The URL can be used to link to this page

Categorical Exemption Memo.pdfMay 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank May 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA Submitted to: City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 Prepared by: LSA 157 Park Place Point Richmond, California 94801 510.236.6810 Project No. COC1803 This page intentionally left blank CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) i TABLE OF CONTENTS FIGURES AND TABLES ............................................................................................................................. ii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ............................................................................................ iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................ 3 2.1 PROJECT SITE ........................................................................................................................ 3 2.1.1 Location ................................................................................................................................. 3 2.1.2 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................................. 3 2.1.3 Existing Site Conditions .......................................................................................................... 3 2.2 PROPOSED PROJECT ............................................................................................................. 4 2.2.1 Building Program ................................................................................................................... 4 2.2.2 Open Space and Landscaping ................................................................................................ 4 2.2.3 Utilities and Infrastructure .................................................................................................... 4 2.2.4 Demolition, Grading, and Construction ............................................................................... 11 2.3 PROJECT APPROVALS ......................................................................................................... 11 3.0 EXEMPTIONS ..................................................................................................... 13 3.1 CRITERION SECTION 15332(A): GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY ................... 13 3.1.1 General Plan ........................................................................................................................ 14 3.1.2 Zoning .................................................................................................................................. 14 3.2 CRITERION SECTION 15332(B): PROJECT LOCATION, SIZE, AND CONTEXT ........................ 14 3.3 CRITERION SECTION 15332(C): ENDANGERED, RARE, OR THREATENED SPECIES ............. 15 3.4 CRITERION SECTION 15332(D): TRAFFIC, NOISE, AIR QUALITY OR WATER QUALITY ........ 16 3.4.1 Traffic, Parking, Access and Circulation ............................................................................... 16 3.4.2 Noise .................................................................................................................................... 17 3.4.3 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................ 28 3.4.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................................................................. 34 3.4.5 Water Quality ...................................................................................................................... 37 3.5 CRITERION SECTION 15332(E): UTILITIES AND PUBLIC SERVICES ...................................... 38 3.5.1 Stormwater .......................................................................................................................... 38 3.5.2 Water ................................................................................................................................... 39 3.5.3 Wastewater ......................................................................................................................... 39 3.5.4 Solid Waste .......................................................................................................................... 40 3.5.5 Police Services ..................................................................................................................... 40 3.5.6 Fire Protection Services ....................................................................................................... 40 3.5.7 Schools ................................................................................................................................. 41 4.0 EXCEPTONS TO CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS ...................................................... 43 4.1 CRITERION SECTION 15300.2(A): LOCATION ..................................................................... 43 4.2 CRITERION SECTION 15300.2(B): CUMULATIVE IMPACT ................................................... 43 4.3 CRITERION SECTION 15300.2(C): SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ..................................................... 44 4.4 CRITERION SECTION 15300.2(D): SCENIC HIGHWAY ......................................................... 44 4.5 CRITERION SECTION 15300.2(E): HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES ............................................ 44 4.6 CRITERION SECTION 15300.2(F): HISTORIC RESOURCES .................................................... 44 4.7 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 45 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) ii 5.0 STREAMLINING UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183 ................................ 47 5.1 CEQA GUIDELINES SECITON 15183 ..................................................................................... 47 5.2 APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 15183 TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ....................................... 47 APPENDICES A: TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS B: AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ANALYSIS C: NOISE ANALYSIS FIGURES Figure 2‐1: Project Location and Regional Vicinity Map ......................................................................... 5 Figure 2‐2: Aerial Photograph of the Project Site and Surrounding Land Uses ...................................... 6 Figure 2‐3: Existing Site Conditions ......................................................................................................... 7 Figure 2‐4: Conceptual Site Plan ............................................................................................................. 8 Figure 2‐5: Conceptual Building Elevations ............................................................................................ 9 TABLES Table 2.A: Potential Permits and Approvals ......................................................................................... 12 Table 3.A: Project Trip Generation ....................................................................................................... 16 Table 3.B: Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments ............................................. 19 Table 3.C: City of Cupertino Daytime and Nighttime Maximum Noise Levels ..................................... 20 Table 3.D: City of Cupertino Example Maximum Permissible Noise Levels.......................................... 20 Table 3.E: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels ..................................................................... 22 Table 3.F: Project Construction Emissions in Pounds Per Day .............................................................. 30 Table 3.G: Project Operational Emissions ............................................................................................. 32 Table 3.H: Inhalation Health Risks from Project Construction to Off‐Site Receptors ........................... 33 Table 3.I: Consistency with Climate Action Plan Measures .................................................................. 36 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) iii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AF acre feet APN Assessor’s Parcel Number BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District BMP best management practice CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model Cal Water California Water Service CCR California Code of Regulations CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CH4 methane CO carbon monoxide CO2 carbon dioxide CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent dB Decibels dBA A‐weighted decibels District Cal Water Los Altos Suburban District FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration GHG greenhouse gas gpd gallons per day GWP Global Warming Potential HFC hydrofluorocarbons HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning I‐280 Interstate 280 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers Lmax maximum instantaneous noise level mgd million gallons per day CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) iv MRP Municipal Regional Permit N2O nitrous oxide NO2 nitrogen dioxide NOI Notice of Intent NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Pb lead PFC perfluorocarbons PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric PM particulate matter PM2.5 particulate matter < 2.5 microns in diameter PM10 particulate matter < 10 microns in diameter (but > 2.5 microns) Regional Water Board San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board ROG reactive organic gas SCCFD Santa Clara County Fire Department SCP Stormwater Control Plan SCVURPP Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program SCVWD Santa Clara Valley Water District SF6 sulfur hexafluoride SO2 sulfur dioxide SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan TAC toxic air contaminants µg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter WPCP Water Pollution Control Plant CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION Article 19 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines includes, as required by Public Resources Code Section 21084, a list of classes of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and, as a result, are exempt from review under CEQA. This document has been prepared to serve as the basis for compliance with CEQA as it pertains to the Cupertino Public Storage Project (proposed project). This document demonstrates that the proposed project qualifies for a CEQA Exemption as an Infill Development Project (Class 32), consistent with the provisions of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15332 and 15300.2 and provides information for City of Cupertino decision‐makers regarding a finding that the proposed project is exempt under CEQA. In summary, this document demonstrates that the proposed project qualifies for an exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 as an infill development project because: 1) the proposed project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and all applicable General Plan policies, as well as the applicable Zoning designations and regulations; 2) the proposed project would occur within the City limits on a site of less than 5 acres in size that is substantially surrounded by urban uses; 3) the project site has no value for endangered, rare or threatened species; 4) the proposed project would not result in any significant effects related to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality; and 5) the project site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. In addition, none of the exceptions to categorical exemptions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply; therefore, the proposed project is categorically exempt from CEQA review as a Class 32 In‐Fill Development Project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15300 and 15332. In addition, Public Resources Code Section 21083.3 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 allow streamlined environmental review for projects that are “consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project‐specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site.” As stated above, the proposed project would be consistent with the General Plan designations and zoning for the site described in the Cupertino General Plan and analyzed in the General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2014032007), which was certified on December 4, 2014, and would meet the requirements for streamlining under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 2 This page intentionally left blank CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 3 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The following describes the proposed Cupertino Public Storage Project (proposed project). This section includes a description of the project’s location and existing site characteristics, project components, required approvals, and entitlements. The City of Cupertino (City) is the lead agency for review of the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 2.1 PROJECT SITE The following section describes the location and characteristics of the project site and provides a brief overview of the existing land uses within and in the vicinity of the site. 2.1.1 Location The approximately 3‐acre (130,462‐square‐foot) project site is located at 20565 Valley Green Drive in the City of Cupertino in Santa Clara County (Assessor’s Parcel Number [APN] 326‐10‐044). The site is bounded by Interstate 280 (I‐280) to the north, residential uses to the east, office uses and associated parking lots to the south, and residential uses to the west. Regional vehicular access to the project site is provided by I‐280, an on‐ and off‐ramp for which is located northwest of the project site at North De Anza Boulevard. Figure 2‐1 shows the site’s regional and local context. Figure 2‐2 is an aerial photograph of the project site and surrounding land uses. 2.1.2 Regulatory Setting The City of Cupertino General Plan Land Use Map designates the project site as Industrial/ Residential. The Industrial/Residential designation allows industrial uses and residential uses or a compatible combination of the two. Industrial use refers to manufacturing, assembly, and research and development. Administrative offices that support manufacturing and wholesaling are included.1 The project site is designated as Planned Development with General Commercial, Light Industrial, and Residential intent (P [CG, ML, RES]) on the City of Cupertino Zoning Map. The P zoning district is intended to provide a means of guiding land development or redevelopment of the City that is uniquely suited for planned coordination of land uses and to provide for a greater flexibility of land use intensity and design because of accessibility, ownership patterns, topographical considerations, and community design objectives.2 2.1.3 Existing Site Conditions As shown in Figure 2‐3, the project site is generally level and developed with nine single‐story buildings totaling 54,186 square feet. Eight of the existing buildings are used solely as storage buildings, and one provides both office and storage uses as well as a residential unit for an onsite 1 Cupertino, City of, 2015. Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015‐2040. October 20. 2 Cupertino, City of, 2018. Zoning Map & Ordinance. Website: www.cupertino.org/our‐ city/departments/community‐development/planning/zoning (accessed November 28, 2018). CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 4 building manager. The existing buildings contain a total of 535 storage units. The project site is accessible from a private driveway through the adjacent parcel to the south, access to which is granted by an ingress‐egress easement. A 10‐foot pole line easement for Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) is located along the northern boundary of the project site. There are no designated parking spaces within the project site. The project site includes 27 ornamental trees around the perimeter. 2.2 PROPOSED PROJECT As described in more detail below, the proposed project would result in the demolition of the existing buildings on the project site and construction of two new four‐story self‐storage buildings, totaling 263,671 square feet. The new buildings would contain a total of approximately 2,400 storage units. Figure 2‐4 shows a conceptual site plan for the proposed project. 2.2.1 Building Program The proposed project would include the construction of two new four‐story self‐storage buildings, each with a below‐grade basement. As shown on Figure 2‐4, Building 1 would be approximately 129,856 square feet, and would include an office space in the northeast corner of the building. Building 2 would be approximately 133,815 square feet, and would include a manager’s apartment in the northwest corner of the building. Both buildings would be a maximum of 45 feet in height. Conceptual building elevations are shown in Figure 2‐5. Both of the proposed buildings would include a lobby in the center of the building with elevators and stairwells, as well as additional stairwells on the east and west sides of the buildings. A total of 32 automobile parking spaces and 2 bicycle parking spaces would be provided throughout the project site. 2.2.2 Open Space and Landscaping The proposed project would include a total of 16,545 square feet of landscaping on the project site. The majority of the landscaping would be around the perimeter of the project site and would consist of trees, shrubs, and groundcover. Approximately 54 trees would be planted as a part of the proposed project, for a net total of 64 trees on the site. A total of 2,690 square feet of bio‐retention basins would be provided on site in the southeast and southwest corners of the project site. Additionally, the project applicant would provide the City with an easement over the existing PG&E easement for a future pedestrian trail. 2.2.3 Utilities and Infrastructure The project site is located in an urban area and is currently served by existing utilities, including: water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, electricity, and telecommunications. Existing and proposed utility connections are discussed below. §¨¦280 0 1000 2000 FEET Project Site §¨¦280 Project Location FIGURE ϮͲ1 ƵƉĞƌƟŶŽWƵďůŝĐ^ƚŽƌĂŐĞWƌŽũĞĐƚ WƌŽũĞĐƚ>ŽĐĂƟŽŶĂŶĚZĞŐŝŽŶĂůsŝĐŝŶŝƚǇDĂƉ Y͗ͰKϭϴϬϯƵƉĞƌƚŝŶŽWƵďůŝĐ^ƚŽƌĂŐĞͰWZKhd^ͰŐͰĮŐƵƌĞƐͰ&ŝŐͺϮͲϭͺWƌŽũĞĐƚ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘Ăŝ;ϭϮͬϬϯͬϭϴͿ ^KhZ͗EĂƟŽŶĂů'ĞŽŐƌĂƉŚŝĐ;ĐͿϮϬϭϴ͖^Z/tŽƌůĚ^ƚƌĞĞƚDĂƉ;ĐͿϮϬϭϴ͘ N DeAnza BlvdN DeAnza BlvdBeardon DrBeardon DrN DeAnza BlvdN DeAnza BlvdFranco CtFranco CtHomestead RdHomestead Rd V a l ley Green Dr Valley Green Dr Bandl ey DrGreenleaf DrGreenleaf Dr Greenleaf DrGreenleaf Dr Acadia CtAcadia Ct M a r ia n i D r Dunbar Dr N DeAnza BlvdBeardon DrN DeAnza BlvdFranco CtHomestead Rd V a l ley Green Dr Valley Green Dr Bandl ey DrGreenleaf Dr Greenleaf Dr Acadia Ct M a r ia n i D r Dunbar Dr SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL - OFFICEMULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FEET 5000 250 Project Site FIGURE 2-2 CuperƟno Public Storage Project Aerial Photograph of the Project Site and Surrounding Land Uses Q:\COC1803 CuperƟno Public Storage\PRODUCTS\g\figures\Fig_2-2_Aerial Photograph.ai (1/24/19) SOURCES: GOOGLE EARTH, 8/9/18; LSA 2018. FEET120060SOURCE: BKF, NOVEMBER 2017.Q:\COC1803 CuperƟno Public Storage\PRODUCTS\g\figures\Fig_2-3_ExisƟng Site CondiƟons.ai (1/24/19)CuperƟno Public Storage ProjectExisƟng Site CondiƟonsFIGURE 2-3 I - 2 8 0 F R E E W A YE X I S T I N G P R O P E R T Y102'-0"322'-0"322'-0"LSLOBBY92'-0"34'-0"DRIVE AISLE12'-0"PG&E EASEMENTPG&E EASEMENT111.78'491.83'PROPERTY LINE182.78'126.36'141.16'910.19'PROPERTY LINE115.26'72'-0"LSLSBUILDING WALL IS 8" CMU WALL /W NO OPENINGS156'-5"67'-0"60'-0"10'-0"102'-0"30'-0"DRIVE AISLE16'-0"TYP.69'-0"TYP.18'-0"TYP.11'-0"6T6'-0" H. WROUGHT IRON FENCENEW 6'-0" H. WROUGHTIRON FENCE10'-0"25'-0"BIO BASIN78'-8"REQ'DBLDGSETBACK92'-0"46'-0"12'-0"10'-0"AAMGR'SAPT.25'-0"20'-0"NEW 6'-0" H. WROUGHT IRON FENCEACCESSKEYPADSTOPNEW WROUGHT IRON DOUBLESWING SECURITY GATE TO OPENSIMULTANEOUSLYACCESS DRIVE FROMVALLEY GREENHAMMERHEADTURN-AROUNDCLEAR TO SKY, TYP40'-0"LSFUTUREPEDESTRIANEASEMENTOFFICELOBBYBIO BASINFUTUREPEDESTRIANEASEMENTBUILDINGS 1A,1B,1C4 STORIES + BASEMENT129,856 S.F.BUILDINGS 2A,2B,2C4 STORIES + BASEMENTTOTAL 133,815 S.F.STOP 32'-0"8'9'-0"2'-0"OVERHANG20'-0"CLEAR60'-0"26'-0"AERIAL FIREAPPARATUSROADWAY(E) PG&E POLE5'-0"200’ DISTANCE FROM ACCESS ROADBBCC228.1 F.F225.4 F.FTRASHENCLOSURE76'-0"18'-0"ASPHALTASPHALTSTANDARD 2 SPACE U-RACK PERCUPERTINO BICYCLETRANSPORTATION PLANMONUMENTSIGN227.42 F.F.918'-0"TYP.5'-0"9'-0"TYP118'-0"123'-0"10'-0"18'-0"TYP.6'-0"9'-0"TYP96'-0"5'-0"5'-0"30'-0"CLEAR SPACEFOR AERIALLADDER9'-0"9'-0"(N) PRIVATEFIRE HYDRANT(N) PUBLIC FIREHYDRANT, SIDEWALK TOBE MODIFIED TOACCOMMODATE MIN. 4'PATH OF TRAVEL76'-0"NO PARKINGNO PARKING30'-0"CLEAR SPACEFOR AERIALLADDERR6 0 '-0"R60'-0"R60'-0"R60'-0"(N) PRIVATEFIRE HYDRANT20'-0"200’ DISTANCE FROM ACCESS ROAD.INSIDEOUTSIDEOUTSIDE OUTSIDER23'-0"INSIDER30'-0"INSIDEREQ'D CITYSETBACKR30'-0"R23'-0"INSIDEGATE34'-0"DRIVE AISLEFIRE PUMP HOUSE26'-0"REQ'D BLDGSETBACKBASEDON 45'-0" HT.200’ DISTANCE FROM ACCESS ROAD 200’ DISTANCE FROM ACCESS ROADFIRE WALL PER CBC 706-TYP.FIRE WALL PER CBC 706-TYP.5'-0"9'-0"TYP18'-0"2MGR'SAPT.PARKINGOUTSIDENEW 6'-0" H.MAN GATE &W.I. FENCEACCESSIBLEPATH OFTRAVELACCESSIBLEPATH OFTRAVELBUILDING 2A46,750 S.F.BUILDING 2C46,605 S.F.BUILDING 2B40,460 S.F.ACCESSIBLE PATH OFTRAVEL TO TRASHENCLOSUREBUILDING 1A32,813 S.F.BUILDING 1B41,788 S.F.BUILDING 1C55,255 S.F.ELECFIREELECFIRE228.1 F.F.228.1 F.F.WASTE TRIO AND CIGARETTE URN,FLOOR MOUNTED AND COVERED.CIGARETTE URN: BY GLOBAL INDUSTRIALMODEL WG603028SL, SILVER9'-0"5'5'12'9'7'(N) PRIVATEFIRE HYDRANTFDC6'-0" H. WROUGHT IRON FENCEPER CALGREEN, ELEC. CONDUIT SHALL BEPROVIDED FOR FUTURE INSTALLATIONOF CHARGING STATIONSFEET60030SOURCE: KSP STUDIO, NOVEMBER 2018.Q:\COC1803 CuperƟno Public Storage\PRODUCTS\g\figures\Fig_2-4_Conceptual Site Plan.ai (1/24/19)CuperƟno Public Storage ProjectConceptual Site PlanFIGURE 2-4 NOT TO SCALESOURCE: KSP STUDIO, NOVEMBER 2018.Q:\COC1803 CuperƟno Public Storage\PRODUCTS\g\figures\Fig_2-5_Conceptual Building ElevaƟons.ai (1/24/19)CuperƟno Public Storage ProjectConceptual Building ElevaƟonsFIGURE 2-5 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 10 This page intentionally left blank CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 11 2.2.3.1 Water California Water Service (Cal Water) provides water service to the project site. Water service to the project site would be provided by the existing water line within the private alley to the east via two 6‐inch connections for fire water, and 2‐inch connections for domestic and irrigation water. The existing buildings on the project site use an average of approximately 125 gallons per day (gpd) of water. 2.2.3.2 Wastewater Cupertino Sanitary District provides wastewater service to the project site. Wastewater generated at the project site would be collected by the existing 8‐inch sanitary sewer line located just north of the project site via a new connection to the project site. The existing buildings on the project site generate approximately 112 gpd of wastewater. 2.2.3.3 Stormwater Approximately 124,411 square feet (95 percent) of the 130,462‐square‐foot site is currently covered with impervious surfaces and 6,043 square feet is covered with pervious surfaces. Development of the proposed project would result in a combination of new and replacement impervious surfaces, as well as new and replacement impervious surfaces. Overall, the area of impervious surfaces on the site would be reduced to 113,599 square feet (87 percent of the current impervious surfaces), and pervious surfaces would be increased to 16,855 square feet (13 percent of the current pervious surfaces). Aside from the future pedestrian easement areas, all stormwater would be treated on‐site in the three bio‐retention basins. 2.2.3.4 Electricity Electrical service to the site is provided by PG&E. An existing electrical line runs along the northern boundary of the project site. Electric service to the project site would be provided via a transformer in the northwestern corner of the project site that would connect to the existing electrical lines. 2.2.4 Demolition, Grading, and Construction To prepare the project site for construction, all nine of the existing buildings would be demolished and 17 trees would be removed. The project site would be excavated down to a depth of approxi‐ mately 12 feet below the existing ground surface for the basements of both of the proposed buildings. Additionally, trenching for utility installation would occur. A total of 24,250 cubic yards of soil would be excavated from the project site, 1,250 cubic yards of which would be kept on site and 23,000 cubic yards of which would be off‐hauled. Project construction is estimated to begin in April 2020 and would occur over a 13‐month period. 2.3 PROJECT APPROVALS A number of permits and approvals would be required for the proposed project. While the City is the CEQA Lead Agency for the project, other agencies also have discretionary authority related to the project and approvals. A list of these agencies and potential permits and approvals that may be required is provided in Table 2.A. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/21/19) 12 Table 2.A: Potential Permits and Approvals Lead Agency Potential Permits/Approvals City of Cupertino  CEQA Categorical Exemption and Streamlined Review  Development Permit  Architectural and Site Approval  Tree Removal Permit  Fence Exception  Provision of grading, demolition, construction, and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan permits and approvals Other Agencies Pacific Gas and Electricity  Connection/Reconnection of utilities California Water Service  Water meter connections Cupertino Sanitary District  Sanitary sewer line connections Source: LSA (2019). CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 13 3.0 EXEMPTIONS Article 19 of the CEQA Guidelines includes, as required by Public Resources Code Section 21084, a list of classes of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and, as a result, are exempt from review under CEQA. This document has been prepared to serve as the basis for compliance with CEQA as it pertains to the proposed project, and to demonstrate that the project qualifies for a CEQA Exemption as an Infill Development Project, consistent with the provisions of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15332 and 15300.2. Specifically, the information provided herein shows that: a. The project qualifies for an exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (i.e., Class 32) and, as a result, would not have a significant effect on the environment; b. No exceptions to the infill exemption, as identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2, apply to the proposed project. CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 is applicable to projects characterized as infill development meeting the following conditions: a. The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations. b. The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. c. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. d. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. e. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. The analysis below concludes, based on substantial evidence that the project qualifies for a categorical exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (e.g., Class 32) and, as a result, would not have a significant effect on the environment. In addition, the analysis shows that none of the exceptions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply; therefore, the proposed project is categorically exempt from CEQA review. 3.1 CRITERION SECTION 15332(A): GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY The proposed project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies, as well as with the applicable zoning designations and regulations, as discussed below. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 14 3.1.1 General Plan The project site is designated Industrial/Residential in the City of Cupertino General Plan.3 The General Plan intends for this site to consist of primarily industrial uses and secondarily residential uses, or a compatible combination of the two. Industrial use refers to manufacturing, assembly, and research and development. Administrative offices that support manufacturing and wholesaling are included. The proposed project would result in the demolition of the existing public storage buildings on the project site and construction of two new four‐story self‐storage buildings. The proposed project meets the requirements of the industrial use that is permitted in the applicable zoning designation, as shown below, under the Industrial/Residential land use designation. The proposed project is generally the same as the existing use on the site, which is also a public storage facility, but with the addition of one caretaker residential unit. The proposed project is also within the 45‐foot height limit established in the General Plan for this land use designation. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the site’s General Plan designation. 3.1.2 Zoning The project site is zoned Planned Development with General Commercial, Light Industrial, and Residential Intent (P [CG, ML, RES]) on the City of Cupertino Zoning Map.4 Permitted uses within the P (CG, ML, RES) district include all uses permitted within the CG, ML, and RES zoning districts. Permitted uses within the CG zoning district include retail, commercial offices, and personal services. Permitted uses within the ML district include automotive service stations, manufacturing, warehouses, and wholesale and storage activities. Permitted uses within RES zoning districts include single‐ and multi‐family residences. As stated above, the proposed project would result in the demolition of the existing public storage buildings on the project site and construction of two new four‐story self‐storage buildings. The Zoning Code does not identify self‐storage as a separate use, so it falls under wholesale and storage activities. Wholesale and storage activities are allowed in the ML district; therefore, the proposed project would be permitted within the P (CG, ML, RES) zoning district. In addition, the proposed project is generally the same as the existing use on the site, which is also a public storage facility, but with the addition of one caretaker residential unit. As stated above, the proposed project would be within the maximum height allowed for the project site in the General Plan, which is 45 feet. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the site’s zoning designation. 3.2 CRITERION SECTION 15332(B): PROJECT LOCATION, SIZE, AND CONTEXT The proposed project is located within City limits on a project site of no more than 5 acres and the site is substantially surrounded by urban uses, including apartment homes, office buildings, I‐280, and restaurants. 3 Cupertino, City of, 2015, op. cit. 4 Cupertino, City of, 2018, op. cit. CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 15 The project site is located within the incorporated limits of the City of Cupertino on a 3‐acre site. The project site is currently developed with nine single‐story storage buildings and is surrounded by properties with urban land uses and paved public streets (see Figure 2‐2). Therefore, the proposed project meets the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(b). 3.3 CRITERION SECTION 15332(C): ENDANGERED, RARE, OR THREATENED SPECIES The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species. The project site is developed and consists of two self‐storage buildings, drive aisles, ruderal vegetation, and 17 trees, which would be removed as a part of the proposed project. No existing buildings that could potentially provide habitat for special‐status bats would be removed as a part of the proposed project. Migratory birds, which are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, may use vegetation, including existing trees, on or near the project site for nesting. Implementation of the following standard condition of approval would ensure that potential impacts to nesting birds and raptors during construction would be less than significant: a. Construction and tree removal/pruning activities shall be scheduled to avoid the nesting season to the extent feasible. If feasible, tree removal and/or pruning shall be completed before the start of the nesting season to help preclude nesting. The nesting season for most birds and raptors in the San Francisco Bay area extends from February 1 through August 31. b. If it is not possible to schedule construction activities between September 1 and January 31, then a qualified ornithologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey to identify active bird nests that may be disturbed during project construction. This survey shall be completed no more than seven days prior to the initiation of demolition/construction activities (including tree removal and pruning). During this survey, the ornithologist shall inspect all trees and other possible nesting habitats in and immediately adjacent to the construction areas for nests. c. If the survey does not identify any nesting birds that would be affected by construction activities, no further mitigation is required. If an active nest is found sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed by these activities, the ornithologist (in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife) shall designate a construction‐free buffer zone (typically 300 feet for raptors and 100 feet for non‐raptors) to be established around the nest to ensure that no nests of species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code will be disturbed during construction activities. The buffer shall remain in place until a qualified ornithologist has determined that the nest is no longer active. d. A final report on nesting birds and raptors, including survey methodology, survey date(s), map of identified active nests (if any), and protection measures (if required), shall be submitted to the Planning Manager, through the building permit review process, and be completed to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director prior to the start of grading. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 16 For the reasons stated above, and with compliance with the standard condition of approval protecting nesting birds listed above, the proposed project meets the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(c). 3.4 CRITERION SECTION 15332(D): TRAFFIC, NOISE, AIR QUALITY OR WATER QUALITY Relative to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(d), the following provides a discussion demonstrating that the proposed project would not result in a significant effect on traffic, noise, air quality and water quality, and that the project adheres to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(d) criterion. 3.4.1 Traffic, Parking, Access and Circulation The proposed project would result in the demolition of the existing self‐storage buildings on the project site and the construction of two new self‐storage buildings. Trip generation rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, were used to estimate the daily and peak hour trip generation for the proposed project. Table 3.A below summarizes the trip generation for the proposed project. As presented in Table 3.A, the existing self‐storage use on the site generates approximately 82 daily trips, with 5 occurring in the AM peak hours and 9 occurring in the PM peak hour. The trip generation potential of the proposed project would be higher than for the existing use on the site. The net increase would be 316 daily trips, with 22 additional trips occurring in the AM peak hour and 36 additional trips occurring in the PM peak hour. The new trips generated by the proposed project would result in a net increase of less than 100 trips during the AM and PM peak hours; therefore, as identified in the Trip Generation Analysis prepared for the proposed project,5 which is included as Appendix A, the new level of project‐generated traffic would not be considered significant. Table 3.A: Project Trip Generation Land Use Size Unit ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Trip Rates1 Mini‐Warehouse (Self‐Storage)2 TSF 1.51 0.06 0.04 0.10 0.08 0.09 0.17 Existing Trip Generation Self‐Storage 54.186 TSF 82 3 2 5 4 5 9 Project Trip Generation Self‐Storage 263.671 TSF 398 16 11 27 21 24 45 Net New Trip Generation 316 13 9 22 17 19 36 Source: LSA (2018). 1 Trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). 2 Land Use Code (151) ‐ Mini Warehouse ADT = average daily traffic TSF = thousand square feet 5 LSA Associates, Inc., 2018. Trip Generation Memorandum for the Proposed Public Storage Facility Project at 20565 Valley Green Drive, Cupertino, California. December 17. CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 17 The project site is located in northern Cupertino and would be readily accessible to pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users, although given the nature of the proposed development; site users are primarily expected to access the site via automobile. The proposed project’s driveway and surface‐ level parking would be adequate to serve the project’s vehicular traffic. Regional access to the project site is provided from I‐280. Vehicular access to and from the project site would not change from existing conditions. Public access to the projects site is provided by a local municipal bus line (Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority Lines 53, 54, 55, and 81) with bus stops approximately .50 miles from the project site. These bus lines provide access to and from the Sunnyvale Transit Center, San Jose State University, and West Valley and De Anza Colleges, among other destinations. The proposed project would not make major modifications to the existing pedestrian facilities at the project site. Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially increase the daytime population at the project site resulting in a large number of vehicular trips and, therefore would not result in changes to the City’s transportation and circulation system that could conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. The proposed project would not otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities, or cause a substantial increase in transit demand which cannot be accommodated by existing or proposed transit capacity or alternative travel modes. 