HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix A - Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
This technical memorandum presents an analysis of the air quality, energy, and greenhouse gas (GHG)
impacts for the proposed Citrus Walk Residential Project (proposed Project). The proposed Project is located
southwest of the intersection of Baseline Avenue and Lime Avenue in the City of Fontana (City). The 4.03-
acre Project site is comprised of a single parcel identified by Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 1110-171-
02. The proposed Project proposes the development of 54 attached residential dwellings, resulting in a net
density of 13.4 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). Additional improvements include associated landscaping,
parking, and recreational space. The proposed Project site is shown in Figure 1, Project Site Plan, included
at the end of this document. The Project site is currently vacant and undeveloped.
The Project is within the Rancho Fontana Specific Plan (RFSP). The RFSP was adopted by Ordinance on
December 7, 1982, with the certification of the RFSP Final Environmental Impact Report. Within the RFSP, the
site is located within Planning Area 18, designated as Low Density Residential with a maximum density of 6
du/ac, allowing for a total of 27 units.1 The Project proposes a Specific Plan Amendment to the RFSP to
establish Planning Area 18A for the Project site, which would change the site’s RFSP land use designation
from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential, which allows a maximum of 12 du/ac.
Table 1, Construction Schedule, shows the estimated construction schedule, which is expected to last
approximately 14 months.
Table 1: Construction Schedule
The following non-default assumptions and adjustments were used in the CalEEMod emission model for this
analysis:
• Land Use: The lot acreage was adjusted to match the site plan provided by the client.
• Construction Phases: Removed demolition phase as the site is currently vacant.
1 Density is calculated pursuant to Section 6.3.18 of the RFSP which states density for residential use shall be based on gross acreage.
Per Section 6.3.17 of the RFSP, gross acreage is denoted as the total land area within a defined boundary. Acreage
measurements are made to the centerline of the streets. Gross acreage for the Project site as defined by the RFSP is 4.53 acres.
To: City of Fontana Planning Department
From: Maryam Javanmardi, Alex J. Garber, EPD Solutions, Inc.
Date: 4/18/2025
Re: Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis for Citrus Walk Residential
Fontana Project, EPD Project Number 24-068
Activity Start Date End Date Total Working Days
Site Preparation 4/1/2025 4/14/2025 10
Grading 4/15/2025 5/26/2025 30
Building Construction 5/27/2025 4/13/2026 230
Paving 4/14/2026 5/11/2026 20
Architectural Coating 5/12/2026 6/8/2026 20
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment A).
Citrus Walk Residential
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 2
• Construction Schedule: Adjusted grading days in accordance with the construction schedule provided by
the client. Extended the grading phase from 20 days to 30 days.
• Construction Equipment: It was assumed that all equipment would be used for 8 hours per workday.
Tractors/loaders/backhoes were replaced with crawler tractors in the site preparation and grading
phases.
• Grading: The Project site would be balanced. Therefore, no import/export is presumed.
• Operational Vehicle Data: The trip rate was adjusted to match the Institute of Transportation Engineers
(ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) Land Use Code (220) according
to the VMT screening analysis prepared for Project.1F1F
2
• Operations: Hearths, wood stoves, and wood fireplaces were removed in accordance with the South
Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) Rule 445, which prohibits the installation of wood-
burning devices in effort to reduce particulate matter and reduce the production of VOCs. Additionally,
gas and propane fireplaces were removed as neither are proposed for the Project.
2 EPD Solutions. (2024). 24-068 Citrus Walk Residential Fontana Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis.
Citrus Walk Residential
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Figure 1: Conceptual Site Plan
Citrus Walk Residential
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
SUMMARY OF AIR QUALITY, ENERGY, AND GHG IMPACTS
Air Quality
The proposed Project’s maximum daily emissions (regional and local) for construction and operation would
not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance. In addition, all construction activities would
comply with applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, including Rule 402, Rule 403, Rule 445, and Rule
1113 to reduce effects related to public nuisance air contaminants, fugitive dust, and architectural coatings.
The construction of the proposed Project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for any of the six criteria
pollutants: reactive organic gases (ROG), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter (PM10), fine particulate
matter (PM2.5), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and carbon monoxide (CO). Projects that do not exceed the regional
thresholds are assumed to not have a significant impact on both a project level and cumulative level. The
proposed Project aligns with SCAQMD's 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), reflecting adherence
to regional air quality management goals and standards. Furthermore, odors produced by construction of
the proposed Project would be minimal and comply with SCAQMD Rule 402. Therefore, the proposed Project
would have less-than-significant air quality impacts.
The operation of the proposed Project is estimated to generate emissions of ROG, SO₂, PM₁₀, PM₂.₅, NOx,
and CO. However, the estimated operational emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds. Projects
that do not exceed the regional thresholds are assumed to not have a significant impact on both a project
level and cumulative level; therefore, the proposed Project would not have a cumulative impact on regional
emissions of criteria pollutants. The Project would also not exceed the SCAQMD localized significance
thresholds (LST) for construction and would therefore have a less-than-significant localized construction air
quality impact. Additionally, the proposed Project aligns with SCAQMD’s 2022 Air Quality Management
Plan (AQMP), reflecting adherence to regional air quality management goals and standards. Furthermore,
odors produced by the operation of the proposed Project would be minimal and comply with SCAQMD Rule
402. Therefore, the proposed Project would have less-than-significant air quality impacts.
Energy
The proposed Project’s energy consumption for construction activities related to development of the site for
residential uses would be conditioned to require compliance with existing fuel standards, machinery
efficiency standards, and California Air Resources Board (CARB) requirements that limit idling of trucks. In
addition, construction activities related to the proposed Project and the associated infrastructure are not
expected to result in demand for fuel greater on a per-unit-of-development basis than similar development
projects in Southern California.
Operation of the proposed Project would result in the consumption of natural gas, diesel, gasoline, and
electricity for heating, cooling, transportation, and electrical needs. Through compliance with existing energy
efficiency standards, the Project’s energy demand would be consistent with other comparable development
projects in Southern California. Therefore, the operation of the Project would have a less-than-significant
impact related to inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary energy use, and no mitigation would be required.
Additionally, the proposed Project would be required to meet the California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title
24 energy efficiency standards and comply with all applicable City energy codes, and the Project buildings
would be solar ready in compliance with current Title 24 requirements. Therefore, the Project would not
inhibit the use of and would allow for future flexibility relating to renewable energy.
Citrus Walk Residential
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 5
GHG Emissions
The construction and operational GHG emissions of the proposed Project are estimated at 462 MTCO₂e per
year, which remains below the SCAQMD significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO₂e per year. Additionally,
the Project is consistent with the goals and policies of the City of Fontana’s General Plan and CARB’s 2022
Scoping Plan, ensuring alignment with regional efforts to reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, the proposed
Project would not conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation aimed at reducing GHG emissions.
Citrus Walk Residential
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 6
AIR QUALITY
Methodology and Model Inputs
To calculate air quality impacts, the proposed Project’s construction and operational emissions were
estimated using CalEEMod. Passenger vehicle information was analyzed using the CalEEMod default trip
distance information.
Regional Emissions
SCAQMD has adopted maximum daily emission thresholds (pounds/day) for the criteria pollutants during
construction and operation of a project.3 While incremental regional air quality impacts of an individual
project are generally very small and difficult to measure, SCAQMD’s regional maximum emission thresholds
set standards to reduce the burden of SCAQMD to attain and maintain ambient air quality standards. The
regional thresholds apply to the criteria pollutants listed in Table 2, which includes the proposed Project’s
estimated construction emissions, and in Table 3, which includes the proposed Project’s operational emissions.
These emission thresholds apply to the Project emissions generated both from onsite sources (such as off-road
construction equipment, fugitive dust, and onsite operational equipment) and off-site sources (vehicle travel
arriving to and leaving from the site).
