEQA- and AB52-compliance process was requested.

Recommendations

CEQA establishes that a project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a “historical resource” or a “tribal cultural resource” is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment (PRC §21084.1-2). “Substantial adverse change,” according to PRC §5020.1(q), “means demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of a historical resource would be impaired.” Although no “historical resources,” as defined by CEQA, have been identified within or adjacent to the project area, the area is sensitive for buried cultural deposits of prehistoric origin. Hence, as recommended by CRM TECH for the nearby project, the following recommendations are considered appropriate for this project, to reduce potential impacts:

1. Archaeological monitoring should be required during any grubbing, grading, trenching, excavations, and other earth-moving activities reaching below the depth of two feet.
a. The monitoring program should consist of, at a minimum, the following:
i. All disturbances of native soils should be monitored by a qualified archaeologist. Whenever cultural materials more than 50 years of age are discovered, they need to be field-recorded and evaluated. The monitor should be prepared to quickly recover any artifacts as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays. If a substantial cultural deposit is encountered, however, the monitor must have the power to temporarily halt or divert construction activities in that area to allow for controlled removal.
ii. On-site monitoring should be coordinated with the nearest Native American groups, such as the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians, who may wish to participate.
iii. In the event that human remains are encountered during the course of any future development, California State Law (Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Section 5079.98 of the Public Resources Code) states that no further earth disturbance shall occur at the location of the find until the San Bernardino County Coroner has been notified. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD).

iv.Collected artifacts should be cleaned, identified, catalogued, analyzed, and prepared for curation at an appropriate repository with permanent retrievable storage that would allow for additional research in the future.
v.Site records that incorporate the findings of the monitoring program should be prepared and submitted to the SCCIC as a permanent record of the discovery.
vi.A report that documents the methods and results of the monitoring program, including an itemized inventory of recovered artifacts and a detailed artifact analysis, should be prepared upon completion of the fieldwork. The report should include an interpretation of the cultural activities represented by the archaeological remains and a discussion of the significance of all recovered cultural material. vii.The submittal of the report to the City of Yucaipa and the curation of the artifacts will signify completion of the monitoring program and the mitigation of impacts to cultural resources.

APPENDIX A: HISTORICAL USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS

• 2018 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
• 2015 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
• 2012 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
• 1996 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
• 1988 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
• 1980 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
• 1973 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
• 1967 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
• 1954 (Yucaipa 7.5-minute)
• 1901 (Redlands 15-minute)
• 1899 (Redlands 15-minute)

Appendix B: HISTORIC AERIALS
• 2016
• 2012
• 2009
• 2006
• 2002
• 1995
• 1989
• 1985
• 1978
• 1975
• 1967
• 1959
• 1953
• 1949
• 1938

Appendix C: Historic Sites Within 1-Mile of Project
• Location Radius Map
• Sites Uncovered

Corrected Yucaipa Adobe History (SBCM Site documents)
California Historical Landmark #528

Serrano Era
Prior to European contact, the site of the Yucaipa Adobe was occupied by Serrano Indians. The marshland fed by springs at the site, supported abundant vegetation and wildlife.

Mission Era (1771 - 1833)
The Spanish Crown seeking to colonize “Alta (northern) California” developed a system of precidios (fortified military compounds,) and missions which sought to evangelize to the Native Americans and convert their populations to Christianity. The Alta California Missions were run by the Franciscan Order. One of these missions was the Mission San Gabriel, which was founded on September 8, 1771 by Fray Ángel Fernández de la Somera and Fray Pedro Benito Cambón. Ranchos, consisting of large expanses of land were established in a wide area for raising cattle, sheep and other livestock. Rancho San Bernardino was one of these.

Spanish rule ended, resulting in the 1834 Decree of Secularization, ending the Mission operations as well. The former mission lands were divided into large land grants called ranchos (secular, rather than Mission’s), significantly increasing the number of private land holdings in Alta California. Rancho San Bernardino was one of these.