3.4.2 Noise The following is based on the Noise Analysis prepared for the proposed project, which is included in Appendix C.6 A project will normally have a significant effect on the environment related to noise if it would substantially increase the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas or conflict with the adopted environmental plans and goals of the community in which it is located. Noise impacts can be described in three categories. The first is audible impacts that increase noise levels noticeable to humans. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3.0 decibels (dB) or greater since this level has been found to be barely perceptible in exterior environments. The second category, potentially audible, is the change in the noise level between 1.0 and 3.0 dB. This range of noise levels has been found to be noticeable only in laboratory environments. The last category is changes in noise levels of less than 1.0 dB, which are inaudible to the human ear. Only audible changes in existing ambient or background noise levels are considered potentially significant. For the purpose of this analysis, the proposed project creates a significant noise impact if the project‐related noise increase at an existing sensitive receptor is greater than 3 dB and the resulting noise level is greater than the standards cited below or if the project‐related increase in noise is greater than 5 A‐weighted decibels (dBA). Certain land uses are considered more sensitive to noise than others. Examples of these land uses include residential areas, educational facilities, hospitals, childcare facilities, and senior housing. The 6 LSA Associates, Inc. 2019. Noise Analysis – Cupertino Public Storage Project. February 5. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 18 closest sensitive receptors to the project site are the multi‐family residences located adjacent to the western border of the project site and the multi‐family residences located approximately 75 feet east of the eastern border of the project site. To assess existing noise levels, LSA conducted noise monitoring to establish the existing ambient noise environment at the project site. Three short‐term (15‐minute) and one long‐term (24‐hour) noise measurements were conducted at the project site from Friday, January 25, 2019, to Tuesday, January 29, 2019. The short‐term noise measurements indicate that ambient noise in the project site vicinity ranges from approximately 56.5 dBA to 62.6 dBA Leq. The long‐term measurement resulted in a daily noise level of 69.2 dBA CNEL. Vehicle traffic on I‐280 was reported as the primary noise source. The Health and Safety Element of the City’s General Plan7 seeks to ensure that the community continues to enjoy a high quality of life through reduced noise pollution, effective project design and noise management operations. The Health and Safety Element identifies the City’s land use compatibility guidelines for determining acceptable noise levels for specified land uses, as shown in Table 3.B. The City of Cupertino further addresses noise in the Municipal Code in Chapter 10.48, Community Noise Control. Section 10.48.040 establishes the acceptable daytime and nighttime maximum noise levels at receiving land uses. As shown in Table 3.C below, the maximum permissible noise level (as measured at receiving sensitive land uses) that may be generated by sources on a nonresidential land use is 55 dBA during nighttime hours and 65 dBA during daytime hours. The maximum permissible noise level that may be generated by sources on a residential land use is 50 dBA during nighttime hours and 60 dBA during daytime hours. Daytime hours are defined to be the period from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, and from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekends. 7 Cupertino, City of, 2015. Cupertino General Plan 2015‐2040. October 20. CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 19 Table 3.B: Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments Land Use Category Community Noise Exposure (Ldn or CNEL, dB) 55 60 65 70 75 80 Residential – Low Density (Single‐Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes) Residential – Multi‐Family Transient Lodging (Motels, Hotels) Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries Office Buildings, Business Commercial and Professional Centers Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture Normally Acceptable Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. Normally Unacceptable New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conditionally Acceptable New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise reduction features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice. Clearly Unacceptable New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. Source: Cupertino, City of (2015). Cupertino General Plan 2015‐2040. Figure HS‐8. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 20 Table 3.C: City of Cupertino Daytime and Nighttime Maximum Noise Levels Land Use at Point of Origin Maximum Noise Level at Complaint Site of Receiving Property Nighttime Daytime Residential 50 dBA 60 dBA Nonresidential 55 dBA 65 dBA Source: City of Cupertino Municipal Code Section 10.48.040 (2018). In addition, during the daytime period only, brief noise incidents exceeding established limits are permitted, providing that the sum of the noise duration in minutes plus the excess noise level does not exceed 20 dBA in a two‐hour period. Table 3.D shows example combinations of allowable noise level exceedances. Table 3.D: City of Cupertino Example Maximum Permissible Noise Levels Noise Increment Above Normal Standard Noise Duration in 2‐Hour Period 5 dBA 15 minutes 10 dBA 10 minutes 15 dBA 5 minutes 19 dBA 1 minute Source: City of Cupertino Municipal Code Section 10.48.050 (2018). According to Section 10.48.051 of the Municipal Code, the use of motorized equipment for landscape maintenance activities is limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays for the proposed project. During these hours, noise from the use of motorized equipment for landscape maintenance activities is allowed to exceed the maximum permissible noise limits of Section 10.48.040 of the Municipal Code, provided that the equipment is outfitted with appropriate mufflers and is operated for “only the minimal period necessary.” According to Section 10.48.053 of the Municipal Code, noise from grading, construction, and demolition activities is also allowed to exceed the maximum permissible noise limits described above (with examples given in Table 3.D), provided that the equipment utilized is outfitted with high‐quality mufflers and abatement devices and is in good condition. In addition, noise‐producing construction activities must meet one of the following criteria:  No individual device produces a noise level of more than 87 dBA Lmax (maximum instantaneous noise level) as measured at a distance of 25 feet; or  The operation of such equipment does not produce noise levels that exceed 80 dBA Lmax as measured at any nearby property. CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 21 Except for emergency work, construction activities including grading, street construction, demolition, or underground utility work are not permitted within 750 feet of a residential area on Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, and during the nighttime period. Construction activities, other than street construction, are prohibited on holidays (which include New Year’s Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day). In addition, construction activities, other than street construction, are prohibited during nighttime periods unless they meet the City’s nighttime maximum permissible noise level standards. 3.4.2.1 Generation of Substantial Increase in Ambient Noise Levels The following section describes how the short‐term construction and long‐term operational noise impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant. Short‐Term Construction Noise Impacts. As described above, noise from grading, construction, and demolition activities may exceed the maximum permissible noise limits (shown in Table 3.D), provided that the equipment utilized is outfitted with high‐quality mufflers and abatement devices and is in good condition. In addition, noise‐producing construction activities must meet one of the following criteria:  No individual device produces a noise level of more than 87 dBA Lmax as measured at a distance of 25 feet; or  The operation of such equipment does not produce noise levels that exceed 80 dBA Lmax as measured at any nearby property. In addition, construction noise is permitted by the City of Cupertino when activities occur between daytime hours on weekdays (daytime hours are defined to be the period from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays). Construction noise is prohibited on Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays when construction activities occur within 750 feet of a residential area. In addition, construction noise is prohibited during nighttime periods unless it meets the nighttime standards shown in Table 3.C. Project construction would result in short‐term noise impacts on the nearby sensitive receptors. Maximum construction noise would be short‐term, generally intermittent depending on the construction phase, and variable depending on receiver distance from the active construction zone. The duration of noise impacts would generally be from one day to several days depending on the phase of construction. The level and types of noise impacts that would occur during construction are described below. Short‐term noise impacts would occur during grading and site preparation activities. Table 3.E lists typical construction equipment noise levels (Lmax) recommended for noise impact assessments, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor, obtained from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model. Construction‐related short‐term noise levels would be higher than existing ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site but would no longer occur once construction of the project is completed. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 22 Table 3.E: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels Equipment Description Acoustical Usage Factor (%) Maximum Noise Level (Lmax) at 50 Feet1 Backhoes 40 80 Compactor (ground) 20 80 Compressor 40 80 Cranes 16 85 Dozers 40 85 Dump Trucks 40 84 Excavators 40 85 Flat Bed Trucks 40 84 Forklift 20 85 Front‐end Loaders 40 80 Graders 40 85 Impact Pile Drivers 20 95 Jackhammers 20 85 Pick‐up Truck 40 55 Pneumatic Tools 50 85 Pumps 50 77 Rock Drills 20 85 Rollers 20 85 Scrapers 40 85 Tractors 40 84 Welder 40 73 Source: Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA 2006). Note: Noise levels reported in this table are rounded to the nearest whole number. 1 Maximum noise levels were developed based on Spec 721.560 from the Central Artery/Tunnel (CA/T) program to be consistent with the City of Boston’s Noise Code for the “Big Dig” project. Lmax = maximum instantaneous sound level Two types of short‐term noise impacts could occur during construction of the proposed project. The first type involves construction crew commutes and the transport of construction equipment and materials to the site, which would incrementally increase noise levels on roads leading to the site. As shown in Table 3.E, there would be a relatively high single‐event noise exposure potential at a maximum level of 84 dBA Lmax with trucks passing at 50 feet. The second type of short‐term noise impact is related to noise generated during grading and construction on the project site. Construction is performed in discrete steps, or phases, each with its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These various sequential phases would change the character of the noise generated on site. Therefore, the noise levels vary as construction progresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction‐related noise ranges to be categorized by work phase. As shown in Table 3.E, typical maximum noise levels range up to 87 dBA Lmax at 50 feet during the noisiest construction phases. The site preparation phase, including excavation and grading of the site, tends to generate the highest noise levels because earthmoving machinery is the noisiest CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 23 construction equipment. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as backfillers, bulldozers, draglines, and front loaders. Earthmoving and compacting equipment includes compactors, scrapers, and graders. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full‐power operation followed by 3 or 4 minutes at lower power settings. As discussed above, the proposed project must implement best management noise reduction practices, including, but not limited to, meeting at least one of the following criteria: no individual device produces a noise level of more than 87 dBA Lmax as measured at a distance of 25 feet; or the operation of such equipment does not produce noise levels that exceed 80 dBA Lmax as measured at any nearby property. As shown in Table 3.E, typical maximum noise levels range up to 87 dBA Lmax at 50 feet during the noisiest construction phases. At a distance of only 25 feet from the operating equipment, noise levels would be approximately 6 dBA higher than those listed in the table. Therefore, typical maximum noise levels generated by almost all of the types of heavy construction equipment listed in the table would exceed 87 dBA Lmax at 25 feet from the operating equipment. Therefore, this analysis focuses on whether noise from multiple pieces of heavy construction equipment operating simultaneously near the project borders would result in noise levels in excess of the City’s standard of 80 dBA Lmax as measured at nearby receiving properties. As noted above, the closest sensitive receptors to the project site are the multi‐family residences located immediately west of the project site and the multi‐family residences located approximately 75 feet east of the eastern border of the project site. Due to proposed building setbacks and the proposed bio‐retention basin, the residences that would be closest to major building construction activities would be the multi‐family residences immediately west of the project site. The property lines of these sensitive receptors are located immediately adjacent to the project site; however the area adjacent to the project site includes a parking lot and carports. The nearest residential buildings are located approximately 125 feet west of the project site. At 125 feet, there would be a decrease of approximately 8 dBA from the increased distance compared to the noise level measured at 50 feet from the active construction area. Therefore, the closest sensitive receptor may be subject to short‐term maximum construction noise reaching 79 dBA Lmax during construction. Therefore, construction noise levels as measured at the nearest façade of noise sensitive land uses would below the City’s threshold of 80 dBA Lmax. In addition, construction equipment would operate at various locations within the 3‐acre project site and would only generate this maximum noise level when operations occur closest to the receptor. As discussed above, construction noise may exceed the maximum permissible noise limits, provided that the equipment utilized is outfitted with high‐quality mufflers and abatement devices and is in good condition. Consistent with the Municipal Code, the following construction best management practices will be implemented: CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 24  Equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards.  Place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the active project site.  Locate equipment staging in areas that would create the greatest possible distance between construction‐related noise sources and noise‐sensitive receptors nearest the active project site during all construction activities. Ensure that all general construction related activities are restricted to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Construction shall be prohibited on Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, and during the nighttime period. Long‐Term Noise Impacts. The proposed project would include the demolition of existing self‐ storage buildings and would construct two new four‐story self‐storage buildings in a developed area of the City. Operational noise can be categorized as mobile source noise and stationary source noise. Mobile source noise would be attributable to the additional trips that would occur with implementation of the proposed project. Stationary source noise includes noise generated by the proposed project, such as storage loading/unloading activities and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment. Traffic Noise Impacts. Motor vehicles with their distinctive noise characteristics are the dominant noise source in the project vicinity. The amount of noise varies according to many factors, such as volume of traffic, vehicle mix (percentage of cars and trucks), average traffic speed, and distance from the observer. Implementation of the proposed project would result in new daily trips on local roadways in the project site vicinity. A characteristic of sound is that a doubling of a noise source is required in order to result in a perceptible (3 dBA or greater) increase in the resulting noise level. Based on the Trip Generation Memorandum8 prepared for the proposed project, the proposed project would generate a maximum of approximately 316 net new average daily trips, with approximately 22 trips occurring in the AM peak hour and approximately 36 trips occurring in the PM peak hour. The adjacent I‐280, which is the predominant source of noise in the vicinity of the project site, carries approximately 146,000 average daily trips.9 Project trips would represent a small increase in noise level, approximately 0.01 dBA CNEL based on the following equation: 8 LSA, 2019. Trip Generation Memorandum for the Proposed Public Storage Facility Project at 20565 Valley Green Drive, Cupertino, California. January 25. 9 Caltrans, 2017. 2017 Traffic Volumes. Website: www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census (accessed January 2019). CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 25 𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 𝑖𝑛 ሺ𝑑𝐵𝐴ሻ ൌ10∗logଵ଴ ൬𝐶𝑢𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 Future Volume ൰ Therefore, project daily trips would not result in a perceptible noise increase along any roadway segment in the project vicinity and this impact would be less than significant. Stationary Source Noise Impacts. As described above, the City of Cupertino has established maximum permissible noise levels that may be generated by a nonresidential land use. These maximum levels are 55 dBA during nighttime hours and 65 dBA during daytime hours, as measured at a receiving sensitive land use. (Daytime hours are defined to be the period from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, and from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekends.) The maximum permissible noise level that may be generated by a residential land use is 50 dBA during nighttime hours and 60 dBA during daytime hours. The proposed public storage uses would contain stationary noise sources such as storage loading/unloading activities and HVAC equipment. These are potential point sources of noise that could affect noise‐sensitive receptors in the project site vicinity. Customer Vehicle Access Activities. The proposed project would contain self‐storage uses, therefore, vehicle noise, including engine sounds, car doors slamming, car alarms, music, and people conversing, could occur as a result of the proposed project. Typical vehicle access activities, such as people conversing or doors slamming, would generate noise levels of approximately 60 dBA to 70 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. Intensity of operation of the proposed project may increase due to the higher number of storage units; however, these operations would be internal to the new buildings and would not contribute to the exterior noise environment at the surrounding receptors. Therefore, noise levels due to customer vehicle activities are anticipated to remain similar to existing conditions. HVAC Equipment. HVAC equipment could be a primary noise source associated with the proposed project as the project would be a climate‐controlled facility. HVAC equipment is often mounted on rooftops, located on the ground, or located within mechanical rooms. The noise sources could take the form of fans, pumps, air compressors, chillers, or cooling towers. HVAC operations would be required to meet all noise standards. Precise details of HVAC equipment, including future location and sizing, are unknown at this time; therefore, for purposes of this analysis, 75 dBA at 3 feet was assumed to represent HVAC‐ related noise.10 The nearest sensitive receptors to proposed buildings include the multi‐family residences located adjacent to the western border of the project site, which would be located approximately 200 feet west of Building 2. Adjusted for distance to the nearest off‐site sensitive receptors, these residences would be exposed to a noise level of 39 dBA Lmax generated by HVAC equipment. This noise level would not exceed the City’s maximum noise level standards of 55 dBA during nighttime hours and 65 dBA during daytime hours, as measured at the nearest receiving sensitive land use. 10 Trane, 2002. Sound Data and Application Guide for the New and Quieter Air‐Cooled Series R Chiller. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 26 3.4.2.2 Generation of Excessive Groundborne Vibration Vibration refers to groundborne noise and perceptible motion. Groundborne vibration is almost exclusively a concern inside buildings and is rarely perceived as a problem outdoors. Vibration energy propagates from a source, through intervening soil and rock layers, to the foundations of nearby buildings. The vibration then propagates from the foundation throughout the remainder of the structure. Building vibration may be perceived by the occupants as the motion of building surfaces, rattling of items on shelves or hanging on walls, or as a low‐frequency rumbling noise. The rumbling noise is caused by the vibrating walls, floors, and ceilings radiating sound waves. Annoyance from vibration often occurs when the vibration exceeds the threshold of perception by 10 dB or less. This is an order of magnitude below the damage threshold for normal buildings. Typical sources of groundborne vibration are construction activities (e.g., pavement breaking and operating heavy‐duty earthmoving equipment), and occasional traffic on rough roads. In general, groundborne vibration from standard construction practices is only a potential issue when within 25 feet of sensitive uses. Groundborne vibration levels from construction activities very rarely reach levels that can damage structures; however, these levels are perceptible near the active construc‐ tion site. With the exception of buildings built prior to the 1950s or buildings of historic significance, potential structural damage from heavy construction activities rarely occurs. When roadways are smooth, vibration from traffic (even heavy trucks) is rarely perceptible. The streets surrounding the project area are paved, smooth, and unlikely to cause significant groundborne vibration. In addition, the rubber tires and suspension systems of buses and other on‐ road vehicles make it unusual for on‐road vehicles to cause groundborne noise or vibration problems. It is therefore assumed that no such vehicular vibration impacts would occur and no vibration impact analysis of on‐road vehicles is necessary. Additionally, once constructed, the proposed project would not contain uses that would generate groundborne vibration. Construction Vibration. Construction of the proposed project could result in the generation of groundborne vibration. This construction vibration impact analysis discusses the level of human annoyance using vibration levels in VdB and assesses the potential for building damages using vibration levels in PPV (in/sec) because vibration levels calculated in RMS are best for characterizing human response to building vibration, while vibration level in PPV is best used to characterize potential for damage. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment guidelines indicate that a vibration level up to 102 VdB (an equivalent to 0.5 in/sec in PPV) is considered safe for buildings consisting of reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster), and would not result in any construction vibration damage. For a non‐engineered timber and masonry building, the construction vibration damage criterion is 94 VdB (0.2 in/sec in PPV). Due to distance attenuation, the multi‐family residences located east of the project site would experience vibration levels of up to 73 VdB (0.017 PPV [in/sec]), the multi‐family residences located west of the project site would experience vibration levels of up to 63 VdB (0.008 PPV [in/sec]), and the commercial buildings to the south would experience vibration levels of up to 66 VdB (0.008 PPV [in/sec]). These vibration levels at the nearest buildings from construction equipment would not exceed the FTA threshold of 94 VdB (0.2 in/sec PPV) for building damage. Although construction vibration levels at the nearest buildings would have the potential to result in annoyance, these CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 27 vibration levels would no longer occur once construction of the project is completed. Therefore, groundborne vibration impacts from construction activities associated with the proposed project would not be considered significant. 3.4.2.3 Aircraft Noise Impacts The proposed project is not located within 2 miles of a public or public use airport. The San Jose International Airport is the closest airport and is located approximately 5.7 miles northeast of the project site. Aircraft noise is occasionally audible at the project site; however, no portion of the project site lies within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contours of any public airport nor does any portion of the project site lie within 2 miles of any private airfield or heliport. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels associated with the proximity of an airport. 3.4.2.4 Land Use Compatibility The proposed project would include a manager’s apartment in the northwest corner of Building 2. The General Plan contains noise level standards for land use compatibility and interior noise exposure of new development. According to the General Plan, noise levels below 60 dBA CNEL are considered satisfactory for residential land uses and do not require special insulation requirements. Exterior noise levels between 55 and 70 dBA CNEL require an analysis of noise reduction require‐ ments and noise insulation as needed. For areas with noise levels between 70 dBA CNEL and 80 dBA CNEL, residential land use development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. In addition, for areas with noise levels over 70 dBA CNEL, residential land use development should not be undertaken. The interior noise level standard for residential land uses is 45 dBA CNEL. In addition, according to the City’s General Plan, noise levels below 75 dBA CNEL are considered satisfactory for industrial land uses and do not require special insulation requirements. Noise levels between 70 and 75 dBA CNEL require an analysis of noise reduction requirements and noise insulation as needed. For areas with noise levels over 75 dBA CNEL, industrial land use development should generally be discouraged. The noise environment at the project site is dominated by vehicle traffic noise from I‐280. Based on the long‐term noise monitoring, noise levels on the project site are approximately 69.2 dBA CNEL. Based on the City’s noise and land use compatibility standards (Figure HS‐8 of the General Plan), this noise level is considered normally acceptable for industrial development and conditionally acceptable for residential land uses. Based on the City’s noise and land use compatibility standards, new residential construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. An interior and exterior noise analysis for the proposed manager’s apartment is provided below. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 28 Interior Noise Analysis. Based on the USEPA’s Protective Noise Levels,11 with a combination of walls, doors, and windows, standard construction for Northern California buildings (STC‐24 to STC‐28) would provide more than 25 dBA in exterior‐to‐interior noise reduction with windows closed and 15 dBA or more with windows open. With windows open, the manager’s apartment would not meet the City’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL (i.e., 69.2 dBA – 15.0 dBA = 54.2 dBA) for residential land uses. Therefore, an alternate form of ventilation, such as an air‐conditioning system, would be required to ensure that windows can remain closed for a prolonged period of time. The proposed project would include an HVAC system, which would allow windows in the manager’s apartment to remain closed and would meet the City’s interior noise level criterion of 45 dBA CNEL (i.e., 69.2 dBA – 25.0 dBA = 44.2 dBA). Therefore, the proposed project would meet the City’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Exterior Noise Analysis. As identified above, noise levels on the project site are approximately 69.2 dBA CNEL. Based on the City’s noise and land use compatibility standards, this noise level is within the City’s normally acceptable noise level of below 75 dBA CNEL for industrial land uses and within the City’s conditionally acceptable noise level of 60 to 70 dBA CNEL for residential land uses. Based on the City’s noise and land use compatibility standards (Figure HS‐8 of the General Plan), new residential construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Therefore, the measured existing on‐site noise level of 69.2 dBA would meet the City’s exterior noise level standards for residential land uses if noise reduction requirements and noise insulation features are included in the design to meet the interior noise standard. As discussed above, the proposed project would include an HVAC system, which would allow windows in the manager’s apartment to remain closed, resulting in a noise level of 44.2 dBA, which and would meet the City’s interior noise level criterion of 45 dBA CNEL. Since interior noise levels would meet City standards, the proposed project would meet the City’s exterior land use compatibility standards for residential land uses. Therefore, the proposed project would meet the City’s exterior land use compatibility standards for both residential and industrial land uses. This impact would be less than significant. 3.4.3 Air Quality The proposed project is located in the City of Cupertino, and is within the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), which regulates air quality in the San Francisco Bay Area. Air quality conditions in the San Francisco Bay Area have improved significantly since the BAAQMD was created in 1955. Ambient concentrations of air pollutants and the number of days during which the region exceeds air quality standards have fallen substantially. In Cupertino, and the rest of the air basin, exceedances of air quality standards occur primarily during meteorological conditions conducive to high pollution levels, such as cold, windless winter nights or hot, sunny summer afternoons. 11 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1978. Protective Noise Levels, Condensed Version of EPA Levels Document. November. CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 29 Within the BAAQMD, ambient air quality standards for ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5), and lead (Pb) have been set by both the State of California and the federal government. The State has also set standards for sulfate and visibility. The BAAQMD is under State non‐attainment status for ozone and particulate matter standards. The BAAQMD is classified as non‐attainment for the federal ozone 8‐hour standard and non‐attainment for the federal PM2.5 24‐hour standard. The following is based on the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared for the proposed project, which is included in Appendix B.12 3.4.3.1 Consistency with Applicable Air Quality Plans The applicable air quality plan is the BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan, which was adopted on April 19, 2017. The 2017 Clean Air Plan/Regional Climate Protection Strategy serves as a roadmap for the BAAQMD to reduce air pollution and protect public health and the global climate. The 2017 Clean Air Plan also includes measures and programs to reduce emissions of fine particulates and toxic air contaminants. In addition, the Regional Climate Protection Strategy is included in the 2017 Clean Air Plan, which identifies potential rules, control measures, and strategies that the BAAQMD can pursue to reduce greenhouse gases throughout the Bay Area. Consistency with the 2017 Clean Air Plan is determined by whether or not the proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable air quality impacts or hinder implementation of control measures (e.g., excessive parking or preclude extension of transit lane or bicycle path). As indicated in the analysis that follows, the proposed project would not result in significant operational and construction‐period emissions. Therefore, the proposed project supports the goals of the Clean Air Plan and would not conflict with any of the control measures identified in the plan as designed to bring the region into attainment. Additionally, the project site is located in close proximity to a mix of existing uses, including residential, commercial, and office uses and would be readily accessible to pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. As stated in Section 3.4.1, above, regional access to the project site is provided via I‐280. In addition, public access to the project site is provided by a local municipal bus line (Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority Lines 53, 54, 55, and 81) with bus stops approximately .50 miles from the project site. These bus lines provide access to and from the Sunnyvale Transit Center, San Jose State University, and West Valley and De Anza Colleges, among other destinations. In addition, the proposed project would provide bicycling parking spaces, which would promote BAAQMD initiatives to reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled and would increase the use of alternate means of transportation. The proposed project would not hinder the region from attaining the goals outlined in the Clean Air Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not hinder or disrupt implementation of any control measures from the Clean Air Plan. 3.4.3.2 Result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of Any Criteria Pollutant Air quality standards for the proposed project are regulated by the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. According to the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, to meet air quality standards for operational‐related criteria air pollutant and air precursor impacts, the project must not: 12 LSA Associates, Inc. 2019. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis – Cupertino Public Storage Project. January 29. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 30  Contribute to CO concentrations exceeding the State ambient air quality standards;  Generate average daily construction emissions of reactive organic gases (ROG), NOx or PM2.5 greater than 54 pounds per day or PM10 exhaust emissions greater than 82 pounds per day; or  Generate average operational emissions of ROG, NOx or PM2.5 of greater than 10 tons per year or 54 pounds per day or PM10 emissions greater than 15 tons per year or 82 pounds per day. The following sections describe the proposed project’s construction‐ and operation‐related air quality impacts and CO impacts. Construction Emissions. During construction, short‐term degradation of air quality may occur due to the release of particulate emissions generated by grading, paving, building, and other activities. Emissions from construction equipment are also anticipated and would include CO, NOx, ROG, directly‐emitted particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), and toxic air contaminants (TACs) such as diesel exhaust particulate matter. Construction emissions were estimated for the project using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2016.3.2, consistent with BAAQMD recommendations. Project construction would commence in April 2020 and would extend for approximately 13 months. Construction of the proposed project would include the demolition of on‐site buildings totaling 54,186 square feet and off‐haul of approximately 23,000 cubic yards of soil, which were included as inputs to CalEEMod. Other construction details are not yet known; therefore, default assumptions (e.g., construction fleet activities) from CalEEMod were used. Construction‐related emissions are presented in Table 3.F. Table 3.F: Project Construction Emissions in Pounds Per Day Project Construction ROG NOx Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Dust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust PM2.5 Average Daily Emissions 8.9 18.7 0.8 1.2 0.7 0.4 BAAQMD Thresholds 54.0 54.0 54.0 BMP 82.0 BMP Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No Source: LSA (2019). BMP = best management practices As shown in Table 3.F, construction emissions associated with the project would not exceed the thresholds for ROG, NOx, PM2.5, and PM10 exhaust emissions. The BAAQMD requires the implementation of the BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation Measures to reduce construction fugitive dust impacts as follows:  All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.  All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off‐site shall be covered. CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 31  All visible mud or dirt tracked‐out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.  