As shown in Table 2, construction emissions generated from the proposed Project would not exceed SCAQMD
thresholds. As shown in Table 3, the Project’s operational emissions are estimated for ROG, NOx, CO, SO₂,
PM₁₀, and PM₂.₅. The estimated operational emissions would remain below the SCAQMD thresholds.
Additionally, the Project would be required to comply with SCAQMD regulations to reduce construction-
related effects on air quality:
• Rule 402, Public Nuisance: Prohibits the discharge of air contaminants that cause injury, nuisance, or
annoyance to the public or damage to property.
• Rule 403, Fugitive Dust: Aims to minimize fugitive particulate matter dust emissions during construction
activities.
• Rule 1113, Architectural Coatings: Allows only low-VOC (volatile organic compounds) paints to be used.
As such, the Project would generate emissions below the SCAQMD thresholds for both construction and
operation, and therefore result in less-than-significant regional air quality impacts.
3 SCAQMD. (March 2023). South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Referenced at
https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/south-coast-aqmd-air-quality-significance-
thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=25.
Citrus Walk Residential
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 7
Table 2: Regional Construction Emission Estimates
Construction Activity
Maximum Daily Regional Emissions
(pounds/day)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
2025
Site Preparation 4.1 37.5 33.8 0.1 7.8 4.5
Grading 2.4 20.7 20.8 <0.1 3.6 2.0
Building Construction 1.4 11.7 17.3 <0.1 1.0 0.6
Maximum Daily Emissions 2025 4.1 37.5 33.8 0.1 7.8 4.5
2026
Building Construction 1.3 11.0 17.0 <0.1 1.0 0.5
Paving 1.0 7.5 10.4 <0.1 0.3 0.3
Architectural Coating 24.6 1.2 2.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1
Maximum Daily Emissions 2026 24.6 37.5 33.8 0.1 7.8 4.5
Maximum Daily Emission
2025-2026 24.6 37.5 33.8 0.1 7.8 4.5
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes: ROG = reactive organic gases, NOx = nitrogen oxides, CO = carbon monoxide, SO2 = sulfur dioxide, PM10 =
particulate matter 10 microns in diameter, PM2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment A).
Table 3: Regional Operational Emission Estimates
Operational Activity
Maximum Daily Regional Emissions
(pounds/day)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Mobile 1.3 1.1 9.4 <0.1 2.0 0.5
Area 2.0 <0.1 3.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Energy <0.1 0.2 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Total Project
Operational Emissions 3.3 1.3 12.6 <0.1 2.0 0.6
SCAQMD Significance
Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes: ROG = reactive organic gases, NOx = nitrogen oxides, CO = carbon monoxide, SO2 = sulfur dioxide, PM10 = particulate
matter 10 microns in diameter, PM2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment A).
Local Emissions
Localized significance thresholds (LSTs) were also adopted by the SCAQMD due to project -related
construction or operational air emissions having the potential to exceed the State and national air quality
standards in the project vicinity, while not exceeding the regional emission significance thresholds adopted
by the SCAQMD. These thresholds set the maximum rates of daily construction or operational emissions from
Citrus Walk Residential
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 8
a project site that would not exceed a national or State ambient air quality standard.5F5F
4 The differences
between regional thresholds and LSTs are as follows:
1. Regional thresholds include all sources of project construction and operational emissions generated from
onsite and offsite emission sources whereas the LSTs only consider the emissions generated from onsite
emission sources.
2. LSTs only apply to CO, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5, while regional thresholds include both ROG and SO2.
3. Regional thresholds apply to emission sources located anywhere within the SCAQMD whereas the LSTs
are location dependent and rely on the size of the project and emission location relative to the nearest
sensitive receptor.
SCAQMD provides screening tables (Appendix C of the SCAQMD 2008 Final Localized Significance
Threshold Methodology) for projects that disturb less than or equal to 5 acres in a day.6F6F
5 These tables were
created to easily determine if the daily emissions of NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 from a project could result
in a significant impact to the local air quality. The thresholds are determined by:
• Source receptor area (SRA), which is the geographic area within the SCAQMD that can act as both a
source of emissions and a receptor of emission impacts (the Project is located within SRA 34, Central San
Bernadino Valley);
• Size of grading disturbance (construction)/size of the project (operation); and
• Distance to the nearest sensitive receptor, which is defined as an individual who is most susceptible to
negative health effects when exposed to air pollutants and includes children, the elderly, and adults with
chronic health issues. Locations for such receptors include residences, schools, elderly care centers, and
hospitals.
Table 4, Construction Equipment Modeled in CalEEMod and Acres Disturbed per Day, shows the amount of
grading that would occur during the demolition, site preparation, and grading phases. As can be seen in
Table 4, the phase with the most ground disturbance would be the site preparation phase, with a maximum
of 3.5 acres of ground disturbance per day. Distance to the nearest sensitive receptor also determines the
emission thresholds. The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site consist of a residential home located
approximately 1.52 meters (5 feet) south of the southern boundary of the Project site, with additional
residential homes located at a distance of approximately 6.79 meters (22.28 feet) to the south. Therefore,
the construction and operational emission thresholds for 25 meters were used to provide a conservative
analysis. The construction thresholds per acreage were interpolated using the thresholds for 2 acres and 5
acres.6 Table 5, Localized Construction Emission Estimates, shows the thresholds and estimated maximum daily
construction emissions for the proposed Project. As shown in Table 5, the proposed Project would not exceed
the SCAQMD LST thresholds and would therefore have a less-than-significant localized construction air
quality impact.
4 SCAQMD 2008: Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. Referenced at
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/final-lst-
methodology-document.pdf.
5 SCAQMD 2008: Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology Appendix C. Referenced at
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/appendix-c-mass-
rate-lst-look-up-tables.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
6 SCAQMD 2011: Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds.
https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/caleemod-
guidance.pdf
Citrus Walk Residential
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 9
Table 4: Construction Equipment Modeled in CalEEMod and Acres Disturbed per Day
Activity Equipment Type Equipment
Quantity
Operating
Hours per
Day
Acres Disturbed per
piece of Equipment
per Day
Acres
Disturbed
per Day
Site
Preparation
Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8 0.5 1.5
Crawler Tractors 4 8 0.5 2.0
Total Acres Disturbed Per Day 3.5
Graders 1 8 0.5 0.5
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8 0.5 0.5
Crawler Tractors 3 8 0.5 1.5
Total Acres Disturbed Per Day 2.5
Maximum Acres Disturbed Per Day 3.5
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment A).
Table 5: Localized Construction Emission Estimates
Construction Activity
Maximum Daily Localized Emissions
(pounds/day)
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
2025
Site Preparation 37.5 32.4 7.6 4.5
Grading 20.6 19.6 3.4 2.0
Building Construction 11.3 14.1 0.5 0.4
Maximum Daily Emissions 2025 37.5 32.4 7.6 4.5
2026
Building Construction 10.7 14.1 0.4 0.4
Paving 6.2 8.8 0.3 0.3
Architectural Coating 1.1 1.5 <0.1 <0.1
Maximum Daily Emissions 2026 10.7 14.1 0.4 0.4
Maximum Daily Emission 2025-2026 37.5 32.4 7.6 4.5
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 220 1359.0 10.5 6
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No
Notes: NOx = nitrogen oxides, CO = carbon monoxide, PM10 = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter, PM2.5 = particulate
matter 2.5 microns in diameter
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment A).
Air Quality Management Plan Consistency
SCAQMD’s CEQA Handbook provides the following two criteria to determine if a project would be consistent
with the AQMP:
1. The Project would not generate population and employment growth that would be inconsistent with
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)’s growth forecasts.
2. The Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations
or cause or contribute to new violations or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the
interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP.