Lugo Era (1842-1851)
Brothers Jose del Carmen Lugo, Jose Maria Lugo and Vincente Lugo, along with their cousin Diego Sepulveda, were granted title to the San Bernardino Rancho by the Mexican Governor of California in 1842.

Diego Sepulveda, brought a herd of cattle from other ranchos and settled in the Yucaipa valley. Oral history and tradition attributed the Yucaipa Adobe to him. However, historic and archeological analyses undertaken during restoration and seismic retrofit in 1989-1990, determined that Sepulveda’s adobe was actually located a few hundred yeards away, at 16th and Dunlap Boulevard; and that the Yucaipa Adobe was actually constructed by James Waters in 1858-1890. Waters was a noted hunter, trapper, and mountaineer, who stocked his ranch with sheep driven from New Mexico and Arizona.

Mormon Colony (1851-1869)
In 1851, the Lugo family sold their entire Rancho San Bernardino to Amasa Lyman and Charles C. Rich, leaders of the Mormon colony, that was to become today’s City of San Bernardino.

Dunlap Era (1869-1950s)
John Dunlap, a Texas cattleman purchased the property in 1869, and resided in the adobe. The ranch land was used for grazing and for raising grain and alfalfa.

Yucaipa Women’s Club and San Bernardino County Museums (1954-) The Adobe began to deteriorate, once the Dunlap family moved out, and the associated lands were gradually sold off.

In 1954, the Yucaipa Women’s Club raised funds to save it from demolition by neglect, and then donated it to the San Bernardino County Museums, where it remains as a historic site museum for the public.

APPENDIX D: References
• Nearby Site CRM Reports
• EDR Data References

REFERENCED CRM REPORTS
Tang, Tom Bai/CRM TECH. Historical /Archeological Resources Survey Report Avenue D Senior Housing Project Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 0301-101-18, 0301-111-24, 0301-111-25, and 0301-111-26 City of Yucaipa, San Bernardino County, California, 2022.

Tang, Tom Bai/CRM TECH. Historical /Archeological Resources Survey Report Iris Greens Project Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 0301-101-09 and -10, City of Yucaipa, San Bernardino County, California, 2018.

White, Robert S./Archeological Associates. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Of 4.08 ACRES of Partially Developed Land As Shown On TTM 20537 Located At 12294 8TH Street, City Of Yucaipa, San Bernardino County. 2022.

EDR REFERENCES
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Federal Contacts for Additional Information Telephone: 703-358-2205 Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife. of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration,
Building Department Records Searched Name: Yucaipa Years: 1902-2022 Source: City of Yucaipa, Yucaipa, CA Phone: 909.797.2489 (main) Name: San Bernardino County Years: 1970- 2022 Source: San Bernardino County, Land Use, Building & Safety, Yucaipa, CA Phone: (909) 387-831
EDR Internal databases.

Federal Lands Highway Division. Fish and Wildlife Service lands as part of the National Trails Inventory Program conducted by the US Dept.

Indian Religious Sites 916-653-6624 Office of Historic Preservation, Ept. Of Parks & Recreation State Contacts for Additional Information Phone: (202) 208-6843 Washington, DC 20240 1849 C Street NW Park Service
Indian Reservations: Indian Reservations
Telephone: 800-305-7417 Source: Natchez Trace Parkway.

Indian Reservations: Indian Reservations
USGS
Phone: 202-208-3710

National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers Fax: 202-501-1516 Office: 202-208-3711
Washington, DC 20240-0001 1849 C Street, NW

National Register of Historic Places
CA Historic Landmarks: CA Historical Landmarks. Source: California Office of Historic Preservation Fax: 202-628-2241 Phone: 202-628-8476 Washington, DC 20005 1411 K Street NW, Suite 700

Office of Public Affairs Department of the Interior- Bureau of Indian Affairs Federal Contacts for Additional Information Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Phone: 888-275-8747 Source:

USGS equal to or greater than 640 acres.