All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.  All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible.  Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.  Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.  All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.  A publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and person to contact at the City of Cupertino regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The BAAQMD phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Operational Air Quality Emissions. Long‐term air pollutant emission impacts are those associated with area sources and mobile sources related to the proposed project. In addition to the short‐term construction emissions, the project would also generate long‐term air pollutant emissions, such as those associated with changes in permanent use of the project site. These long‐term emissions are primarily mobile source emissions that would result from vehicle trips associated with the proposed project. Area sources, such as landscape equipment would also result in pollutant emissions. Emission estimates for operation of the project were calculated using CalEEMod. Model results are shown in Table 3.G. Trip generation rates for the project were based on the project’s trip generation estimates, as identified in the Trip Generation Memorandum.13 Based on the Trip Generation Memorandum, the proposed project would generate approximately 316 net new average daily trips, with approximately 22 trips occurring in the AM peak hour and approximately 36 trips occurring in the PM peak hour. The primary emissions associated with the project are regional in nature, meaning that air pollutants are rapidly dispersed on release or, in the case of vehicle emissions associated with the project; emissions are released in other areas of the Air Basin (i.e., vehicles traveling to the project site would release emissions along roadways throughout the Air Basin and not specifically on the project site). The daily emissions associated with project operational trip generation, energy, and area 13 LSA, 2017. Trip Generation Memorandum for the Proposed Public Storage Facility Project at 20565 Valley Green Drive, Cupertino, California. December 11. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 32 sources are identified in Table 3.G for ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5. The results shown in Table 3.G indicate the project would not exceed the significance criteria for daily ROG, NO2, PM10 or PM2.5 emissions; therefore, the proposed project would not have a significant effect on regional air quality and mitigation would not be required. Table 3.G: Project Operational Emissions ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5 Pounds Per Day Area Source Emissions 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Energy Source Emissions 0.2 1.9 0.1 0.1 Mobile Source Emissions 0.6 2.6 2.0 0.5 Total Emissions 7.2 4.5 2.1 0.7 BAAQMD Thresholds 54.0 54.0 82.0 54.0 Exceed Threshold? No No No No Tons Per Year Area Source Emissions 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Energy Source Emissions 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 Mobile Source Emissions 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.1 Total Emissions 1.3 0.8 0.4 0.1 BAAQMD Thresholds 10.0 10.0 15.0 10.0 Exceed Threshold? No No No No Source: LSA (2019). Localized CO Impacts. The BAAQMD has established a screening methodology that provides a conservative indication of whether the implementation of a proposed project would result in significant CO emissions. According to the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, a proposed project would result in a less‐than‐significant impact to localized CO concentrations if the following screening criteria are met:  The project is consistent with an applicable congestion management program established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways, and the regional transportation plan and local congestion management agency plans;  Project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour; and  The project would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or urban street canyon, or below‐grade roadway). The proposed project would not conflict with standards established by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, which administers the applicable congestion management program, for designated roads and highways, a regional transportation plan, or other agency plans. The project site is not located in an area where vertical or horizontal mixing of air (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or urban street canyon, or below‐grade roadway) is substantially limited. As identified in the Trip Generation Memorandum, the proposed project would generate CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 33 approximately 316 net new average daily trips, with approximately 22 trips occurring in the AM peak hour and approximately 36 trips occurring in the PM peak hour. Therefore, the project’s contribution to peak hour traffic volumes at intersections in the vicinity of the project site would be well below 44,000 vehicles per hour. Therefore, the proposed project would meet the screening criteria listed above, and would not result in localized CO concentrations that exceed State or federal standards. 3.4.3.3 Sensitive Receptors Sensitive receptors are defined as residential uses, schools, daycare centers, nursing homes, and medical centers. Individuals particularly vulnerable to diesel particulate matter are children, whose lung tissue is still developing, and the elderly, who may have serious health problems that can be aggravated by exposure to diesel particulate matter. Exposure from diesel exhaust associated with construction activity contributes to both cancer and chronic non‐cancer health risks. According to the BAAQMD, a project would result in a significant impact if it would: individually expose sensitive receptors to TACs resulting in an increased cancer risk greater than 10.0 in one million, increased non‐cancer risk of greater than 1.0 on the hazard index (chronic or acute), or an annual average ambient PM2.5 increase greater than 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3). A significant cumulative impact would occur if the project in combination with other projects located within a 1,000‐foot radius of the project site would expose sensitive receptors to TACs resulting in an increased cancer risk greater than 100.0 in one million, an increased non‐cancer risk of greater than 10.0 on the hazard index (chronic), or an ambient PM2.5 increase greater than 0.8 µg/m3 on an annual average basis. Impacts from substantial pollutant concentrations are discussed below. The Air Quality and Greenhouse Analysis Memorandum prepared for the project evaluated the health risk impacts associated with construction of the proposed project. Error! Reference source not found. identifies the results of the analysis. Table 3.H: Inhalation Health Risks from Project Construction to Off‐Site Receptors Source Carcinogenic Inhalation Health Risk (in a million) Annual PM2.5 Concentration (µg/m3) Chronic Inhalation Hazard Index Maximum Exposed Individual Location 9.94 0.06 0.01 Threshold 10.00 0.30 1.00 Source: LSA (January 2019). As shown in Table 3.H, the risk would be 9.94 in one million, which would not exceed the BAAQMD cancer risk of 10 in one million. The highest chronic hazard index would be 0.01, which would not exceed the threshold of 1.0. The results of the analysis indicate that the maximum PM2.5 concentration would be 0.06 µg/m3, which would not exceed the BAAQMD significance threshold of 0.30 µg/m3. Once the project is constructed, the project would not be a source of substantial emissions. Therefore, construction and operation of the project would not exceed BAAQMD thresholds and would not expose nearby sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 34 3.4.3.4 Odors During project construction, some odors may be created due to diesel exhaust. However, these odors would be temporary and limited to the construction period. The proposed project would not include any activities or operations that would generate objectionable odors and once operational, the project would not be a source of odors. Therefore, the proposed project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. 3.4.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions While greenhouse gases (GHGs) are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources, or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere, over the last 200 years, humans have caused substantial quantities of GHGs to be released into the atmosphere. These extra emissions are increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere and enhancing the natural greenhouse effect, believed to be causing global warming. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human‐induced global climate change are:  Carbon dioxide (CO2);  Methane (CH4);  Nitrous oxide (N2O);  Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs);  Perfluorocarbons (PFCs); and  Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6). While manmade GHGs include naturally‐occurring GHGs such as CO2, methane, and N2O, some gases, like HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 are completely new to the atmosphere. Certain gases, such as water vapor, are short‐lived in the atmosphere. Others remain in the atmos‐ phere for significant periods of time, contributing to climate change in the long term. Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs, above, because it is short‐lived in the atmosphere and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation. These gases vary considerably in terms of Global Warming Potential (GWP), a concept developed to compare the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to another gas. The GWP is based on several factors, including the relative effectiveness of a gas to absorb infrared radiation and length of time that the gas remains in the atmosphere (“atmospheric lifetime”). The GWP of each gas is measured compared to CO2, the most abundant GHG. The definition of GWP for a particular GHG is the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of the GHG to the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of CO2 over a specified time period. GHG emissions are typically measured in terms of pounds or tons of “CO2 equivalents” (CO2e). 3.4.4.1 Generate Greenhouse Gas Emissions This section describes the proposed project’s construction‐ and operational‐related GHG emissions and contribution to global climate change. The BAAQMD has not addressed emission thresholds for CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 35 construction in its CEQA Guidelines; however, the BAAQMD encourages quantification and disclosure. Thus, construction emissions are discussed in this section. Construction Activities. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would produce combustion emissions from various sources. During construction, GHGs would be emitted through the operation of construction equipment and from worker and builder supply vendor vehicles, each of which typically use fossil‐based fuels to operate. The combustion of fossil‐based fuels creates GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N2O. Furthermore, CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Exhaust emissions from on‐site construction activities would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The BAAQMD does not have an adopted threshold of significance for construction‐related GHG emissions. However, lead agencies are encouraged to quantify and disclose GHG emissions that would occur during construction. Using CalEEMod, it is estimated that construction of the proposed project would generate approximately 652.8 metric tons of CO2e. Implementation of the BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation Measures (refer to Section 3.4.3.2) would reduce GHG emissions by reducing the amount of construction vehicle idling and by requiring the use of properly maintained equipment. Therefore, project construction impacts associated with GHG emissions would be reduced to the extent feasible and as required by the BAAQMD. Operational Emissions. Long‐term operation of the proposed project would generate GHG emissions from area and mobile sources as well as indirect emissions from sources associated with energy consumption. Mobile‐source GHG emissions would include project‐generated vehicle trips associated with trips to the proposed project. Area‐source emissions would be associated with activities such as landscaping and maintenance on the project site, and other sources. According to the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, if a project is consistent with an adopted qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy that meets certain specified standards, it may be presumed that the project will not have significant cumulative greenhouse gas emission impacts. This approach is consistent with the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15183.5(b), which states that “[p]ursuant to Sections 15064(h)(3) and 15130(d), a lead agency may determine that a project’s incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable if the project complies with a previously adopted plan or mitigation program [for reduction of greenhouse gases],” and will be used in this analysis. The City’s CAP meets the BAAQMD requirements for a Qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy. Therefore, the proposed project’s GHG emissions would not be considered a significant cumulative impact if the proposed project would be consistent with the City’s CAP. The proposed project’s consistency with the relevant CAP reduction measures is provided in Error! Reference source not found.. In addition, the proposed project is consistent with the GHG inventory contained in the CAP. Both the existing and projected GHG inventory contained in the City’s CAP were derived based on the land use designations and associated densities defined in the City’s General Plan. The City of Cupertino General Plan Land Use Map designates the project site as Industrial/Residential which allows industrial uses and residential uses or a compatible combination of the two. Therefore, because the project is consistent with the City’s General Plan, it is also consistent with the GHG CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 36 inventory contained in the CAP. As shown in Table 3.IError! Reference source not found., the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable CAP reduction measures. Table 3.I: Consistency with Climate Action Plan Measures Policy Compliance Discussion Transportation and Land Use Strategy Measure C‐T‐1: Bicycle & Pedestrian Environment Enhancements. Continue to encourage multi‐modal transportation, including walking and biking, through safety and comfort enhancements in the bicycle and pedestrian environment. Complies. The project site is located in northern Cupertino and would be readily accessible to pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. In addition, the proposed project would provide bicycle parking. Measure C‐T‐3: Transportation Demand Management. Provide informational resources to local businesses subject to SB 1339 transportation demand management program requirements and encourage additional voluntary participation in the program. Complies. The project site is located in northern Cupertino and would be readily accessible to pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. Regional access to the project site is provided via I‐280. In addition, public access to the projects site is provided by a local municipal bus line (Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority Lines 53, 54, 55, and 81) with bus stops approximately .50 miles from the project site. These bus lines provide access to and from the Sunnyvale Transit Center, San Jose State University, and West Valley and De Anza Colleges, among other destinations. Measure C‐T‐6: Transit‐Oriented Development. Continue to encourage development that takes advantage of its location near local transit options (e.g., major bus stops) through higher densities and intensities to increase ridership potential. Complies. Public access to the projects site is provided by a local municipal bus line (Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority Lines 53, 54, 55, and 81) with bus stops approximately .50 miles from the project site. These bus lines provide access to and from the Sunnyvale Transit Center, San Jose State University, and West Valley and De Anza Colleges, among other destinations. Water Strategy Measures Measure C‐W‐1: SB‐X7‐7. Implement water conservation policies contained within Cupertino's Urban Water Management Plan to achieve 20 percent per capita water reductions by 2020. Complies. The proposed project would be required to comply with the Cupertino's Urban Water Management Plan. Solid Waste Strategy Measures Measure C‐SW‐3: Construction & Demolition Waste Diversion Program. Continue to enforce diversion requirements in City's Construction & Demolition Debris Diversion and Green Building Ordinances. Complies. The proposed project would be required to comply with the City's Construction & Demolition Debris Diversion and Green Building Ordinances. CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 37 Table 3.I: Consistency with Climate Action Plan Measures Policy Compliance Discussion Green Infrastructure Strategy Measures Measure C‐G‐1: Urban Forest Program. Support development and maintenance of a healthy, vibrant urban forest through outreach, incentives, and strategic leadership. Complies. The proposed project would include a total of 16,545 square feet of landscaping on the project site. The majority of the landscaping would be around the perimeter of the project site and would consist of trees, shrubs, and groundcover. Approximately 54 trees would be planted as a part of the proposed project, for a net total of 64 trees on the site. A total of 2,690‐square‐feet of bio‐ retention basins would be provided on site in the southeast and southwest corners of the project site. Source: LSA (2019). 3.4.5 Water Quality The City, as a participant in the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPP), which is regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program, is committed to reducing the amount of pollutants entering waterways. Below is a discussion of the project’s compliance with water quality standards. 3.4.5.1 Construction Related Water Quality Impacts The proposed project would include the demolition of existing self‐storage buildings and the construction of two new self‐storage buildings on a 3‐acre site. Runoff water quality is regulated by the NPDES Program. Locally, the NPDES Program is administered by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board). The proposed project would be required to comply with the General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activity (Construction General Permit), because it would result in a disturbance of 1 acre or more, and the Regional Water Board Municipal Regional Permit (MRP), because it would replace more than 10,000 square feet of existing impervious surfaces. In compliance with the Construction General Permit, the project applicant would be required to prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as a standard condition of project approval. Preparation and implementation of the SWPPP, as described in the standard condition of approval below, would ensure that potential adverse impacts to surface water quality throughout the construction period would not be significant. When and where it is required by the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board), the developer must obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) from the State Water Board, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality, and BMP inspection and maintenance. 3.4.5.2 Operation Period Water Quality Impacts CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 38 The proposed project would include the demolition of existing self‐storage buildings and construction of two new self‐storage buildings on a 3‐acre site. The proposed project would result in a decrease in impervious surface area by adding landscaping on the project site. Additionally, the proposed project would include point source control measures, as identified in Section 1.2.3, Utilities and Infrastructure, of the Project Description. As noted above, the proposed project would be required to comply with the MRP. In compliance with the MRP, the project applicant would be required to prepare a Stormwater Control Plan (SCP), which would act as the overall program document designed to provide measures to mitigate potential water quality impacts associated with operation of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would continue to minimize pollutant runoff from the project site, and water quality impacts during operation would not be significant. 3.4.5.3 Groundwater The proposed project would connect to the existing water line within the private alley and would not use groundwater at the site. Although no use of groundwater is proposed for the project, some dewatering may be required during construction. Any dewatering activities would be expected to be temporary in nature. Therefore, the proposed project would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. 3.4.5.4 Stormwater Collection The proposed project would not increase the impervious surface area of the project site and therefore would not result in an increase in runoff that would exceed existing stormwater facilities or cause flooding of receiving waters. Additionally, the proposed project would implement site design and source control measures, such as directing stormwater flows to landscaped areas on site, to reduce stormwater runoff. 3.4.5.5 Flooding The project site is not located within a 100‐year flood zone or special flood hazard area as mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).14 Additionally, the project site is also not located in an area subject to tsunami, seiche, or dam failure inundation.15 3.5 CRITERION SECTION 15332(E): UTILITIES AND PUBLIC SERVICES The project site is located in an urban area already served by all necessary municipal utilities (i.e., stormwater, water, wastewater, solid waste) and public services (i.e., police and fire). The following analysis reviews whether the project can, as required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(e), be “adequately served by all required utilities and public services.” As discussed, the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. 3.5.1 Stormwater 14 Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2009. Flood Rate Insurance Map. Santa Clara County, California and Incorporated Areas. Panel 208 of 830. May 18. 15 Cupertino, City of, 2015, op. cit. CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 39 The City of Cupertino Public Works Department is responsible for the engineering and maintenance of the stormwater drainage system for the project site and the surrounding area. Stormwater runoff from the project site is channeled into storm drains located along the private alley, which discharge into Calabazas Creek, and ultimately into San Francisco Bay. As noted above, the City participates in the SCVURPP, which implements the NPDES program throughout the county. Overall stormwater runoff volume from the project site would decrease because the existing site is comprised almost entirely of impervious surfaces. The proposed project would reduce the site coverage by impervious surfaces to 87 percent of the current conditions, and would provide bio‐ retention areas that would include 16,855 square feet of pervious surfaces for an increase of 8 percent. Additionally, as noted above, the proposed project would include site design and source control measures to reduce stormwater runoff. Therefore, there would be no significant increase in contributions to the municipal stormwater system once the proposed project is in operation. 3.5.2 Water The project site is served by existing water supply and distribution systems operated and managed by Cal Water. Cupertino is within Cal Water’s Los Altos Suburban District (District). The District uses a combination of local groundwater and imported water purchased from the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD). The project site would be served by the existing water line within the private alley via two new 6‐inch connections for water used for fire suppression and 2‐inch connections for domestic and irrigation water. It is estimated that the proposed project would result in a slight increase in water usage due to the increase in storage units on the site and new landscaped areas, to a total of 608 gpd, or 0.68 acre feet (AF) per year, an increase of 483 gpd, or 0.54 AF. Cal Water projects that the District’s demand for water will increase from 14,156 AF per year to 14,673 AF per year by 2040. The District projects that in 2040 the reasonably available volume of water would be approximately 14,934 AF, a surplus of 261 AF.16 Therefore, the proposed project would decrease the total available surplus of water supply by approximately 0.2 percent. Therefore, because the proposed project would result in a marginal increase compared to existing water use, and because Cal Water has sufficient supplies through at least 2040, there is sufficient water to serve the proposed project. 3.5.3 Wastewater Cupertino Sanitary District provides wastewater service to the project site. The Cupertino Sanitary District provides service to over 50,000 people and conveys nearly 5 million gallons of wastewater daily from its customers through 17 pump stations to the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP). The WPCP treats an average of 110 million gallons of wastewater per day (mgd) and has a capacity of up to 167 mgd.17 The project site would be served via a new connection to the existing 8‐inch sanitary sewer line located just north of the project site. It is estimated that the proposed project would result in a slight increase in wastewater generation due to the increase in storage units on the site, to a total of 16 California Water Service, 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Los Altos Suburban District. June. 17 Cupertino Sanitary District. About Us. Website: www.cupertinosanitarydistrict.org/about_us (accessed January 21, 2019). CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 40 547 gpd, an increase of 435 gpd. This increase would not substantially change the Cupertino Sanitary District’s wastewater treatment demand projections or require the expansion of wastewater facilities, as it would reduce the WPCP’s available capacity of 57 mgd by less than 0.01 percent. Additionally, the WPCP is currently undergoing various operational improvements including headworks enhancements and new and expanded treatment basins.18 Therefore, there is sufficient wastewater treatment capacity to serve the project. 3.5.4 Solid Waste Recology South Bay (Recology) provides solid waste collection within the City and transports waste to the Newby Island Sanitary Landfill (Newby Island). As of October 2014, Newby Island had approximately 21 million cubic yards of remaining capacity and a planned closure date of January 2041.19 The proposed project would produce a minimal amount of solid waste, when compared to the existing solid waste generation on the project site, and would not require the expansion or construction of new solid waste facilities. 3.5.5 Police Services The Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office, West Valley Division (Sheriff’s Office), provides law enforcement services to the City of Cupertino. The proposed project would result in an increase in the daytime population at the project site, but would not result in an increase in residential population within the City. The project site is in an area already served by the Sheriff’s Office. It is not anticipated that the proposed project would result in the need for any new physical facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios, response time, or other performance objectives. Therefore, police service is adequate to serve the proposed project. 3.5.6 Fire Protection Services The Santa Clara County Fire Department (SCCFD) provides fire and emergency services to the City of Cupertino, which includes the project site. The SCCFD handles all fire, rescue, emergency medical and special operations, as well as non‐emergency calls for service and assistance. Emergency medical services transportation is provided by Santa Clara County Ambulance, a private ambulance service contracted by the SCCFD. Daily emergency response for the SCCFD consists of 66 employees. The Cupertino Fire Station of the SCCFD is located at 20215 Stevens Creek Boulevard, approximately 1 mile south of the project site. The Cupertino Fire Station is continuously staffed by 8 personnel and includes three fire engines and one fire truck. The project site is in an area already served by the SCCFD, and would not impact the SCCFD’s response time standard of responding within 8 minutes. The proposed project would not require development of new or physically altered facilities. Therefore, fire protection service would be adequate to serve the proposed project. 18 San Jose, City of, 2013. The Plant Master Plan. November. 19 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, 2019. Solid Waste Information System Facility Detail: Newby Island Sanitary Landfill (43‐AN‐0003). Website: www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/ swfacilities/Directory/43‐AN‐0003 (accessed January 21, 2019). CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 41 3.5.7 Schools The proposed project would include the demolition of the existing self‐storage buildings on the project site and the construction of two new self‐storage buildings. One residential unit is also included as part of the proposed project; however, it is not expected that the proposed project would result in a substantial increase the school‐age population in the area. Therefore, the proposed project would not have an impact on school capacity. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 42 This page intentionally left blank CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 43 4.0 EXCEPTONS TO CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS In addition to analyzing the applicability of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (Class 32), this technical report assesses whether any of the exceptions to categorical exemptions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 (Exceptions) apply to the proposed project. The following analysis compares the criteria in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 (Exceptions) to the project, and concludes, based on substantial evidence, that none of the exceptions are applicable to the project, and that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15300 and 15332. 4.1 CRITERION SECTION 15300.2(A): LOCATION a. Location. Classes 3,4,5,6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies. The proposed project does not qualify for an exemption under Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, or 11. The project site is located within an urban developed area and is not located within a sensitive environment. In addition, the proposed project would not result in any impacts on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern. Therefore, the exception under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(a) does not apply to the proposed project. 4.2 CRITERION SECTION 15300.2(B): CUMULATIVE IMPACT b. Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. The effects of the proposed project would generally be beneficial, as the proposed project would provide greater self‐storage space within the City and would replace an existing self‐storage facility with a more modern facility. The proposed project would result in an increased density of self‐ storage activities in an urban neighborhood that is already served by utilities and public services, as well as transportation. Any construction effects would be temporary, confined to the project vicinity, and reduced to the extent feasible by implementing specific General Plan policies and applicable regulatory requirements. No successive project of the same type in the same place are known or expected to occur over time that would result in cumulatively considerable impacts. Additionally, as stated in Section 3.4.4.1, the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable CAP, and would not result in cumulative impacts related to GHGs. Therefore, the exception under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(b) does not apply to the proposed project. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 44 4.3 CRITERION SECTION 15300.2(C): SIGNIFICANT EFFECT c. Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. There are no known unusual circumstances that are applicable to the project and which may result in a significant effect on the environment. The proposed project consists of the demolition of the existing self‐storage buildings on the project site and the construction of two new four‐story self‐ storage buildings. The proposed project would not result in a change in the existing use or introduce a new activity to the area that could result in a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, the exception under CEQA Guidelines Section 15003.2(b) does not apply to the proposed project. 4.4 CRITERION SECTION 15300.2(D): SCENIC HIGHWAY d. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a State Scenic Highway. This criterion does not apply to improvements required as mitigation by an adopted Negative Declaration or certified EIR. The proposed project would not affect a resource within a State Scenic Highway. The nearest scenic highway, State Route 9, is located approximately 5 miles south of the project site.20 Therefore, no scenic resources within view of a State Scenic Highway would be altered as part of the project. 4.5 CRITERION SECTION 15300.2(E): HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES e. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project site is not on any list pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code or any other list compiled for purposes related to identifying the prior release of hazardous materials.21,22 The project site is currently used as a self‐storage site. Therefore, the exception under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(e) does not apply to the project. 4.6 CRITERION SECTION 15300.2(F): HISTORIC RESOURCES f. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. 20 California, State of, 2018. California Scenic Highway Mapping System. Website: www.dot.ca.gov/hq/ LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm (accessed January 2, 2019). 21 California State Water Resources Control Board, 2019. EnviroStor. Website: www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/ public (accessed January 2, 2019). 22 Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2015. GeoTracker. Website: geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov (accessed January 2, 2019). CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 45 No historic resources exist in the vicinity of the project site. There is also no known sensitivity for archaeological or paleontological resources on the site. However, the site may contain previously unknown subsurface archaeological deposits. The proposed project would comply with Land Use and Community Design Element Policy 2‐72 in the General Plan which would require compliance with City, State, and federal historic preservation laws, regulations, and Codes, including laws related to archaeological resources. In particular, the proposed project would be required to comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e), which specifies procedures to be used in the event of a discovery of Native American human remains on non‐federal land. Adherence to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) would ensure that impacts to cultural resources would not occur. 4.7 CONCLUSION On the basis of substantial evidence, as discussed above, the project is eligible for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15332, In‐Fill Development Projects. Because the proposed project meets the criteria for categorically exempt in‐fill development projects in CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 and none of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply, and it would not have a significant effect on the environment, and this analysis finds that a Notice of Exemption may be prepared for the project. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 46 This page intentionally left blank CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 47 5.0 STREAMLINING UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183 5.1 CEQA GUIDELINES SECITON 15183 Section 15183(c) of the CEQA Guidelines specifies that “if an impact is not peculiar to the parcel or to the proposed project, has been addressed as a significant effect in the prior EIR, or can be substantially mitigated by the imposition of uniformly applied development policies or standards,… then an additional EIR need not be prepared for the project solely on the basis of that impact.” Section 15183(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states that “in approving a project meeting the requirements of this section, a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency determines, in an initial study or other analysis: (1) are peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located; (2) were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general plan, or community plan, with which the project is consistent; (3) are potentially significant off‐site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action; or (4) are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR.” Section 15183(d) of the CEQA Guidelines further states that the streamlining provisions of this section “shall apply only to projects that meet the following conditions: (1) the project is consistent with a community plan adopted as part of a general plan, a zoning action which zoned or designated the parcel on which the project would be located to accommodate a particular density of development, or a general plan of a local agency; and (2) an EIR was certified by the lead agency for the zoning action, the community plan, or the general plan.” 5.2 APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 15183 TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT As stated in Sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 above, the proposed project would be consistent with the General Plan designations and zoning for the site described in the General Plan and would meet the requirements for streamlining under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183(d). As stated in Sections 3.0 and 4.0 above, potential impacts as a result of the proposed project would be substantially mitigated by the imposition of uniformly applied standard conditions of approval. As stated previously, the General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2014032007), was certified by the City Council on December 4, 2014. The General Plan EIR was prepared consistent with the requirements for applicability of streamlining under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183(d)(2), described above. There are no environmental effects that are peculiar to the proposed project or project site that were not analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed project is eligible for streamlined environmental review under California Public Resources Code Section 21083.3 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) 48 This page intentionally left blank CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) APPENDIX A TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) This page intentionally left blank CARLSBAD FRESNO IRVINE LOS ANGELES PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SAN LUIS OBISPO 157 Park Place, Pt. Richmond, California 94801 510.236.6810 www.lsa.net MEMORANDUM DATE: January 25, 2019 TO: Erick Serrano, Associate Planner, City of Cupertino FROM : Ken Wilhelm, Principal Matthew Wiswell, Planner/Project Manager SUBJECT: Trip Generation Memorandum for the Proposed Public Storage Facility Project at 20565 Valley Green Drive, Cupertino , California LSA has prepared this analysis of trip generation for the proposed Public Storage (self-storage/mini - warehouse) Facility Project (project) in the City of Cupertino. The project site is located at 20565 Valley Green Drive . The proposed project would demolish the existing 54,186-square-foot (sf) single - story storage facility and construct an approximately 263,671-gross-square -foot storage facility within two four-story buildings with below-grade basements . The proposed site plan is provided as an attachment. The existing Public Storage facility includes nine one -story drive-up buildings totaling 54,186 sf of self-storage use and is bounded by Interstate 280 to the north, office use to the south, and residential uses to the east and west. Access to the site is provided through a driveway at the northeast corner of the site that connects to a shared driveway that ends at Valley Green Drive. The purpose of this analysis is to determine the trip generation of the proposed project and whether the project would require a more -detailed traffic analysis according to the City of Cupertino’s (City) General Plan Circulation Element. According to the General Plan and consistent with the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) guidelines, a traffic impact analysis would be needed for all developments projected to generate more than 100 trips during either AM or PM peak-hours. As such, this memorandum evaluates the trip generation for the proposed project. Trip Generation The trip generation potential of the proposed project was calculated using trip generation rates found in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). Table A presents the trip generation estimate for the proposed project. As Table A shows, the proposed 263,671 sf self-storage project is estimated to generate 398 daily trips, 27 of which would occur in the AM peak hour and 45 of which would occur in the PM peak hour. Table A also presents a comparison of the trip generation potential of the existing buildings using the same ITE methodology. As shown in Table A, the existing 54,186 sf facility is estimated to generate 82 daily trips, 5 of which would occur in the AM peak hour and 9 of which would occur in 1/28/19 «\\PTR11\projects \COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS \CE\Inputs\Trip Generation Memo.docx» the PM peak hour. The trip generation potential of the proposed project is higher than for the existing buildings, and the net increase is 316 daily trips, of which 22 net new trips would occur in the AM peak hour and 36 net new trips would occur in the PM peak hour. Table A: Project Trip Generation Land Use Size Unit ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Trip Rates 1 Mini -Warehouse (Self-Storage)2 TSF 1.51 0.06 0.04 0.10 0.08 0.09 0.17 Existing Trip Generation Self-Storage 54.186 TSF 82 3 2 5 4 5 9 Project Trip Generation Self-Storage 263.671 TSF 398 16 11 27 21 24 45 Net Trip Generation 316 13 9 22 17 19 36 1 Trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). 2 Land Use Code (151) - Mini Warehouse ADT = average daily traffic TSF = thousand square feet Conclusion LSA analyzed trip generation for the proposed project to determine whether it would require a more detailed traffic analysis according to the City’s General Plan Circulation Element. Using ITE trip rates, the proposed project is anticipated to result in a net increase of less than 100 trips in the AM and PM peak hours, which is below the threshold for requiring a detailed TIA. Thus, the proposed project does not meet the criteria for requiring a TIA. If you have any questions, please contact me at (949) 553-0666. Attachment: Proposed Site Plan I - 2 8 0 F R E E W A YE X I S T I N G P R O P E R T Y102'-0"322'-0"322'-0"LSLOBBY92'-0"34'-0"DRIVE AISLE12'-0"PG&E EASEMENTPG&E EASEMENT111.78'491.83'PROPERTY LINE182.78'126.36'141.16'910.19'PROPERTY LINE115.26'72'-0"LSLSBUILDING WALL IS 8" CMU WALL /W NO OPENINGS156'-5"67'-0"60'-0"10'-0"102'-0"30'-0"DRIVE AISLE16'-0"TYP.69'-0"TYP.18'-0"TYP.11'-0"6T6'-0" H. WROUGHT IRON FENCENEW 6'-0" H. WROUGHTIRON FENCE10'-0"25'-0"BIO BASIN78'-8"REQ'DBLDGSETBACK92'-0"46'-0"12'-0"10'-0"AAMGR'SAPT.25'-0"20'-0"NEW 6'-0" H. WROUGHT IRON FENCEACCESSKEYPADSTOPNEW WROUGHT IRON DOUBLESWING SECURITY GATE TO OPENSIMULTANEOUSLYACCESS DRIVE FROMVALLEY GREENHAMMERHEADTURN-AROUNDCLEAR TO SKY, TYP40'-0"LSFUTUREPEDESTRIANEASEMENTOFFICELOBBYBIO BASINFUTUREPEDESTRIANEASEMENTBUILDINGS 1A,1B,1C4 STORIES + BASEMENT129,856 S.F.BUILDINGS 2A,2B,2C4 STORIES + BASEMENTTOTAL 133,815 S.F.STOP 32'-0"8'9'-0"2'-0"OVERHANG20'-0"CLEAR60'-0"26'-0"AERIAL FIREAPPARATUSROADWAY(E) PG&E POLE5'-0"200’ DISTANCE FROM ACCESS ROADBBCC228.1 F.F225.4 F.FTRASHENCLOSURE76'-0"18'-0"ASPHALTASPHALTSTANDARD 2 SPACE U-RACK PERCUPERTINO BICYCLETRANSPORTATION PLANMONUMENTSIGN227.42 F.F.918'-0"TYP.5'-0"9'-0"TYP118'-0"123'-0"10'-0"18'-0"TYP.6'-0"9'-0"TYP96'-0"5'-0"5'-0"30'-0"CLEAR SPACEFOR AERIALLADDER9'-0"9'-0"(N) PRIVATEFIRE HYDRANT(N) PUBLIC FIREHYDRANT, SIDEWALK TOBE MODIFIED TOACCOMMODATE MIN. 4'PATH OF TRAVEL76'-0"NO PARKINGNO PARKING30'-0"CLEAR SPACEFOR AERIALLADDERR6 0 '-0"R60'-0"R60'-0"R60'-0"(N) PRIVATEFIRE HYDRANT20'-0"200’ DISTANCE FROM ACCESS ROAD.INSIDEOUTSIDEOUTSIDE OUTSIDER23'-0"INSIDER30'-0"INSIDEREQ'D CITYSETBACKR30'-0"R23'-0"INSIDEGATE34'-0"DRIVE AISLEFIRE PUMP HOUSE26'-0"REQ'D BLDGSETBACKBASEDON 45'-0" HT.200’ DISTANCE FROM ACCESS ROAD 200’ DISTANCE FROM ACCESS ROADFIRE WALL PER CBC 706-TYP.FIRE WALL PER CBC 706-TYP.5'-0"9'-0"TYP18'-0"2MGR'SAPT.PARKINGOUTSIDENEW 6'-0" H.MAN GATE &W.I. FENCEACCESSIBLEPATH OFTRAVELACCESSIBLEPATH OFTRAVELBUILDING 2A46,750 S.F.BUILDING 2C46,605 S.F.BUILDING 2B40,460 S.F.ACCESSIBLE PATH OFTRAVEL TO TRASHENCLOSUREBUILDING 1A32,813 S.F.BUILDING 1B41,788 S.F.BUILDING 1C55,255 S.F.ELECFIREELECFIRE228.1 F.F.228.1 F.F.WASTE TRIO AND CIGARETTE URN,FLOOR MOUNTED AND COVERED.CIGARETTE URN: BY GLOBAL INDUSTRIALMODEL WG603028SL, SILVER9'-0"5'5'12'9'7'(N) PRIVATEFIRE HYDRANTFDC6'-0" H. WROUGHT IRON FENCEPER CALGREEN, ELEC. CONDUIT SHALL BEPROVIDED FOR FUTURE INSTALLATIONOF CHARGING STATIONSFEET60030SOURCE: KSP STUDIO, NOVEMBER 2018.Q:\COC1803 CuperƟno Public Storage\PRODUCTS\g\figures\Proposed Site Plan.ai (1/24/19)CuperƟno Public Storage ProjectProposed Site Plan This page intentionally left blank CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) APPENDIX B AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ANALYSIS CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) This page intentionally left blank CARLSBAD FRESNO IRVINE LOS ANGELES PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SAN LUIS OBISPO 157 Park Place, Pt. Richmond, California 94801 510.236.6810 www.lsa.net MEMORANDUM DATE: January 29, 2019 TO: Erick Serrano, Associate Planner, City of Cupertino FROM: Amy Fischer, Principal Matthew Wiswell, Planner/Project Manager SUBJECT: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis – Cupertino Public Storage Project INTRODUCTION This Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis Memorandum for the proposed Cupertino Public Storage Project (project) in the City of Cupertino (City) has been prepared using methods and assumptions recommended in the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD) California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.1 This analysis includes an assessment of criteria pollutant emissions, an assessment of carbon monoxide (CO) hot-spot impacts, and an assessment of the project’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The approximately 3-acre (130,462-square-foot) project site is located at 20565 Valley Green Drive in the City of Cupertino in Santa Clara County (Assessor’s Parcel Number [APN] 326-10-044). The site is bounded by Interstate 280 (I-280) to the north, residential uses to the east, office uses and associated parking lots to the south, and residential uses to the west. The project site is developed with nine single-story buildings totaling 54,186 square feet, all of which would be demolished as part of the project. The proposed project would include the construction of two new four-story self-storage buildings, each with a below-grade basement. Building 1 would be approximately 129,856 square feet, and would include an office space in the northeast corner of the building. Building 2 would be approximately 133,815 square feet, and would include a manager’s apartment in the northwest corner of the building. Both of the proposed buildings would include a lobby in the center of the building with elevators and stairwells, as well as additional stairwells on the east and west sides of the buildings. A total of 32 automobile parking spaces and two bicycle parking spaces would be provided throughout the project site. 1 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2017. CEQA Guidelines. May. To prepare the project site for construction, all nine of the existing buildings would be demolished and 17 trees would be removed. The project site would be excavated down to a depth of approximately 12 feet for the basements of both of the proposed buildings. Additionally, trenching for utility installation would occur. A total of 24,250 cubic yards of soil would be excavated from the project site, 1,250 cubic yards of which would be retained on site and 23,000 cubic yards of which would be off-hauled. Project construction would occur over a 13-month period commencing in April 2020. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Air Quality Background Both State and federal governments have established health-based Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) for six criteria air pollutants:2 carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), lead (Pb), and suspended particulate matter (PM). In addition, the State has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride and visibility-reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety. Two criteria pollutants, O3 and NO2, are considered regional pollutants because they (or their precursors) affect air quality on a regional scale. Pollutants such as CO, SO2, and Pb are considered local pollutants that tend to accumulate in the air locally. The primary pollutants of concern in the project area are O3, CO, and PM. Significance thresholds established by an air district are used to manage total regional and local emissions within an air basin based on the air basin’s attainment status for criteria pollutants. These emission thresholds were established for individual development projects that would contribute to regional and local emissions and could adversely affect or delay the Air Basin’s projected attainment target goals for nonattainment criteria pollutants. Because of the conservative nature of the significance thresholds, and the basin-wide context of individual development project emissions, there is no direct correlation between a single project and localized air quality-related health effects. One individual project that generates emissions exceeding a threshold does not necessarily result in adverse health effects for residents in the project vicinity. This condition is especially true when the criteria pollutants exceeding thresholds are those with regional effects, such as ozone precursors like nitrogen oxides (NOx) and reactive organic gases (ROG). Occupants of facilities such as schools, day care centers, parks and playgrounds, hospitals, and nursing and convalescent homes are considered to be more sensitive than the general public to air pollutants because these population groups have increased susceptibility to respiratory disease. Persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise also have increased sensitivity to poor air quality. Residential areas are considered more sensitive to air quality conditions, compared to commercial and industrial areas, because people generally spend longer periods of time at their residences, with 2 Criteria pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the Federal and State governments have established ambient air quality standards, or criteria, for outdoor concentrations in order to protect public health. greater associated exposure to ambient air quality conditions. Recreational uses are also considered sensitive compared to commercial and industrial uses due to greater exposure to ambient air quality conditions associated with exercise. Greenhouse Gas and Global Climate Change Background Global climate change is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans in recent decades. The Earth’s average near-surface atmospheric temperature rose 0.6 ± 0.2° Celsius (°C) or 1.1 ± 0.4° Fahrenheit (°F) in the 20th century. The prevailing scientific opinion on climate change is that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities. The increased amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other GHGs are the primary causes of the human-induced component of warming. GHGs are released by the burning of fossil fuels, land clearing, agriculture, and other activities that lead to an increase in the greenhouse effect.3 GHGs are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources, or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced global climate change are: • Carbon dioxide (CO2) • Methane (CH4) • Nitrous oxide (N2O) • Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) • Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) • Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) Over the last 200 years, humans have caused substantial quantities of GHGs to be released into the atmosphere. These extra emissions are increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere, and enhancing the natural greenhouse effect, which is believed to be causing global warming. While manmade GHGs include naturally-occurring GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N2O, some gases, like HFCs, PFCs, and SF6, are completely new to the atmosphere. Certain gases, such as water vapor, are short-lived in the atmosphere. Others remain in the atmosphere for significant periods of time, contributing to climate change in the long term. Water 3 The temperature on Earth is regulated by a system commonly known as the "greenhouse effect." Just as the glass in a greenhouse lets heat from sunlight in and reduces the heat escaping, greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide in the atmosphere keep the Earth at a relatively even temperature. Without the greenhouse effect, the Earth would be a frozen globe; thus, although an excess of greenhouse gas results in global warming, the naturally occurring greenhouse effect is necessary to keep our planet at a comfortable temperature. vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs above because it is short-lived in the atmosphere and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation. For the purposes of this air quality analysis, the term “GHGs” will refer collectively to the six gases listed above only. These gases vary considerably in terms of Global Warming Potential (GWP), which is a concept developed to compare the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to another gas. The GWP is based on several factors, including the relative effectiveness of a gas to absorb infrared radiation and length of time that the gas remains in the atmosphere (“atmospheric lifetime”). The GWP of each gas is measured relative to CO2, the most abundant GHG. The definition of GWP for a particular GHG is the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of the GHG to the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of CO2 over a specified time period. GHG emissions are typically measured in terms of pounds or tons of “CO2 equivalents” (CO2e). REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Air quality standards and the regulatory framework are discussed below. United States Environmental Protection Agency At the federal level, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has been charged with implementing national air quality programs. USEPA air quality mandates are drawn primarily from the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), which was enacted in 1963. The FCAA was amended in 1970, 1977, and 1990. The FCAA required USEPA to establish primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and required each state to prepare an air quality control plan referred to as a State Implementation Plan (SIP). The FCAA Amendments of 1990 added requirements for states with nonattainment areas to revise their SIPs to incorporate additional control measures to reduce air pollution. The SIP is periodically modified to reflect the latest emissions inventories, planning documents, and rules and regulations of the air basins as reported by their jurisdictional agencies. USEPA has responsibility to review all state SIPs to determine conformity with the mandates of the FCAAA and determine if implementation will achieve air quality goals. If the USEPA determines a SIP to be inadequate, a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) may be prepared for the nonattainment area, which imposes additional control measures. Failure to submit an approvable SIP or to implement the plan within the mandated timeframe may result in sanctions on transportation funding and stationary air pollution sources in the air basin. The USEPA is also required to develop National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, which are defined as those which may reasonably be anticipated to result in increased deaths or serious illness and which are not already regulated. An independent science advisory board reviews the health and exposure analyses conducted by the USEPA on suspected hazardous pollutants prior to regulatory development. California Air Resources Board CARB is the agency responsible for the coordination and oversight of State and local air pollution control programs in California and for implementing the California Clean Air Act (CCAA), adopted in 1988. The CCAA requires that all air districts in the State achieve and maintain the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) by the earliest practical date. The CCAA specifies that districts should focus on reducing the emissions from transportation and air-wide emission sources, and provides districts with the authority to regulate indirect sources. CARB is also primarily responsible for developing and implementing air pollution control plans to achieve and maintain the NAAQS. CARB is primarily responsible for Statewide pollution sources and produces a major part of the SIP. Local air districts provide additional strategies for sources under their jurisdiction. CARB combines this data and submits the completed SIP to USEPA. Other CARB duties include monitoring air quality (in conjunction with air monitoring networks maintained by air pollution control and air quality management districts), establishing CAAQS (which are more stringent than the NAAQS), determining and updating area designations and maps, and setting emissions standards for mobile sources, consumer products, small utility engines, and off- road vehicles. CARB’s Diesel Risk Reduction Plan 4 is intended to substantially reduce diesel particulate matter emissions and associated health risks through introduction of ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel – a step already implemented – and cleaner-burning diesel engines. Because of the robust evidence relating proximity to roadways and a range of non-cancer and cancer health effects, the CARB also created guidance for avoiding air quality conflicts in land use planning in its Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective.5 In its guidance, CARB advises that new sensitive uses (e.g., residences, schools, day care centers, playgrounds, and hospitals) not be located within 500 feet of a freeway or urban roads carrying 100,000 vehicles per day, or within 1,000 feet of a distribution center (warehouse) that accommodates more than 100 trucks or more than 90 refrigerator trucks per day. 4 California Air Resources Board. 2000. Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles. Prepared by the Stationary Source Division and Mobile Source Control Division. Available online at: www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/documents/rrpFinal.pdf (accessed January 2019). October. 5 California Environmental Protection Agency and California Air Resources Board. 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. Available online at: www.arb.ca.gov/ch/ handbook.pdf (accessed January 2019). April. CARB guidance suggests that the use of these guidelines be customized for individual land use decisions, and take into account the context of development projects. The Air Quality and Land Use Handbook specifically states that these recommendations are advisory and acknowledges that land use agencies must balance other considerations, including housing and transportation needs, economic development priorities, and other quality of life issues. Bay Area Air Quality Management District The BAAQMD seeks to attain and maintain air quality conditions in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin through a comprehensive program of planning, regulation, enforcement, technical innovation, and education. The clean air strategy includes the preparation of plans for the attainment of ambient air quality standards, adoption and enforcement of rules and regulations, and issuance of permits for stationary sources. The BAAQMD also inspects stationary sources and responds to citizen complaints, monitors ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, and implements programs and regulations required by law. BAAQMD Regulation 7 places general limitations on odorous substances and specific emission limitations on certain odorous compounds.6 This regulation limits the “discharge of any odorous substance which causes the ambient air at or beyond the property line…to be odorous and to remain odorous after dilution with four parts of odor-free air.” The BAAQMD must receive odor complaints from ten or more complainants within a 90-day period in order for the limitations of this regulation to go into effect. If this criterion has been met, an odor violation can be issued by the BAAQMD if a test panel of people can detect an odor in samples collected periodically from the source. Clean Air Plan The Clean Air Plan 7 guides the region’s air quality planning efforts to attain the CAAQS. The BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan, which was adopted on April 19, 2017, by the BAAQMD Board of Directors, is the current Clean Air Plan which contains district-wide control measures to reduce ozone precursor emissions (i.e., ROG and NOx), particulate matter and GHG emissions. The Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan: • Describes the BAAQMD’s plan towards attaining all State and federal air quality standards and eliminating health risk disparities from exposure to air pollution among Bay Area communities; • Defines a vision for transitioning the region to a post-carbon economy needed to achieve ambitious GHG reduction targets for 2030 and 2050; 6 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 1982. Rules and Regulations, Regulation 7: Odorous Substances. March. 7 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2017. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. Available online at: www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/plans/2017-clean-air-plan/attachment-a_- proposed-final-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en (accessed January 2019). April 19. • Provides a regional climate protection strategy that will put the Bay Area on a pathway to achieve GHG reduction targets; and • Includes a wide range of control measures designed to decrease emissions of air pollutants that are most harmful to Bay Area residents, such as particulate matter, ozone, and toxic air contaminants; to reduce emissions of methane and other “Super-GHGs” that are potent climate pollutants in the near term; and to decrease emissions of carbon dioxide by reducing fossil fuel combustion. BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines were prepared to assist in the evaluation of air quality impacts of projects and plans proposed within the Bay Area. The guidelines provide recommended procedures for evaluating potential air impacts during the environmental review process, consistent with CEQA requirements, and include recommended thresholds of significance, mitigation measures, and background air quality information. They also include recommended assessment methodologies for air toxics, odors, and GHG emissions. In June 2010, the BAAQMD adopted updated draft CEQA Air Quality Guidelines and these were finalized in May 2011. These guidelines superseded agency air quality guidelines previously adopted in 1999 and were intended to advise lead agencies on how to evaluate potential air quality impacts. In May 2017, the BAAQMD published an updated version of the CEQA Guidelines. The 2017 CEQA Guidelines include thresholds to evaluate project impacts in order to protectively evaluate the potential effects of the project on air quality. These protective thresholds are appropriate in the context of the size, scale, and location of the project. City of Cupertino General Plan The Environmental Resources and Sustainability Element of the City’s General Plan 8 seeks to ensure a sustainable future for the City of Cupertino, promote conservation of energy resources, improve building efficiency and energy conservation, and maintain healthy air quality levels. Applicable Environmental Resources and Sustainability Element policies include the following: • Policy ES-1.1: Principles of Sustainability. Incorporate the principles of sustainability into Cupertino’s planning, infrastructure and development process in order to improve the environment, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and meet the needs of the community without compromising the needs of future generations. • Policy ES-2.1: Conservation and Efficient Use of Energy Resources. Encourage the maximum feasible conservation and efficient use of electrical power and natural gas resources for new and existing residences, businesses, industrial and public uses. 8 Cupertino, City of, 2015. Cupertino General Plan 2015-2040. October 20. • Policy ES-3.1: Green Building Design. Set standards for the design and construction of energy and resource conserving/efficient building. • Policy ES-4.1: New Development. Minimize the air quality impacts of new development projects and air quality impacts that affect new development. ○ Strategy ES-4.1.1: Toxic Air Contaminants. Continue to review projects for potential generation of toxic air contaminants at the time of approval and confer with Bay Area Air Quality Management District on controls needed if impacts are uncertain. ○ Strategy ES-4.1.2: Dust Control. Continue to require water application to non-polluting dust control measures during demolition and the duration of the construction period. ○ Strategy ES-4.1.3: Planning. Ensure that land use and transportation plans support air quality goals. Climate Action Plan The City of Cupertino Climate Action Plan (CAP) was adopted in January 2015.9 The CAP was developed to identify sources of GHG emissions within the City; present current and future emissions estimates; identify a GHG reduction target for future years; and present strategic goals, measures, and actions to reduce emissions from the energy, transportation and land use, water, solid waste, and green infrastructure sectors. The emissions reduction strategies developed by the City are consistent with the BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines for a Qualified Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Program. METHODOLOGY Construction Emissions Construction activities can generate a substantial amount of air pollution. Construction activities are considered temporary; however, short term impacts can contribute to exceedances of air quality standards. Construction activities include site preparation, earthmoving, and general construction. The emissions generated from these common construction activities include fugitive dust from soil disturbance, fuel combustion from mobile heavy-duty diesel and gasoline powered equipment, portable auxiliary equipment, and worker commute trips. The California Emission Estimator Model v.2016.3.2 (CalEEMod) computer program was used to calculate emissions from on-site construction equipment and emissions from worker and vehicle trips to the site. Operational Emissions The air quality analysis includes estimating emissions associated with long-term operation of the project. Indirect emissions of criteria pollutants with regional impacts would be emitted by project- generated vehicle trips. In addition, localized air quality impacts (i.e., higher carbon monoxide 9 Cupertino, City of, 2015. City of Cupertino Climate Action Plan. January. concentrations or “hot spots”) near intersections or roadway segments in the project vicinity would also potentially occur due to project generated vehicle trips. Consistent with the BAAQMD guidance for estimating emissions associated with land use development projects, the CalEEMod computer program was used to calculate the long-term operational emissions associated with the project. Greenhouse Gas Emissions GHG emissions associated with the project would occur over the short term from construction activities, consisting primarily of emissions from equipment exhaust. There would also be long-term GHG emissions associated with project-related vehicular trips. The City of Cupertino’s CAP meets the BAAQMD requirements for a Qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy; therefore, the proposed project was evaluated for consistency with the relevant CAP reduction measures. THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The State CEQA Guidelines indicate that a project would normally have a significant adverse air quality impact if project-generated pollutant emissions would: • Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; • Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard; • Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or • Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people. The BAAQMD has further defined these criteria of significance to indicate the project would result in a significant air quality impact if it would: • Violate the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s air quality standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation by: ○ Generating average daily criteria air pollutant emissions of ROG, NOx or PM2.5 exhaust emissions in excess of 54 pounds per day or PM10 exhaust emissions of 82 pounds per day during project construction; ○ For project operations, generating average daily criteria air pollutant emissions of ROG, NOx, or PM2.5 in excess of 54 pounds per day, or maximum annual emissions of 10 tons per year. For emissions of PM10, generating average daily emissions of 82 pounds per day or 15 tons per year; or ○ Contributing to CO concentrations exceeding the State ambient air quality standards of 9 ppm averaged over 8 hours and 20 ppm for 1-hour for project operations. • Expose sensitive receptors (including residential areas) or the general public to toxic air contaminants in excess of the following thresholds: ○ An excess cancer risk level of more than 10 in one million, or non-cancer (i.e., chronic or acute) risk greater than 1.0 hazard index from a single source; ○ An incremental increase of greater than 0.3 µg/m3 annual average PM2.5 from a single source; ○ An excess cancer risk level of more than 100 in one million, or non-cancer risk greater than 100 in one million from all sources; or ○ An incremental increase of greater than 0.8 µg/m3 annual average PM2.5 from all sources. It should be noted that the emission thresholds were established based on the attainment status of the air basin in regard to air quality standards for specific criteria pollutants. Because the concentration standards were set at a level that protects public health with an adequate margin of safety, these emission thresholds are regarded as conservative and would overstate an individual project’s contribution to health risks. The State CEQA Guidelines indicate that a project would normally have a significant adverse green- house gas emission impact if the project would: • Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or • Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reduction the emissions of greenhouse gases. Section 15064.4 of the CEQA Guidelines states that: “A lead agency should make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project.” In performing that analysis, the lead agency has discretion to determine whether to use a model or methodology to quantify greenhouse gas emissions, or to rely on a qualitative analysis or performance-based standards. In making a determination as to the significance of potential impacts, the lead agency then considers the extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting, whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project, and the extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a Statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. According to the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, if a project is consistent with an adopted qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy that meets the standards, it can be presumed that the project will not have significant greenhouse gas emission impacts. This approach is consistent with the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15183.5, and will be used in this analysis. The City of Cupertino’s CAP meets the BAAQMD requirements for a Qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy. Therefore, the proposed project’s GHG emissions would not be considered a significant impact if the proposed project would be consistent with the City’s CAP. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES The proposed project would release emissions over the short term as a result of construction activities, and over the long term from traffic generation and operation of the project. Emissions would include criteria air pollutants and GHG emissions. The sections below describe the proposed project’s consistency with applicable air quality plans, estimated project emissions, and the significance of impacts with respect to BAAQMD thresholds. Air Quality Impacts The following sections describe the proposed project’s construction- and operation-related air quality impacts and CO impacts. Consistency with Applicable Air Quality Plans The applicable air quality plan is the BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan (Clean Air Plan),10 which was adopted on April 19, 2017. The Clean Air Plan is a comprehensive plan to improve Bay Area air quality and protect public health. The Clean Air Plan defines control strategies to reduce emissions and ambient concentrations of air pollutants; safeguard public health by reducing exposure to air pollutants that pose the greatest heath risk, with an emphasis on protecting the communities most heavily affected by air pollution; and reduce GHG emissions to protect the climate. Consistency with the Clean Air Plan can be determined if the project: 1) supports the goals of the Clean Air Plan; 2) includes applicable control measures from the Clean Air Plan; and 3) would not disrupt or hinder implementation of any control measures from the Clean Air Plan. Clean Air Plan Goals. The primary goals of the Bay Area Clean Air Plan are to: attain air quality standards; reduce population exposure and protect public health in the Bay Area; and reduce GHG emissions and protect climate. The BAAQMD has established significance thresholds for project construction and operational impacts at a level at which the cumulative impact of exceeding these thresholds would have an adverse impact on the region’s attainment of air quality standards. The health and hazards thresholds were established to help protect public health. As discussed below, implementation of the proposed project would result in less-than-significant construction- and operation-period emissions. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the Clean Air Plan goals. Clean Air Plan Control Measures. The control strategies of the Clean Air Plan include measures in the following categories: Stationary Source Measures, Transportation Measures, Energy Measures, Building Measures, Agriculture Measures, Natural and Working Lands Measures, Waste Management Measures, Water Measures, and Super-GHG Pollutants Measures. 