Citrus Walk Residential
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 10
Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers to the SCAG’s growth forecasts, and associated assumptions included in
the AQMP. The future air quality levels projected in the AQMP are based on SCAG’s growth projections,
which are based, in part, on the general plans of cities located within the SCAG region. Therefore, if the
level of housing and employment growth related to the proposed Project is consistent with the applicable
assumptions used in the development of the AQMP, the Project would not jeopardize attainment of the air
quality levels identified in the AQMP.
The Project site is designated as Residential Planned Community (R-PC) in the General Plan and zoned as
RFSP. The Specific Plan (SP) for the area originally anticipated 2,445 units, with 2,360 units constructed to
date, and 85 units remaining for development. The proposed Project would add 54 units, resulting in a total
of 2,414 units upon buildout. Although the Project includes a land use change to increase density, the total
unit count remains within the previously anticipated and analyzed capacity in the SP. Therefore, the Project
would not generate significant population growth or alter the City’s growth assumptions, ensuring alignment
with the Specific Plan and consistency with Criterion 1.
Consistency Criterion No. 2 refers to the California Ambient Air Quality Standards. An impact would occur
if the long-term emissions associated with the proposed Project would exceed SCAQMD’s regional
significance thresholds for operation-phase emissions. As presented in Tables 2 and 3, construction and
operation of the proposed Project would result in emissions that do not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds.
Therefore, the proposed Project would be consistent with Criterion No. 2.
As the Project would be consistent with both Criterion No. 1 and 2, impacts related to consistency with the
AQMP would be less than significant.
Odors
Odors would be produced during the construction of the proposed Project due to the operation of heavy-
duty off-road equipment. The primary odor emitted would be diesel particulate matter from the vendor
trucks and heavy-duty off-road equipment. This odor may be noticeable by nearby residents; however,
these odors would be expected and not necessarily objectionable. These odors would also dissipate quickly
and would be temporary. Therefore, due to the nature of the odor produced during construction as
temporary and non-objectionable to a substantial number of people, the odor impact from construction of
the proposed Project would be less than significant.
For operational odor emissions, SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook describes odor complaints
associated with the following land uses:
• Agricultural uses
• Chemical plants
• Composting activities
• Dairies
• Fiberglass molding
• Food processing plants
• Landfills
• Refineries
• Wastewater treatment plants
The Project does not propose any of the above land uses and is required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402,
Nuisance, which states:
A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants
or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable
Citrus Walk Residential
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 11
number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety
of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury
or damage to business or property. The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors
emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of
fowl or animals.
Thus, impacts associated with odor produced by operation of the proposed Project would be less than
significant.
Conclusion
The operation of the proposed Project is expected to result in emissions that would remain below the
SCAQMD regional thresholds for all pollutants. Projects that do not exceed the regional thresholds are
assumed to not have a significant impact on both a project level and cumulative level; therefore, the
proposed Project would not have a cumulative impact on regional emissions of criteria pollutants. The
proposed Project would also not exceed the SCAQMD localized thresholds for construction and operation
and would therefore have a less-than-significant localized construction air quality impact. Additionally, the
proposed Project is consistent with SCAQMD’S 2022 AQMP, reflecting adherence to regional air quality
management goals and standards. Finally, the proposed Project involves land uses that typically do not
generate significant odor complaints, and the Project would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402.
Therefore, the proposed Project would result in less-than-significant air quality impacts and would not require
mitigation.
Citrus Walk Residential
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 12
ENERGY
The State CEQA Guidelines do not have specific thresholds for energy consumption. Rather, the question in
Appendix G: VI Energy (a) asks, “[Would the proposed Project] Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project
construction or operation?” and in (b) asks “[Would the project] Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency?”7 Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, a significant impact
would occur if:
(a) The project design and/or location encourages wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of
energy, especially fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, and petroleum, as well as the use of fuel by
vehicles anticipated to travel to and from the project; or
(b) The project design impedes the growth of future renewable energy developments.
Southern California Edison and Southern California Gas Company would provide electricity and natural gas,
respectively, for construction and operation of the proposed Project. The following assumptions were used
to calculate the energy (electricity, natural gas, and petroleum) consumption of the proposed Project:
• Construction equipment fuel consumption was derived from the CARB OffRoad2021 emission model.
• Fuel Consumption from vehicle travel was derived from the CARB EMFAC2021 emission model.
• Electrical and natural gas usage was derived from the CalEEMod model Version 2022.1.
Construction
Electricity and Natural Gas Usage
Due to the Project size and the fact that construction is temporary, the electricity used during construction of
the proposed Project would be substantially less than that required for Project operation and would have a
negligible contribution to the Project’s overall energy consumption. The electric power used would be for as-
necessary lighting and electronic equipment such as computers inside temporary construction trailers. Natural
gas is not anticipated to be needed for construction activities. Any consumption of natural gas would be
minor and negligible in comparison to the usage during the operation of the proposed Project.
Petroleum Fuel Usage
The equipment associated with construction activities (off-road/heavy duty vehicles) would rely on diesel
fuel as would vendor. Construction workers would travel to and from the Project site throughout the duration
of construction, and for a conservative analysis, it is assumed that construction workers would travel in
gasoline-powered passenger vehicles. Table 6 lists the total fuel consumption and horsepower-hour data
contained within the CARB OffRoad2021 emission model for specific types of diesel construction equipment.
It should be noted that the total fuel consumption is a conservative analysis and would likely overstate the
amount of fuel usage, as specific construction equipment is not expected to operate during the entire duration
of the construction activity (e.g., crane). Table 7 summarizes the Project’s construction vehicle fuel usage
based on vehicle miles traveled and fuel usage factors contained in the CARB EMFAC2021. The trips included
are worker vehicles and vendor vehicles. Table 8 shows the overall fuel consumption for Project construction.
7 California Energy Commission. (2023). CEQA Statutes and Guidelines Attachment 10 Appendix G: Environmental
Checklist Form. Referenced at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-01/11_Attachment_10_-
_Appendix_G_from_CEQA_Handbook_ada.docx
Citrus Walk Residential Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 13
Table 6: Construction Equipment Fuel Usage
Activity Equipment Number
Hours
per
day
Horse-
power
Load
Factor
Days of
Construction
Total
Horsepower-
hours
Fuel Rate
(gal/hp-hr)
Fuel Use
(gallons)
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8 367 0.4 10 35,232 0.046957715 1,654
Crawler Tractors 4 8 87 0.37 10 10,301 0.05036589 519
Grading
Excavators 1 8 36 0.38 30 3,283 0.05110175 168
Graders 1 8 148 0.41 30 14,563 0.05205489 758
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8 367 0.4 30 35,232 0.04695772 1,654
Crawler Tractors 3 8 87 0.43 30 26,935 0.05036589 1,357
Building Construction
Cranes 1 8 367 0.29 230 195,831 0.05427386 10,629
Forklifts 3 8 82 0.2 230 90,528 0.05346958 4,840
Generator Sets 1 8 14 0.74 230 19,062 0.08050323 1,535
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8 84 0.37 230 171,562 0.05349335 9,177
Welders 1 8 46 0.45 230 38,088 0.03211507 1,223
Paving
Pavers 1 8 81 0.42 20 5,443 0.05163856 281
Paving Equipment 2 8 89 0.36 20 10,253 0.05129285 526
Rollers 2 8 36 0.38 20 4,378 0.053604335 235
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 84 0.37 20 4,973 0.05349335 266
Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 8 10 0.56 20 1,792 0.048501212 87
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 8 37 0.48 20 2,842 0.030167966 86
Total 34,995
Source: Fuel Calculation Sheets (see Attachment B)
Citrus Walk Residential
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 14
Table 7: Construction Vehicle Fuel Usage
Construction
Source
Total Number of
Trips VMT Fuel Rate Gallons of
Diesel Fuel
Gallons of
Gasoline Fuel
Vendor Trucks 1,380 55,200 9.04 6,107 <0.1
Worker Vehicles 10,160 375,920 29.87 <0.1 12,585
Total 6,107 12,585
Source: Fuel Calculation Sheets (see Attachment B).