US Trails: US Trails
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
703-358-2205

transportation ■ noise ■ air quality | GANDDINI GROUP

555 Parkcenter Drive, Suite 225, Santa Ana, California 92705 (714) 795-3100 | ganddini.com

July 11, 2022

Mr. Jeff Kreidel

PREMIUM LAND DEVELOPMENT
35109 Avenue C
Yucaipa, California 92399

RE: 14th Street Apartment Project Transportation Study Screening Assessment Project No. 19503

Dear Mr. Kreidel:

Ganddini Group, Inc. is pleased to provide this Transportation Study Screening Assessment for the proposed 14th Street Apartment Project in the City of Yucaipa. The purpose of this screening assessment is to provide a preliminary review of the proposed project’s potential for level of service (LOS) impacts with respect to local performance standards or vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impacts with respect to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. We trust the findings of this analysis will aid you and the City of Yucaipa in assessing the project.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The 5.1-acre project site is located at east of 14th Street approximately 300 feet north of Avenue D (APNs 0301-051-29, 30, 48, 49) in the City of Yucaipa, California. The project site is currently vacant. The proposed project involves construction a 144-dwelling unit apartment complex. Vehicular access is proposed at 14th Street with one full access driveway and one emergency vehicle access (EVA). The proposed site plan is shown in Attachment A.

PROJECT TRIPS

Table 1 shows the proposed project trips based on trip generation rates obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021). Trip generation rates for ITE Land Use Code 220 (Multifamily Attached Housing – Low Rise) per dwelling unit for the proposed site development.

As also shown in Table 1, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately net new 971 daily trips, including 58 trips during the AM peak hour and 73 trips during the PM peak hour.

CRITERIA FOR THE PREPARATION OF TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSES

The project has been screened for both level of service analysis and vehicle miles traveled analysis using the City of Yucaipa Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (August 2020) [“City TIA Guidelines”].

LEVEL OF SERVICE SCREENING CRITERIA (NON-CEQA/GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY)

As specified in the City TIA Guidelines, the requirement to prepare a transportation impact study with Level of Service analysis should be based on one or more of the following criteria:

Mr. Jeff Kreidel

PREMIUM LAND DEVELOPMENT
July 11, 2022

14th Street Apartment Project
Transportation Study Screening Assessment
2 19503

 When the project AM or PM peak hour trip generation is 100 or more trips.  Projects that will add 51 or more trips during either the AM or PM peak hour to any intersection.  When determined by the City Engineer that existing or proposed traffic conditions in the project vicinity have unique characteristics that warrant evaluation.

The proposed project is forecast to generate fewer than 100 peak hour trips. The full access driveway provides access north and south of the project driveway such that there is less than 51 peak hour trips at any one intersection.

The project trip distribution patterns were developed using engineering judgment based on review of existing traffic data, surrounding land uses, and the local and regional roadway facilities in the project vicinity. Project trips are expected to distribute from the site approximately 60% north to Yucaipa Boulevard and approximately 40% south along 14th Street. Based on the greater of AM or PM peak hour trip generation, the project would not add 51 or more trips at any intersection (73 PM peak hour trips x 60% = 44 trips).

Assuming the project shall construct all on-site and off-site improvements (if any) in accordance with City design standards, the project should not create any new safety or operational concerns. Therefore, the proposed project does not warrant preparation of a transportation impact study with Level of Service analysis based on the City-established screening criteria.

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED SCREENING CRITERIA (CEQA)

The VMT screening assessment has been prepared in accordance with City TIA Guidelines, which were developed based on guidance from the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (State of California, December 2018) [“OPR Technical Advisory”]. In general terms, VMT quantifies the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project or region. The OPR Technical Advisory provides technical considerations regarding methodologies and thresholds with a focus on office, residential, and retail developments as these projects tend to have the greatest influence on VMT.