10 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2017. Clean Air Plan. April 19. Stationary Source Control Measures. The stationary source measures, which are designed to reduce emissions from stationary sources such as metal melting facilities, cement kilns, refineries, and glass furnaces, are incorporated into rules adopted by the BAAQMD and then enforced by the BAAQMD’s Permit and Inspection programs. Since the project would not include any stationary sources, the Stationary Source Measures of the Clean Air Plan are not applicable to the project. Transportation Control Measures. The BAAQMD identifies Transportation Measures as part of the Clean Air Plan to decrease emissions of criteria pollutants, TACs, and GHGs by reducing demand for motor vehicle travel, promoting efficient vehicles and transit service, decarbonizing transportation fuels, and electrifying motor vehicles and equipment. The project site is located in close proximity to a mix of existing uses, including residential, commercial, and office uses and would be readily accessible to pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. Regional access to the project site is provided via I-280. In addition, public access to the projects site is provided by a local municipal bus line (Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority Lines 53, 54, 55, and 81) with bus stops approximately a ½-mile from the project site. These bus lines provide access to and from the Sunnyvale Transit Center, San Jose State University, and West Valley and De Anza Colleges, among other destinations. In addition, the proposed project would provide bicycling parking spaces, which would promote the BAAQMD’s initiatives to reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled and would increase the use of alternate means of transportation. Therefore, the project would not hinder the BAAQMD’s initiatives to reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled. Energy Control Measures. The Clean Air Plan also includes Energy Measures, which are designed to reduce emissions of criteria air pollutants, TACs, and GHGs by decreasing the amount of electricity consumed in the Bay Area, as well as decreasing the carbon intensity of the electricity used by switching to less GHG-intensive fuel sources for electricity generation. Since these measures apply to electrical utility providers and local government agencies (and not individual projects), the energy control measures of the Clean Air Plan are not applicable to the project. Building Control Measures. The BAAQMD has authority to regulate emissions from certain sources in buildings such as boilers and water heaters, but has limited authority to regulate buildings themselves. Therefore, the strategies in the control measures for this sector focus on working with local governments that do have authority over local building codes, to facilitate adoption of best GHG control practices and policies. The proposed project would be required to comply with the latest Cal Green Building Code standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with these measures. Agriculture Control Measures. The Agriculture Control Measures are designed to primarily reduce emissions of methane. Since the Project does not include any agricultural activities, the Agriculture Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan are not applicable to the project. Natural and Working Lands Control Measures. The Natural and Working Lands Control Measures focus on increasing carbon sequestration on rangelands and wetlands, as well as encouraging local governments to adopt ordinances that promote urban-tree plantings. Since the project does not include the disturbance of any rangelands or wetlands, the Natural and Working Lands Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan are not applicable to the project. Waste Management Control Measures. The Waste Management Measures focus on reducing or capturing methane emissions from landfills and composting facilities, diverting organic materials away from landfills, and increasing waste diversion rates through efforts to reduce, reuse, and recycle. The project would comply with local requirements for waste management (e.g., recycling and composting services). Therefore, the project would be consistent with the Waste Management Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan. Water Control Measures. The Water Control Measures focus on reducing emissions of criteria pollutants, TACs, and GHGs by encouraging water conservation, limiting GHG emissions from publicly owned treatment works (POTWs), and promoting the use of biogas recovery systems. Since these measures apply to POTWs and local government agencies (and not individual projects), the Water Control Measures are not applicable to the project. Super GHG Control Measures. The Super-GHG Control Measures are designed to facilitate the adoption of best GHG control practices and policies through the BAAQMD and local government agencies. Since these measures do not apply to individual projects, the Super-GHG Control Measures are not applicable to the project. Clean Air Plan Implementation. As discussed above, implementation of the proposed project would generally implement the applicable measures outlined in the Clean Air Plan, including Transportation Control Measures. Therefore, the project would not disrupt or hinder implementation of a control measure from the Clean Air Plan. Construction Emissions During construction, short-term degradation of air quality may occur due to the release of particulate emissions generated by grading, paving, building, and other activities. Emissions from construction equipment are also anticipated and would include CO, NOx, ROG, directly-emitted particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), and TACs such as diesel exhaust particulate matter. Project construction activities would include demolition, grading, paving, and building activities. Construction-related effects on air quality from the proposed project would be greatest during the site preparation phase due to the disturbance of soils. If not properly controlled, these activities would temporarily generate particulate emissions. Sources of fugitive dust would include disturbed soils at the construction site. Unless properly controlled, vehicles leaving the site would deposit dirt and mud on local streets, which could be an additional source of airborne dust after it dries. PM10 emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the nature and magnitude of construction activity and local weather conditions. PM10 emissions would depend on soil moisture, silt content of soil, wind speed, and the amount of operating equipment. Larger dust particles would settle near the source, while fine particles would be dispersed over greater distances from the construction site. Water or other soil stabilizers can be used to control dust, resulting in emission reductions of 50 percent or more. The BAAQMD has established standard measures for reducing fugitive dust emissions (PM10). With the implementation of these Basic Construction Mitigation Measures, fugitive dust emissions from construction activities would not result in adverse air quality impacts. In addition to dust-related PM10 emissions, heavy trucks and construction equipment powered by gasoline and diesel engines would generate CO, SO2, NOx, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and some soot particulate (PM2.5 and PM10) in exhaust emissions. If construction activities were to increase traffic congestion in the area, CO and other emissions from traffic would increase slightly while those vehicles idle in traffic. These emissions would be temporary in nature and limited to the immediate area surrounding the construction site. Construction emissions were estimated for the project using CalEEMod, consistent with BAAQMD recommendations. Project construction would commence in April 2020 and would extend for approximately 13 months. Construction of the proposed project would include the demolition of on- site buildings totaling 54,186 square feet and would require the off-haul of approximately 23,000 cubic yards of soil, which were included as inputs to CalEEMod. Other construction details are not yet known; therefore, default assumptions (e.g., construction fleet activities) from CalEEMod were used. Construction-related emissions are presented in Table 1. CalEEMod output sheets are included in Attachment A. Table 1: Project Construction Emissions in Pounds Per Day Project Construction ROG NOx Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Dust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust PM2.5 Average Daily Emissions 8.9 18.7 0.8 1.2 0.7 0.4 BAAQMD Thresholds 54.0 54.0 54.0 BMP 82.0 BMP Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No Source: LSA Associates, Inc., January 2019. BMP = best management practices As shown in Table 1, construction emissions associated with the project would not exceed the BAAQMD’s thresholds for ROG, NOx, exhaust PM2.5, and exhaust PM10 emissions. The BAAQMD requires the implementation of the BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Mitigation Measures to reduce construction fugitive dust impacts to a less-than-significant level as follows: • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt tracked-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. • All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. • Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. • A publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and person to contact at the City of Cupertino regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The BAAQMD phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Long-Term Operational Emissions Long-term air pollutant emission impacts are those associated with area sources and mobile sources related to the proposed project. In addition to the short-term construction emissions, the project would also generate long-term air pollutant emissions, such as those associated with changes in permanent use of the project site. These long-term emissions are primarily mobile source emissions that would result from vehicle trips associated with the proposed project. Area sources, such as landscape equipment would also result in pollutant emissions. PM10 emissions result from running exhaust, tire and brake wear, and the entrainment of dust into the atmosphere from vehicles traveling on paved roadways. Entrainment of PM10 occurs when vehicle tires pulverize small rocks and pavement and the vehicle wakes generate airborne dust. The contribution of tire and brake wear is small compared to the other PM emission processes. Gasoline-powered engines have small rates of particulate matter emissions compared with diesel- powered vehicles. Energy source emissions result from activities in buildings for which electricity and natural gas are used. The quantity of emissions is the product of usage intensity (i.e., the amount of electricity or natural gas) and the emission factor of the fuel source. Major sources of energy demand for the proposed project could include building mechanical systems, such as heating and air conditioning, lighting, and plug-in electronics, such as refrigerators or computers. Greater building or appliance efficiency reduces the amount of energy for a given activity and thus lowers the resultant emissions. The emission factor is determined by the fuel source, with cleaner energy sources, like renewable energy, producing fewer emissions than conventional sources. Area source emissions associated with the project would include emissions from the use of landscaping equipment. Emission estimates for operation of the project were calculated using CalEEMod. Model results are shown in Table 2. Trip generation rates for the project were based on the project’s trip generation estimates, as identified in the Trip Generation Memorandum.11 Based on the Trip Generation 11 LSA Associates, Inc., 2019. Trip Generation Memorandum for the Proposed Public Storage Facility Project at 20565 Valley Green Drive, Cupertino, California. January 25. Memorandum, the proposed project would generate approximately 316 net new average daily trips, with approximately 22 trips occurring in the AM peak hour and approximately 36 trips occurring in the PM peak hour. The primary emissions associated with the project are regional in nature, meaning that air pollutants are rapidly dispersed on release or, in the case of vehicle emissions associated with the project; emissions are released in other areas of the Air Basin. The daily emissions associated with project operational trip generation, energy, and area sources are identified in Table 2 for ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5. The results shown in Table 2 indicate the project would not exceed the significance criteria for daily ROG, NO2, PM10 or PM2.5 emissions; therefore, the proposed project would not have a significant effect on regional air quality and mitigation would not be required. Table 2: Project Operational Emissions ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5 Pounds Per Day Area Source Emissions 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Energy Source Emissions 0.2 1.9 0.1 0.1 Mobile Source Emissions 0.6 2.6 2.0 0.5 Total Emissions 7.2 4.5 2.1 0.7 BAAQMD Thresholds 54.0 54.0 82.0 54.0 Exceed Threshold? No No No No Tons Per Year Area Source Emissions 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Energy Source Emissions 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 Mobile Source Emissions 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.1 Total Emissions 1.3 0.8 0.4 0.1 BAAQMD Thresholds 10.0 10.0 15.0 10.0 Exceed Threshold? No No No No Source: LSA Associates, Inc., January 2019. Localized CO Impacts The BAAQMD has established a screening methodology that provides a conservative indication of whether the implementation of a proposed project would result in significant CO emissions. According to the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, a proposed project would result in a less-than- significant impact to localized CO concentrations if the following screening criteria are met: • The project is consistent with an applicable congestion management program established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways, and the regional transportation plan and local congestion management agency plans; • Project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour; and • The project would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or urban street canyon, or below-grade roadway). The proposed project would not conflict with standards established by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority for designated roads and highways, a regional transportation plan, or other agency plans. The project site is not located in an area where vertical or horizontal mixing of air is substantially limited. As identified in the Trip Generation Memorandum, the proposed project would generate approximately 316 net new average daily trips, with approximately 22 trips occurring in the AM peak hour and approximately 36 trips occurring in the PM peak hour. Therefore, the project’s contribution to peak hour traffic volumes at intersections in the vicinity of the project site would be well below 44,000 vehicles per hour. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in localized CO concentrations that exceed State or federal standards. Cumulative Impacts CEQA defines a cumulative impact as two or more individual effects, which when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. Therefore, if annual emissions of construction- or operational-related criteria air pollutants exceed any applicable threshold established by the BAAQMD, the proposed project would result in a cumula- tively significant impact. As discussed above, no exceedance of BAAQMD emission thresholds would occur as a result of construction or operation of the proposed project. The proposed project’s construction and operational emissions of criteria pollutants are estimated to be well below the emissions threshold established for the region. Therefore, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to regional air quality impacts. Sensitive Receptors Sensitive receptors are defined as residential uses, schools, daycare centers, nursing homes, and medical centers. Individuals particularly vulnerable to diesel particulate matter are children, whose lung tissue is still developing, and the elderly, who may have serious health problems that can be aggravated by exposure to diesel particulate matter. Exposure from diesel exhaust associated with construction activity contributes to both cancer and chronic non-cancer health risks. According to the BAAQMD, a project would result in a significant impact if it would: individually expose sensitive receptors to TACs resulting in an increased cancer risk greater than 10.0 in one million, increased non-cancer risk of greater than 1.0 on the hazard index (chronic or acute), or an annual average ambient PM2.5 increase greater than 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3). A significant cumulative impact would occur if the project in combination with other projects located within a 1,000-foot radius of the project site would expose sensitive receptors to TACs resulting in an increased cancer risk greater than 100.0 in one million, an increased non-cancer risk of greater than 10.0 on the hazard index (chronic), or an ambient PM2.5 increase greater than 0.8 µg/m3 on an annual average basis. This section describes the potential impact on sensitive receptors from construction of the proposed project. The project site is located in an urban area in close proximity to existing residential uses that could be exposed to diesel emission exhaust during the construction period. The property lines of residential uses are located immediately adjacent to the project site; however the area adjacent to the project site includes a parking lot and carports. The nearest residential buildings are located approximately 125 feet west of the project site. To estimate the potential cancer risk from project construction equipment exhaust (including diesel particulate matter), a dispersion model was used to translate an emission rate from the source location to a concentration at the receptor location (i.e., a nearby residential land use). Dispersion modeling varies from a simpler, more conservative screening-level analysis to a more complex and refined detailed analysis. This refined assessment was conducted using CARB’s exposure methodology, with the air dispersion modeling performed using the USEPA dispersion model AERMOD. The model provides a detailed estimate of exhaust concentrations based on site and source geometry, source emissions strength, distance from the source to the receptor, and site-specific meteorological data. Table 3 identifies the results of the analysis utilizing the CalEEMod default of Tier 0 construction equipment. Model snap shots of the sources are shown in Attachment B. Table 3: Inhalation Health Risks from Project Construction to Off-Site Receptors Source Carcinogenic Inhalation Health Risk (in a million) Annual PM2.5 Concentration (ug/m3) Chronic Inhalation Hazard Index Maximum Exposed Individual Location 9.94 0.06 0.01 Threshold 10.00 0.30 1.00 Source: LSA Associates, Inc., 2019. As shown in Table 3, the risk would be 9.94 in one million, which would not exceed the BAAQMD cancer risk of 10 in one million. The highest chronic hazard index would be 0.01, which would not exceed the threshold of 1.0. The results of the analysis indicate that the maximum PM2.5 concentration would be 0.06 µg/m3, which would not exceed the BAAQMD significance threshold of 0.30 µg/m3. Once the project is constructed, the project would not be a source of substantial emissions. Therefore, construction and operation of the project would not exceed BAAQMD thresholds and would not expose nearby sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Objectionable Odors During project construction, some odors may be present due to diesel exhaust. However, these odors would be temporary and limited to the construction period. The proposed project would not include any activities or operations that would generate objectionable odors and once operational, the project would not be a source of odors. Therefore, the proposed project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Greenhouse Gas Analysis This section discusses the project’s impacts related to the release of GHG emissions for both construction and operational phases of the project. Construction Emissions Construction activities associated with the proposed project would produce combustion emissions from various sources. During construction, GHGs would be emitted through the operation of construction equipment and from worker and builder supply vendor vehicles, each of which typically use fossil-based fuels to operate. The combustion of fossil-based fuels creates GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N2O. Furthermore, CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Exhaust emissions from on-site construction activities would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The BAAQMD does not have an adopted threshold of significance for construction-related GHG emissions. However, lead agencies are encouraged to quantify and disclose GHG emissions that would occur during construction. Using CalEEMod, it is estimated that construction of the proposed project would generate approximately 652.8 metric tons of CO2e. Implementation of the BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Mitigation Measures would reduce GHG emissions by reducing the amount of construction vehicle idling and by requiring the use of properly maintained equipment. Operational Emissions Long-term operation of the proposed project would generate GHG emissions from area and mobile sources as well as indirect emissions from sources associated with energy consumption. Mobile- source GHG emissions would include project-generated vehicle trips associated with trips to the proposed project. Area-source emissions would be associated with activities such as landscaping and maintenance on the project site, and other sources. As discussed above, the City of Cupertino CAP was developed to identify sources of GHG emissions within the City; present current and future emissions estimates; identify a GHG reduction target for future years; and present strategic goals, measures, and actions to reduce emissions from the energy, transportation and land use, water, solid waste, and green infrastructure sectors. The emissions reduction strategies developed by the City are consistent with the BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines for a Qualified Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Program. Therefore, the proposed project’s GHG emissions would not be considered a significant impact if the proposed project would be consistent with the City’s CAP. The proposed project’s consistency with the relevant CAP reduction measures is provided in Table 4. In addition, the proposed project is generally consistent with the GHG inventory contained in the CAP. Both the existing and projected GHG inventory contained in the City’s CAP were derived based on the land use designations and associated densities defined in the City’s General Plan and Housing Element. The City of Cupertino General Plan Land Use Map designates the project site as Industrial/Residential which allows industrial uses and residential uses or a compatible combination of the two. Therefore, since the project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and proposed development is within the development capacity assumed in the Housing Element, it is also consistent with the GHG inventory contained in the CAP. As shown in Table 4, the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable CAP reduction measures and the proposed project’s GHG emissions would not be considered a significant impact. Table 4: Consistency with Climate Action Plan Measures Policy Compliance Discussion Transportation and Land Use Strategy Measure C-T-1: Bicycle & Pedestrian Environment Enhancements. Continue to encourage multi- modal transportation, including walking and biking, through safety and comfort enhancements in the bicycle and pedestrian environment. Complies. The project site is located in northern Cupertino and would be readily accessible to pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. In addition, the proposed project would provide bicycle parking. Measure C-T-3: Transportation Demand Management. Provide informational resources to local businesses subject to SB 1339 transportation demand management program requirements and encourage additional voluntary participation in the program. Complies. The project site is located in northern Cupertino and would be readily accessible to pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. Regional access to the project site is provided via I-280. In addition, public access to the projects site is provided by a local municipal bus line (Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority Lines 53, 54, 55, and 81) with bus stops approximately a ½-mile from the project site. These bus lines provide access to and from the Sunnyvale Transit Center, San Jose State University, and West Valley and De Anza Colleges, among other destinations. Measure C-T-6: Transit-Oriented Development. Continue to encourage development that takes advantage of its location near local transit options (e.g., major bus stops) through higher densities and intensities to increase ridership potential. Complies. Public access to the projects site is provided by a local municipal bus line (Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority Lines 53, 54, 55, and 81) with bus stops approximately a ½-mile from the project site. These bus lines provide access to and from the Sunnyvale Transit Center, San Jose State University, and West Valley and De Anza Colleges, among other destinations. Water Strategy Measures Measure C-W-1: SB-X7-7. Implement water conservation policies contained within Cupertino's Urban Water Management Plan to achieve 20 percent per capita water reductions by 2020. Complies. The proposed project would be required to comply with the City of Cupertino's Urban Water Management Plan. Solid Waste Strategy Measures Measure C-SW-3: Construction & Demolition Waste Diversion Program. Continue to enforce diversion requirements in City's Construction & Demolition Debris Diversion and Green Building Ordinances. Complies. The proposed project would be required to comply with the City's Construction & Demolition Debris Diversion and Green Building Ordinances. Green Infrastructure Strategy Measures Measure C-G-1: Urban Forest Program. Support development and maintenance of a healthy, vibrant urban forest through outreach, incentives, and strategic leadership. Complies. The proposed project would include a total of 16,545 square feet of landscaping on the project site. The majority of the landscaping would be around the perimeter of the project site and would consist of trees, shrubs, and groundcover. Approximately 54 trees would be planted as a part of the proposed project, for a net total of 64 trees on the site. A total of 2,690-square-feet of bio- retention basins would be provided on site in the southeast and southwest corners of the project site. Source: LSA Associates, Inc., 2019. CONCLUSION Based on the analysis presented above, with implementation of the BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Mitigation Measures, construction of the proposed project would not result in the generation of criteria air pollutants that would exceed BAAQMD thresholds of significance. In addition, operational emissions associated with the proposed project would not exceed BAAQMD established significance thresholds for ROG, NOx, PM10, or PM2.5 emissions. The proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to regional air quality impacts. In addition, the proposed project is not expected to produce significant emissions that would affect nearby sensitive receptors. The proposed project would also not result in objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. The proposed project would be consistent with the applicable reduction measures included in the City’s CAP, and therefore, the proposed project’s GHG emissions would not be considered a significant impact. Attachment A: CalEEMod Output Sheets Attachment B: HRA Model Snapshots ATTACHMENT A CALEEMOD OUTPUT SHEETS Project Characteristics - CO2 intensity based on a 5-year average (2016-2020), PG&E, 2015 Land Use - Building 1 would be approximately 129,856 square feet and Building 2 would be approximately 133,815 square feet. total of 32 automobile parking spaces would be provided throughout the 3-acre project site. Construction Phase - Approximately 13-month construction period Demolition - Nine on-site existing buildings totaling 54,186 square feet would be demolished Grading - Approximately 23,000 cubic yards of soil off-haul Vehicle Trips - Trip generation based on Trip Generation Memorandum for the Proposed Public Storage Facility Project at 20565 Valley Green Drive, Cupertino, California Mobile Land Use Mitigation - 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Light Industry 263.67 1000sqft 2.70 263,671.00 0 Parking Lot 32.00 Space 0.30 12,800.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 64 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company 2021Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 328.8 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Cupertino Public Storage Project Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 1 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 23,000.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 263,670.00 263,671.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 6.05 2.70 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.29 0.30 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 641.35 328.8 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.32 1.20 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 0.68 1.20 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.97 1.20 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 2 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 2.1 Overall Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2020 0.2813 2.9655 2.1278 5.7500e- 003 0.2028 0.1199 0.3227 0.0641 0.1125 0.1766 0.0000 522.4902 522.4902 0.0732 0.0000 524.3196 2021 1.4512 0.6777 0.6348 1.4400e- 003 0.0350 0.0302 0.0652 9.5000e- 003 0.0284 0.0379 0.0000 128.0011 128.0011 0.0201 0.0000 128.5040 Maximum 1.4512 2.9655 2.1278 5.7500e- 003 0.2028 0.1199 0.3227 0.0641 0.1125 0.1766 0.0000 522.4902 522.4902 0.0732 0.0000 524.3196 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2020 0.2813 2.9654 2.1278 5.7500e- 003 0.2028 0.1199 0.3227 0.0641 0.1125 0.1766 0.0000 522.4899 522.4899 0.0732 0.0000 524.3193 2021 1.4512 0.6777 0.6348 1.4400e- 003 0.0350 0.0302 0.0652 9.5000e- 003 0.0284 0.0379 0.0000 128.0010 128.0010 0.0201 0.0000 128.5039 Maximum 1.4512 2.9654 2.1278 5.7500e- 003 0.2028 0.1199 0.3227 0.0641 0.1125 0.1766 0.0000 522.4899 522.4899 0.0732 0.0000 524.3193 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 3 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 1.1686 3.0000e- 005 2.7300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.2800e- 003 5.2800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.6300e- 003 Energy 0.0375 0.3410 0.2864 2.0500e- 003 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0000 696.6656 696.6656 0.0358 0.0127 701.3590 Mobile 0.0923 0.4666 1.1338 4.0200e- 003 0.3432 3.7200e- 003 0.3470 0.0921 3.4800e- 003 0.0956 0.0000 369.0571 369.0571 0.0134 0.0000 369.3912 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 66.3679 0.0000 66.3679 3.9222 0.0000 164.4237 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 19.3441 49.2059 68.5501 1.9912 0.0478 132.5770 Total 1.2984 0.8076 1.4230 6.0700e- 003 0.3432 0.0296 0.3729 0.0921 0.0294 0.1215 85.7120 1,114.933 8 1,200.645 9 5.9626 0.0606 1,367.756 5 Unmitigated Operational Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 4-6-2020 7-5-2020 1.4488 1.4488 2 7-6-2020 10-5-2020 0.8957 0.8957 3 10-6-2020 1-5-2021 0.8957 0.8957 4 1-6-2021 4-5-2021 1.0955 1.0955 5 4-6-2021 7-5-2021 0.9906 0.9906 Highest 1.4488 1.4488 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 4 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Area 1.1686 3.0000e- 005 2.7300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.2800e- 003 5.2800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.6300e- 003 Energy 0.0375 0.3410 0.2864 2.0500e- 003 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0000 696.6656 696.6656 0.0358 0.0127 701.3590 Mobile 0.0923 0.4666 1.1338 4.0200e- 003 0.3432 3.7200e- 003 0.3470 0.0921 3.4800e- 003 0.0956 0.0000 369.0571 369.0571 0.0134 0.0000 369.3912 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 66.3679 0.0000 66.3679 3.9222 0.0000 164.4237 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 19.3441 49.2059 68.5501 1.9912 0.0478 132.5770 Total 1.2984 0.8076 1.4230 6.0700e- 003 0.3432 0.0296 0.3729 0.0921 0.0294 0.1215 85.7120 1,114.933 8 1,200.645 9 5.9626 0.0606 1,367.756 5 Mitigated Operational 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 5 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 4/6/2020 5/1/2020 5 20 2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 5/2/2020 5/6/2020 5 3 3 Grading Grading 5/7/2020 5/14/2020 5 6 4 Building Construction Building Construction 5/15/2020 3/18/2021 5 220 5 Paving Paving 3/19/2021 4/1/2021 5 10 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 4/2/2021 4/15/2021 5 10 OffRoad Equipment Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 395,507; Non-Residential Outdoor: 131,836; Striped Parking Area: 768 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 3 Acres of Paving: 0.3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 6 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38 Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.00 9 0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 6.00 132 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 6.00 80 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 7 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.2 Demolition - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0267 0.0000 0.0267 4.0400e- 003 0.0000 4.0400e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0331 0.3320 0.2175 3.9000e- 004 0.0166 0.0166 0.0154 0.0154 0.0000 33.9986 33.9986 9.6000e- 003 0.0000 34.2386 Total 0.0331 0.3320 0.2175 3.9000e- 004 0.0267 0.0166 0.0433 4.0400e- 003 0.0154 0.0195 0.0000 33.9986 33.9986 9.6000e- 003 0.0000 34.2386 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 246.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 2,875.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 116.00 45.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 23.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 8 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.2 Demolition - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 1.0300e- 003 0.0360 7.2300e- 003 1.0000e- 004 2.0800e- 003 1.2000e- 004 2.1900e- 003 5.7000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 6.8000e- 004 0.0000 9.4264 9.4264 4.9000e- 004 0.0000 9.4385 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.0000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.1900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.1900e- 003 3.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.2000e- 004 0.0000 1.0384 1.0384 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0391 Total 1.5300e- 003 0.0363 0.0109 1.1000e- 004 3.2700e- 003 1.3000e- 004 3.3800e- 003 8.9000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 003 0.0000 10.4648 10.4648 5.2000e- 004 0.0000 10.4776 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0267 0.0000 0.0267 4.0400e- 003 0.0000 4.0400e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0331 0.3320 0.2175 3.9000e- 004 0.0166 0.0166 0.0154 0.0154 0.0000 33.9986 33.9986 9.6000e- 003 0.0000 34.2385 Total 0.0331 0.3320 0.2175 3.9000e- 004 0.0267 0.0166 0.0433 4.0400e- 003 0.0154 0.0195 0.0000 33.9986 33.9986 9.6000e- 003 0.0000 34.2385 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 9 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.2 Demolition - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 1.0300e- 003 0.0360 7.2300e- 003 1.0000e- 004 2.0800e- 003 1.2000e- 004 2.1900e- 003 5.7000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 6.8000e- 004 0.0000 9.4264 9.4264 4.9000e- 004 0.0000 9.4385 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.0000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.1900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.1900e- 003 3.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.2000e- 004 0.0000 1.0384 1.0384 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0391 Total 1.5300e- 003 0.0363 0.0109 1.1000e- 004 3.2700e- 003 1.3000e- 004 3.3800e- 003 8.9000e- 004 1.2000e- 004 1.0000e- 003 0.0000 10.4648 10.4648 5.2000e- 004 0.0000 10.4776 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Site Preparation - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0271 0.0000 0.0271 0.0149 0.0000 0.0149 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 6.1100e- 003 0.0636 0.0323 6.0000e- 005 3.3000e- 003 3.3000e- 003 3.0300e- 003 3.0300e- 003 0.0000 5.0146 5.0146 1.6200e- 003 0.0000 5.0552 Total 6.1100e- 003 0.0636 0.0323 6.0000e- 005 0.0271 3.3000e- 003 0.0304 0.0149 3.0300e- 003 0.0179 0.0000 5.0146 5.0146 1.6200e- 003 0.0000 5.0552 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 10 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.3 Site Preparation - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 9.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1869 0.1869 0.0000 0.0000 0.1870 Total 9.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1869 0.1869 0.0000 0.0000 0.1870 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0271 0.0000 0.0271 0.0149 0.0000 0.0149 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 6.1100e- 003 0.0636 0.0323 6.0000e- 005 3.3000e- 003 3.3000e- 003 3.0300e- 003 3.0300e- 003 0.0000 5.0146 5.0146 1.6200e- 003 0.0000 5.0551 Total 6.1100e- 003 0.0636 0.0323 6.0000e- 005 0.0271 3.3000e- 003 0.0304 0.0149 3.0300e- 003 0.0179 0.0000 5.0146 5.0146 1.6200e- 003 0.0000 5.0551 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 11 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.3 Site Preparation - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 9.