Table 8: Total Construction Fuel Usage
Construction Source Gallons of Diesel Fuel Gallons of Gasoline Fuel
Construction Vehicles 6,107 12,585
Off-Road Construction Equipment 34,995 <0.1
Total 41,102 12,585
Source: Fuel Calculation Sheets (see Attachment B).
Construction activities for the proposed Project would be required to comply with existing fuel standards
and machinery efficiency standards. In addition, CCR Title 13, Motor Vehicles, Section 2449(d)(3), Idling,
limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than 5 minutes, thereby precluding unnecessary and
wasteful consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of construction equipment. As shown in Tables 6, 7,
and 8, construction of the proposed Project would require a total of 41,102 gallons of diesel fuel (34,995
gallons of diesel fuel from off-road construction equipment and 6,107 gallons of diesel fuel from construction
vehicles) and 12,585 gallons of gasoline fuel from construction vehicles. Construction of the project would
remain consistent with that of similar projects in the State and thus would not constitute an inefficient use of
energy. Additionally, energy usage for construction would be temporary until construction is completed.
Operation
The operation of the proposed Project would consume electricity, natural gas, and petroleum. The energy
consumption of the proposed Project can be found in Table 9, Project Annual Operational Energy
Requirements, below. Electricity and natural gas consumption can be found in the CalEEMod Output Sheets
attached (Attachment A). The gasoline consumption rates utilize the same assumptions that were used for the
worker vehicles. Table 9 shows that the proposed Project is expected to require natural gas, gasoline fuel,
and electricity. However, the energy demand would be consistent with projects of similar size and use, and
therefore, would not constitute an inefficient use of energy. As a result, the proposed Project would have
less-than-significant energy impacts, with no mitigation required.
Citrus Walk Residential Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 15
Table 9: Project Annual Operational Energy Requirements
Electricity (Kilowatt-Hours)
Proposed Project 270,583
Natural Gas (Thousands British Thermal Units)
Proposed Project 899,454
Petroleum (Gasoline) Consumption
Annual VMT Gallons of Gasoline Fuel
Proposed Project 933,543 31,253
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment A).
Future Renewable Energy Developments
The proposed Project would be required to meet the CCR Title 24 energy efficiency standards in effect
during permitting of the proposed Project and comply with all applicable City energy codes. The City’s
administration of the CCR Title 24 requirements includes review of design components and energy
conservation measures that occurs during the permitting process, which ensures that all requirements are met.
In addition, Project design and operation would comply with State Building Energy Efficiency Standards,
appliance efficiency regulations, and green building standards. The Project buildings would install solar
ready in compliance with current Title 24 requirements. As such, the Project would not inhibit the use of and
would contribute for future flexibility relating to renewable energy.
Conclusion
Construction activities related to the proposed Project and the associated infrastructure are not expected to
result in demand for fuel greater on a per-unit-of-development basis than any other development projects
in Southern California. Construction activities for the proposed Project would be required to comply with
existing fuel standards, machinery efficiency standards, and CARB requirements that limit idling of
construction equipment. There are no unusual Project characteristics that would cause the use of construction
equipment that would be less energy efficient compared with other similar construction sites in other parts of
the State. The operation of the Project would also be similar to other residential projects within the city. The
proposed Project would consume natural gas, diesel, gasoline, and electricity. However, through compliance
with existing standards, the Project would not result in a fuel demand on a per-development basis that
exceeds typical development projects in Southern California. Therefore, the construction and operation of
the Project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary
energy use, and no mitigation would be required.
In addition, the proposed Project would be required to meet the CCR Title 24 energy efficiency standards
and comply with all applicable City energy codes, and the Project buildings would install solar ready in
compliance with current Title 24 requirements. Therefore, the Project would not inhibit the use of and would
contribute to future flexibility relating to renewable energy.
Citrus Walk Residential Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 16
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Regulatory Background and Thresholds of Significance
California State Executive Order S-3-05, issued by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in June 2005,
established comprehensive GHG reduction targets for the State.8 It mandated reducing GHG emissions to
2000 levels by 2010, to 1990 levels by 2020, and to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. This Executive
Order laid the foundation for subsequent climate change mitigation efforts in California, including the
development of various policies and programs aimed at reducing emissions across sectors such as
transportation, energy, and industry. The objective of the Executive Order is to contribute to capping
worldwide CO2 concentrations at 450 parts per million (ppm), stabilizing global climate change.
SCAQMD convened a Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group to
help lead agencies determine significance thresholds for GHG emissions when SCAQMD is not the lead
agency. The last working group was held in September 2010 (Meeting No. 15) and proposed a tiered
approach, equivalent to the existing consistency determination requirements in CEQA Guidelines Sections
15064(h)(3), 15125(d), or 15152(a).9 The most recent proposal issued in Meeting No. 15 uses a tiered
approach, Tier 1 to Tier 5, to evaluate potential GHG impacts from various uses. This assessment will apply
the Tier 3: Numerical Screening Thresholds approach. Tier 3 consists of screening values, which the lead
agency can choose, but must be consistent with all projects within its jurisdiction. A project’s construction
emissions are averaged over 30 years and added to the project’s operational emissions. If a project’s
emissions are below one of the following screening thresholds, then the project impact would be less than
significant:
• Option 1, all land use types: 3,000 MTCO2e per year
• Option 2, based on land use type:
o Residential: 3,500 MTCO2e per year;
o Commercial: 1,400 MTCO2e per year; or
o Mixed use: 3,000 MTCO2e per year.
The SCAQMD’s interim thresholds used the Executive Order S-3-05-year 2050 goal as the basis for the Tier
3 screening level. Achieving the Executive Order’s objective would contribute to worldwide efforts to cap
CO2 concentrations at 450 ppm, thus stabilizing global climate.
Based on the foregoing guidance, the City has elected to rely on compliance with a local air district
(SCAQMD) threshold in the determination of significance of Project-related GHG emissions. Specifically, the
City has selected the interim 3,000 MTCO2e/year threshold recommended by SCAQMD staff for residential
and commercial sector projects against which to compare Project-related GHG emissions.
The City understands that the 3,000 MTCO2e/year threshold for residential/commercial uses was proposed
by SCAQMD a decade ago and was adopted as an interim policy; however, no permanent, superseding
policy or threshold has since been adopted. The 3,000 MTCO2e/year threshold was developed and
recommended by SCAQMD, an expert agency, based on substantial evidence as provided in the Draft
Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas Significance Threshold (2008) document and subsequent
Working Group meetings (latest of which occurred in 2010). SCAQMD has not withdrawn its support of the
8 Executive Department State of California Executive Order S-3-05 https://www.library.ca.gov/wp-
content/uploads/GovernmentPublications/executive-order-proclamation/5129-5130.pdf
9 SCAQMD. (2010). Minutes of the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #15.
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008-
2009/ghg-meeting-15/ghg-meeting-15-minutes.pdf.
Citrus Walk Residential Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 17
interim threshold and all documentation supporting the interim threshold remains on the SCAQMD website
on a page that provides guidance to CEQA practitioners for air quality analysis (and where all SCAQMD
significance thresholds for regional and local criteria pollutants and toxic air contaminants also are listed).
Further, as stated by SCAQMD, this threshold “uses the Executive Order S-3-05 goal [80% below 1990
levels by 2050] as the basis for deriving the screening level” and, thus, remains valid for use in 2025 and
for purposes of this analysis. Lastly, this threshold has been used for hundreds, if not thousands of GHG
analyses performed for projects located within the SCAQMD jurisdiction.