The City TIA Guidelines identify screening criteria for certain types of projects that typically reduce VMT and may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact. The project need only satisfy one of the following screening criteria:

 Projects located within a Transit Priority Area (TPA) □ Projects located within one-half mile radius of major transit stop1 or high-quality transit corridor2  Projects located within a low VMT area
□ Site location can be verified with the web-based or map-based VMT Screening Tool3  Project Type Screening
□ Local serving land use
□ Community institutions

1 A major transit stop is defined as an existing rail transit station, ferry terminal with bus or rail service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with less than 15 minute headways during the peak commute hours (Pub. Resources Code, § 21064.3.). 2 Fixed route bus service with less than 15 minute headways during the peak commute hours (Pub. Resources Code, § 21155). 3 The SBCTA VMT Screening Tool was developed from the San Bernardino Transportation Analysis Model (SBTAM) travel forecasting model to measure VMT performance for individual jurisdictions and for individual traffic analysis zones (TAZs).

Mr. Jeff Kreidel

PREMIUM LAND DEVELOPMENT
July 11, 2022

14th Street Apartment Project
Transportation Study Screening Assessment
3 19503
□ Supportive Housing
□ Projects with trip generate less than net new 400 daily vehicle4 trips (ADT)

TPA SCREENING

Projects located within a TPA, defined as within one-half mile of major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor, may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. This presumption may not apply, however, if the project:

1. Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;

2. Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the jurisdiction (if the jurisdiction requires the project to supply parking)

3. Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (as determined by the City with input from the Metropolitan Planning Organization): or

4. Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate or high-income residential units.

Based on review the of the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) VMT Screening Tool, the proposed project is not located within a TPA; therefore, the project does not satisfy the TPA screening criteria.

LOW VMT AREA SCREENING

Residential and office projects located within a low VMT generating area may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. In addition, other employment-related and mixed-use land use projects may qualify for the use of screening if the project can reasonably be expected to generate VMT per resident, per worker, or per service population that is similar to the existing land uses in the low VMT area. Based on the City-established thresholds, a project would satisfy the low VMT screening criteria if it is located in a traffic analysis zone (TAZ) that does not exceed the City average total daily VMT per service population.

To identify if the project is in a low VMT area, the SBCTA VMT Screening Tool was used. The SBCTA VMT Screening Tool was developed from the San Bernardino Transportation Analysis Model (SBTAM) travel forecasting model to measure VMT performance for individual jurisdictions and for individual traffic analysis zones (TAZs). TAZs are geographic polygons similar to census block groups used to represent areas of homogenous travel behavior. Projects located in areas that incorporate similar features of the TAZ will tend to exhibit similar VMT. This presumption may not be appropriate if the project land uses would alter the existing built environment in such a way as to increase the rate or length of vehicle trips.

The proposed project is consistent with existing residential land uses in the project TAZ and there does not appear to be anything unique about the project that would otherwise be mis-represented utilizing the data from the SBCTA VMT Screening Tool. Based on the SBCTA VMT Screening Tool assessment. In this case, the

4 As specified by the OPR Technical Advisory, the term vehicle refers to on-road passenger vehicles, specifically cars and light trucks.

Heavy-duty trucks should only be included in a traffic impact analysis for modeling convenience and ease of calculation (e.g., where data provided combine auto and heavy freight VMT). Therefore, heavy-duty trucks should not contribute to a finding of significant traffic (VMT) impact.

Mr. Jeff Kreidel

PREMIUM LAND DEVELOPMENT
July 11, 2022

14th Street Apartment Project
Transportation Study Screening Assessment
4 19503
proposed project consists of residential uses only; therefore, the applicable service population is the residential population and the project TAZ VMT has been calculated for VMT per population.

Exhibit A – SBCTA VMT Screening Tool Results

Exhibit A shows the SBCTA VMT Screening Tool results for the project site, which is located within TAZ 53847104. As shown on Exhibit A, the baseline year (2022) VMT per service population for the project TAZ is equal to 15.6 and the City baseline is equal to 19.8. Therefore, the proposed project does satisfy the City- established screening criteria for projects located in low VMT areas.