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1869 0.1869 0.0000 0.0000 0.1870 Total 9.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1869 0.1869 0.0000 0.0000 0.1870 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0210 0.0000 0.0210 0.0103 0.0000 0.0103 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 7.2900e- 003 0.0792 0.0482 9.0000e- 005 3.8200e- 003 3.8200e- 003 3.5100e- 003 3.5100e- 003 0.0000 7.8176 7.8176 2.5300e- 003 0.0000 7.8808 Total 7.2900e- 003 0.0792 0.0482 9.0000e- 005 0.0210 3.8200e- 003 0.0248 0.0103 3.5100e- 003 0.0138 0.0000 7.8176 7.8176 2.5300e- 003 0.0000 7.8808 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 12 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.4 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0120 0.4203 0.0845 1.1400e- 003 0.0243 1.3600e- 003 0.0256 6.6800e- 003 1.3000e- 003 7.9700e- 003 0.0000 110.1661 110.1661 5.6700e- 003 0.0000 110.3079 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.5000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1100e- 003 0.0000 3.6000e- 004 0.0000 3.6000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 0.3115 0.3115 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.3117 Total 0.0122 0.4204 0.0856 1.1400e- 003 0.0246 1.3600e- 003 0.0260 6.7700e- 003 1.3000e- 003 8.0700e- 003 0.0000 110.4777 110.4777 5.6800e- 003 0.0000 110.6196 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0210 0.0000 0.0210 0.0103 0.0000 0.0103 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 7.2900e- 003 0.0792 0.0482 9.0000e- 005 3.8200e- 003 3.8200e- 003 3.5100e- 003 3.5100e- 003 0.0000 7.8176 7.8176 2.5300e- 003 0.0000 7.8808 Total 7.2900e- 003 0.0792 0.0482 9.0000e- 005 0.0210 3.8200e- 003 0.0248 0.0103 3.5100e- 003 0.0138 0.0000 7.8176 7.8176 2.5300e- 003 0.0000 7.8808 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 13 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.4 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0120 0.4203 0.0845 1.1400e- 003 0.0243 1.3600e- 003 0.0256 6.6800e- 003 1.3000e- 003 7.9700e- 003 0.0000 110.1661 110.1661 5.6700e- 003 0.0000 110.3079 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.5000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1100e- 003 0.0000 3.6000e- 004 0.0000 3.6000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 004 0.0000 0.3115 0.3115 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.3117 Total 0.0122 0.4204 0.0856 1.1400e- 003 0.0246 1.3600e- 003 0.0260 6.7700e- 003 1.3000e- 003 8.0700e- 003 0.0000 110.4777 110.4777 5.6800e- 003 0.0000 110.6196 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.1749 1.5829 1.3900 2.2200e- 003 0.0922 0.0922 0.0867 0.0867 0.0000 191.0782 191.0782 0.0466 0.0000 192.2436 Total 0.1749 1.5829 1.3900 2.2200e- 003 0.0922 0.0922 0.0867 0.0867 0.0000 191.0782 191.0782 0.0466 0.0000 192.2436 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 14 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0144 0.4283 0.1077 1.0100e- 003 0.0243 2.0900e- 003 0.0264 7.0400e- 003 2.0000e- 003 9.0400e- 003 0.0000 97.2005 97.2005 5.0100e- 003 0.0000 97.3258 Worker 0.0317 0.0227 0.2351 7.3000e- 004 0.0756 5.1000e- 004 0.0761 0.0201 4.7000e- 004 0.0206 0.0000 66.2513 66.2513 1.6000e- 003 0.0000 66.2914 Total 0.0461 0.4510 0.3427 1.7400e- 003 0.1000 2.6000e- 003 0.1026 0.0272 2.4700e- 003 0.0296 0.0000 163.4517 163.4517 6.6100e- 003 0.0000 163.6171 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.1749 1.5829 1.3900 2.2200e- 003 0.0922 0.0922 0.0867 0.0867 0.0000 191.0780 191.0780 0.0466 0.0000 192.2434 Total 0.1749 1.5829 1.3900 2.2200e- 003 0.0922 0.0922 0.0867 0.0867 0.0000 191.0780 191.0780 0.0466 0.0000 192.2434 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 15 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0144 0.4283 0.1077 1.0100e- 003 0.0243 2.0900e- 003 0.0264 7.0400e- 003 2.0000e- 003 9.0400e- 003 0.0000 97.2005 97.2005 5.0100e- 003 0.0000 97.3258 Worker 0.0317 0.0227 0.2351 7.3000e- 004 0.0756 5.1000e- 004 0.0761 0.0201 4.7000e- 004 0.0206 0.0000 66.2513 66.2513 1.6000e- 003 0.0000 66.2914 Total 0.0461 0.4510 0.3427 1.7400e- 003 0.1000 2.6000e- 003 0.1026 0.0272 2.4700e- 003 0.0296 0.0000 163.4517 163.4517 6.6100e- 003 0.0000 163.6171 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.0523 0.4794 0.4558 7.4000e- 004 0.0264 0.0264 0.0248 0.0248 0.0000 63.7003 63.7003 0.0154 0.0000 64.0845 Total 0.0523 0.4794 0.4558 7.4000e- 004 0.0264 0.0264 0.0248 0.0248 0.0000 63.7003 63.7003 0.0154 0.0000 64.0845 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 16 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.5 Building Construction - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.9300e- 003 0.1293 0.0323 3.3000e- 004 8.1100e- 003 2.8000e- 004 8.4000e- 003 2.3500e- 003 2.7000e- 004 2.6200e- 003 0.0000 32.0938 32.0938 1.5800e- 003 0.0000 32.1333 Worker 9.7900e- 003 6.7500e- 003 0.0716 2.4000e- 004 0.0252 1.6000e- 004 0.0254 6.7100e- 003 1.5000e- 004 6.8600e- 003 0.0000 21.3089 21.3089 4.8000e- 004 0.0000 21.3208 Total 0.0137 0.1360 0.1038 5.7000e- 004 0.0333 4.4000e- 004 0.0338 9.0600e- 003 4.2000e- 004 9.4800e- 003 0.0000 53.4027 53.4027 2.0600e- 003 0.0000 53.4541 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.0523 0.4794 0.4558 7.4000e- 004 0.0264 0.0264 0.0248 0.0248 0.0000 63.7002 63.7002 0.0154 0.0000 64.0844 Total 0.0523 0.4794 0.4558 7.4000e- 004 0.0264 0.0264 0.0248 0.0248 0.0000 63.7002 63.7002 0.0154 0.0000 64.0844 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 17 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.5 Building Construction - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.9300e- 003 0.1293 0.0323 3.3000e- 004 8.1100e- 003 2.8000e- 004 8.4000e- 003 2.3500e- 003 2.7000e- 004 2.6200e- 003 0.0000 32.0938 32.0938 1.5800e- 003 0.0000 32.1333 Worker 9.7900e- 003 6.7500e- 003 0.0716 2.4000e- 004 0.0252 1.6000e- 004 0.0254 6.7100e- 003 1.5000e- 004 6.8600e- 003 0.0000 21.3089 21.3089 4.8000e- 004 0.0000 21.3208 Total 0.0137 0.1360 0.1038 5.7000e- 004 0.0333 4.4000e- 004 0.0338 9.0600e- 003 4.2000e- 004 9.4800e- 003 0.0000 53.4027 53.4027 2.0600e- 003 0.0000 53.4541 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 5.4700e- 003 0.0542 0.0613 9.0000e- 005 2.8900e- 003 2.8900e- 003 2.6700e- 003 2.6700e- 003 0.0000 8.1853 8.1853 2.5700e- 003 0.0000 8.2496 Paving 3.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 5.8600e- 003 0.0542 0.0613 9.0000e- 005 2.8900e- 003 2.8900e- 003 2.6700e- 003 2.6700e- 003 0.0000 8.1853 8.1853 2.5700e- 003 0.0000 8.2496 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 18 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.6 Paving - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.1000e- 004 2.1000e- 004 2.2400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 004 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.6680 0.6680 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.6684 Total 3.1000e- 004 2.1000e- 004 2.2400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 004 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.6680 0.6680 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.6684 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 5.4700e- 003 0.0542 0.0613 9.0000e- 005 2.8900e- 003 2.8900e- 003 2.6700e- 003 2.6700e- 003 0.0000 8.1853 8.1853 2.5700e- 003 0.0000 8.2496 Paving 3.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 5.8600e- 003 0.0542 0.0613 9.0000e- 005 2.8900e- 003 2.8900e- 003 2.6700e- 003 2.6700e- 003 0.0000 8.1853 8.1853 2.5700e- 003 0.0000 8.2496 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 19 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.6 Paving - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.1000e- 004 2.1000e- 004 2.2400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 004 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.6680 0.6680 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.6684 Total 3.1000e- 004 2.1000e- 004 2.2400e- 003 1.0000e- 005 7.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 8.0000e- 004 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 2.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.6680 0.6680 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.6684 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 1.3776 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.0900e- 003 7.6300e- 003 9.0900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 4.7000e- 004 4.7000e- 004 4.7000e- 004 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.2766 1.2766 9.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.2788 Total 1.3786 7.6300e- 003 9.0900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 4.7000e- 004 4.7000e- 004 4.7000e- 004 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.2766 1.2766 9.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.2788 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 20 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.5000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 2.5800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.1000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 9.1000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.5000e- 004 0.0000 0.7682 0.7682 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7686 Total 3.5000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 2.5800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.1000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 9.1000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.5000e- 004 0.0000 0.7682 0.7682 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7686 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 1.3776 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.0900e- 003 7.6300e- 003 9.0900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 4.7000e- 004 4.7000e- 004 4.7000e- 004 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.2766 1.2766 9.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.2788 Total 1.3786 7.6300e- 003 9.0900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 4.7000e- 004 4.7000e- 004 4.7000e- 004 4.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.2766 1.2766 9.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.2788 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 21 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.5000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 2.5800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.1000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 9.1000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.5000e- 004 0.0000 0.7682 0.7682 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7686 Total 3.5000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 2.5800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 9.1000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 9.1000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.5000e- 004 0.0000 0.7682 0.7682 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7686 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 22 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.0923 0.4666 1.1338 4.0200e- 003 0.3432 3.7200e- 003 0.3470 0.0921 3.4800e- 003 0.0956 0.0000 369.0571 369.0571 0.0134 0.0000 369.3912 Unmitigated 0.0923 0.4666 1.1338 4.0200e- 003 0.3432 3.7200e- 003 0.3470 0.0921 3.4800e- 003 0.0956 0.0000 369.0571 369.0571 0.0134 0.0000 369.3912 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT General Light Industry 315.88 315.88 315.88 922,205 922,205 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 315.88 315.88 315.88 922,205 922,205 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by General Light Industry 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 28.00 13.00 92 5 3 Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH General Light Industry 0.575198 0.040076 0.193827 0.113296 0.016988 0.005361 0.017552 0.025197 0.002581 0.002349 0.005904 0.000881 0.000789 Parking Lot 0.575198 0.040076 0.193827 0.113296 0.016988 0.005361 0.017552 0.025197 0.002581 0.002349 0.005904 0.000881 0.000789 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 23 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 5.0 Energy Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 325.4861 325.4861 0.0287 5.9400e- 003 327.9737 Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 325.4861 325.4861 0.0287 5.9400e- 003 327.9737 NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0375 0.3410 0.2864 2.0500e- 003 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0000 371.1795 371.1795 7.1100e- 003 6.8000e- 003 373.3852 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0375 0.3410 0.2864 2.0500e- 003 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0000 371.1795 371.1795 7.1100e- 003 6.8000e- 003 373.3852 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 24 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr General Light Industry 6.95564e +006 0.0375 0.3410 0.2864 2.0500e- 003 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0000 371.1795 371.1795 7.1100e- 003 6.8000e- 003 373.3852 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0375 0.3410 0.2864 2.0500e- 003 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0000 371.1795 371.1795 7.1100e- 003 6.8000e- 003 373.3852 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr General Light Industry 6.95564e +006 0.0375 0.3410 0.2864 2.0500e- 003 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0000 371.1795 371.1795 7.1100e- 003 6.8000e- 003 373.3852 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0375 0.3410 0.2864 2.0500e- 003 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0259 0.0000 371.1795 371.1795 7.1100e- 003 6.8000e- 003 373.3852 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 25 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr General Light Industry 2.17792e +006 324.8179 0.0287 5.9300e- 003 327.3005 Parking Lot 4480 0.6682 6.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.6733 Total 325.4861 0.0287 5.9400e- 003 327.9737 Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr General Light Industry 2.17792e +006 324.8179 0.0287 5.9300e- 003 327.3005 Parking Lot 4480 0.6682 6.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.6733 Total 325.4861 0.0287 5.9400e- 003 327.9737 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 26 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 1.1686 3.0000e- 005 2.7300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.2800e- 003 5.2800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.6300e- 003 Unmitigated 1.1686 3.0000e- 005 2.7300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.2800e- 003 5.2800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.6300e- 003 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.1378 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 1.0306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.5000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 2.7300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.2800e- 003 5.2800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.6300e- 003 Total 1.1686 3.0000e- 005 2.7300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.2800e- 003 5.2800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.6300e- 003 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 27 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.1378 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 1.0306 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.5000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 2.7300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.2800e- 003 5.2800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.6300e- 003 Total 1.1686 3.0000e- 005 2.7300e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.2800e- 003 5.2800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 5.6300e- 003 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 28 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT/yr Mitigated 68.5501 1.9912 0.0478 132.5770 Unmitigated 68.5501 1.9912 0.0478 132.5770 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr General Light Industry 60.9737 / 0 68.5501 1.9912 0.0478 132.5770 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 68.5501 1.9912 0.0478 132.5770 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 29 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr General Light Industry 60.9737 / 0 68.5501 1.9912 0.0478 132.5770 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 68.5501 1.9912 0.0478 132.5770 Mitigated 8.0 Waste Detail Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e MT/yr Mitigated 66.3679 3.9222 0.0000 164.4237 Unmitigated 66.3679 3.9222 0.0000 164.4237 Category/Year CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 30 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 8.2 Waste by Land Use Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr General Light Industry 326.95 66.3679 3.9222 0.0000 164.4237 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 66.3679 3.9222 0.0000 164.4237 Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr General Light Industry 326.95 66.3679 3.9222 0.0000 164.4237 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 66.3679 3.9222 0.0000 164.4237 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 31 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual 11.0 Vegetation 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:35 AMPage 32 of 32 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual Project Characteristics - CO2 intensity based on a 5-year average (2016-2020), PG&E, 2015 Land Use - Building 1 would be approximately 129,856 square feet and Building 2 would be approximately 133,815 square feet. total of 32 automobile parking spaces would be provided throughout the 3-acre project site. Construction Phase - Approximately 13-month construction period Demolition - Nine on-site existing buildings totaling 54,186 square feet would be demolished Grading - Approximately 23,000 cubic yards of soil off-haul Vehicle Trips - Trip generation based on Trip Generation Memorandum for the Proposed Public Storage Facility Project at 20565 Valley Green Drive, Cupertino, California Mobile Land Use Mitigation - 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Light Industry 263.67 1000sqft 2.70 263,671.00 0 Parking Lot 32.00 Space 0.30 12,800.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 64 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company 2021Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 328.8 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Cupertino Public Storage Project Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 1 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 23,000.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 263,670.00 263,671.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 6.05 2.70 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.29 0.30 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 641.35 328.8 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.32 1.20 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 0.68 1.20 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.97 1.20 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 2 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2020 6.4348 163.6722 43.7340 0.4121 18.2141 2.1984 20.4125 9.9699 2.0225 11.9924 0.0000 43,762.31 32 43,762.31 32 2.9714 0.0000 43,836.59 70 2021 275.8033 22.3004 20.5211 0.0484 1.2575 0.9747 2.2322 0.3405 0.9164 1.2569 0.0000 4,772.350 4 4,772.350 4 0.6976 0.0000 4,789.789 9 Maximum 275.8033 163.6722 43.7340 0.4121 18.2141 2.1984 20.4125 9.9699 2.0225 11.9924 0.0000 43,762.31 32 43,762.31 32 2.9714 0.0000 43,836.59 70 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2020 6.4348 163.6722 43.7340 0.4121 18.2141 2.1984 20.4125 9.9699 2.0225 11.9924 0.0000 43,762.31 32 43,762.31 32 2.9714 0.0000 43,836.59 70 2021 275.8033 22.3004 20.5211 0.0484 1.2575 0.9747 2.2322 0.3405 0.9164 1.2569 0.0000 4,772.350 4 4,772.350 4 0.6976 0.0000 4,789.789 9 Maximum 275.8033 163.6722 43.7340 0.4121 18.2141 2.1984 20.4125 9.9699 2.0225 11.9924 0.0000 43,762.31 32 43,762.31 32 2.9714 0.0000 43,836.59 70 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 3 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 6.4048 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Energy 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 Mobile 0.5747 2.4743 6.5509 0.0234 1.9594 0.0204 1.9798 0.5243 0.0191 0.5434 2,366.897 2 2,366.897 2 0.0820 2,368.946 4 Total 7.1850 4.3429 8.1506 0.0346 1.9594 0.1625 2.1219 0.5243 0.1612 0.6855 4,608.909 0 4,608.909 0 0.1251 0.0411 4,624.285 3 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 6.4048 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Energy 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 Mobile 0.5747 2.4743 6.5509 0.0234 1.9594 0.0204 1.9798 0.5243 0.0191 0.5434 2,366.897 2 2,366.897 2 0.0820 2,368.946 4 Total 7.1850 4.3429 8.1506 0.0346 1.9594 0.1625 2.1219 0.5243 0.1612 0.6855 4,608.909 0 4,608.909 0 0.1251 0.0411 4,624.285 3 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 4 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 4/6/2020 5/1/2020 5 20 2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 5/2/2020 5/6/2020 5 3 3 Grading Grading 5/7/2020 5/14/2020 5 6 4 Building Construction Building Construction 5/15/2020 3/18/2021 5 220 5 Paving Paving 3/19/2021 4/1/2021 5 10 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 4/2/2021 4/15/2021 5 10 OffRoad Equipment ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 395,507; Non-Residential Outdoor: 131,836; Striped Parking Area: 768 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 3 Acres of Paving: 0.3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 5 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38 Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.00 9 0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 6.00 132 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 6.00 80 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 6 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.2 Demolition - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 2.6669 0.0000 2.6669 0.4038 0.0000 0.4038 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3121 33.2010 21.7532 0.0388 1.6587 1.6587 1.5419 1.5419 3,747.704 9 3,747.704 9 1.0580 3,774.153 6 Total 3.3121 33.2010 21.7532 0.0388 2.6669 1.6587 4.3256 0.4038 1.5419 1.9456 3,747.704 9 3,747.704 9 1.0580 3,774.153 6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 246.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 2,875.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 116.00 45.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 23.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 7 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.2 Demolition - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.1015 3.5233 0.7002 9.7900e- 003 0.2149 0.0115 0.2264 0.0589 0.0110 0.0699 1,046.463 8 1,046.463 8 0.0524 1,047.772 5 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0521 0.0316 0.4025 1.2400e- 003 0.1232 8.0000e- 004 0.1240 0.0327 7.4000e- 004 0.0334 123.1165 123.1165 2.9700e- 003 123.1907 Total 0.1536 3.5548 1.1027 0.0110 0.3381 0.0123 0.3504 0.0916 0.0118 0.1033 1,169.580 2 1,169.580 2 0.0553 1,170.963 2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 2.6669 0.0000 2.6669 0.4038 0.0000 0.4038 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3121 33.2010 21.7532 0.0388 1.6587 1.6587 1.5419 1.5419 0.0000 3,747.704 9 3,747.704 9 1.0580 3,774.153 6 Total 3.3121 33.2010 21.7532 0.0388 2.6669 1.6587 4.3256 0.4038 1.5419 1.9456 0.0000 3,747.704 9 3,747.704 9 1.0580 3,774.153 6 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 8 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.2 Demolition - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.1015 3.5233 0.7002 9.7900e- 003 0.2149 0.0115 0.2264 0.0589 0.0110 0.0699 1,046.463 8 1,046.463 8 0.0524 1,047.772 5 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0521 0.0316 0.4025 1.2400e- 003 0.1232 8.0000e- 004 0.1240 0.0327 7.4000e- 004 0.0334 123.1165 123.1165 2.9700e- 003 123.1907 Total 0.1536 3.5548 1.1027 0.0110 0.3381 0.0123 0.3504 0.0916 0.0118 0.1033 1,169.580 2 1,169.580 2 0.0553 1,170.963 2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Site Preparation - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.0765 42.4173 21.5136 0.0380 2.1974 2.1974 2.0216 2.0216 3,685.101 6 3,685.101 6 1.1918 3,714.897 5 Total 4.0765 42.4173 21.5136 0.0380 18.0663 2.1974 20.2637 9.9307 2.0216 11.9523 3,685.101 6 3,685.101 6 1.1918 3,714.897 5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 9 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.3 Site Preparation - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0626 0.0379 0.4830 1.4800e- 003 0.1479 9.6000e- 004 0.1488 0.0392 8.8000e- 004 0.0401 147.7398 147.7398 3.5600e- 003 147.8288 Total 0.0626 0.0379 0.4830 1.4800e- 003 0.1479 9.6000e- 004 0.1488 0.0392 8.8000e- 004 0.0401 147.7398 147.7398 3.5600e- 003 147.8288 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.0765 42.4173 21.5136 0.0380 2.1974 2.1974 2.0216 2.0216 0.0000 3,685.101 6 3,685.101 6 1.1918 3,714.897 5 Total 4.0765 42.4173 21.5136 0.0380 18.0663 2.1974 20.2637 9.9307 2.0216 11.9523 0.0000 3,685.101 6 3,685.101 6 1.1918 3,714.897 5 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 10 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.3 Site Preparation - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0626 0.0379 0.4830 1.4800e- 003 0.1479 9.6000e- 004 0.1488 0.0392 8.8000e- 004 0.0401 147.7398 147.7398 3.5600e- 003 147.8288 Total 0.0626 0.0379 0.4830 1.4800e- 003 0.1479 9.6000e- 004 0.1488 0.0392 8.8000e- 004 0.0401 147.7398 147.7398 3.5600e- 003 147.8288 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.9859 0.0000 6.9859 3.4331 0.0000 3.4331 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.4288 26.3859 16.0530 0.0297 1.2734 1.2734 1.1716 1.1716 2,872.485 1 2,872.485 1 0.9290 2,895.710 6 Total 2.4288 26.3859 16.0530 0.0297 6.9859 1.2734 8.2593 3.4331 1.1716 4.6047 2,872.485 1 2,872.485 1 0.9290 2,895.710 6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 11 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.4 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 3.9539 137.2548 27.2785 0.3812 8.3709 0.4487 8.8196 2.2939 0.4293 2.7232 40,766.71 16 40,766.71 16 2.0394 40,817.69 58 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0521 0.0316 0.4025 1.2400e- 003 0.1232 8.0000e- 004 0.1240 0.0327 7.4000e- 004 0.0334 123.1165 123.1165 2.9700e- 003 123.1907 Total 4.0060 137.2863 27.6810 0.3825 8.4941 0.4495 8.9436 2.3266 0.4300 2.7566 40,889.82 80 40,889.82 80 2.0423 40,940.88 64 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.9859 0.0000 6.9859 3.4331 0.0000 3.4331 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.4288 26.3859 16.0530 0.0297 1.2734 1.2734 1.1716 1.1716 0.0000 2,872.485 1 2,872.485 1 0.9290 2,895.710 6 Total 2.4288 26.3859 16.0530 0.0297 6.9859 1.2734 8.2593 3.4331 1.1716 4.6047 0.0000 2,872.485 1 2,872.485 1 0.9290 2,895.710 6 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 12 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.4 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 3.9539 137.2548 27.2785 0.3812 8.3709 0.4487 8.8196 2.2939 0.4293 2.7232 40,766.71 16 40,766.71 16 2.0394 40,817.69 58 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0521 0.0316 0.4025 1.2400e- 003 0.1232 8.0000e- 004 0.1240 0.0327 7.4000e- 004 0.0334 123.1165 123.1165 2.9700e- 003 123.1907 Total 4.0060 137.2863 27.6810 0.3825 8.4941 0.4495 8.9436 2.3266 0.4300 2.7566 40,889.82 80 40,889.82 80 2.0423 40,940.88 64 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.1198 19.1860 16.8485 0.0269 1.1171 1.1171 1.0503 1.0503 2,553.063 1 2,553.063 1 0.6229 2,568.634 5 Total 2.1198 19.1860 16.8485 0.0269 1.1171 1.1171 1.0503 1.0503 2,553.063 1 2,553.063 1 0.6229 2,568.634 5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 13 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1706 5.1283 1.2233 0.0124 0.3046 0.0251 0.3297 0.0877 0.0241 0.1117 1,312.686 2 1,312.686 2 0.0646 1,314.302 3 Worker 0.4032 0.2441 3.1123 9.5500e- 003 0.9529 6.1700e- 003 0.9591 0.2528 5.6800e- 003 0.2584 952.1008 952.1008 0.0229 952.6744 Total 0.5738 5.3724 4.3356 0.0220 1.2575 0.0313 1.2888 0.3404 0.0297 0.3702 2,264.787 0 2,264.787 0 0.0876 2,266.976 7 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.1198 19.1860 16.8485 0.0269 1.1171 1.1171 1.0503 1.0503 0.0000 2,553.063 1 2,553.063 1 0.6229 2,568.634 5 Total 2.1198 19.1860 16.8485 0.0269 1.1171 1.1171 1.0503 1.0503 0.0000 2,553.063 1 2,553.063 1 0.6229 2,568.634 5 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 14 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1706 5.1283 1.2233 0.0124 0.3046 0.0251 0.3297 0.0877 0.0241 0.1117 1,312.686 2 1,312.686 2 0.0646 1,314.302 3 Worker 0.4032 0.2441 3.1123 9.5500e- 003 0.9529 6.1700e- 003 0.9591 0.2528 5.6800e- 003 0.2584 952.1008 952.1008 0.0229 952.6744 Total 0.5738 5.3724 4.3356 0.0220 1.2575 0.0313 1.2888 0.3404 0.0297 0.3702 2,264.787 0 2,264.787 0 0.0876 2,266.976 7 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.9009 17.4321 16.5752 0.0269 0.9586 0.9586 0.9013 0.9013 2,553.363 9 2,553.363 9 0.6160 2,568.764 3 Total 1.9009 17.4321 16.5752 0.0269 0.9586 0.9586 0.9013 0.9013 2,553.363 9 2,553.363 9 0.6160 2,568.764 3 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 15 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.5 Building Construction - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1396 4.6504 1.0966 0.0123 0.3046 0.0101 0.3147 0.0877 9.6400e- 003 0.0973 1,300.313 4 1,300.313 4 0.0610 1,301.839 2 Worker 0.3730 0.2180 2.8493 9.2200e- 003 0.9529 6.0000e- 003 0.9589 0.2528 5.5200e- 003 0.2583 918.6730 918.6730 0.0205 919.1864 Total 0.5125 4.8683 3.9459 0.0215 1.2575 0.0161 1.2736 0.3405 0.0152 0.3556 2,218.986 5 2,218.986 5 0.0816 2,221.025 6 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.9009 17.4321 16.5752 0.0269 0.9586 0.9586 0.9013 0.9013 0.0000 2,553.363 9 2,553.363 9 0.6160 2,568.764 3 Total 1.9009 17.4321 16.5752 0.0269 0.9586 0.9586 0.9013 0.9013 0.0000 2,553.363 9 2,553.363 9 0.6160 2,568.764 3 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 16 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.5 Building Construction - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1396 4.6504 1.0966 0.0123 0.3046 0.0101 0.3147 0.0877 9.6400e- 003 0.0973 1,300.313 4 1,300.313 4 0.0610 1,301.839 2 Worker 0.3730 0.2180 2.8493 9.2200e- 003 0.9529 6.0000e- 003 0.9589 0.2528 5.5200e- 003 0.2583 918.6730 918.6730 0.0205 919.1864 Total 0.5125 4.8683 3.9459 0.0215 1.2575 0.0161 1.2736 0.3405 0.0152 0.3556 2,218.986 5 2,218.986 5 0.0816 2,221.025 6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.0940 10.8399 12.2603 0.0189 0.5788 0.5788 0.5342 0.5342 1,804.552 3 1,804.552 3 0.5670 1,818.727 0 Paving 0.0786 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1726 10.8399 12.2603 0.0189 0.5788 0.5788 0.5342 0.5342 1,804.552 3 1,804.552 3 0.5670 1,818.727 0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 17 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.6 Paving - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0643 0.0376 0.4913 1.5900e- 003 0.1643 1.0300e- 003 0.1653 0.0436 9.5000e- 004 0.0445 158.3919 158.3919 3.5400e- 003 158.4804 Total 0.0643 0.0376 0.4913 1.5900e- 003 0.1643 1.0300e- 003 0.1653 0.0436 9.5000e- 004 0.0445 158.3919 158.3919 3.5400e- 003 158.4804 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.0940 10.8399 12.2603 0.0189 0.5788 0.5788 0.5342 0.5342 0.0000 1,804.552 3 1,804.552 3 0.5670 1,818.727 0 Paving 0.0786 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1726 10.8399 12.2603 0.0189 0.5788 0.5788 0.5342 0.5342 0.0000 1,804.552 3 1,804.552 3 0.5670 1,818.727 0 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 18 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.6 Paving - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0643 0.0376 0.4913 1.5900e- 003 0.1643 1.0300e- 003 0.1653 0.0436 9.5000e- 004 0.0445 158.3919 158.3919 3.5400e- 003 158.4804 Total 0.0643 0.0376 0.4913 1.5900e- 003 0.1643 1.0300e- 003 0.1653 0.0436 9.5000e- 004 0.0445 158.3919 158.3919 3.5400e- 003 158.4804 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 275.5104 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2189 1.5268 1.8176 2.9700e- 003 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 281.4481 281.4481 0.0193 281.9309 Total 275.7293 1.5268 1.8176 2.9700e- 003 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 281.4481 281.4481 0.0193 281.9309 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 19 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0740 0.0432 0.5650 1.8300e- 003 0.1889 1.1900e- 003 0.1901 0.0501 1.1000e- 003 0.0512 182.1507 182.1507 4.0700e- 003 182.2525 Total 0.0740 0.0432 0.5650 1.8300e- 003 0.1889 1.1900e- 003 0.1901 0.0501 1.1000e- 003 0.0512 182.1507 182.1507 4.0700e- 003 182.2525 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 275.5104 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2189 1.5268 1.8176 2.9700e- 003 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0193 281.9309 Total 275.7293 1.5268 1.8176 2.9700e- 003 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0193 281.9309 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 20 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0740 0.0432 0.5650 1.8300e- 003 0.1889 1.1900e- 003 0.1901 0.0501 1.1000e- 003 0.0512 182.1507 182.1507 4.0700e- 003 182.2525 Total 0.0740 0.0432 0.5650 1.8300e- 003 0.1889 1.1900e- 003 0.1901 0.0501 1.1000e- 003 0.0512 182.1507 182.1507 4.0700e- 003 182.2525 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 21 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 0.5747 2.4743 6.5509 0.0234 1.9594 0.0204 1.9798 0.5243 0.0191 0.5434 2,366.897 2 2,366.897 2 0.0820 2,368.946 4 Unmitigated 0.5747 2.4743 6.5509 0.0234 1.9594 0.0204 1.9798 0.5243 0.0191 0.5434 2,366.897 2 2,366.897 2 0.0820 2,368.946 4 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT General Light Industry 315.88 315.88 315.88 922,205 922,205 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 315.88 315.88 315.88 922,205 922,205 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by General Light Industry 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 28.00 13.00 92 5 3 Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH General Light Industry 0.575198 0.040076 0.193827 0.113296 0.016988 0.005361 0.017552 0.025197 0.002581 0.002349 0.005904 0.000881 0.000789 Parking Lot 0.575198 0.040076 0.193827 0.113296 0.016988 0.005361 0.017552 0.025197 0.002581 0.002349 0.005904 0.000881 0.000789 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 22 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 5.0 Energy Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 23 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day General Light Industry 19056.6 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day General Light Industry 19.0566 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 24 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 6.4048 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Unmitigated 6.4048 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.7548 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 5.6471 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.8300e- 003 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Total 6.4047 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 25 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.0 Water Detail 8.0 Waste Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.7548 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 5.6471 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.8300e- 003 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Total 6.4047 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 26 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer 11.0 Vegetation Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:36 AMPage 27 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer Project Characteristics - CO2 intensity based on a 5-year average (2016-2020), PG&E, 2015 Land Use - Building 1 would be approximately 129,856 square feet and Building 2 would be approximately 133,815 square feet. total of 32 automobile parking spaces would be provided throughout the 3-acre project site. Construction Phase - Approximately 13-month construction period Demolition - Nine on-site existing buildings totaling 54,186 square feet would be demolished Grading - Approximately 23,000 cubic yards of soil off-haul Vehicle Trips - Trip generation based on Trip Generation Memorandum for the Proposed Public Storage Facility Project at 20565 Valley Green Drive, Cupertino, California Mobile Land Use Mitigation - 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Light Industry 263.67 1000sqft 2.70 263,671.00 0 Parking Lot 32.00 Space 0.30 12,800.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 4 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 64 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company 2021Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 328.8 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Cupertino Public Storage Project Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 1 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 23,000.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 263,670.00 263,671.