Project GHG Emissions
During construction, temporary sources of GHG emissions include construction equipment and workers’
commutes to and from the site. The combustion of fossil-based fuels from vehicles and construction equipment
creates GHGs such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). Exhaust emissions from
on-site construction activities would vary daily as construction activity levels change. Long-term (operational)
GHG emissions are typically generated from mobile sources (e.g., vehicle trips), area sources (e.g.,
maintenance activities and landscaping), indirect emissions from sources associated with energy consumption,
waste sources (land filling and waste disposal), and water sources (water supply and conveyance, treatment,
and distribution).
This analysis evaluates construction and operational GHG emissions associated with the proposed Project.
The proposed Project’s GHG emissions were estimated using CalEEMod.
The Project’s construction GHG emissions are shown in Table 10, Project Construction GHG Emissions, and the
overall construction and operational emissions are shown in Table 11, Project Total GHG Emissions. The
construction emissions were amortized over 30 years and added to the operational GHG emissions.10 Table
11 shows that the Project’s construction and operational GHG emissions are estimated at 462 MTCO₂e per
year. These emissions would remain below the SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MTCO ₂e per year. Therefore,
the proposed Project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to GHG emissions.
10 SCAQMD. (2008). Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans.
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-
thresholds/ghgboardsynopsis.pdf.
Citrus Walk Residential Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 18
Table 10: Project Construction GHG Emissions
Activity Annual GHG Emissions
(MTCO2e)
2025 309
2026 131
Total Emissions 439
Total Emissions Amortized Over 30 Years 15
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment A).
Table 11: Project Total GHG Emissions
Activity Annual GHG Emissions
(MTCO2e)
Mobile 337
Area 1
Energy 91
Water 6
Waste 12
Refrigerant <0.1
Total Project Operational Emissions 447
Project Construction Emissions 15
Total Project Emissions 462
Significance Threshold 3,000
Threshold Exceeded No
Source: CalEEMod Output Sheets (see Attachment A).
Project Consistency with the City of Fontana General Plan Update and 2022 CARB Scoping Plan
Table 12 provides a consistency summary that outlines the City of Fontana General Plan Update (adopted
in 2018) goals and policies related to GHG emissions. As shown in Table 12, the Project would be consistent
with the City of Fontana General Plan Update goals and policies related to GHG emissions.
The 2022 CARB Scoping Plan Update sets the GHG emission reduction target for 2045 for the State at
85% below 1990 levels, which was codified by Senate Bill (SB) 32. As seen in Table 13, the Project would
be consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with any plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs within the City of Fontana
and the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan.
Citrus Walk Residential Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 19
Table 12: City of Fontana General Plan Update Consistency Summary
Goals Consistency
Community Mobility and Circulation
Goal 5: Fontana’s commercial and mixed-use areas
include a multi-functional street network that ensures a
safe, comfortable, and efficient movement of people,
goods, and services to support a high quality of life
and economic vitality.
Consistent. The Project would install a 6-foot wide
sidewalk along the Project frontage on Orlando Drive and
a 5 foot wide sidewalk along the Project frontage on Lime
Avenue. The existing sidewalk along the Project frontage
on Baseline Avenue would be protected in place and would
not be changed through the implementation of the
Project. Fontana is served by Omnitrans, with bus route 367
located along the Project’s frontage on Baseline Avenue.
As such, the Project would support alternate modes of
transportation.
Goal 6: The city has attractive and convenient parking
facilities, including electric charging stations, for both
motorized and non-motorized vehicles that meet needs
that fit the context.
Consistent. The proposed Project would provide a total of
147 passenger vehicle stalls, including 96 garage space
stalls and 51 head-in stalls, with electric charging hookups
as required by Title 24 Part 6 Energy.
Infrastructure and Green Systems
Goal 7: Fontana is becoming an energy-efficient
community.
Consistent. The proposed Project would be designed to
meet the 2022 Title 24 Part 6 building energy
requirements, which would minimize the energy utilized
through installation of enhanced insulation and use of
energy efficient lights and appliances. This ensures the
Project would be designed in a manner that would facilitate
the reduction of GHG emissions from onsite sources.
Sustainability and Resilience
Goal 3: Renewable sources of energy, including solar
and wind, and other energy-conservation strategies
are available to city households and businesses.
Consistent. Consistent with the 2022 Title 24 Part 6
requirements, the proposed project would install solar
panels as part of the development. This would contribute to
renewable resources to the households proposed by the
Project.
Goal 6: Green building techniques are used in new
development and retrofits.
Consistent. The proposed Project would be designed to
meet the 2022 Title 24 Part 6 and Part 11 building energy
and CalGreen requirements, which would minimize the
energy utilized and promote environmental resilience. This
ensures the Project would be designed in a manner that
would facilitate the reduction of GHG emissions from onsite
sources and address the changing climate.
Source: City of Fontana. (2018). Fontana General Plan Update 2015-2035.
Citrus Walk Residential Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 20
Table 13: 2022 Scoping Plan Consistency Summary
Action Consistency
GHG Emissions Reductions Relative to the SB 32 Target
40% Below 1990 levels by 2030. Consistent. The Project would comply with the 2022 Title
24 Part 6 building energy requirements and part 11
CalGreen requirements, along with other local and State
initiatives that aim to achieve the 40% below 1990 levels
by 2030 goal.
Smart Growth/Vehicle Miles Traveled VMT
VMT per capita reduced 25% below 2019 levels by
2030, and 30% below 2019 levels by 2045.
Consistent. The proposed Project includes the installation
of sidewalks along the Project’s frontage on Orlando Drive
and Lime Avenue to encourage alternative modes of
transportation. The Project is consistent with the growth and
land use assumptions in the Southern California Association
of Governments’ 2022 Connect SoCal Regional
Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, so
the Project would not interfere with the analysis completed
for the Connect SoCal report outlining VMT reduction
targets and measures.
Light-Duty Vehicle (LDV) Zero-Emission Vehicles (ZEVs)
100% of LDV sales are ZEV by 2035. Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and does not propose the sale of vehicles.
Truck ZEVs
100% of medium-duty (MDV)/HDC sales are ZEV by
2040 (AB 74 University of California Institute of
Transportation Studies [ITS] report).
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and does not propose the sale of trucks.
Aviation
20% of aviation fuel demand is met by electricity
(batteries) or hydrogen (fuel cells) in 2045.
Sustainable aviation fuel meets most or the rest of the
aviation fuel demand that has not already transitioned
to hydrogen or batteries.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not utilize aviation fuel.
Ocean-Going Vessels (OGV)
2020 OGV At-Berth regulation fully implemented,
with most OGVs utilizing shore power by 2027.
25% of OGVs utilize hydrogen fuel cell electric
technology by 2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not utilize any OGVs.
Port Operations
100% of cargo handling equipment is zero-emission
by 2037.
100% of drayage trucks are zero emission by 2035.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not impact any operations at any ports.
Freight and Passenger Rail
100% of passenger and other locomotive sales are
ZEV by 2030.
100% of line haul locomotive sales are ZEV by 2035.
Line haul and passenger rail rely primarily on
hydrogen fuel cell technology, and others primarily
utilize electricity.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not involve any freight or passenger rail
operations.
Citrus Walk Residential Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 21
Action Consistency
Oil and Gas Extraction
Reduce oil and gas extraction operations in line with
petroleum demand by 2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not involve oil and gas extraction
operations.
Petroleum Refining
CCS on majority of operations by 2030, beginning in
2028. Production reduced in line with petroleum
demand.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not involve any petroleum refining.
Electricity Generation
Sector GHG target of 38 million metric tons of carbon
dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) in 2030 and 30
MMTCO2e in 2035.
Retail sales load coverage13420 gigawatts (GW) of
offshore wind by 2045. Meet increased demand for
electrification without new fossil gas-fired resources.
Consistent. The proposed Project would install solar
energy systems in compliance with Title 24 requirements to
meet the demand for electrification without relying on new
fossil gas-fired resources.