PROJECT TYPE SCREENING

The City TIA Guidelines identify the following types of projects that may be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact as they are local serving and thus can be expected to reduce VMT or they are small enough to have a negligible impact:

 Local parks
 Day care centers
 Local-serving retail uses less than 50,000 square feet, including:
□ Gas stations
□ Banks
□ Restaurants
□ Shopping Center
 Local-serving medical office less than 100,000 square feet  Student housing projects on or adjacent to college campuses

Mr. Jeff Kreidel

PREMIUM LAND DEVELOPMENT
July 11, 2022

14th Street Apartment Project
Transportation Study Screening Assessment
5 19503
 Local-serving assembly uses (places of worship, community organizations)  Community institutions (Public libraries, fire stations, local government)  Local serving community colleges that are consistent with the assumptions noted in the RTP/SCS  Hotels (non-destination or resort; no banquet or special event space)  Affordable or supportive housing5
 Assisted living facilities
 Senior housing (as defined by HUD)
 Projects generating less than 400 daily vehicle trips. This generally corresponds to the following “typical” development potentials:
□ 42 single family housing units
□ 54 multi-family, condominiums, or townhouse housing units □ 41,000 sq. ft. of office
□ 80,000 sq. ft. of light industrial
□ 229,000 sq. ft. of warehousing
□ 285,000 sq. ft. of high cube transload and short-term storage warehouse

As previously shown in Table 1, the proposed project consists of 144 multi-family housing units which is forecast to generate more than 400 net new daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project does not satisfy the City-established project type screening criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 971 daily trips, including 58 trips during the AM peak hour and 73 trips during the PM peak hour. The project satisfies the City-established LOS screening criteria for fewer than 100 peak hour trips. Therefore, the proposed project does not appear to warrant preparation of a Level of Service transportation impact study based on the City-established screening criteria for Level of Service analysis.

The proposed project is located within a low VMT area. Therefore, the proposed project satisfies the City- established screening criteria for projects in low VMT areas and may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact.

It has been a pleasure to assist you with this project. Should you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call at (714) 795-3100.

Sincerely,
GANDDINI GROUP, INC.

Perrie Ilercil, P.E. (AZ) Giancarlo Ganddini, PE, PTP
Senior Engineer Principal

5 The project must provide 100% of residential units as affordable or supportive housing.

Land Use Source1 % In % Out Rate % In % Out Rate
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise, Not Close to Rail Transit)ITE 220 24%76%0.40 63%37%0.51 6.74 Land Use Source In Out Total In Out Total
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise, Not Close to Rail Transit)ITE 220 144 DU 14 44 58 46 27 73 971 Notes:
1 2 DU = Dwelling Unit.

Trips Generated
ITE = Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021); ### = Land Use Code.

All rates based on General Urban/Suburban setting.

PM Peak HourLand Use
Variable2
AM Peak Hour Daily
Rate
DU
Quantity
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
Trip Generation Rates
Project Trip Generation
Table 1
14th Street Apartment Project
Transportation Study Screening Assessment
195036

ATTACHMENT A

SITE PLAN
Apx-1

N89° 25' 03.32"E 300.069'14TH STREETN
( IN FEET )

GRAPHIC SCALE
0 80
1" = 40'
0 4040

REPRESENTATIVE

VICINITY MAP

APPLICANT
OWNER
APN

SITE ADDRESS

LOT AREA

PROJECT DESCIPTION

UTILITY CONTACTS
LEGEND

SITEPLAN AND

CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
APN 0301-051-49-0000
APN 0301-051-48-0000
APN 0301-051-30-0000
APN 0301-051-29-0000
TYPICAL SECTION 14TH STREET

GENERAL COMMERCIAL
(VACANT)
RM-10M
(RV STORAGE)
RM-10M
(SINGLE FAMILY USES)
RM-10M
(SINGLE RESIDENTAIL USES)
NOTES:

LOT MIX AND PARKING LOT CALCULATION

GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION

LAND USE COMPLIANCE REVIEW
Apx-2