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 6.05 2.70 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.29 0.30 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 641.35 328.8 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.32 1.20 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 0.68 1.20 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.97 1.20 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 2 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2020 6.5460 167.0478 45.7976 0.4056 18.2141 2.1984 20.4125 9.9699 2.0225 11.9924 0.0000 43,067.87 87 43,067.87 87 3.0737 0.0000 43,144.72 05 2021 275.8077 22.3917 20.5014 0.0474 1.2575 0.9750 2.2326 0.3405 0.9168 1.2572 0.0000 4,666.948 6 4,666.948 6 0.7012 0.0000 4,684.478 3 Maximum 275.8077 167.0478 45.7976 0.4056 18.2141 2.1984 20.4125 9.9699 2.0225 11.9924 0.0000 43,067.87 87 43,067.87 87 3.0737 0.0000 43,144.72 05 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2020 6.5460 167.0478 45.7976 0.4056 18.2141 2.1984 20.4125 9.9699 2.0225 11.9924 0.0000 43,067.87 87 43,067.87 87 3.0737 0.0000 43,144.72 05 2021 275.8077 22.3917 20.5014 0.0474 1.2575 0.9750 2.2326 0.3405 0.9168 1.2572 0.0000 4,666.948 6 4,666.948 6 0.7012 0.0000 4,684.478 3 Maximum 275.8077 167.0478 45.7976 0.4056 18.2141 2.1984 20.4125 9.9699 2.0225 11.9924 0.0000 43,067.87 87 43,067.87 87 3.0737 0.0000 43,144.72 05 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 3 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 2.2 Overall Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 6.4048 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Energy 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 Mobile 0.5044 2.6187 6.4938 0.0219 1.9594 0.0205 1.9799 0.5243 0.0192 0.5435 2,215.877 9 2,215.877 9 0.0828 2,217.947 4 Total 7.1147 4.4873 8.0935 0.0331 1.9594 0.1626 2.1220 0.5243 0.1613 0.6856 4,457.889 8 4,457.889 8 0.1259 0.0411 4,473.286 3 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Area 6.4048 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Energy 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 Mobile 0.5044 2.6187 6.4938 0.0219 1.9594 0.0205 1.9799 0.5243 0.0192 0.5435 2,215.877 9 2,215.877 9 0.0828 2,217.947 4 Total 7.1147 4.4873 8.0935 0.0331 1.9594 0.1626 2.1220 0.5243 0.1613 0.6856 4,457.889 8 4,457.889 8 0.1259 0.0411 4,473.286 3 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 4 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 4/6/2020 5/1/2020 5 20 2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 5/2/2020 5/6/2020 5 3 3 Grading Grading 5/7/2020 5/14/2020 5 6 4 Building Construction Building Construction 5/15/2020 3/18/2021 5 220 5 Paving Paving 3/19/2021 4/1/2021 5 10 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 4/2/2021 4/15/2021 5 10 OffRoad Equipment ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 395,507; Non-Residential Outdoor: 131,836; Striped Parking Area: 768 (Architectural Coating – sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 3 Acres of Paving: 0.3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 5 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38 Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.00 9 0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 2 6.00 132 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 6.00 80 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Trips and VMT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 6 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.2 Demolition - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 2.6669 0.0000 2.6669 0.4038 0.0000 0.4038 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3121 33.2010 21.7532 0.0388 1.6587 1.6587 1.5419 1.5419 3,747.704 9 3,747.704 9 1.0580 3,774.153 6 Total 3.3121 33.2010 21.7532 0.0388 2.6669 1.6587 4.3256 0.4038 1.5419 1.9456 3,747.704 9 3,747.704 9 1.0580 3,774.153 6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 246.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 2,875.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 116.00 45.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 23.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 7 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.2 Demolition - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.1043 3.6097 0.7538 9.6200e- 003 0.2149 0.0117 0.2266 0.0589 0.0112 0.0701 1,028.887 1 1,028.887 1 0.0550 1,030.261 6 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0552 0.0390 0.3780 1.1400e- 003 0.1232 8.0000e- 004 0.1240 0.0327 7.4000e- 004 0.0334 113.4098 113.4098 2.7700e- 003 113.4792 Total 0.1594 3.6487 1.1318 0.0108 0.3381 0.0125 0.3506 0.0916 0.0120 0.1035 1,142.296 9 1,142.296 9 0.0578 1,143.740 8 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 2.6669 0.0000 2.6669 0.4038 0.0000 0.4038 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.3121 33.2010 21.7532 0.0388 1.6587 1.6587 1.5419 1.5419 0.0000 3,747.704 9 3,747.704 9 1.0580 3,774.153 6 Total 3.3121 33.2010 21.7532 0.0388 2.6669 1.6587 4.3256 0.4038 1.5419 1.9456 0.0000 3,747.704 9 3,747.704 9 1.0580 3,774.153 6 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 8 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.2 Demolition - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.1043 3.6097 0.7538 9.6200e- 003 0.2149 0.0117 0.2266 0.0589 0.0112 0.0701 1,028.887 1 1,028.887 1 0.0550 1,030.261 6 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0552 0.0390 0.3780 1.1400e- 003 0.1232 8.0000e- 004 0.1240 0.0327 7.4000e- 004 0.0334 113.4098 113.4098 2.7700e- 003 113.4792 Total 0.1594 3.6487 1.1318 0.0108 0.3381 0.0125 0.3506 0.0916 0.0120 0.1035 1,142.296 9 1,142.296 9 0.0578 1,143.740 8 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Site Preparation - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.0765 42.4173 21.5136 0.0380 2.1974 2.1974 2.0216 2.0216 3,685.101 6 3,685.101 6 1.1918 3,714.897 5 Total 4.0765 42.4173 21.5136 0.0380 18.0663 2.1974 20.2637 9.9307 2.0216 11.9523 3,685.101 6 3,685.101 6 1.1918 3,714.897 5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 9 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.3 Site Preparation - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0662 0.0468 0.4536 1.3700e- 003 0.1479 9.6000e- 004 0.1488 0.0392 8.8000e- 004 0.0401 136.0918 136.0918 3.3300e- 003 136.1750 Total 0.0662 0.0468 0.4536 1.3700e- 003 0.1479 9.6000e- 004 0.1488 0.0392 8.8000e- 004 0.0401 136.0918 136.0918 3.3300e- 003 136.1750 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.0765 42.4173 21.5136 0.0380 2.1974 2.1974 2.0216 2.0216 0.0000 3,685.101 6 3,685.101 6 1.1918 3,714.897 5 Total 4.0765 42.4173 21.5136 0.0380 18.0663 2.1974 20.2637 9.9307 2.0216 11.9523 0.0000 3,685.101 6 3,685.101 6 1.1918 3,714.897 5 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 10 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.3 Site Preparation - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0662 0.0468 0.4536 1.3700e- 003 0.1479 9.6000e- 004 0.1488 0.0392 8.8000e- 004 0.0401 136.0918 136.0918 3.3300e- 003 136.1750 Total 0.0662 0.0468 0.4536 1.3700e- 003 0.1479 9.6000e- 004 0.1488 0.0392 8.8000e- 004 0.0401 136.0918 136.0918 3.3300e- 003 136.1750 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.9859 0.0000 6.9859 3.4331 0.0000 3.4331 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.4288 26.3859 16.0530 0.0297 1.2734 1.2734 1.1716 1.1716 2,872.485 1 2,872.485 1 0.9290 2,895.710 6 Total 2.4288 26.3859 16.0530 0.0297 6.9859 1.2734 8.2593 3.4331 1.1716 4.6047 2,872.485 1 2,872.485 1 0.9290 2,895.710 6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 11 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.4 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 4.0621 140.6229 29.3666 0.3748 8.3709 0.4565 8.8274 2.2939 0.4367 2.7307 40,081.98 38 40,081.98 38 2.1419 40,135.53 07 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0552 0.0390 0.3780 1.1400e- 003 0.1232 8.0000e- 004 0.1240 0.0327 7.4000e- 004 0.0334 113.4098 113.4098 2.7700e- 003 113.4792 Total 4.1172 140.6619 29.7446 0.3760 8.4941 0.4573 8.9514 2.3266 0.4375 2.7641 40,195.39 36 40,195.39 36 2.1447 40,249.00 98 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.9859 0.0000 6.9859 3.4331 0.0000 3.4331 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.4288 26.3859 16.0530 0.0297 1.2734 1.2734 1.1716 1.1716 0.0000 2,872.485 1 2,872.485 1 0.9290 2,895.710 6 Total 2.4288 26.3859 16.0530 0.0297 6.9859 1.2734 8.2593 3.4331 1.1716 4.6047 0.0000 2,872.485 1 2,872.485 1 0.9290 2,895.710 6 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 12 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.4 Grading - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 4.0621 140.6229 29.3666 0.3748 8.3709 0.4565 8.8274 2.2939 0.4367 2.7307 40,081.98 38 40,081.98 38 2.1419 40,135.53 07 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0552 0.0390 0.3780 1.1400e- 003 0.1232 8.0000e- 004 0.1240 0.0327 7.4000e- 004 0.0334 113.4098 113.4098 2.7700e- 003 113.4792 Total 4.1172 140.6619 29.7446 0.3760 8.4941 0.4573 8.9514 2.3266 0.4375 2.7641 40,195.39 36 40,195.39 36 2.1447 40,249.00 98 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.1198 19.1860 16.8485 0.0269 1.1171 1.1171 1.0503 1.0503 2,553.063 1 2,553.063 1 0.6229 2,568.634 5 Total 2.1198 19.1860 16.8485 0.0269 1.1171 1.1171 1.0503 1.0503 2,553.063 1 2,553.063 1 0.6229 2,568.634 5 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 13 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1795 5.1857 1.3995 0.0121 0.3046 0.0256 0.3302 0.0877 0.0245 0.1121 1,279.472 6 1,279.472 6 0.0699 1,281.220 6 Worker 0.4265 0.3016 2.9231 8.8000e- 003 0.9529 6.1700e- 003 0.9591 0.2528 5.6800e- 003 0.2584 877.0359 877.0359 0.0215 877.5722 Total 0.6060 5.4873 4.3225 0.0209 1.2575 0.0317 1.2892 0.3404 0.0301 0.3706 2,156.508 5 2,156.508 5 0.0914 2,158.792 8 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 2.1198 19.1860 16.8485 0.0269 1.1171 1.1171 1.0503 1.0503 0.0000 2,553.063 1 2,553.063 1 0.6229 2,568.634 5 Total 2.1198 19.1860 16.8485 0.0269 1.1171 1.1171 1.0503 1.0503 0.0000 2,553.063 1 2,553.063 1 0.6229 2,568.634 5 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 14 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.5 Building Construction - 2020 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1795 5.1857 1.3995 0.0121 0.3046 0.0256 0.3302 0.0877 0.0245 0.1121 1,279.472 6 1,279.472 6 0.0699 1,281.220 6 Worker 0.4265 0.3016 2.9231 8.8000e- 003 0.9529 6.1700e- 003 0.9591 0.2528 5.6800e- 003 0.2584 877.0359 877.0359 0.0215 877.5722 Total 0.6060 5.4873 4.3225 0.0209 1.2575 0.0317 1.2892 0.3404 0.0301 0.3706 2,156.508 5 2,156.508 5 0.0914 2,158.792 8 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Building Construction - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.9009 17.4321 16.5752 0.0269 0.9586 0.9586 0.9013 0.9013 2,553.363 9 2,553.363 9 0.6160 2,568.764 3 Total 1.9009 17.4321 16.5752 0.0269 0.9586 0.9586 0.9013 0.9013 2,553.363 9 2,553.363 9 0.6160 2,568.764 3 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 15 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.5 Building Construction - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1478 4.6903 1.2604 0.0120 0.3046 0.0104 0.3150 0.0877 9.9700e- 003 0.0977 1,267.322 2 1,267.322 2 0.0660 1,268.972 8 Worker 0.3951 0.2693 2.6658 8.4900e- 003 0.9529 6.0000e- 003 0.9589 0.2528 5.5200e- 003 0.2583 846.2625 846.2625 0.0192 846.7412 Total 0.5430 4.9596 3.9262 0.0205 1.2575 0.0164 1.2739 0.3405 0.0155 0.3559 2,113.584 7 2,113.584 7 0.0852 2,115.714 0 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.9009 17.4321 16.5752 0.0269 0.9586 0.9586 0.9013 0.9013 0.0000 2,553.363 9 2,553.363 9 0.6160 2,568.764 3 Total 1.9009 17.4321 16.5752 0.0269 0.9586 0.9586 0.9013 0.9013 0.0000 2,553.363 9 2,553.363 9 0.6160 2,568.764 3 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 16 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.5 Building Construction - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.1478 4.6903 1.2604 0.0120 0.3046 0.0104 0.3150 0.0877 9.9700e- 003 0.0977 1,267.322 2 1,267.322 2 0.0660 1,268.972 8 Worker 0.3951 0.2693 2.6658 8.4900e- 003 0.9529 6.0000e- 003 0.9589 0.2528 5.5200e- 003 0.2583 846.2625 846.2625 0.0192 846.7412 Total 0.5430 4.9596 3.9262 0.0205 1.2575 0.0164 1.2739 0.3405 0.0155 0.3559 2,113.584 7 2,113.584 7 0.0852 2,115.714 0 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.0940 10.8399 12.2603 0.0189 0.5788 0.5788 0.5342 0.5342 1,804.552 3 1,804.552 3 0.5670 1,818.727 0 Paving 0.0786 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1726 10.8399 12.2603 0.0189 0.5788 0.5788 0.5342 0.5342 1,804.552 3 1,804.552 3 0.5670 1,818.727 0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 17 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.6 Paving - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0681 0.0464 0.4596 1.4600e- 003 0.1643 1.0300e- 003 0.1653 0.0436 9.5000e- 004 0.0445 145.9073 145.9073 3.3000e- 003 145.9899 Total 0.0681 0.0464 0.4596 1.4600e- 003 0.1643 1.0300e- 003 0.1653 0.0436 9.5000e- 004 0.0445 145.9073 145.9073 3.3000e- 003 145.9899 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.0940 10.8399 12.2603 0.0189 0.5788 0.5788 0.5342 0.5342 0.0000 1,804.552 3 1,804.552 3 0.5670 1,818.727 0 Paving 0.0786 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.1726 10.8399 12.2603 0.0189 0.5788 0.5788 0.5342 0.5342 0.0000 1,804.552 3 1,804.552 3 0.5670 1,818.727 0 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 18 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.6 Paving - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0681 0.0464 0.4596 1.4600e- 003 0.1643 1.0300e- 003 0.1653 0.0436 9.5000e- 004 0.0445 145.9073 145.9073 3.3000e- 003 145.9899 Total 0.0681 0.0464 0.4596 1.4600e- 003 0.1643 1.0300e- 003 0.1653 0.0436 9.5000e- 004 0.0445 145.9073 145.9073 3.3000e- 003 145.9899 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 275.5104 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2189 1.5268 1.8176 2.9700e- 003 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 281.4481 281.4481 0.0193 281.9309 Total 275.7293 1.5268 1.8176 2.9700e- 003 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 281.4481 281.4481 0.0193 281.9309 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 19 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0783 0.0534 0.5286 1.6800e- 003 0.1889 1.1900e- 003 0.1901 0.0501 1.1000e- 003 0.0512 167.7934 167.7934 3.8000e- 003 167.8884 Total 0.0783 0.0534 0.5286 1.6800e- 003 0.1889 1.1900e- 003 0.1901 0.0501 1.1000e- 003 0.0512 167.7934 167.7934 3.8000e- 003 167.8884 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 275.5104 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.2189 1.5268 1.8176 2.9700e- 003 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0193 281.9309 Total 275.7293 1.5268 1.8176 2.9700e- 003 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 0.0941 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0193 281.9309 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 20 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2021 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0783 0.0534 0.5286 1.6800e- 003 0.1889 1.1900e- 003 0.1901 0.0501 1.1000e- 003 0.0512 167.7934 167.7934 3.8000e- 003 167.8884 Total 0.0783 0.0534 0.5286 1.6800e- 003 0.1889 1.1900e- 003 0.1901 0.0501 1.1000e- 003 0.0512 167.7934 167.7934 3.8000e- 003 167.8884 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 21 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 0.5044 2.6187 6.4938 0.0219 1.9594 0.0205 1.9799 0.5243 0.0192 0.5435 2,215.877 9 2,215.877 9 0.0828 2,217.947 4 Unmitigated 0.5044 2.6187 6.4938 0.0219 1.9594 0.0205 1.9799 0.5243 0.0192 0.5435 2,215.877 9 2,215.877 9 0.0828 2,217.947 4 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT General Light Industry 315.88 315.88 315.88 922,205 922,205 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 315.88 315.88 315.88 922,205 922,205 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by General Light Industry 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 28.00 13.00 92 5 3 Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH General Light Industry 0.575198 0.040076 0.193827 0.113296 0.016988 0.005361 0.017552 0.025197 0.002581 0.002349 0.005904 0.000881 0.000789 Parking Lot 0.575198 0.040076 0.193827 0.113296 0.016988 0.005361 0.017552 0.025197 0.002581 0.002349 0.005904 0.000881 0.000789 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 22 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 5.0 Energy Detail ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 23 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area Detail 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day General Light Industry 19056.6 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day General Light Industry 19.0566 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.2055 1.8683 1.5694 0.0112 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 0.1420 2,241.947 1 2,241.947 1 0.0430 0.0411 2,255.269 9 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 24 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 6.4048 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Unmitigated 6.4048 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.7548 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 5.6471 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.8300e- 003 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Total 6.4047 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 25 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.0 Water Detail 8.0 Waste Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural Coating 0.7548 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 5.6471 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.8300e- 003 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Total 6.4047 2.8000e- 004 0.0303 0.0000 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 0.0647 0.0647 1.7000e- 004 0.0690 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 26 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter 11.0 Vegetation Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/4/2019 10:37 AMPage 27 of 27 Cupertino Public Storage Project - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter ATTACHMENT B HRA MODEL SNAPSHOTS 1/24/19 (P:\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\HRA Model Snapshots.docx) 1 Project Boundary Residential Receptors 1/24/19 (P:\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\HRA Model Snapshots.docx) 2 Cancer Risk PM2.5 Concentrations 1/24/19 (P:\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\HRA Model Snapshots.docx) 3 Chronic Inhalation Hazard Index CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) APPENDIX C NOISE ANALYSIS CUPERTINO PUBLIC STORAGE PROJECT CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION MAY 2019 \\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Public\Cupertino Public Storage CE Memo.docx (05/03/19) This page intentionally left blank CARLSBAD FRESNO IRVINE LOS ANGELES PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SAN LUIS OBISPO 7086 North Maple Avenue, Suite 104, Fresno, California 93720 559.490.1210 www.lsa.net MEMORANDUM DATE: February 6, 2019 TO: Erick Serrano, Associate Planner, City of Cupertino FROM: Amy Fischer, Principal Matthew Wiswell, Project Manager SUBJECT: Noise Analysis – Cupertino Public Storage Project INTRODUCTION This Noise Analysis Memorandum for the proposed Cupertino Public Storage Project (project) in the City of Cupertino (City) has been prepared to satisfy the City’s requirement for a project-specific noise impact analysis by examining the impacts of the proposed project and evaluating the mitigation measures required for the project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The approximately 3-acre (130,462-square-foot) project site is located at 20565 Valley Green Drive in the City of Cupertino in Santa Clara County (Assessor’s Parcel Number [APN] 326-10-044). The site is bounded by Interstate 280 (I-280) to the north, residential uses to the east, office uses and associated parking lots to the south, and residential uses to the west. The project site is developed with nine single-story buildings totaling 54,186 square feet, which would be demolished as part of the project. The proposed project would include the construction of two new four-story self-storage buildings, each with a below-grade basement. Building 1 would be approximately 129,856 square feet, and would include an office space in the northeast corner of the building. Building 2 would be approximately 133,815 square feet, and would include a manager’s apartment in the northwest corner of the building. Both of the proposed buildings would include a lobby in the center of the building with elevators and stairwells, as well as additional stairwells on the east and west sides of the buildings. A total of 32 automobile parking spaces and two bicycle parking spaces would be provided throughout the project site. Rental office hours would be Monday through Friday from 9:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and Saturday and Sunday from 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Customers would have access to the self-storage buildings between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. daily. To prepare the project site for construction, all nine of the existing buildings would be demolished and 17 trees would be removed. The project site would be excavated down to a depth of approximately 12 feet for the basements of both of the proposed buildings. Additionally, trenching 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 2 for utility installation would occur. A total of 24,250 cubic yards of soil would be excavated from the project site, 1,250 cubic yards of which would be kept on site and 23,000 cubic yards of which would be off-hauled. Project construction would occur over a 13-month period commencing in April 2020. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Characteristics of Sound Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound. Noise consists of any sound that may produce physiological or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest, recreation, and sleep. To the human ear, sound has two significant characteristics: pitch and loudness. Pitch is generally an annoyance, while loudness can affect the ability to hear. Pitch is the number of complete vibrations, or cycles per second, of a wave resulting in the tone’s range from high to low. Loudness is the strength of a sound that describes a noisy or quiet environment and is measured by the amplitude of the sound wave. Loudness is determined by the intensity of the sound waves combined with the reception characteristics of the human ear. Sound intensity refers to how hard the sound wave strikes an object, which in turn produces the sound’s effect. This characteristic of sound can be precisely measured with instruments. The analysis of a project defines the noise environment of the project area in terms of sound intensity and its effect on adjacent sensitive land uses. Measurement of Sound Sound intensity is measured through the A-weighted scale to correct for the relative frequency response of the human ear. That is, an A-weighted noise level de-emphasizes low and very high frequencies of sound similar to the human ear’s de-emphasis of these frequencies. Unlike linear units, such as inches or pounds, decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale representing points on a sharply rising curve. For example, 10 decibels (dB) are 10 times more intense than 1 dB, 20 dB are 100 times more intense, and 30 dB are 1,000 times more intense. Thirty dB represents 1,000 times as much acoustic energy as one decibel. The decibel scale increases as the square of the change, representing the sound pressure energy. A sound as soft as human breathing is about 10 times greater than 0 dB. The decibel system of measuring sound gives a rough connection between the physical intensity of sound and its perceived loudness to the human ear. A 10 dB increase in sound level is perceived by the human ear as only a doubling of the loudness of the sound. Ambient sounds generally range from 30 dB (very quiet) to 100 dB (very loud). Sound levels are generated from a source, and their decibel level decreases as the distance from that source increases. Sound dissipates exponentially with distance from the noise source. For a single point source, sound levels decrease approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from the source. This drop-off rate is appropriate for noise generated by stationary equipment. If noise is produced by a line source, such as highway traffic or railroad operations, the sound decreases 3 dB for each doubling of distance in a hard site environment. Line source, noise in a relatively flat environment with absorptive vegetation, decreases 4.5 dB for each doubling of distance. 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 3 There are many ways to rate noise for various time periods, but an appropriate rating of ambient noise affecting humans also accounts for the annoying effects of sound. Equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) is the total sound energy of time varying noise over a sample period. However, the predominant rating scales for human communities in the State of California are the Leq and community noise equivalent level (CNEL) or the day-night average level (Ldn) based on A-weighted decibels (dBA). CNEL is the time varying noise over a 24-hour period, with a 5 dBA weighting factor applied to the hourly Leq for noises occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. (defined as relaxation hours) and 10 dBA weighting factor applied to noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (defined as sleeping hours). Ldn is similar to the CNEL scale but without the adjustment for events occurring during the evening hours. CNEL and Ldn are within 1 dBA of each other and are normally exchangeable. The City uses the CNEL noise scale for long-term noise impact assessment. Other noise rating scales of importance when assessing the annoyance factor include the maximum noise level (Lmax), which is the highest exponential time averaged sound level that occurs during a stated time period. The noise environments discussed in this analysis for short-term noise impacts are specified in terms of maximum levels denoted by Lmax. Lmax reflects peak operating conditions and addresses the annoying aspects of intermittent noise. It is often used together with another noise scale, or noise standards in terms of percentile noise levels, in noise ordinances for enforcement purposes. For example, the L10 noise level represents the noise level exceeded 10 percent of the time during a stated period. The L50 noise level represents the median noise level. Half the time the noise level exceeds this level, and half the time it is less than this level. The L90 noise level represents the noise level exceeded 90 percent of the time and is considered the background noise level during a monitoring period. For a relatively constant noise source, the Leq and L50 are approximately the same. Noise impacts can be described in three categories. The first is audible impacts that refer to increases in noise levels noticeable to humans. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3.0 dB or greater because this level has been found to be barely perceptible in exterior environments. The second category, potentially audible, refers to a change in the noise level between 1.0 and 3.0 dB. This range of noise levels has been found to be noticeable only in laboratory environments. The last category is changes in noise levels of less than 1.0 dB, which are inaudible to the human ear. Only audible changes in existing ambient or background noise levels are considered potentially significant. Physiological Effects of Noise Physical damage to human hearing begins at prolonged exposure to noise levels higher than 85 dBA. Exposure to high noise levels affects the entire system, with prolonged noise exposure in excess of 75 dBA increasing body tensions, thereby affecting blood pressure and functions of the heart and the nervous system. In comparison, extended periods of noise exposure above 90 dBA would result in permanent cell damage. When the noise level reaches 120 dBA, a tickling sensation occurs in the human ear even with short-term exposure. This level of noise is called the threshold of feeling. As the sound reaches 140 dBA, the tickling sensation is replaced by the feeling of pain in the ear. This is called the threshold of pain. A sound level of 160 to 165 dBA will result in dizziness or loss of equilibrium. The ambient or background noise problem is widespread and generally more concentrated in urban areas than in outlying less developed areas. 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 4 Table 1 lists definitions of acoustical terms, and Table 2 shows common sound levels and their sources. Table 1: Definitions of Acoustical Terms Term Definitions Decibel, dB A unit level that denotes the ratio between two quantities proportional to power, the number of decibels is 10 times the logarithm (to the base 10) of this ratio. Frequency, Hz Of a function periodic in time, the number of times that the quantity repeats itself in one second (i.e., number of cycles per second). A-Weighted Sound Level, dBA The sound level obtained by use of A-weighting. The A-weighting filter deemphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise. All sound levels in this assessment are A-weighted, unless reported otherwise. L01, L10, L50, L90 The fast A-weighted noise levels equaled or exceeded by a fluctuating sound level for 1 percent, 10 percent, 50 percent, and 90 percent of a stated time period. Equivalent Continuous Noise Level, Leq The level of a steady sound that, in a stated time period and at a stated location, has the same A-weighted sound energy as the time varying sound. Community Noise Equivalent Level, CNEL The 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, obtained after the addition of 5 dB to sound levels occurring in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and after the addition of 10 dB to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Day/Night Noise Level, Ldn The 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, obtained after the addition of 10 dB to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m Lmax, Lmin The maximum and minimum A-weighted sound levels measured on a sound level meter, during a designated time interval, using fast time averaging Ambient Noise Level The all-encompassing noise associated with a given environment at a specified time, usually a composite of sound from many sources at many directions, near and far; no particular sound is dominant. Intrusive The noise that intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content, as well as the prevailing ambient noise level. Source: Harris, Cyril M. Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control (1991). 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 5 Table 2: Common Sound Levels and Noise Sources Source: LSA, Associates, Inc., 2016. Regulatory Framework The federal, State, and local framework for noise standards is outlined below. The City of Cupertino has established standards in the General Plan and in the Municipal Code for land use projects that could potentially expose sensitive receptors to excessive noise levels. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency In 1972 Congress enacted the Noise Control Act. This act authorized the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) to publish descriptive data on the effects of noise and establish levels of sound requisite to protect the public welfare with an adequate margin of safety. These levels are separated into health (hearing loss levels) and welfare (annoyance levels), as shown in Table 3. The U.S. EPA cautions that these identified levels are not standards because they do not take into account the cost or feasibility of the levels. 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 6 For protection against hearing loss, 96 percent of the population would be protected if sound levels are less than or equal to an Leq(24) of 70 dBA. The “(24)” signifies an Leq duration of 24 hours. The U.S. EPA activity and interference guidelines are designed to ensure reliable speech communication at about 5 feet in the outdoor environment. For outdoor and indoor environments, interference with activity and annoyance should not occur if levels are below 55 dBA and 45 dBA, respectively. Table 3: Summary of USEPA Noise Levels Effect Level Area Hearing loss Leq(24) < 70 dB All areas. Outdoor activity interference and annoyance Ldn < 55 dB Outdoors in residential areas and farms and other outdoor areas where people spend widely varying amounts of time and other places in which quiet is a basis for use. Leq(24) < 55 dB Outdoor areas where people spend limited amounts of time, such as school yards, playgrounds, etc. Indoor activity interference and annoyance Leq < 45 dB Indoor residential areas. Leq(24) < 45 dB Other indoor areas with human activities such as schools, etc. Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety (March 1974). The noise effects associated with an outdoor Ldn of 55 dBA are summarized in Table 4. At 55 dBA Ldn, 95 percent sentence clarity (intelligibility) may be expected at 11 feet, and no community reaction. However, 1 percent of the population may complain about noise at this level and 17 percent may indicate annoyance. Table 4: Summary of Human Effects in Areas Exposed to 55 dBA Ldn Type of Effect Magnitude of Effect Speech – Indoors 100 percent sentence intelligibility (average) with a 5 dB margin of safety. Speech – Outdoors 100 percent sentence intelligibility (average) at 0.35 meter. 99 percent sentence intelligibility (average) at 1.0 meter. 95 percent sentence intelligibility (average) at 3.5 meters. Average Community Reaction None evident; 7 dB below level of significant complaints and threats of legal action and at least 16 dB below “vigorous action.” Complaints 1 percent dependent on attitude and other non-level related factors. Annoyance 17 percent dependent on attitude and other non-level related factors. Attitude Towards Area Noise essentially the least important of various factors. Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety (March 1974). 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 7 State of California The State has established land use compatibility guidelines for determining acceptable noise levels for specified land uses. The City has adopted and modified the State’s land use compatibility guidelines, as discussed below. Local Regulations City of Cupertino General Plan. The Health and Safety Element of the City’s General Plan 1 seeks to ensure that the community continues to enjoy a high quality of life through reduced noise pollution, effective project design, and noise management operations. Applicable Health and Safety Element policies include the following: • Policy HS-8.1: Land Use Decision Evaluation. Use the Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments chart, the Future Noise Contour Map (see Figure D-1 in Appendix D of the General Plan) and the City Municipal Code to evaluate land use decisions. • Policy HS-8.2: Building and Site Design. Minimize noise impacts through appropriate building and site design. ○ Strategy: HS-8.2.1: Commercial Delivery Areas. Locate delivery areas for new commercial and industrial developments away from existing or planned homes. ○ Strategy HS-8.2.2: Noise Control Techniques. Require analysis and implementation of techniques to control the effects of noise from industrial equipment and processes for projects near low-intensity residential uses. ○ Strategy HS-8.2.3: Sound Wall Requirements. Exercise discretion in requiring sound walls to be sure that all other measures of noise control have been explored and that the sound wall blends with the neighborhood. • Policy HS-8.3: Construction and Maintenance Activities. Regulate construction and maintenance activities. Establish and enforce reasonable allowable periods of the day, during weekdays, weekends and holidays for construction activities. Require construction contractors to use the best available technology to minimize excessive noise and vibration from construction equipment such as pile drivers, jack hammers, and vibratory rollers. 1 Cupertino, City of, 2015. Cupertino General Plan 2015-2040. October 20. 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 8 Table 5: Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments Land Use Category Community Noise Exposure (Ldn or CNEL, dB) 55 60 65 70 75 80 Residential – Low Density (Single-Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes) Residential – Multi-Family Transient Lodging (Motels, Hotels) Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries Office Buildings, Business Commercial and Professional Centers Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture Normally Acceptable Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. Normally Unacceptable New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conditionally Acceptable New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise reduction features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice. Clearly Unacceptable New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. Source: Cupertino, City of, 2015. Cupertino General Plan 2015-2040. Figure HS-8. October 20. 