New Residential and Commercial Buildings
All electric appliances beginning 2026 (residential)
and 2029 (commercial), contributing to 6 million heat
pumps installed statewide by 2030.
Consistent. The proposed Project would comply with the
2022 Title 24, Part 6 building energy requirements, which
would require all in-unit appliances for residential projects
to be all-electric and Energy Star certified.
Existing Residential Buildings
80% of appliance sales are electric by 2030 and
100% of appliance sales are electric by 2035.
Appliances are replaced at end of life such that by
2030 there are 3 million all-electric and electric-ready
homes—and by 2035, 7 million homes—as well as
contributing to 6 million heat pumps installed statewide
by 2030.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a construction of
a new residential project and would not involve any
existing residential buildings.
Existing Commercial Buildings
80% of appliance sales are electric by 2030, and
100% of appliance sales are electric by 2045.
Appliances are replaced at end of life, contributing to
6 million heat pumps installed statewide by 2030.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not involve any existing Commercial
buildings.
Food Products
7.5% of energy demand electrified directly and/or
indirectly by 2030; 75% by 2045.
Not Applicable, the proposed Project is a residential
project and does not involve the storage of food products.
Construction Equipment
25% of energy demand electrified by 2030 and 75%
electrified by 2045.
Consistent. The proposed Project would be required to use
construction equipment that is registered by CARB and meet
CARB’s standards. CARB sets its standards to be in line with
the goal of reducing energy demand by 25% in 2030 and
75% in 2045.
Chemicals and Allied Products; Pulp and Paper
Electrify 0% of boilers by 2030 and 100% of boilers
by 2045.
Hydrogen for 25% of process heat by 2035 and
100% by 2045.
Electrify 100% of other energy demand by 2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not be utilized for pulp and/or paper
products.
Stone, Clay, Glass, and Cement
Citrus Walk Residential Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 22
Action Consistency
CCS on 40% of operations by 2035 and on all
facilities by 2045.
Process emissions reduced through alternative
materials and CCS.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not be utilized for stone, clay, glass, and
cement.
Other Industrial Manufacturing
0% energy demand electrified by 2030 and 50% by
2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not involve the construction of new
industrial manufacturing buildings.
Combined Heat and Power
Facilities retire by 2040.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not involve any existing combined heat
and power facilities.
Agriculture Energy Use
25% energy demand electrified by 2030 and 75%
by 2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not involve any agricultural uses.
Low Carbon Fuels for Transportation
Biomass supply is used to produce conventional and
advanced biofuels, as well as hydrogen.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not involve any production of biofuels.
Low Carbon Fuels for Buildings and Industry
In 2030s, biomethane135 blended in pipeline
Renewable hydrogen blended in fossil gas pipeline at
7% energy (~20% by volume), ramping up between
2030 and 2040.
In 2030s, dedicated hydrogen pipelines constructed to
serve certain industrial clusters.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not involve any production of energy
fuels for buildings and industry, nor would it impede in the
development and adoption of utilizing low carbon fuels for
buildings and industry.
Non-Combustion Methane Emissions
Increase landfill and dairy digester methane capture.
Some alternative manure management deployed for
smaller dairies.
Moderate adoption of enteric strategies by 2030.
Divert 75% of organic waste from landfills by 2025.
Oil and gas fugitive methane emissions reduced 50%
by 2030 and further reductions as infrastructure
components retire in line with reduced fossil gas
demand
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and would not involve any production of non-
combustion methane emissions or organic waste.
High GWP Potential Emissions
Low GWP refrigerants introduced as building
electrification increases, mitigating HFC emissions.
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is a residential
project and does not include large scale refrigeration uses.
Source: California’s 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan Table 2-1: Actions for the Scoping Plan Scenario: AB 32 GHG Inventory
Sectors
Conclusion
The construction and operational GHG emissions of the proposed Project are estimated at 462 MTCO₂e per
year, which remains below the SCAQMD significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO₂e per year. Additionally,
as shown in Tables 12 and 13, the proposed Project would be consistent with the City of Fontana’s goals
and policies related to the reduction of GHG emissions, as well as the CARB 2022 Scoping Plan. As such, the
Citrus Walk Residential Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
Page | 23
proposed Project would not conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation adopted to reduce the emissions of
GHGs
Citrus Walk Residential Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
ATTACHMENT A: CALEEMOD OUTPUT SHEETS
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
1 / 40
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
3.5. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
2 / 40
3.11. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
3 / 40
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
5.5. Architectural Coatings
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
4 / 40
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
5.7. Construction Paving
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
5 / 40
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
6 / 40
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
7 / 40
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use
Construction Start Date 9/1/2025
Operational Year 2027
Lead Agency City of Fontana
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s)2.80
Precipitation (days)6.40
Location 34.121, -117.465292
County San Bernardino-South Coast
City Fontana
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 5304
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.29
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft)Landscape Area (sq
ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Apartments Low
Rise
54.0 Dwelling Unit 2.87 75,702 23,680 —179 —
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
8 / 40
Parking Lot 51.0 Space 0.46 0.00 0.00 ———
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.70 Acre 0.70 0.00 0.00 ———
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Un/Mit.ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Unmit.24.6 37.5 33.8 0.05 7.82 4.52 5,798
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unmit.1.39 11.7 16.5 0.03 1.03 0.56 3,335
Average Daily (Max)———————
Unmit.1.67 7.76 9.75 0.02 0.95 0.53 1,866
Annual (Max)———————
Unmit.0.30 1.42 1.78 < 0.005 0.17 0.10 309
Exceeds (Daily Max)———————
Threshold 75.0 100 550 150 150 55.0 —
Unmit.No No No No No No —
Exceeds (Average
Daily)
———————
Threshold 75.0 100 550 150 150 55.0 —
Unmit.No No No No No No —
2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
9 / 40
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Year ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily - Summer (Max)———————
2025 4.13 37.5 33.8 0.05 7.82 4.52 5,798
2026 24.6 11.0 17.0 0.03 0.97 0.51 3,367
Daily - Winter (Max)———————
2025 1.39 11.7 16.5 0.03 1.03 0.56 3,335
2026 1.32 11.0 16.3 0.03 0.97 0.51 3,321
Average Daily ———————
2025 0.90 7.76 9.75 0.02 0.95 0.53 1,866
2026 1.67 2.71 4.05 0.01 0.23 0.12 788
Annual ———————
2025 0.16 1.42 1.78 < 0.005 0.17 0.10 309
2026 0.30 0.49 0.74 < 0.005 0.04 0.02 131
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Un/Mit.ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Unmit.3.31 1.25 12.6 0.02 2.07 0.55 3,075
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Unmit.2.96 1.30 8.15 0.02 2.07 0.55 2,915
Average Daily (Max)———————
Unmit.3.00 1.22 9.63 0.02 1.84 0.49 2,701
Annual (Max)———————
Unmit.0.55 0.22 1.76 < 0.005 0.34 0.09 447
Exceeds (Daily Max)———————
Threshold 55.0 55.0 550 150 150 55.0 —
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
10 / 40
Unmit.No No No No No No —
Exceeds (Average
Daily)
———————
Threshold 55.0 55.0 550 150 150 55.0 —
Unmit.No No No No No No —
Exceeds (Annual)———————
Threshold ——————3,000
Unmit.——————No
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Mobile 1.27 1.00 9.44 0.02 2.05 0.53 2,408
Area 2.03 0.03 3.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 8.22
Energy 0.01 0.23 0.10 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 547
Water ——————35.5
Waste ——————75.4
Refrig.——————0.54
Total 3.31 1.25 12.6 0.02 2.07 0.55 3,075
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Mobile 1.19 1.07 8.06 0.02 2.05 0.53 2,256
Area 1.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.01 0.23 0.10 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 547
Water ——————35.5
Waste ——————75.4
Refrig.——————0.54
Total 2.96 1.30 8.15 0.02 2.07 0.55 2,915
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
11 / 40
Average Daily ———————
Mobile 1.05 0.97 7.44 0.02 1.82 0.47 2,037
Area 1.94 0.02 2.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.63
Energy 0.01 0.23 0.10 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 547
Water ——————35.5
Waste ——————75.4
Refrig.——————0.54
Total 3.00 1.22 9.63 0.02 1.84 0.49 2,701
Annual ———————
Mobile 0.19 0.18 1.36 < 0.005 0.33 0.09 337
Area 0.35 < 0.005 0.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.93
Energy < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 90.6
Water ——————5.87
Waste ——————12.5
Refrig.——————0.09
Total 0.55 0.22 1.76 < 0.005 0.34 0.09 447
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 4.05 37.5 32.4 0.05 1.93 1.78 5,547
Dust From Material
Movement
————5.66 2.69 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
12 / 40
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.11 1.03 0.89 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 152
Dust From Material
Movement
————0.16 0.07 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.02 0.19 0.16 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 25.2
Dust From Material
Movement
————0.03 0.01 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.08 0.08 1.36 0.00 0.23 0.05 250
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 6.37
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.05
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
13 / 40
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 2.30 20.6 19.6 0.03 1.15 1.05 3,145
Dust From Material
Movement
————2.26 0.94 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.19 1.70 1.61 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 258
Dust From Material
Movement
————0.19 0.08 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.03 0.31 0.29 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 42.8
Dust From Material
Movement
————0.03 0.01 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.07 0.07 1.17 0.00 0.20 0.05 215
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.02 < 0.005 16.4
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.71
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
14 / 40