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 9 City of Cupertino Municipal Code. The City of Cupertino further addresses noise in the Municipal Code in Chapter 10.48, Community Noise Control. Section 10.48.040 establishes the acceptable daytime and nighttime maximum noise levels at receiving land uses. As shown in Table 6 below, the maximum permissible noise level (as measured at receiving sensitive land uses) that may be generated by sources on a nonresidential land use is 55 dBA during nighttime hours and 65 dBA during daytime hours. The maximum permissible noise level that may be generated by sources on a residential land use is 50 dBA during nighttime hours and 60 dBA during daytime hours. Daytime hours are defined to be the period from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, and from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekends. Table 6: City of Cupertino Daytime and Nighttime Maximum Noise Levels Land Use at Point of Origin Maximum Noise Level at Complaint Site of Receiving Property Nighttime Daytime Residential 50 dBA 60 dBA Nonresidential 55 dBA 65 dBA Source: City of Cupertino, 2018. In addition, during the daytime period only, brief noise incidents exceeding established limits are permitted, providing that the sum of the noise duration in minutes plus the excess noise level does not exceed 20 dBA in a 2-hour period. Table 7 shows example combinations of allowable noise level exceedances. Table 7: City of Cupertino Example Maximum Permissible Noise Levels Noise Increment Above Normal Standard Noise Duration in 2-Hour Period 5 dBA 15 minutes 10 dBA 10 minutes 15 dBA 5 minutes 19 dBA 1 minute Source: City of Cupertino, 2018. According to Section 10.48.051 of the Municipal Code, the use of motorized equipment for landscape maintenance activities is limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays for the proposed project. During these hours, noise from the use of motorized equipment for landscape maintenance activities is allowed to exceed the maximum permissible noise limits of Section 10.48.040 of the Municipal Code, provided that the equipment is outfitted with appropriate mufflers and is operated over the minimal period necessary. According to Section 10.48.053 of the Municipal Code, noise from grading, construction, and demolition activities is also allowed to exceed the maximum permissible noise limits described above (with examples given in Table 7), provided that the equipment utilized is outfitted with high- 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 10 quality mufflers and abatement devices and is in good condition. In addition, noise-producing construction activities must meet one of the following criteria: • No individual device produces a noise level of more than 87 dBA Lmax as measured at a distance of 25 feet; or • The operation of such equipment does not produce noise levels that exceed 80 dBA Lmax as measured at any nearby property. Except for emergency work, construction activities including grading, street construction, demolition, or underground utility work are not permitted within 750 feet of a residential area on Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, and during the nighttime period. Construction activities, other than street construction, are prohibited on holidays (which include New Year’s Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day). In addition, construction activities, other than street construction, are prohibited during nighttime periods unless they meet the City’s nighttime maximum permissible noise level standards. Existing Noise Environment The ambient noise environment in the City of Cupertino is affected by a variety of noise sources, including auto traffic on arterial streets and I-280. As indicated in the Noise Element of the General Plan, noise produced by industrial facilities has an insignificant effect on the City’s noise environment. The following section describes the existing noise environment and identifies the primary noise sources in the vicinity of the project site. Existing Ambient Monitored Noise Levels To assess existing noise levels, LSA conducted noise monitoring to establish the existing ambient noise environment at the project site. Three short-term (15-minute) and one long-term (24-hour) noise measurements were conducted at the project site from Friday, January 25, 2019 to Tuesday, January 29, 2019. Noise measurement data collected during the noise monitoring are summarized in Table 8. As shown in Table 8, the short-term noise measurements indicate that ambient noise in the project site vicinity ranges from approximately 56.5 dBA to 62.6 dBA Leq. The long-term measurement resulted in a daily noise level of 69.2 dBA CNEL. Vehicle traffic on I-280 was reported as the primary noise source. The meteorological data conditions at the time of the noise monitoring are shown in Table 9. Noise measurement sheets are provided in Attachment A. 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 11 Table 8: Ambient Noise Monitoring Results, dBA Location Number Location Description Date, Start Time Leq/CNELa Lmax b Lmin c Primary Noise Sources ST-1 Near rear entrance to 20705 Valley Green Drive 1/25/19, 5:11 p.m. 59.1 64.4 56.5 I-280 traffic ST-2 Property line of Villages at Cupertino Apartment Homes 1/25/19, 5:30 p.m. 56.5 64.1 52.5 I-280 traffic ST-3 Rooftop of attendant unit 1/29/19, 2:20 p.m. 62.6 66.1 59.3 I-280 traffic LT-1 Western boundary of project site near adjacent residences 1/25/19, 4:55 p.m. 69.3/ 69.2 84.4 61.5 I-280 traffic Source: LSA (January 2019). a Leq represents the average of the sound energy occurring over the measurement time period for the short-term noise measurements. CNEL is the 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, obtained after the addition of five decibels to sound levels occurring in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and after the addition of 10 decibels to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. b Lmax is the highest sound level measured during the measurement time period. c Lmin is the lowest sound level measured during the measurement time period. Table 9: Meteorological Conditions During Ambient Noise Monitoring Location Number Average Wind Speed (mph) Maximum Wind Speed (mph) Temperature (˚F) Humidity (%) ST-1 0.0 1.0 55.4 63 ST-2 0.0 0.8 54.5 65 ST-3 0.0 1.0 54.0 62 Source: LSA (January 2019). Existing Sensitive Land Uses Certain land uses are considered more sensitive to noise than others. Examples of these land uses include residential areas, educational facilities, hospitals, childcare facilities, and senior housing. The closest sensitive receptors to the project site include the multi-family residences located adjacent to the western border of the project site and the multi-family residences located approximately 75 feet east of the eastern border of the project site. THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The State CEQA Guidelines indicate that a project would have a significant impact on noise if it would result in: • Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 12 • Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; or • For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES The following section discusses the potential noise and vibration impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project. Generation of Substantial Increase in Ambient Noise Levels The following section describes how the short-term construction and long-term operational noise impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant. Short-Term (Construction) Noise Impacts As described above, noise from grading, construction, and demolition activities may exceed the maximum permissible noise limits (shown in Table 6), provided that the equipment utilized is outfitted with high-quality mufflers and abatement devices and is in good condition. In addition, noise-producing construction activities must meet one of the following criteria: • No individual device produces a noise level of more than 87 dBA Lmax as measured at a distance of 25 feet; or • The operation of such equipment does not produce noise levels that exceed 80 dBA Lmax as measured at any nearby property. In addition, construction noise is permitted by the City of Cupertino when activities occur between daytime hours on weekdays (daytime hours are defined to be the period from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays). Construction noise is prohibited on Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays when construction activities occur within 750 feet of a residential area. In addition, construction noise is prohibited during nighttime periods unless it meets the nighttime standards shown in Table 6. Project construction would result in short-term noise impacts on the nearby sensitive receptors. Maximum construction noise would be short-term, generally intermittent depending on the construction phase, and variable depending on receiver distance from the active construction zone. The duration of noise impacts would generally be from one day to several days depending on the phase of construction. The level and types of noise impacts that would occur during construction are described below. Short-term noise impacts would occur during grading and site preparation activities. Table 10 lists typical construction equipment noise levels (Lmax) recommended for noise impact assessments, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor, obtained from the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model. Construction-related short-term noise levels would be 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 13 higher than existing ambient noise levels currently in the project area but would no longer occur once construction of the project is completed. Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during construction of the proposed project. The first type involves construction crew commutes and the transport of construction equipment and materials to the site, which would incrementally increase noise levels on roads leading to the site. As shown in Table 10, there would be a relatively high single-event noise exposure potential at a maximum level of 84 dBA Lmax with trucks passing at 50 feet. The second type of short-term noise impact is related to noise generated during grading and construction on the project site. Construction is performed in discrete steps, or phases, each with its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These various sequential phases would change the character of the noise generated on site. Therefore, the noise levels vary as construction progresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction-related noise ranges to be categorized by work phase. Table 10 lists maximum noise levels recommended for noise impact assessments for typical construction equipment, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor. Typical maximum noise levels range up to 87 dBA Lmax at 50 feet during the noisiest construction phases. The site preparation phase, including excavation and grading of the site, tends to generate the highest noise levels because earthmoving machinery is the noisiest construction equipment. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as backfillers, bulldozers, draglines, and front loaders. Earthmoving and compacting equipment includes compactors, scrapers, and graders. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full-power operation followed by 3 or 4 minutes at lower power settings. 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 14 Table 10: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels Equipment Description Acoustical Usage Factor (%) Maximum Noise Level (Lmax) at 50 Feet1 Backhoes 40 80 Compactor (ground) 20 80 Compressor 40 80 Cranes 16 85 Dozers 40 85 Dump Trucks 40 84 Excavators 40 85 Flat Bed Trucks 40 84 Forklift 20 85 Front-end Loaders 40 80 Graders 40 85 Impact Pile Drivers 20 95 Jackhammers 20 85 Pick-up Truck 40 55 Pneumatic Tools 50 85 Pumps 50 77 Rock Drills 20 85 Rollers 20 85 Scrapers 40 85 Tractors 40 84 Welder 40 73 Source: Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA 2006). Note: Noise levels reported in this table are rounded to the nearest whole number. 1 Maximum noise levels were developed based on Spec 721.560 from the Central Artery/Tunnel (CA/T) program to be consistent with the City of Boston’s Noise Code for the “Big Dig” project. Lmax = maximum instantaneous sound level As discussed above, the proposed project must implement best management noise reduction practices, including, but not limited to, meeting at least one of the following criteria: no individual device produces a noise level of more than 87 dBA Lmax as measured at a distance of 25 feet; or the operation of such equipment does not produce noise levels that exceed 80 dBA Lmax as measured at any nearby property. As shown in Table 10, typical maximum noise levels range up to 87 dBA Lmax at 50 feet during the noisiest construction phases. At a distance of only 25 feet from the operating equipment, noise levels would be approximately 6 dBA higher than those listed in the table. Therefore, typical maximum noise levels generated by almost all of the types of heavy construction equipment listed in the table would exceed 87 dBA Lmax at 25 feet from the operating equipment. Therefore, this analysis focuses on whether noise from multiple pieces of heavy construction equipment operating simultaneously near the project borders would result in noise levels in excess of the City’s standard of 80 dBA Lmax as measured at nearby receiving properties. 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 15 As noted above, the closest sensitive receptors to the project site include the multi-family residences located immediately west of the project site and the multi-family residences located approximately 75 feet east of the eastern border of the project site. Due to proposed building setbacks and the proposed bio-retention basin, the residences that would be closest to major building construction activities would be the multi-family residences immediately west of the project site. The property lines of these sensitive receptors are located immediately adjacent to the project site; however, the area adjacent to the project site includes a parking lot and carports. The nearest residential buildings are located approximately 125 feet west of the project site. At 125 feet, there would be a decrease of approximately 8 dBA from the increased distance compared to the noise level measured at 50 feet from the active construction area. Therefore, the closest sensitive receptor may be subject to short-term maximum construction noise reaching 79 dBA Lmax during construction. Therefore, construction noise levels as measured at the nearest façade of noise sensitive land uses would below the City’s threshold of 80 dBA Lmax. In addition, construction equipment would operate at various locations within the 3-acre project site and would only generate this maximum noise level when operations occur closest to the receptor. As discussed above, construction noise may exceed the maximum permissible noise limits, provided that the equipment utilized is outfitted with high-quality mufflers and abatement devices and is in good condition. Consistent with the Municipal Code, the following construction best management practices will be implemented: • Equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards. • Place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the active project site. • Locate equipment staging in areas that would create the greatest possible distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the active project site during all construction activities. • Ensure that all general construction related activities are restricted to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Construction shall be prohibited on Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, and during the nighttime period. Long-Term Noise Impacts The proposed project would include the demolition of existing self-storage buildings and would construct two new four-story self-storage buildings in a developed area of the City. Operational noise can be categorized as mobile source noise and stationary source noise. Mobile source noise would be attributable to the additional trips that would occur with implementation of the proposed project. Stationary source noise includes noise generated by the proposed project, such as storage loading/unloading activities and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment. 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 16 Traffic Noise Impacts. Motor vehicles with their distinctive noise characteristics are the dominant noise source in the project vicinity. The amount of noise varies according to many factors, such as volume of traffic, vehicle mix (percentage of cars and trucks), average traffic speed, and distance from the observer. Implementation of the proposed project would result in new daily trips on local roadways in the project site vicinity. A characteristic of sound is that a doubling of a noise source is required in order to result in a perceptible (3 dBA or greater) increase in the resulting noise level. Based on the Trip Generation Memorandum 2 prepared for the proposed project, the proposed project would generate a maximum of approximately 316 net new average daily trips, with approximately 22 trips occurring in the AM peak hour and approximately 36 trips occurring in the PM peak hour. The adjacent I-280, which is the predominant noise source in the vicinity of the project site, carries approximately 146,000 average daily trips.3 Project trips would represent a small increase in noise level, approximately 0.01 dBA CNEL based on the following equation: 𝐶𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑖𝑖𝑎𝑎 (𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑)=10 ∗lo g10 �𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝐶𝐶 𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝐶𝐶𝑉𝑉𝑎𝑎Future Volume � Therefore, project daily trips would not result in a perceptible noise increase along any roadway segment in the project vicinity. Stationary Source Noise Impacts. As described in the regulatory framework discussion above, the City of Cupertino has established maximum permissible noise levels that may be generated by a nonresidential land use. These maximum levels are 55 dBA during nighttime hours and 65 dBA during daytime hours, as measured at a receiving sensitive land use. (Daytime hours are defined to be the period from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, and from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekends.) The maximum permissible noise level that may be generated by a residential land use is 50 dBA during nighttime hours and 60 dBA during daytime hours. The proposed public storage uses would contain stationary noise sources such as storage loading/unloading activities and HVAC equipment. These are potential point sources of noise that could affect noise-sensitive receptors in the project site vicinity. Customer Vehicle Access Activities. The proposed project would contain self-storage uses, therefore, vehicle noise, including engine sounds, car doors slamming, car alarms, music, and people conversing, could occur as a result of the proposed project. Typical vehicle access activities, such as people conversing or doors slamming, would generate noise levels of approximately 60 dBA to 70 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. As noted above, the closest sensitive receptors to the project site include the multi-family residences located immediately west of the project site and the multi-family residences located approximately 75 feet east of the eastern border of the project site. The closest guest parking 2 LSA, 2019. Trip Generation Memorandum for the Proposed Public Storage Facility Project at 20565 Valley Green Drive, Cupertino, California. January 25. 3 Caltrans, 2017. 2017 Traffic Volumes. Website: http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/ (accessed January 2019). 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 17 spaces to the nearby sensitive receptors are located near the eastern wall of the proposed Building 1,which would be located approximately 210 feet west of the nearest residential buildings. At 210 feet, there would be a decrease in noise of approximately 13 dBA due to the increased distance from the baseline noise levels of 60 dBA to 70 dBA Lmax. The parking spaces would be shielded by a 6-foot concrete masonry unit (CMU) wall, which would provide an additional 5 dBA decrease in noise. Therefore, the closest sensitive receptor may be subject to parking lot activity noise reaching 42 dBA to 52 dBA Lmax. This noise level would not exceed the City’s maximum noise level standards of 55 dBA during nighttime hours and 65 dBA during daytime hours, as measured at the nearest receiving sensitive land use. HVAC Equipment. HVAC equipment could be a primary noise source associated with the proposed project as the project would be a climate-controlled facility. HVAC equipment is often mounted on rooftops, located on the ground, or located within mechanical rooms. The noise sources could take the form of fans, pumps, air compressors, chillers, or cooling towers. HVAC operations would be required to meet all noise standards. Precise details of HVAC equipment, including future location and sizing, are unknown at this time; therefore, for purposes of this analysis, 75 dBA at 3 feet was assumed to represent HVAC-related noise.4 The nearest sensitive receptors to proposed buildings include the multi-family residences located adjacent to the western border of the project site, which would be located approximately 200 feet west of Building 2. Adjusted for distance to the nearest off-site sensitive receptors, these residences would be exposed to a noise level of 39 dBA Lmax generated by HVAC equipment. This noise level would not exceed the City’s maximum noise level standards of 55 dBA during nighttime hours and 65 dBA during daytime hours, as measured at the nearest receiving sensitive land use. Generation of Excessive Groundborne Vibration Vibration refers to groundborne noise and perceptible motion. Groundborne vibration is almost exclusively a concern inside buildings and is rarely perceived as a problem outdoors. Vibration energy propagates from a source, through intervening soil and rock layers, to the foundations of nearby buildings. The vibration then propagates from the foundation throughout the remainder of the structure. Building vibration may be perceived by the occupants as the motion of building surfaces, rattling of items on shelves or hanging on walls, or as a low-frequency rumbling noise. The rumbling noise is caused by the vibrating walls, floors, and ceilings radiating sound waves. Annoyance from vibration often occurs when the vibration exceeds the threshold of perception by 10 dB or less. This is an order of magnitude below the damage threshold for normal buildings. Typical sources of groundborne vibration are construction activities (e.g., pavement breaking and operating heavy-duty earthmoving equipment), and occasional traffic on rough roads. In general, groundborne vibration from standard construction practices is only a potential issue when within 25 feet of sensitive uses. Groundborne vibration levels from construction activities very rarely reach levels that can damage structures; however, these levels are perceptible near the active construc- tion site. With the exception of buildings built prior to the 1950s or buildings of historic significance, 4 Trane, 2002. Sound Data and Application Guide for the New and Quieter Air-Cooled Series R Chiller. 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 18 potential structural damage from heavy construction activities rarely occurs. When roadways are smooth, vibration from traffic (even heavy trucks) is rarely perceptible. The streets surrounding the project area are paved, smooth, and unlikely to cause significant groundborne vibration. In addition, the rubber tires and suspension systems of buses and other on- road vehicles make it unusual for on-road vehicles to cause groundborne noise or vibration problems. It is therefore assumed that no such vehicular vibration impacts would occur and no vibration impact analysis of on-road vehicles is necessary. Additionally, once constructed, the proposed project would not contain uses that would generate groundborne vibration. Construction Vibration Construction of the proposed project could result in the generation of groundborne vibration. This construction vibration impact analysis discusses the level of human annoyance using vibration levels in VdB and assesses the potential for building damages using vibration levels in PPV (in/sec) because vibration levels calculated in RMS are best for characterizing human response to building vibration, while vibration level in PPV is best used to characterize potential for damage. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment guidelines indicate that a vibration level up to 102 VdB (an equivalent to 0.5 in/sec in PPV) is considered safe for buildings consisting of reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster), and would not result in any construction vibration damage. For a non-engineered timber and masonry building, the construction vibration damage criterion is 94 VdB (0.2 in/sec in PPV). Table 11 shows the PPV and VdB values at 25 feet from a construction vibration source. As shown in Table 11, bulldozers and other heavy-tracked construction equipment (except for pile drivers and vibratory rollers) generate approximately 87 VdB of groundborne vibration when measured at 25 feet, based on the Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment guidelines. At this level, groundborne vibration would result in potential annoyance to residents and workers, but would not cause any damage to the buildings. Construction vibration, similar to vibration from other sources, would not have any significant effects on outdoor activities (e.g., those outside of residences and commercial/office buildings in the project vicinity). Outdoor site preparation for the proposed project is expected to include the use of bulldozers and loaded trucks. The greatest levels of vibration are anticipated to occur during the site preparation phase. All other phases are expected to result in lower vibration levels. The distance to the nearest buildings for vibration impact analysis is measured between the nearest off-site buildings and the project boundary (assuming the construction equipment would be used at or near the project boundary) because vibration impacts occur normally within the buildings. The formula for vibration transmission is provided below. LvdB (D) = LvdB (25 ft) – 30 Log (D/25) PPVequip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 19 Table 11: Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment Equipment Reference PPV/LV at 25 feet PPV (in/sec) LV (VdB)a Pile Driver (Impact), Typical 0.644 104 Pile Driver (Sonic), Typical 0.170 93 Vibratory Roller 0.210 94 Hoe Ram 0.089 87 Large Bulldozer 0.089 87 Caisson Drilling 0.089 87 Loaded Trucks 0.076 86 Jackhammer 0.035 79 Small Bulldozer 0.003 58 Sources: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (FTA 2006). a RMS vibration velocity in decibels (VdB) is 1 µin/sec. µin/sec = micro-inches per second FTA = Federal Transit Administration in/sec = inches per second LV = velocity in decibels PPV = peak particle velocity RMS = root-mean-square VdB = vibration velocity decibels Table 12 lists the projected vibration level from various construction equipment expected to be used on the project site to the nearest buildings in the project vicinity. For typical construction activity, the equipment with the highest vibration generation potential is the large bulldozer, which would generate 87 VdB at 25 feet. The closest buildings to the project site include the multi-family residences located approximately 125 feet west of the project site, the multi-family residences located approximately 75 feet east of the project site, and the commercial buildings located approximately 125 feet south of the project site. Table 12: Summary of Construction Equipment and Activity Vibration Land Use Direction Equipment/Activity Reference Vibration Level (VdB) at 25 feet Reference Vibration Level (PPV) at 25 feet Distanc e (feet) Maximum Vibration Level (VdB) Maximum Vibration Level (PPV) Multi-Family Residential West Large Bulldozers 87 0.089 125 66 0.008 Loaded Trucks 86 0.076 125 65 0.007 Multi-Family Residential East Large Bulldozers 87 0.089 75 73 0.017 Loaded Trucks 86 0.076 75 72 0.015 Commercial South Large Bulldozers 87 0.089 125 66 0.008 Loaded Trucks 86 0.076 125 65 0.007 Source: Compiled by LSA (January 2019). Note: The FTA-recommended building damage threshold is 0.2 PPV (in/sec) or approximately 94 VdB at the receiving property structure or building. FTA = Federal Transit Administration in/sec = inch(es) per second PPV = peak particle velocity VdB = vibration velocity decibel(s) 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 20 As shown in Table 12, the multi-family residences located east of the project site would experience vibration levels of up to 73 VdB (0.017 PPV [in/sec]), the multi-family residences located west of the project site would experience vibration levels of up to 63 VdB (0.008 PPV [in/sec]), and the commercial buildings to the south would experience vibration levels of up to 66 VdB (0.008 PPV [in/sec]). These vibration levels at the nearest buildings from construction equipment would not exceed the FTA threshold of 94 VdB (0.2 in/sec PPV) for building damage. Although construction vibration levels at the nearest buildings would have the potential to result in annoyance, these vibration levels would no longer occur once construction of the project is completed. Therefore, groundborne vibration impacts from construction activities associated with the proposed project would not be considered significant. Aircraft Noise Impacts The proposed project is not located within 2 miles of a public or public use airport. The San Jose International Airport is the closest airport and is located approximately 5.7 miles northeast of the project site. Aircraft noise is occasionally audible at the project site; however, no portion of the project site lies within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contours of any public airport nor does any portion of the project site lie within 2 miles of any private airfield or heliport. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels associated with the proximity of an airport. Land Use Compatibility The proposed project would include a manager’s apartment in the northwest corner of Building 2. The City sets forth noise level standards for land use compatibility and interior noise exposure of new development. According to the City’s General Plan, noise levels below 60 dBA CNEL are considered satisfactory for residential land uses and do not require special insulation requirements. Noise levels between 55 and 70 dBA CNEL require an analysis of noise reduction requirements and noise insulation as needed. For areas with noise levels between 70 dBA CNEL and 80 dBA CNEL, residential land use development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. In addition, for areas with noise levels over 70 dBA CNEL, residential land use development should not be undertaken. The interior noise level standard for residential land uses is 45 dBA CNEL. In addition, according to the City’s General Plan, noise levels below 75 dBA CNEL are considered satisfactory for industrial land uses and do not require special insulation requirements. Noise levels between 70 and 75 dBA CNEL require an analysis of noise reduction requirements and noise insulation as needed. For areas with noise levels over 75 dBA CNEL, industrial land use development should generally be discouraged. The noise environment at the project site is dominated by vehicle traffic noise from I-280. Based on the long-term noise monitoring, noise levels on the project site are approximately 69.2 dBA CNEL. Based on the City’s noise and land use compatibility standards, this noise level is considered conditionally acceptable for residential land uses and normally acceptable for industrial 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 21 development. According to the City, new residential construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Therefore, the land use may be permitted only after detailed analysis of the noise reduction features proposed to be incorporated in the building design. A preliminary interior and exterior noise analysis for the proposed manager’s apartment is provided below. Interior Noise Analysis Based on the USEPA’s Protective Noise Levels,5 with a combination of walls, doors, and windows, standard construction for Northern California buildings (STC-24 to STC-28) would provide more than 25 dBA in exterior-to-interior noise reduction with windows closed and 15 dBA or more with windows open. With windows open, the manager’s apartment would not meet the City’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL (i.e., 69.2 dBA – 15.0 dBA = 54.2 dBA) for residential land uses. Therefore, an alternate form of ventilation, such as an air-conditioning system, would be required to ensure that windows can remain closed for a prolonged period of time. The proposed project would include an HVAC system, which would allow windows in the manager’s apartment to remain closed and would meet the City’s interior noise level criterion of 45 dBA CNEL (i.e., 69.2 dBA – 25.0 dBA = 44.2 dBA). Therefore, the proposed project would meet the City’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Exterior Noise Analysis As identified above, noise levels on the project site are approximately 69.2 dBA CNEL. Based on the City’s noise and land use compatibility standards, this noise level is within the City’s conditionally acceptable noise level of 60 to 70 dBA CNEL for residential land uses and within the City’s normally acceptable noise level of below 75 dBA CNEL for industrial land uses. According to the City, new residential construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. The existing on-site noise level would meet the City’s exterior noise level standards for residential land uses if noise reduction requirements and noise insulation features are included in the design to meet the interior noise standard. As discussed above, the proposed project would include an HVAC system, which would allow windows in the manager’s apartment to remain closed and would meet the City’s interior noise level criterion of 45 dBA CNEL. Since interior noise levels would meet City standards, the proposed project would meet the City’s exterior land use compatibility standards for residential land uses. Therefore, the proposed project would meet the City’s exterior land use compatibility standards for both residential and industrial land uses. CONCLUSION Based on the analysis presented above, construction noise levels associated with the proposed project would not result in the generation of noise levels that would exceed the City’s threshold. In addition, traffic-related noise impacts would not be significant. As discussed above, long-term operation of the proposed project would also not create a significant increase in stationary source 5 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1978. Protective Noise Levels, Condensed Version of EPA Levels Document. November. 2/6/19 (\\PTR11\projects\COC1803 Cupertino Public Storage\PRODUCTS\CE\Inputs\Noise\Noise Memo.docx) 22 noise, including noise associated with customer vehicle activities and HVAC equipment. Results of the construction vibration analysis conclude that during construction of the proposed project, vibration levels at the closest structures from construction equipment would not exceed the FTA threshold. Additionally, once constructed, the proposed project would not contain uses that would generate groundborne vibration. The proposed project would also not result in the exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. In addition, as described in the analysis above, the City sets forth noise level standards for land use compatibility and interior noise exposure of new development. As identified above, noise levels on the project site would be up to 69.2 dBA CNEL. Based on the City’s noise and land use compatibility standards, this noise level would be within the City’s normally acceptable noise level standards for industrial land uses. For residential land uses, special noise insulation should be provided. As discussed above, the proposed project would include an HVAC system, which would allow windows in the manager’s apartment to remain closed and would meet the City’s interior noise level criterion of 45 dBA CNEL. Therefore, since interior noise levels would meet City standards, the proposed project would meet the City’s exterior land use compatibility standards. Attachment A: Noise Measurement Survey Sheets ATTACHMENT A NOISE MEASRUREMENT SURVEY SHEETS Noise Measurement Survey Project Number: COC1803 Test Personnel: Chet Monh Project Name: Public Storage- Cupertino Equipment: LD SoundTrack LXT0004025 Site Number: 01 Date: January 25, 2019 Time: From 5:11pm To 5:27pm Site Location: Near rear entrance to 20705 Valley Green Drive Primary Noise Sources: I-280 traffic Comments: There is a lounging area with tables and chairs outside toward building entrance Adjacent Roadways: Parking lot activities File: COC1803_STNLM_S01.xlsx Leq 59.1 Lmax 64.4 Lmin 56.5 L5 60.8 L10 60.3 L33 59.4 L50 58.7 L66 58.3 L90 57.7 Atmospheric Conditions Average Wind Velocity (mph) 0 Maximum Wind Velocity (mph) 1 Temperature (F) 55.4 Relative Humidity (%) 63 Noise Measurement Survey Project Number: COC1803 Test Personnel: Chet Monh Project Name: Public Storage- Cupertino Equipment: LD SoundTrack LXT0004025 Site Number: 02 Date: January 25, 2019 Time: From 5:30pm To 5:45pm Site Location: Property line of Villages at Cupertino Apartment Homes Primary Noise Sources: I-280 traffic Comments: Parking lot ingress/egress activities Adjacent Roadways: Beardon Drive File: COC1803_STNLM_S02.xlsx Leq 56.5 Lmax 64.1 Lmin 52.5 L5 58.5 L10 57.9 L33 56.8 L50 56.2 L66 55.8 L90 54.6 Atmospheric Conditions Average Wind Velocity (mph) 0 Maximum Wind Velocity (mph) 0.8 Temperature (F) 54.5 Relative Humidity (%) 65 Noise Measurement Survey Project Number: COC1803 Test Personnel: Chet Monh Project Name: Public Storage- Cupertino Equipment: LD SoundTrack LXT0004025 Site Number: 03 Date: January 29, 2019 Time: From 2:20pm To 2:35pm Site Location: Rooftop of attendance residence unit Primary Noise Sources: I-280 traffic Comments: To supplement long-term measurement for residence area Adjacent Roadways: Storage facility ingress/egress File: COC1803_STNLM_S03.xlsx Leq 62.6 Lmax 66.1 Lmin 59.3 L5 64.3 L10 63.8 L33 62.8 L50 62.5 L60 62.1 L90 61.3 Atmospheric Conditions Average Wind Velocity (mph) 0 Maximum Wind Velocity (mph) 1 Temperature (F) 54.0 Relative Humidity (%) 62 Location Photo: STNLM_02 STNLM_01 STNLM_03 LTNLM_01 1-25-19 Hourly Leq Edit Hourly Leq Weighting 69.3 16 4:00 PM 69.3 8550224.137 17 5:00 PM 59.7 929046.2842 1 18 6:00 PM 63.1 2062983.322 19 7:00 PM 63.4 5.0 6920313.905 20 8:00 PM 62.4 5.0 5495202.714 21 9:00 PM 63.4 5.0 6905253.122 22 10:00 PM 63.6 10.0 22774792.45 23 11:00 PM 60.9 10.0 12259786.23 0 12:00 AM 59.5 10.0 8820878.316 1 1:00 AM 56.6 10.0 4578797.816 2 2:00 AM 57.6 10.0 5748913.998 3 3:00 AM 60.0 10.0 9946329.138 4 4:00 AM 63.2 10.0 20742881.04 5 5:00 AM 65.0 10.0 31825470.19 6 6:00 AM 66.0 10.0 39892187.4 7 7:00 AM 63.2 2109705.211 8 8:00 AM 59.6 911786.2972 9 9:00 AM 59.9 974514.7189 10 10:00 AM 59.6 917349.425 11 11:00 AM 61.3 1342200.395 12 12:00 PM 60.3 1062568.935 13 1:00 PM 60.4 1103468.756 14 2:00 PM 60.3 1061636.605 15 3:00 PM 60.3 1066164.456 CNEL 69.2 Peak Leq 69.3 Daytime Min 59.5 Max 69.3 Evening Min 56.6 Max 60.0 Night Min 59.6 Max 66.0 MIN 51.60 MAX 84.4 44.0 46.0 48.0 50.0 52.0 54.0 56.0 58.0 60.0 62.0 64.0 4:00 PM5:00 PM6:00 PM7:00 PM8:00 PM9:00 PM10:00 PM11:00 PM12:00 AM1:00 AM2:00 AM3:00 AM4:00 AM5:00 AM6:00 AM7:00 AM8:00 AM9:00 AM10:00 AM11:00 AM12:00 PM1:00 PM2:00 PM3:00 PMNoise Level (dBA Leq) Time of Day Long-Term 24-Hour Noise Monitoring Location: LT-1