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.5. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.21 11.3 14.1 0.03 0.47 0.43 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.21 11.3 14.1 0.03 0.47 0.43 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.52 4.85 6.06 0.01 0.20 0.18 1,131
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.09 0.88 1.11 < 0.005 0.04 0.03 187
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.18 0.17 3.03 0.00 0.51 0.12 556
Vendor 0.01 0.20 0.11 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 187
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.17 0.19 2.28 0.00 0.51 0.12 509
Vendor < 0.005 0.21 0.11 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 187
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
15 / 40
Average Daily ———————
Worker 0.07 0.09 1.03 0.00 0.22 0.05 221
Vendor < 0.005 0.09 0.05 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 80.0
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Worker 0.01 0.02 0.19 0.00 0.04 0.01 36.7
Vendor < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 13.2
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.16 10.7 14.1 0.03 0.41 0.38 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 1.16 10.7 14.1 0.03 0.41 0.38 2,639
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.23 2.15 2.84 0.01 0.08 0.08 532
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.04 0.39 0.52 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 88.1
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.17 0.15 2.80 0.00 0.51 0.12 545
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
16 / 40
Vendor < 0.005 0.19 0.10 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 184
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker 0.16 0.17 2.11 0.00 0.51 0.12 498
Vendor < 0.005 0.20 0.10 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 184
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily ———————
Worker 0.03 0.04 0.45 0.00 0.10 0.02 102
Vendor < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 37.0
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.02 < 0.005 16.9
Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.13
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.83 7.46 10.4 0.02 0.31 0.28 1,604
Paving 0.15 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.05 0.41 0.57 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 87.9
Paving 0.01 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
17 / 40
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.07 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 14.5
Paving < 0.005 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.09 0.08 1.44 0.00 0.26 0.06 280
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Worker < 0.005 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 14.3
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.36
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.11. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Onsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.16 1.14 1.51 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 179
Architectural Coatings 24.4 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
18 / 40
Average Daily ———————
Off-Road Equipment 0.01 0.06 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.79
Architectural Coatings 1.34 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Off-Road Equipment < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.62
Architectural Coatings 0.24 ——————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite ———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.56 0.00 0.10 0.02 109
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Average Daily ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 5.54
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.92
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
19 / 40
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Apartments Low Rise 1.27 1.00 9.44 0.02 2.05 0.53 2,408
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 1.27 1.00 9.44 0.02 2.05 0.53 2,408
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Apartments Low Rise 1.19 1.07 8.06 0.02 2.05 0.53 2,256
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 1.19 1.07 8.06 0.02 2.05 0.53 2,256
Annual ———————
Apartments Low Rise 0.19 0.18 1.36 < 0.005 0.33 0.09 337
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.19 0.18 1.36 < 0.005 0.33 0.09 337
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Apartments Low Rise ——————241
Parking Lot ——————16.7
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
20 / 40
0.00——————Other Asphalt
Surfaces
Total ——————258
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Apartments Low Rise ——————241
Parking Lot ——————16.7
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
Total ——————258
Annual ———————
Apartments Low Rise ——————40.0
Parking Lot ——————2.77
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
Total ——————42.7
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Apartments Low Rise 0.01 0.23 0.10 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 289
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.01 0.23 0.10 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 289
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Apartments Low Rise 0.01 0.23 0.10 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 289
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
21 / 40
Total 0.01 0.23 0.10 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 289
Annual ———————
Apartments Low Rise < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 47.9
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 47.9
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Consumer Products 1.62 ——————
Architectural Coatings 0.13 ——————
Landscape Equipment 0.27 0.03 3.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 8.22
Total 2.03 0.03 3.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 8.22
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Consumer Products 1.62 ——————
Architectural Coatings 0.13 ——————
Total 1.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual ———————
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Consumer Products 0.30 ——————
Architectural Coatings 0.02 ——————
Landscape Equipment 0.03 < 0.005 0.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.93
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
22 / 40
Total 0.35 < 0.005 0.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.93
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Apartments Low Rise ——————35.5
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
Total ——————35.5
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Apartments Low Rise ——————35.5
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
Total ——————35.5
Annual ———————
Apartments Low Rise ——————5.87
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
Total ——————5.87
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
23 / 40
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Apartments Low Rise ——————75.4
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
Total ——————75.4
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Apartments Low Rise ——————75.4
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
Total ——————75.4
Annual ———————
Apartments Low Rise ——————12.5
Parking Lot ——————0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
——————0.00
Total ——————12.5
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Apartments Low Rise ——————0.54
Total ——————0.54
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
24 / 40
Apartments Low Rise ——————0.54
Total ——————0.54
Annual ———————
Apartments Low Rise ——————0.09
Total ——————0.09
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Total ———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Total ———————
Annual ———————
Total ———————
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Total ———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Total ———————
Annual ———————
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
25 / 40
Total ———————
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Total ———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Total ———————
Annual ———————
Total ———————
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Vegetation ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Total ———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Total ———————
Annual ———————
Total ———————
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
26 / 40
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Total ———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Total ———————
Annual ———————
Total ———————
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Avoided ———————
Subtotal ———————
Sequestered ———————
Subtotal ———————
Removed ———————
Subtotal ———————
————————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Avoided ———————
Subtotal ———————
Sequestered ———————
Subtotal ———————
Removed ———————
Subtotal ———————
————————
Annual ———————
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
27 / 40
Avoided ———————
Subtotal ———————
Sequestered ———————
Subtotal ———————
Removed ———————
Subtotal ———————
————————
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description
Site Preparation Site Preparation 4/1/2025 4/14/2025 5.00 10.0 —
Grading Grading 4/15/2025 5/26/2025 5.00 30.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 5/27/2025 4/13/2026 5.00 230 —
Paving Paving 4/14/2026 5/11/2026 5.00 20.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 5/12/2026 6/8/2026 5.00 20.0 —
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 0.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Crawler Tractors Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 87.0 0.43
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
28 / 40
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 0.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Crawler Tractors Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 87.0 0.43
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36
Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 10.0 0.56
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 37.0 0.48
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix
Site Preparation ————
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck ——HHDT
Grading ————
Grading Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
29 / 40
Grading Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck ——HHDT
Building Construction ————
Building Construction Worker 38.9 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 5.77 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck ——HHDT
Paving ————
Paving Worker 20.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck ——HHDT
Architectural Coating ————
Architectural Coating Worker 7.78 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor —10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck ——HHDT
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 153,297 51,099 0.00 0.00 3,032
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
30 / 40
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy)Material Exported (cy)Acres Graded (acres)Material Demolished (sq. ft.)Acres Paved (acres)
Site Preparation ——35.0 0.00 —
Grading 0.00 0.00 50.0 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.16
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day)PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction
Water Exposed Area 3 74%74%
5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres)% Asphalt
Apartments Low Rise —0%
Parking Lot 0.46 100%
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.70 100%
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 349 0.03 < 0.005
2026 0.00 346 0.03 < 0.005
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
31 / 40
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year
Apartments Low
Rise
364 246 208 118,570 2,866 1,934 1,641 933,543
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)
Apartments Low Rise —
Wood Fireplaces 0
Gas Fireplaces 0
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 54
Conventional Wood Stoves 0
Catalytic Wood Stoves 0
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0
Pellet Wood Stoves 0
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
153296.55 51,099 0.00 0.00 3,032
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
32 / 40
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr)CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Apartments Low Rise 253,030 346 0.0330 0.0040 899,454
Parking Lot 17,553 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 346 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year)Outdoor Water (gal/year)
Apartments Low Rise 2,250,783 464,787
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year)Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Apartments Low Rise 40.0 —
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
33 / 40
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg)Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced
Apartments Low Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Apartments Low Rise Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr)Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day)Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
34 / 40
Equipment Type Fuel Type
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year)Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which
assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 21.7 annual days of extreme heat
Extreme Precipitation 5.25 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm
Sea Level Rise —meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
35 / 40
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from
observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if
received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and
consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with
extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data
of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The
four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of
different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score
Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 1 1 3
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
36 / 40
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5
representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction
measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 97.0
AQ-PM 91.2
AQ-DPM 44.6
Drinking Water 66.7
Lead Risk Housing 17.7
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 70.1
Traffic 22.7
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 0.00
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
37 / 40
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 87.1
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 35.5
Cardio-vascular 74.9
Low Birth Weights 90.0
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 67.1
Housing 32.3
Linguistic 42.1
Poverty 46.6
Unemployment 60.6
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 73.87398948
Employed 66.08494803
Median HI 76.97934043
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 33.61991531
High school enrollment 16.64314128
Preschool enrollment 6.954959579
Transportation —
Auto Access 81.29090209
Active commuting 28.82073656
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
38 / 40
Social —
2-parent households 63.10791736
Voting 37.89298088
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.81906839
Park access 24.90696779
Retail density 29.59065828
Supermarket access 48.50506865
Tree canopy 11.20236109
Housing —
Homeownership 87.77107661
Housing habitability 74.22045425
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 66.09778006
Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 33.49159502
Uncrowded housing 67.80443988
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 47.32452201
Arthritis 87.4
Asthma ER Admissions 59.8
High Blood Pressure 83.5
Cancer (excluding skin)80.0
Asthma 58.2
Coronary Heart Disease 90.3
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 88.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 65.9
Life Expectancy at Birth 84.7
Cognitively Disabled 85.7
Physically Disabled 88.8
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
39 / 40
Heart Attack ER Admissions 27.3
Mental Health Not Good 56.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 44.4
Pedestrian Injuries 39.5
Physical Health Not Good 65.0
Stroke 88.3
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 15.4
Current Smoker 63.1
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 61.9
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 45.9
Elderly 96.3
English Speaking 60.3
Foreign-born 41.2
Outdoor Workers 55.6
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 52.6
Traffic Density 33.7
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 49.3
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 49.9
Baseline Residential-Proposed Land Use Detailed Report, 2/5/2025
40 / 40
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a)58.0
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b)51.0
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535)No
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550)No
Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617)No
a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Construction: Construction Phases Removed demolition phase as site is vacant.
Construction: Off-Road Equipment Assumed all construction will be utilized 8 hours per work day. Replaced
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes with Crawler Tractors in the Site Preparation and Grading Phases.
Operations: Vehicle Data Adjusted rates for Weekday Trips, Saturday Trips, and Sunday Trips to match ITE 11th Edition
Trip Rates for Apartment Low Rise (ITE Land Use Code 220).
Land Use Lot acreage adjusted to match site plan.
Construction: Dust From Material Movement Adjusted soil export to match grading numbers provided by client.
Operations: Hearths Fireplaces and Wood Stoves are removed in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 445.
Citrus Walk Residential Fontana
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Impact Summary
ATTACHMENT B: FUEL CALCULATIONS
Model Output: OFFROAD2021 (v1.0.7) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: Sub-Area
Region: Los Angeles (SC)
Calendar Year: 2025 <- Construction Start Year
Scenario: All Adopted Rules - Exhaust
Vehicle Classification: OFFROAD2021 Equipment Types
Units: tons/day for Emissions, gallons/year for Fuel, hours/year for Activity, Horsepower-hours/year for Horsepower-hours
Region Calendar Year VehClass MdlYr HP_Bin Fuel Fuel Consumption Horsepower Hours Fuel Rate
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Rubber Tired Dozers Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 94866.43859 2020252.426 0.046957715
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 2562375.588 47900820.93 0.053493354
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Graders Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 385497.1163 7405589.129 0.052054888
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Excavators Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 2591582.532 50714159.53 0.051101755
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Scrapers Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 987109.8495 20652849.43 0.047795335
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Industrial - Forklifts Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 336921.4553 6301179.813 0.053469583
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Light Commercial - Misc - Generator Sets Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 158306.9269 1966466.7 0.080503233
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Cranes Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 299133.6982 5511560.918 0.054273862
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Light Commercial - Misc - Welders Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 172450.794 5369777.8 0.032115071
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Pavers Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 167866.7287 3250801.703 0.051638563
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Paving Equipment Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 185972.4833 3625699.919 0.05129285
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Rollers Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 451711.4959 8426771.713 0.053604335
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Light Commercial - Misc - Air Compressors Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 33041.63081 1095255.5 0.030167966
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Misc - Concrete/Industrial Saws Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1819.275189 43602.9 0.04172372
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Crawler Tractors Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 816540.4064 16212170.42 0.050365891
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Construction and Mining - Off-Highway Trucks Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1075548.779 22175709.35 0.048501212
San Bernardino (SC)2026 Ligh Commercial - Misc - Pumps Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 87300.000 1150626.000 0.075871743
Source: EMFAC2021 (v1.0.2) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: Sub-Area
San Bernardino (SC)
Season: Annual 2026 Construction start year
Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories
Units: miles/day for CVMT and EVMT, trips/day for Trips, kWh/day for Energy Consumption, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel Consumption
Region Calendar Year Vehicle Category Model Year Speed Fuel VMT Fuel Consumption Fuel Rate
San Bernardino (SC)2026 MHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 665955.6798 73.67630673 9.04
San Bernardino (SC)2026 HHDT Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1831295.475 297.3157582 6.16
San Bernardino (SC)2026 LHDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 431830.7159 20.81459135 20.75
San Bernardino (SC)2026 LHDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 187863.321 10.78518691 17.42
7.723517043
Source: EMFAC2021 (v1.0.2) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: Sub-Area
San Bernardino (SC)
Calendar Year: 2026
Season: Annual
Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories
Units: miles/day for CVMT and EVMT, trips/day for Trips, kWh/day for Energy Consumption, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel Consumption
Region Calendar Year Vehicle Category Model Year Speed Fuel VMT Fuel Consumption
San Bernardino (SC)2026 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 19874166.46 641.5351772 30.98
San Bernardino (SC)2026 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1360017.769 53.36846197 25.48
San Bernardino (SC)2026 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 8343534.623 327.3242951 25.49
San Bernardino (SC)2026 MCY Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 122975.6545 2.907527557 42.30
Average MGP From Vehicle Splits